Reasonable points as well. I am not a slouch at CW but I am far from
one of the best. The pileups I saw from J6 were bigger than anything I
recall from V47. I suspect J6 on CW was much more rare and we did not
have skimmer, code readers or computers for that matter. I tried
cutting my power back from 500 watts to 100 then 10 but the pile up was
still unmanageable for me. At 10 watts I was getting covered too much
to be productive. The choice was to stay there and work a rate of 50 an
hour or move. If I was doing CQ WW CW regularly from a DX location I
could certainly do better. It was a good learning experience for all of
us. If he had more elements we could have attempted to null out say NA
and concentrate on EU or Asia or vise versa.
I only recall having issues on 10m when the band was open what seemed
everywhere. Most of the other bands we were able to sit still and run
run run.
Mike W0MU
W0MU-1 CC Cluster w0mu.net:23 or w0mu-1.dnsdynamic.com
Http://www.w0mu.com
On 8/28/2012 1:05 PM, Steve London wrote:
> On 08/28/2012 08:09 AM, Ward Silver wrote:
>
>>> Option 1: DX quits and goes to beach.
>>> Option 2: DX tries calling someone on the same frequency.
>>> Option 3: DX starts S&P and never tries to resume running
>>> Option 4: DX asks up 3
>>> Option 5: DX asks up 5
>>> Option 6: DX asks up and listens 3-7 up
>> Jukka, there is another option that will surely become more popular: DX QSYs
>> and starts another smaller pileup.
>>
>>
>> Given that we now have the tools to know so much about who is operating
>> where, running strategies must evolve to limit the pileup size to maximize
>> rate.
> "We" have the tools ? Who is this "we" ?
>
> You mean, those who operate in the multi-op or single-op assisted categories
> that have DX spotting and Skimmer access, right ?
>
> For the rest of us traditionalists doing S&P, a frequency-hopping running
> station is nothing but a frustrating headache for several reasons:
>
> 1) If I work the station quickly, before they QSY, I have now marked them in
> the
> bandmap as worked. I go back on the hunt, and a few minutes later, find
> another
> pileup. But, alas, it's the same station I just worked. Time wasted,
> especially
> if they are using the so-called pileup-reducing technique of rarely signing
> their call.
>
> 2) If I can't easily break the pileup, I mark them in the bandmap as unworked,
> and come back later. But, drat, they are gone. I can only hope I stumble
> across
> them again.
>
> Please, let's not promote frequency hopping as a recommended operating
> technique !
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|