[Skimmertalk] Skimmer Tests during SS

[David Robbins K1TTT]

I am wondering... in ss it is relatively unique that you send your call as
part of the exchange.  I wonder if skimmer was accidentally picking up on
stations calling the one who was cqing?  


David Robbins K1TTT
e-mail: mailto:k1ttt at arrl.net
web: http://www.k1ttt.net
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dick Green WC1M [mailto:wc1m at msn.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 19:42
> To: 'Pete Smith'; skimmertalk at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [Skimmertalk] Skimmer Tests during SS
> 
> Jim and I have been discussing his report offline. His results don't
> correlate with mine in IARU CW, where I often got more spots for CQing
> stations than I could keep up with, and accuracy was outstanding.
> 
> While Pete is probably correct about the effect of SO2R time delays on
> finding CQing stations, another reason for the low hit rate is that it's
> quite common for stations CQing in SS to simply send something like "SS
> <call sign> <call sign> SS". The words "CQ" and "TEST" are often omitted.
> CW
> Skimmer doesn't have SS-specific code, does it? If not, I'm sure it will
> eventually... :-)
> 
> I agree on using Paranoid mode. With the right SCP file, that would have
> eliminated the non-USA calls, and I suspect it would have greatly reduced
> the number of busted calls that got mangled into valid FCC calls.
> 
> 73, Dick WC1M
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Pete Smith [mailto:n4zr at contesting.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 6:44 AM
> > To: skimmertalk at contesting.com
> > Subject: Re: [Skimmertalk] Skimmer Tests during SS
> >
> > I have posted the full report at
> > http://www.pvrc.org/~n4zr/K5QQ%20Skimmer%20Test%20-%202008%20SS.pdf
> >
> > His statistics are very interesting.  However, I'm a little skeptical
> > about
> > Jim's conclusion that I quoted below.  In my tests, if anything,
> > Skimmer
> > does not identify *enough* of the stations that are running.  It
> > relies on
> > markers in the stations' transmissions, such as QRZ, TEST,or CQ.  If a
> > station is running on a frequency, just signing [call] TU or[call] UP,
> > then
> > Skimmer doesn't know that he is "CQ-ing."
> >
> > I suspect that part of the problem Jim encountered is due to SO2R
> > stations
> > CQing, and then taking a pretty long time to work someone they find on
> > the
> > second radio.  The issue with busted calls is real, of course, and
> > many of
> > them are going to be legitimate calls, because even in Aggressive mode
> > Skimmer is relying on patterns rather than a positive list.  If you
> > want to
> > cut way down on the number of busted calls, switch to Paranoid, and
> > make
> > sure Skimmer is pointed to a current master.dta file.
> >
> > 73, Pete
> >
> >    At 05:36 PM 11/14/2008, Jim Baremore wrote:
> > >I performed this evaluation at 8 different intervals during the
> > contest and
> > >did evaluations on 20, 40 and 80.  All total 359 spots were tested.
> > Of
> > >those, only 111 were the station CW Skimmer was indicated on the
> > frequency.
> > >30 were for a station whose callsign was close but which I judged
> > Skimmer
> > >had missed a dit or something and mangled it into another call.
> > >Interestingly enough, the mangled call was still a valid FCC call.
> > Finally,
> > >218 spots were for stations no longer on the frequency.  Most likely
> > they
> > >were stations just worked by the station running the frequency.
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Skimmertalk mailing list
> Skimmertalk at contesting.com
> http://dayton.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/skimmertalk