----- Original Message -----
From: "Jan Verduyn" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: LF: CW Skimmer
It is virtually impossible for a machine to read poor morse because when the
elements are split up you get a different character to that intended.
> I expect it is only a matter of time before CW Skimmer will cope with poor
> quality CW signals, similarly to what CWGet is apparently capable of.
> Just a case of implementing an the algorithm. If I had to name software
> authors who are capable of doing this than Alex the author of CW Skimmer
> would be at the top of my list...
>
> It's not that many years ago that a skilled CW operator beat the PC at
> decoding CW signals just below noiselevel...with QRSS this has now been
> accepted that a PC does better.
>
> I ran CW Skimmer during 160m contest on 26th Jan and it decoded some 130+
> stations using a softrock RX... extremely impressive software
What about the 700 plus that you missed.
>
> Jan G0BBL
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roman ." <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 4:34 AM
> Subject: Re: LF: CW Skimmer
>
>
> That systems are working with 'ideal' quality CW signal only.
> The other famous shareware program CW skimmer in russia is UA9OSV CwGet:
> http://www.dxsoft.com/ru/products/cwget/
>
>
>
> * John W Gould <[email protected]> [Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:54:10 -0000]:
> > Not sure if this has been mentioned on this group but an interesting
> > piece
> > of software by Alex, VE3NEA, called CW Skimmer has recently been made
> > available, see
> > http://www.dxatlas.com/CwSkimmer/
> >
> > Although the software costs $75 one can download a trial version (30
> > days).
> > It's interesting to see that whilst away from the shack this evening
> the
> > program correctly identified G3KEV (501.9 at 19:35) and also G0MRF
> > (503.0 at
> > 19:37). The callsign picking routine must have been designed for the
> > HF
> > bands, where the protocol is very mature, so got a bit confused with
> the
> > protocol used on 500kHz and eventually decided that David callsign was
> > IO91TK!
> >
> > It seems to need a reasonable S/N, but could be quite useful if one is
> > not
> > able to personally monitor the band all of the time. Have others
> tried
> > it?
> >
> > 73 John, G3WKL
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Roman ..
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.5/1279 - Release Date:
14/02/2008 18:35
>
|
