[Skimmertalk] SSB + Skimmer idea

[Pete Smith N4ZR]

Speaking only for myself, not on behalf of the RBN team, I'm opposed to 
the idea, for a number of reasons:

CW Skimmer/Skimmer Server  software would require significant modifications.

VE3NEA is about to release RTTY Skimmer Server, which will massively 
increase the amount of RBN traffic.  Even the current level strains the 
capability of logging software and cluster servers.

SDRs currently in use have maximum coverage range of ~180 KHz. Phone 
bands are much wider.

Intelligibility of fast CW will be dependent on audio adjustments, 
unless transmitters are switched to CW, and then different radios will 
differ in what frequency they transmit CW on, with the same VFO setting. 
If MCW is used, quality will depend on audio settings, and may not be 
legal in many countries. Very high-speed CW is more vulnerable to 
QRM/QRN, so bust rate will be greatly increased.

Most logging software does not distinguish running from S&P. CW Skimmer 
relies on repetition of callsigns and presence of keywords in 
transmissions to identify CQers and reduce rate of miscopies.  How much 
overhead of this sort is desirable in phone transmissions?

Depending on multiple logging programs to generate the CW on many 
different radios risks a real tower of babel. Right now, we have one 
Skimmer, one Aggregator, multiple receiver types.  This is already hard 
to support.

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
http://reversebeacon.net,
blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
For spots, please go to your favorite
ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.

On 12/7/2014 5:25 PM, Edward Kritsky wrote:
> Dear Skimmertalk,
>
> Together with my friend, Yuri, UA3ATQ, we came up with an interesting
> idea on how to identify SSB stations in contests using skimmer
> technology.
>
> All of the elements are currently present out there and require no or
> minimal modifications
>
> 1. Radios
> 2. Computers
> 3. Skimmers
> 4. Spotting networks
>
> What needs to be modified would be logging software to enable
> additional radio station identification.
>
> How?
>
> The idea is to identify stations by transmitting CW ID at high rate of
> speed (at maximum speed that skimmers can accept), at intervals that
> would be determined by the operator's behaviour (CQing vs. searching).
> CW ID should not be set to tax outside ops' hearing and would be for
> skimmers only (although I would not exclude humans entirely).
>
> Logging program would send an ID based on what the op is doing.
>
> There is some trial and error needed to set this in motion - how
> often should ID be sent, how fast, on what sideband (to correspond to the
> operating SSB frequency). The op should have a choice of turning it on
> and off, not to slow him or others down, not to cut into his
> transmissions etc. Operator's action should have precedence over
> logging program actions. When ID has not been sent in its entirety,
> skimmer should ignore it or wait for a successful re-identification.
>
> I'm sure there is a bit of intelligent analysis required on how to make this
> work for everyone. CW ID can be very short (fraction of a second), it
> would not slow things down, it (hopefully) would not be viewed as an
> annoyance (unlike an end-transmission beep in the commercial world)
>
> In my view, it needs to be experimented with before it becomes a
> mainstream, in or out of contests
>
> What we have seen in CQ WW CW contest with skimmers basically changed
> how we operate, where we operate and how stations are spotted. Perhaps
> this is an easy and inexpensive way of bringing this technology to
> SSB. I don't think FCC should object since maximum allowable CW speed
> is not an issue - transmitting station identifies itself in voice
> anyway.
>
> I'm not a member of this forum, so if you wish to reply to my posting,
> my email address is on the bottom of this message
>
> It would be great to get this off the ground
>
> de Dave, K1TTT: One other consideration is the bandwidth of the
> existing skimmers. Most are only skimming the bottom 96khz or at most
> 192khz of the bands, so making wider bandwidths or shifting them for
> phone contests would be necessary. Some do scan the bands on a
> schedule so that might be a possibility also.
>
> 73 to all,
>
> Ed Kritsky/NT2X
> Brooklyn, NY