--- "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson, electrical engineer"
<geraldj@isunet.net> wrote:
> At that point, why not have the computer copy, then
> the operator can
> take a long siesta and wander back to see how the
> contest went. Where's
> the OPERATOR SKILL in that?
The "skill" in this particular case is knowing how to
build such a sophisticated system, - nothing really
wrong with that. Not really any different than knowing
how to build an effective antenna system vs. trying to
"get by" with some random piece of wire a few feet off
the ground. Taking this thought a bit further consider
that ops could either build a such a highly
"automated" station using mediocre radios OR build a
more "traditional" station with good basic RF
performing radios/antennas. However it will be the AND
thinkers who build their stations using both the tried
and proven techniques combining good RF front
ends/antennas AND some powerful computing power (DSP
IF AND control software) that will become the
consistent winners. However they still need to be savy
about the nuances of radio propagation to be truly
successful, - that is something that will never
change.
Another good example of this can be seen by looking at
VHF contesting today, - the no code types vs. those
who use SSB AND CW AND WSJT that score better. The no
code ops will miss Q's and mult's that can only be
worked on CW, the CW/SSB only ops (who are afraid of,
- or hate computers) will miss Q's/mult's that can
only be worked with WSJT, but the ops who use all
three modes/methods will score best.
Like a local no code
> Extra who claims 100
> countries on CW but can't copy CW in the real world.
> Just spent the
> right money on computer software and computer
> controlled radios.
So he is also an OR thinker, (learn code OR use a
computer) if he was an AND thinker he would probably
have 200 countries on CW now because he could then
work CW both with and without a computer.
> The local logging software produced by ISU students
> hasn't been nearly
> so sophisticated and often takes more time to log
> than to make the
> contact, sometimes two or three times longer to log
> than to make
> contests. I ran much better scores on paper logs in
> the past. Besides I
> don't copy to keyboard nearly as fast or accurately
> as to paper.
If the logging software is that hard to use then it
needs to be scrapped and rewritten from scratch. I for
one will never again use paper logging in a contest,
and I'm not even remotely a touch typist. Infact I'm
glad that I did go to computer contest logging in
1991, having done that sure made importing all of them
into my master log (VQLog) quite easy (the 1988-1990
logs were "imported" into VQLog manually, a huge pain,
- and I still have 1980-1987 to go :( ). Once imported
it is fun to extract all sorts of QSO and grid data
from the master log, can't do that on paper very
quickly.
So ham radio really is not about choosing one thing OR
the other but is instead a case of adding newer
technologies without necessarily throwing away
anything that's already proven good. A radio with a
solid analog RF chain preceding a DSP IF (like the
Orion) is an example of AND thinking, it uses cutting
edge DSP AND a top notch performing analog RF/IF chain
ahead of it. However neither a solid RF front end OR
DSP IF alone will be cutting edge by themselves. But
yet so many out in hamdom seem to think you must
choose one OR the other, simply not true, you can have
both (AND).
Duane
N9DG
> 73, Jerry, K0CQ
>
> --
> Entire content copyright Dr. Gerald N. Johnson,
> electrical engineer.
> Reproduction by permission only.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
|