What about if you use a CW decoder to copy CW during the contest? Is this unassisted? 73, Jorge CX6VM/CW5W _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contestin
In my opinion, it does not. League general rules for Skimmer like technology refer to MULTI-CHANNEL decoders. If someone is using a CW Reader to help copy CW, we should encourage that. I know a numbe
If the CW decoder is used only on the frequency to which your radio is tuned, it's legal for the Single Op (unassisted) category in ARRL contests. If it's part of a multi-channel decoder that provide
Hmmmm, interesting comments. My brain is a CW decoder. I guess I will have to start using a narrower CW filter and stop listening to signals that fall in or near my receivers passband band other than
<snip> It seems to me this is a long way of describing the "do nothing" option. Please consider this - it's simple and unambiguous. CW decoders, whether single or multi-channel, are not permitted for
I'd suggest a slightly different phrasing: "For phone and CW, devices, utilities, or receiver features which process received signals to provide automated audio or text suggestions as to the callsign
Thing is, the means by which a given end result may be accomplished are many. Radio amateurs are an inventive bunch. If one means is (are?) outlawed, we will find another means. You'll end up playing
It may sound heretical coming from an avid CW operator but I categorically reject the notion that the term "assistance" applies to any single-channel signal decoded off the air at a single-operator s
Something else to think about is how important all the "casual" operators are to the big scores the "contest" stations make. One of the things that many less skilled CW operators do is use a CW decod
The problem is that we don't have complete agreement on what means are "inappropriate". During the CW Skimmer debates on the reflector, many held the position that its use should be allowed in the S
OK... so we all agree to disagree... fine. And we all agree that there needs to be discussion... fine.And we all agree that there is no hard fast answer. OR Hard slow answer either.So... let the rule
I'd like to think I resemble that remark. :) Last year's WPX was the first CW test I ever attempted...9 days after my first CW QSO. I did use a CW decoder...and I submitted my log as an assisted entr
Michael, Vladimir, Vladimir, I agree with the 3 points you gave in your e-mail. Michael, I am in the same situation than you. I started CW in march last month and tried a few contests in august. I fo
Where in the rules does it state this? Or is this your opinion, as opposed to the actual rules? Not so simple and unambiguous, really. Should we be decoding RTTY and PSK in our heads too? Andy M0VKG
<Snip> OK, I see what Bob is getting at - we're all trying to do something similar. The definitions need to be comprehensive, unambiguous and agreed. The word "agreed" is the difficult bit. Without a
Geez, we gonna need a lawyer to get on the air? How about this - eliminate everything between the mic (key, keyboard, keyer), the op, and the antenna. Hook the mic (key) directly to the transmit ante