Yes, cw skimmer itself can record the raw iq data for later user. It only
provides a demodulator that goes up to 700hz for cw use. Also there are
other apps that come with the sdr's that can record the raw data. Sdr-iq
has their control app called spectravue that records anything and can
playback and demodulate ssb, am, fm, and cw(but not decode it)... you could
of course playback the ssb audio and use external fsk, psk, or other sound
card apps to decode the other modes. PowerSDR is another app that works on
flex-1000, flex-5000, soft rock 40, or pre-recorded files and demodulates
other modes and does some other processing.
David Robbins K1TTT
e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net
web: http://www.k1ttt.net
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:cq-contest-
> bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ted Bryant
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 01:31
> To: Tree; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] How many more creative subjects using
> "skimmer"arethere?
>
>
> Tree said:
>
> "...When I saw the skimmer demonstrated to me (thanks N6TV), I could see
> that
> he had a file on his laptop that contained a whole band of a contest
> (works
> for both SSB and CW for this)..."
>
> and
>
> "..You could pick and time and a frequency and go listen to someone.
> Wow!..."
>
> I was not aware that the Skimmer worked for ssb. Nor did I know that it
> actually recorded what it
> was hearing. Rather, I thought it merely decoded the cw signals and
> displayed them on a bandmap.
> Was this some even more advanced version Skimmer that was demonstrated?
>
> Ted W4NZ
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:cq-contest-
> bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Tree
> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 12:31 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] How many more creative subjects using "skimmer"
> arethere?
>
>
>
> Lots of interesting reading on cq-contest about the skimmer concept.
>
> I think it is fair to say "one size does not fit all". What is one
> person's
> idea of a natural extension of technology will be another person's
> nightmare
> that contesting as a sport is being demolished.
>
> I believe that eventually, we will find that the skimmer will require some
> updating on the definition of what a single-operator is (either assisted
> or unassisted) and that the "classic" category of a skimmerless unassisted
> operator will be perserved - at least in most of the major contests.
>
> However, with this development - there are some good questions being asked
> about enforcement. Here is an area where technology is also making
> improvements - and they don't have to be constrained by classifications.
> In other words, log checking can always enter the "multi-operator, multi-
> computer, full internet access, unlimited, skimmer" category. :-)
>
> When I saw the skimmer demonstrated to me (thanks N6TV), I could see that
> he had a file on his laptop that contained a whole band of a contest
> (works
> for both SSB and CW for this).
>
> You could pick and time and a frequency and go listen to someone. Wow!
>
> I can now go back and check to make sure someone actually QSY'd 5 khz
> before CQing again in a sprint. I can verify that so-and-so actually
> didn't send their callsign as part of the exchange... or prove that
> someone else didn't send a signal report as part of their exchange.
>
> This is almost enough to give me a log checking orgasm.
>
> I am just imagining getting these types of files from various locations
> around the world - and it will enable me to go back and listen to most
> any QSO that occurred in the contest.
>
> I will now break my own rule about only trying to write about one topic
> per message.
>
> This probably isn't enough to really be able to tell if someone is using a
> skimmer. However, most stations now have the technology available to them
> to actually record a contest. This can be done with a gigabyte or so of
> memory using your computer - and a program that can be running along with
> your logging software.
>
> FOR COMPETITIVE ENTRIES (which needs to be defined) - perhaps asking them
> to submit an audio recording of the contest could become "the standard"
> and that information will go a long way towards enforcing many of the
> current (and future) rules against assistance.
>
> Maybe this distinction between a competitive entries and "standard"
> entries
> will lead to a different log checking process for the competitive entries?
> This idea has been thrown around by those who felt checking ALL of the
> contest logs would lead to casual participants getting upset about their
> score being decreased. I don't know that this has actually happened
> however.
>
> Perhaps I have strayed enough from the original thread to stop now - but
> there
> are interesting ways that we can decide to score compeitive entries
> differently
> than participants that would be interesting to discuss.
>
> I guess my point in writing this was to point out that some of this new
> technology will advance the state of the art in log checking. As a second
> point - I am starting to agree with those who think the time has come to
> send in an audio file (or CD) along with your log.
>
> Tree N6TR
> tree@kkn.net
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.6/1407 - Release Date: 4/30/2008
> 11:35 AM
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|