Hi, While I do agree with the below, one thing we should keep in mind though is that there's a difference between a pile-up on HF and on an FM sat. Not everybody on the sat may be actually interested in working that particular station so we also have to give those some room (in that 10 minute pass). On HF the time it takes to work the pile-up is usually a lot longer than that.
One thing I'd be interested to explore though would be how many of the folks that work the FM sats regularly actually do work DX on HF and often find themselves in a pile-up trying to get through quick and clean. This is out of pure interest and may help make it easier for some. The other problem is that before the madness starts, there are always other stations already working contacts before the "rare grid" station comes into the footprint. Of course the best solution would be to get on the linear birds, we all win the lottery so that we can launch another Phase III sat or two and it would'nt be a problem anymore. (Ok, ok .. just teasing). 73 Mike K5TRI On Oct 2, 2011, at 4:09 PM, James Duffey wrote: > Sebastion - Good points. Here are some more. > > The best contest and pileup ops are those that get it right the first time. > If you ever see a video of a high rate contest station or DXpedition it > doesn't seem like they are going that fast, but they are doing rates of 120+. > They use their exchanges effectively. > > Anyone can improve their rate. Always use phonetics. If you get part of a > call give a report and get his call when he gives his report. Use numbers > instead of decades, that is say six five instead of sixty five. Minimize the > chit chat. These procedures lead to getting the exchanges and calls right > with a minimum of exchanges. > > Example: > ... > > TU QRZ Kilo Kilo Six Mike Charlie > > ...Pileup... > > Four Alpha Sierra Delta Mike Six Five > > Kilo Kilo Six Mike Charlie QSL Echo Lima Eight Four Whiskey Four Alpha > Sierra > > Whiskey Four Alpha Sierra TU QRZ Kilo Kilo Six Mike Charlie > > pileup > > repeat > > If you have to call CQ more than once it isn't a pileup. :^)= > > Of course you can't control what the other guy sends, but you can control > what you send and the tempo of the whole exchange, which is what it takes to > make a lot of QSOs in a short time. It is easy to get overwhelmed, and that > is OK, but don't let the pileup know. > > Fills take up a lot of time and anything you can do to minimize it with good > operating practices will improve rate. This procedure also satisfies those, > mostly weak signal ops, who want a valid QSO to consist of both stations > copying both calls, a significant piece of information (grid square), and > then confirming that the information has been exchanged. This is a valid > point, although many, particularly on HF do not necessarily agree. > > CW simplifies things a bit, plus there are fewer calling. > > Of course the real problem is getting newcomers to move up to linear > satellites where multiple QSOs can be supported. - DUffey KK6MC > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. >> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! >> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > > > _______________________________________________ > Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! > Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb _______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
