Using CW - the all important final confirmation of your QSO

Brian,

According to F6EAZ, HamCall World-Wide Callsign Database

His email address is: christianduclos21@orange.fr

73, Colin G8TMV

Thanks, Colin, I hadnā€™t heard of that site.

Brian

I find this conversation all rather unnecessary personally.

SOTA pile-ups are great fun, and managing them is great fun. Part of managing them is managing the disruptive callers, and part of the fun is improving oneā€™s own operating techniques to do this more effectively.

I suspect some of the major DXpedition ops would laugh their heads off if they saw us moaning about SOTA pile-ups!

1 Like

I have to agree. Why is Colin outing this station?

Can someone give a good reason why SOTA must tolerate persistent Lids just because poor practices are common and uncontrolled in other circles? SOTA is not the same as DXpeditiions (or contesting, either), because the MT actually does have the means - and the will - to sanction bad behavior. We just have to provide the ammunition needed by the MT to keep SOTA from sinking to the lowest standard of misbehavior.

Gary, K9ZMD
Ridgefield, WA

Simply because (in my opinion) a punitive approach by MT will not work. Activatorsā€™ operating protocol is the answer.

Also, this idea of several incoming complaints resulting in a warning (or more) being issued is clearly open to abuse/manipulation.

This topic is all unnecessary. As an activator, work all the callers who are cooperating with how you are running the frequency, and donā€™t work those that are operating inconsiderately. It is THAT easy - and it works. The ā€œlidsā€ soon change their ways, and eventually they get worked too.

And if it can be solved during the activation, as easily as that, then why is there any need for a public discussion, complaining, reporting, warnings, sanctions etc?

1 Like

If the lids let it! Have you actually read post eleven?

Brian

You could move to VK, no such problems downunder :wink:

I wasnā€™t ā€˜outingā€™ them. I was providing a previously referenced station operators email address to a member of the MT to enable him to more easily do his job.

73, Colin G8TMV

Indeed I have Brian. I maintain that it is the activator who is in control, not the disruptor.

I almost always eliminate such problems by sticking to my guns with my operating. On the very rare occasions such as that described by Victor, the solution is simply to QSY. If then in the extraordinarily rare instance that the QRMer follows to the new frequency and resumes disruptive operating (once in 1800+ activations for me), then Iā€™d try a band AND mode change, or just go QRT.

One thing Iā€™d never do (and I believe that this is the golden rule for the major DXpeditioners too) is work the disruptive caller ā€œto get them out of the wayā€. This could very well encourage future problems. However, once they are waiting, listening and operating considerately, I will work them - I donā€™t bear a grudge!

Give me an unruly pile-up over a slow trickle of calls any day.

Morning Tom

You have different ideas than I have on how to improve the standard of operating within SOTA.

The proper and most effective and skilful way to get rid of the few poor operators spoiling things is to work split frequency, not to QSY or go QRT at the expense of contacts with the vast majority of chasers who should not suffer because of the occasional QRMer. Iā€™ve gone split on CW in SOTA as others have on occasion. Iā€™d rather not go split but will when it is necessary. However, if the operator making life difficult for everyone else doesnā€™t catch on that you are listening up he will of course continue to make QRM for the chasers who will now be calling up. The main though is that the activator will now be able to hear the stations calling him in the clear by adjusting his VFO-B between contacts as necessary.

73 Phil

Yes, It seems very questionable also to me to push one single chaser as scapegoat, because the problem is a very human and therefore refers in principle to most of the ambitious participants. There must be only a special incentive (e.g. a new summit reference, beat a playerā€™s wrong) and the good intentions are quickly thrown overboard.

My proven practice to work down a pileup without any stress:
1st answer all (!) repetitive triple calls (they are QRO and do not wait, Tom!)
2nd answer all (!) regular triple calls
3rd answer all (!) repetitive dual calls (they are QRO and do not wait, Tom!)
4th answer all (!) regular dual calls
That all goes very quickly and is IMO really not worth mentioning.
5th turn the paper log (ā€¦) and answer all the remaining calls.
However, there is no guarantee that after some time not again a triple/dual caller appears, hi.

