[CQ-Contest] inhale, spots, skimmer, etc: WHAT'S THE POINT?

[Joe]

I have yet to see any code reader work in a QRM situation. Give it just 
two signals and output is garbled mess.

Yet even a person even with a meager skill at code at all will have no 
trouble.  Till they come up with a reader than can beat a person in a 
Heavy QRM situation I say go ahead and use em.  they will only slow ya 
down anyway.

Joe WB9SBD

The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com

On 10/27/2011 8:59 AM, Zack Widup wrote:
> What about Morse code decoders or readers? I myself have no use for
> them (I can still copy about 55 wpm and my experiences with EME, etc.
> make me pretty good at pulling signals out of the noise) but I know
> there are contesters who do. Do those place someone into an "assisted"
> category?
>
> 73, Zack W9SZ
>
>
> On 10/27/11, Bob Naumann<W5OV at w5ov.com>  wrote:
>> As I have proposed before:
>>
>> Single Operator (that is, one who is operating Without Assistance) must
>> *alone* perform both of the following activities:
>> #1 - locate (tune in) each signal AND
>> #2 - identify each callsign that will be entered into his log.
>>
>> Both #1 and #2 requirements must be met in order to be considered single op.
>>
>> The operator must #1 locate or tune in each signal (or set his radio to a
>> specific frequency by turning a dial, or initiate frequency selection by
>> computer control or whatever) AND
>> #2, he must identify (or copy) the callsign of that station he located by
>> himself.
>>
>> Devices that automatically do either or both of these two functions, like
>> skimmer, would not be part of what a single op can use
>> - as it (skimmer), rather than the operator, would be locating and
>> identifying the callsigns that would end up in the log.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>