Vic_Goncharsky@p180.f10.n462.z2.fido.ccrd1.lviv.ua wrote:
>
> Dear fellow contesters!
> After reading most of the recent discussion regarding the paper vs
omputer
> logging I did not find any messagees containing serious attempt to
> analyze this dilemma that we are facing.
>
> I have been studying this problem since getting my first XT in 1990
> and want to share the conclusions with the skilllful contesting
> audience.
>
> The best epigraph I was able to find for this discussion are the ords
> from Kenny Rogers' "The Gambler" song:
>
> "If you gonna play, boy, you have to do it RIGHT".
> *************************************************
>
> Therefore, arguments like: "I can log with just two fingers", or: "My
scores
> went down with computer logging but I am happy, etc" aren't even orth
> considering. One can type with single finger, nose, pencil,
"SOMETHING ELSE"
> but these methods are, a priori, WRONG and lead to nowhere.
>
> Let's start with CW contests where analysys is quite simple. As a
starting
> point I'll introduce some basics.
>
> Firstly - For decades there have been 2 (T W O) different categories
in
> high-speed CW competitions(I was both participant and referee for the
last
> 25 years):
> 1.Hand copy
> 2.Typewriter copy
>
> Average top scores were 20 - 25% in favor of the Typewriter copy.
> None of the participants shared both methods equally successful.
> TYPE-COPYISTS' scores in hand copying were far behind their
counterparts
> from group 1. HAND-COPYISTS could barely type either.
>
> This shows, quite clearly, the following:
>
> a. Ideally, the keyboard copying speed could increase about 20
percent
> compared to the hand logging.
It doesn't matter. That increase is useful when you're copying high
quantity of text, but to copy 6 or 8 letters I can't see any real
advantage on copying 20% faster.
> b. One faces the problem of necessity to re-train oneself to the
completly
> different skill if decision to switch to the computer logging has
been
> made.
That's true, but not so hard 'cause you don't need to copy the same
speed than a professional typer.
> b. The re-training process will be time-consuming and age-dependent
if equal
> or better results have to be acheived.
See b.
> c. Together with copying skills one has to change the OPERATING
skills as well,
> since there is no left or right (ie free from copying and
paddling) hand
> avaliable to tune the RIT, switch bands,memories, RF/AF gain, etc
anymore.
That's a good point. Tree has solved the most anoyining RIT, by
controlling it with the shift keys. Also to tune same keys are used.
but asuming that you have only 2 hands ;) it's difficult to key, tune
and write at the same time also.
> d. Both hands are to be "chained" to the QWERTY keyboard in a proper
way, since
> only automatic "blind typing" will give one a chance to have the
operating
> convenience and speed compared to the hand-logging scheme.
That's not true due to START SENDING NOW feature. It enables to type
with certain degree of delay, so usually I can start sending right
after
the other station has ended.
> TEST No 1.
> Install the latest version of "SM" software. Try to copy the highest
possible
> speed by hand, say, letters - 25 to 30 wpm. If you can do this
error-free
> you're in good shape. Now try to copy the same speed on keyboard. If,
again,
> you're doing this error-free your chances to be in Top-Ten are quite
high,
> if NOT you'll know what I feel every time I am failing to pass this
test...hi
>
> TEST No 2.
> Measure and compare the time-delay between your response to one's
call
> with manual and computer logging. Ideally it must not exceed :
>
> - for KEYBOARD: time to type the last letter of his call and ENTER
(for TR)
> or GreyPlus for CT;
NOT TRUE, see d.
>
> - for MANUAL LOGGING : * no delay *
> Why? Because with manual logging you have to remember the call and
start to
> respond immediately after hearing the last letter and log the
> QSO while getting his response. Unfortunately this method DOES NOT
work
> with computer logging (!!!!!!!) because the response delay in the
BEST
> case equals the duration of the calling-station's call.
> Painful experience......