Of course they do - if the activator makes them wait :wink:

OK, some donā€™t, and you hear them send ā€œTU 73ā€. I make a quick note of their call and email them when I get home to say ā€œNILā€ (if they appear in the list of ā€œWho chased me?ā€).

Surely if you become known for answering repetitive triple calls first, then you will get an increase in the amount of stations that call you in this inconsiderate manner. I do the opposite - they go to the back of the queue on my activations!

Ok, you can let them wait for an answer but in practice they will not be *quiet" during this time :wink:, what makes no fun, neither for the activator even for the chasers.
Said everything now from me.

So letā€™s suggest that we could mix the two suggestions by Tom and Heinz. If it were me as an activator, I would not work the ā€œalligators and long callersā€ - certainly not when I can hear other stations and pick them off after their first call, of course a narrow CW filter / tight DSP helps. The trouble is these good operators who send their well timed call the once may well not hear me because the alligator is still sending his call a 2nd or 3rd time and will probably stick a K on the end as wellā€¦ Some may also run high power or have an efficient antenna as they are often very strong. I would always go straight back to the guy who calls once.

If the alligators were persistent I would try to ignore them and not work them. If this did not work I would go split on CW and listen up 1-2 KHz rather than QSY and lose the pile up. I would never go QRT that is admitting defeat and the good guys would lose out!

I am looking at this from the view of a chaser and also as an activator as I do both. As someone chasing most days I hear more of this bad practice than you would do on an occasional activation.

73 one and all

Phil

It can be counterproductive when chasers move off my frequency to give me a difference tone, but even with a 300Hz filter I find a little ā€œspreadā€ often works wonders and enables me to pick out a call quickly. Too far and the chaser goes out of the passband.

Over the years I have tried several ways of sorting out the over-calling / persistent calling problem, even resorting to asking ā€œcall once onlyā€ or throwing a wobbly some other way on a few occasions. Such attempts have usually proved to be unsuccessful as those causing the problem have limited CW capabilityā€¦ but they certainly know their own callsign!

Nowadays I usually stop keying for a short period or send a long series of dots which allows me to make a point. As a last resort I move up or down a couple of kHz as I donā€™t like working split. Having chasers running tens of watts on the frequency helps keep it clear of non-SOTA traffic.The RBN system we have usually picks up the move if I have to make one.

73, Gerald G4OIG

1 Like

In this simple graph I want to represent what might be the sequence of a standard CW SOTA QSO during an activation:
First row is the time in seconds and itā€™s purely an estimate, which, obviously varies depending on the CW speed and the informations exchanged during the QSO. Donā€™t pay much attention to it as itā€™s not my intention to focus on that at all.
After the first CQ SOTA call from the activator (not shown in this graph), we have the pile up of several chasers calling. This is where my graph starts.
Then the activators picks up one single callsign and gives the report overlapping other chasers calling for some time but hopefully not all the time,
The picked up station comes back and gives his report to the activator.
Finally the activator confirms the good reception of the substantial information and calls QRZ? for the next QSO.

The key is that the operator must be able to have a good perception of the size of the pile-up and the possible duration of the tail ending callers and in case the activator picks a callsing up quickly and starts sending the picked up callsign plus the signal report, itā€™s very likely that the picked up station and many other chasers in the pile up are not copying what the activator is transmitting because some other chasers may still be tail-end calling.

Thatā€™s why I recommend a very good practice that I heard to a HB9 activator some time ago and I have now incorporated to my ā€œmodus operandiā€ particularly in the begining of the activations when the pile up is big.
This practice consists in when picking up a callsing in the pile-up, responding by sending it once in the begining of the transmission, then sending the usual information like GM TKS NAME UR RPRT and finally sending the picked up station callsing again plus BK. By this time, all or most of the chasers in the pile-up will have got quiet and will have been able to copy the callsing of the picked up station, so all of them will stand by and only this picked up one will come back to the activator to give his signal report.
This practice works very well for me and I highly recommend you to adopt it.

