[CQ-Contest] Robotic contest operating, why knot?
Paul O'Kane
pokane at ei5di.com
Tue Dec 18 10:49:40 EST 2018
On 18/12/2018 04:59, Jim Brown wrote:
<snip>
> Yes, very cool. W6OAT and I are among ops who chase CQ Fields, and the
> ones that are all water are a challenge. Both of us worked this
> station for a new field!
Oh - I'm impressed! You worked someone who wasn't there.
Reminds me of a rhyme attributed to Hughes Mearns
When I was going up the stairs
I met a man who wasn't there.
He wasn't there again today,
I wish to h-ll he'd go away.
> And for those who won't bother to go read about it, WSJT-X standing
> alone can only be set to will only answer one station responding to
> its own CQ and complete one QSO. The automation to reset that process
> was provided by programming of the computer running WSJT-X.
So now we're being selective about technology - isn't all technology good?
Only a purist, or a luddite, would object to automated WSJT-X QSOs. Press
a single button, wait a few hours, and come back to see what "you've"
worked.
This technology can not be un-invented, and it's not about to go away any
time soon.
Progress is inexorable - but progress in what? :-)
73,
Paul EI5DI
More information about the CQ-Contest
mailing list