YOU'RE WRONG!!!! See d. (even more delay (full call) is needed with
manual keying)
>
> The problem described in TEST No 2 gives the answer to the question
"Why one is
> calling CQ on default 35 wpm but responds to those calling on 20 wpm
after some
> delay?" - because he/she does not posess the NECESSARY typewriter
copying
> and computer logging skills.
>
> Secondly - comuter logging contains another problem /skill to be
learned/
> --- > CONTROL CHARACTERS.
>
> The DupeSheet writing/checking skill, which is somewhat functionally
similar,
> is absolutely useless in this case. The only solution to learn how to
use these
> CTRL-_'s and ALT-_'s AUTOMATICALLY (!!!!!) would have been the good
SIMULATOR
> software. At this time I am not aware of any SIMULATOR both for CT
and TR that
> really simulates and TEACHES how to use all possibilities of these
nice
> commercial products including, especially, both S&P and CQ modes,
multiplier
> checks, editing fields and so on.
Well TR does in some degree (QTC, sprints), but that's a good point.
>
> Contest operation is a Battle-field and NOT a Training-ground. One
must fight
> and be well prepared to do this long before touching the first F1.
I think it's harder to be able to remember the call and start to
respond
immediately after hearing the last letter than typing it.
>
> Thirdly - another factor that influences the hand vs computer logging
speed
> ratio is the logging software itself. In other words, the
question
> is how close computer logging can approach the hand logging
QSO
> rate for someone who's able to handle any pile-up both on
SSB and CW
> and and was taught to do this by hand decade or so ago.
>
> I had no chance to try NA, so only CT and TR will be analized.
>
> Potentially, TR is faster and more convenient because of the less
keystrokes
> per QSO, extensive use of the ENTER key and provisions to pick up
tail-enders.
> Unfortunately all these advantages are "effectively killed" by the
nightmare
> of the Alt-E command. This is, for me at least, the weakest part of
the
> software that seriously degrades it's overall performance.
Well, the alt-e is DEFINITELY an issue, but i fail to see why it slows
you down (??)
>
> CT, on the other hand, does the editing in an elegant way, resulting
in much
> less possibility to miss the zone or country multiplier. But again
this advan-
> tage is "blocked" by things like: numeric keypad keys use, necessity
to
> push more different keys to log the QSO and no tail-end options.
>
> SSB contests.
I can't give an opinion since I usually don't work SSB contests.
> --------------
> Summary.
> --------
> 1.It is still not clear if existing computer contest logging is
superior
> to hand-logging based on QSO per hour criterium.
> 2.The existing contest logging software packages have to be upgraded
to
> allow using the best hand-logging tricks like: multiple tail-ending
or
> partial calls scooping( technique to write down parts of calls heard
in
> pile-up to work them aftrwards in a raw) etc.
That's a good suggestion. Tree, how about adding the following feature:
instead of the tail end key, a little window where you can type calls
or
partials and after the QSO is finished does the same as tail end??
(think WF1B does something like this?)
> 3.Editing the callsign field of any logged qso must lead to immediate
> corresponding change of all qso parameters i.e. multiplier(s) and
points
> (CT style) and be as easy as possible.
Amen (but Tree has closed down that issue)
> 4.In order to switch from hand logging to computer logging, one has
to
> have similar CW and voice copying speeds and "blind typing" skills
> BEFORE the actual changeover takes place.
>
> I would like to continue this discussion so please respond directly
at
> us5we@fairs.org
I'm replying to the group, since I think this is a good thread.
>
> 73,Vic
> Vic_Goncharsky US5WE/K1WE/S21ZM/SO9WE Local: 08:37 25
Jul 97
73 de
Ernesto LU6BEG
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/trlogfaq.html
Submissions: trlog@contesting.com
Administrative requests: trlog-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-trlog@contesting.com
Feature Wishlist: http://web.jzap.com/n6tr/trwish.html
|