I agree with Tom M1EYP that the activator has the power and should have the skills to handle the pile-up in a way that all chasers behave smoothly and disciplined.

Best 73 de Guru

2 Likes

OK, I have sat on this all day.

Firstly, from a personal point of view, I feel itā€™s important for me to state that I struggle to communicate what I mean. Iā€™ve always struggled with interacting with people, ham radio has been an important tool for me to grow more confident in speaking to people.

Right, thatā€™s my personal history out of the way, so I hope I can get across my feelings in the manner that I mean them.

Phil, I regard you as a friend and I look up to you as an experienced op, so I hope the following is taken more in a constructive way rather than a nag.

Today, I saw that Tom M1EYP was planning to activate G/SP-004 on 40m/30m/20m CW. Every so often I go out into the garden and set up my SOTA dipole in order to work a particular activator just for a bit of fun. I thought I stood a reasonable chance of working Tom M1EYP on 40m with my highest power level of 5w. I was all set when the spot for M1EYP/P showed up on 20m. I could hear the chasers but nothing from Tom. 30m was the same as 20m. I heard the chaser pack die down on 30m so I changed my station on to 40m to be ready for Tom when he QSYd.

I heard the sound of someone tuning up and then a couple of QRL?s. I zero-beated and then was delighted that it was Tom who started calling CQ. My method for working activators with my QRP is to get in there straight away before the spot has even hit, otherwise Iā€™m fighting with the ā€˜big boysā€™ for a while. I called Tom after his CQ and he came back with my call and RST, I responded with Tomā€™s report (449) and sent ā€˜BKā€™ in order for Tom to respond with the final confirmation. I could not hear my final confirmation because immediately after my ā€˜BKā€™ my ears were filled with a very loud ā€˜G4OBKā€™. I managed to hear a small part of Tomā€™s final over, so as far as Iā€™m concerned, he must have got my report OK.

My view is that I think this sort of thing happens, like it or not, SOTA is competive - I was being competive by trying to beat all other chasers to get in there first. The thing that has wobbled me a bit is that you have made a specific point of pointing out that this sort of behaviour is not to be endorsed, yet today you did exactly this to me.

Like I said above, and to reiterate, I regard you as a friend and I hope we remain as friends, and again, I just accept that this sort of thing happens as a QRP only op, Iā€™m used to having to give way to the big stations, thatā€™s just the way it is. I just find it a bit hypocrital to preach one thing and do another.

I donā€™t know the circumstances at your end, maybe you couldnā€™t hear me, maybe youā€™d misunderstood that Tom was in QSO. In all honesty, I mean this to be constructive and maybe the F6*** station that has come under fire can be given a little more benefit of the doubt.

Vy 73
Colin

HI Colin

I certainly didnā€™t hear you working Tom Colin, bearing in mind that I will have been running 150 watts with a high dipole, and I didnā€™t for sure call over Tom sending as he was a good signal with me at the time on 40m, after being unreadable earlier on 20m and 30m. Tom may recall the QSO. To me I just came straight on to the frequency of Tomā€™s spot and worked him. I believed Tom had completed his previous QSO (which was obviously with you) and so I called him, as you do, that is all I can recall. Sorry if this situation has upset you, which it clearly has.

73 Phil

I appreciate the response Phil. Like I said, Iā€™m only bothered because you brought it up here.

Iā€™m 100% that Tom was still in QSO with me when you called and Iā€™m also sure that youā€™re calling was not intentionally to wipe me out. You did call over Tom sending, I am not mistaken. Everyone is human though and I accept that. As Iā€™d been on frequency longer, I had a better grasp of the situation in this case.

73, Colin