CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Determining ASSISTED vs NON-ASSISTED -- was: =>RE:Cheat

To: "JVarney" <jvarn359@yahoo.com>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Determining ASSISTED vs NON-ASSISTED -- was: =>RE:Cheating and bad journalism
From: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Reply-to: Tom W8JI <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 13:14:46 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> I agree. An example of hair splitting centers around the use of 
> panadapters and bandscopes.

With a really good peak storage spectrum analyzer set with the correct 
bandwidth and the correct attenuator makes a pileup show up just about as 
soon as it happens and stays there just like a marker. It's better than 
anything.

Just don't try a DSP based analyzer because the wide spaced dynamic range is 
too poor to work. Something high end from around the 90's is great, because 
it is usually analog filtered near the front end.

If a good analyzer is used, it is somewhere between using the cluster and 
running unassisted. I tried panadaptor radios and SDR radios, and they are 
about like modern analyzers. Nearly useless while the main transmitter is 
running. I don't think people can use them much more effectively than just 
tuning.


_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>