[CQ-Contest] Questions on Pile-Up Management

[Eric Scace K3NA]

---- Original Message ----- 
From: "VA3NR" <va3nr at arrl.net>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 11:30 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Questions on Pile-up Management



> >I have a couple questions for those experienced running CW
> >pile-ups:
> >
> > 1) I know its best to pick out a full callsign after just
> > one call.  My question is for those times when you can't
> > pick out a full callsign, is it better to send a partial
> > call (e.g. 1AW 5NN4) to keep the rhythm going or should
> > you pause and allow the pile-up to call second a time?
>   

I almost never let the pile-up call again without making a transmission.  One wants the pile-up to develop a rhythm... to know that you will make SOME kind of transmission after the first 3 seconds.  That gets most of the pile in the habit of stopping transmission to listen, which means more stations will be listening when you make your transmission.

So now, what to send?

If I only have a partial call, normally I just send the partial call with a ?.  The risk in continuing to send the exchange is that the full call never gets completed.  "1AW?" or, often, the question mark in the uncertain locations "W1?W"

However, if the pile is very small and the signal of the caller station was good (i.e., I just fumbled the reception, or he got briefly stepped on), I would go ahead to send the exchange with the partial call... and repeat the call fragment with ? at the end of the transmission to emphasize that I only have a fragment.  Remember, the other station may have as much trouble hearing you as you have hearing him, or even more!  It's critical to convey to that station that you do not have his full call!  Otherwise he may just rattle off his exchange and go away -- and you'll have to remove the potential Q.  A second reason for making the call transmission at the end is that more of the pile has (hopefully) stopped transmitting as they notice you're already answering someone... and they can get the idea to whom you're responding.  So, only with small pileup and good signals, I send: "?1AW 599 5 ?1AW"


> >
> > 2) Occasionally when I get the chance to run a CW pile-up
> > I'll get callers who seem to mis-read my exhange to
> > someone else as their own.  For example, I send  W1AW 5NN4
> > and besides the intended  W1AW  I also get some other
> > station sending me a report.  If I just send  R TU  to
> > continue the pileup then both  W1AW plus the mystery
> > caller are logging me but I'm only logging W1AW.  The
> > mystery caller isn't going to call me again in the test
> > because he thinks we've worked and I've lost a potential
> > QSO.  Is there a good way to recover these QSO's without
> > breaking rhythm?
>   

If I copied both stations, I log both.

If I only copied one, I repeat the call of the station to whom I am responding: W1AW TU K3NA

If I copied more than one call in the initial pileup, and picked W1AW to answer first, I will use the "next" approach:
   TU NW W4BVV 5NN 5
But I never grab a second call from the unruly operators who keep calling while I am working someone; that just encourages unruly behavior.  Even if I know exactly the call of an unruly operator, I will only answer him after he has made his transmission at the proper time.

-- Eric K3NA