Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Working more people

Expand Messages
  • Andrew T. Flowers, K0SM
    ... David, fellow Ping Jockeys; We found ourselves in that situation too. I put some thought into it and it occured to me that we could double or triple our
    Message 1 of 7 , Jan 23, 2006
      David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD wrote:

      > wonder if we can all agree on a "symbol" that could
      >be added to one of the messages that would designate that more than one
      >station was calling.
      >
      >at least then, they could exercise much more patience before giving up.
      >
      >
      David, fellow Ping Jockeys;

      We found ourselves in that situation too. I put some thought into it
      and it occured to me that we could double or triple our QSO efficiency
      by working more than one person at a time. It doesn't make any sense to
      one station at a time when time is precious. This is especially true on
      6m where to the bursts are long enough to support the necessary
      overhead. (I seem to remember some of the VK's doing something like
      this a while back. Any wisdom to share?).

      To do this we would need to:
      1) agree on an an unambiguios, realtively intuitive message format
      2) make the format well known in advance and get it into practice (more
      on this below)

      I sat down an wrote out some ideas of how we might modify the standard
      procedure:

      1) Let's say K1ABC calls CQ and gets a response from KT4JA.

      This is straightforward. K1ABC starts to send: "KT4JAK1ABC FN31"

      2) On the next RX period K1ABC sees that KT4JA is also answering him,
      and he receives a R FM15 from WD4KPD. Instead finishing the QSO with
      David before moving onto KT4JA, why not send to both stations?
      I was thinking of proceding each message with the station it is
      addressed too and the sending callsign, when needed always proceeded by
      "DE".

      ...WD4KPD RRR KT4JA FN31 DE K1ABC....

      Of course the other stations should now realize that more than one
      station is on frequency and should ID *their* messages to avoid confusion:

      WD4KPD would respond with "ABC KPD 73 or maybe just "KPD 73",
      KT4JA would respond with "ABC JA REL97" or just "JA REL97"

      I can see several advantages to doing things this way:

      1) "Tailending" doesn't require any waiting around--stations won't blow
      you off because you came back to someone else first, and they could call
      you in the middle of a QSO (something many of us encourage anyway)
      2) You can double- or triple-up your skeds and still finish in the same
      amount of time.
      3) DXpeditions work more people in the same amount of time
      4) Encourages random QSOs
      5) Encourages more contesters to do WSJT. I know several single-ops who
      don't do FSK either because it's not worth it to loose the sleep or
      because they don't like the idea of making skeds. We can take down both
      of those barriers.

      As for making it common knowledge and practice, I think changing the
      interface to make it easy to properly format the messages (whatever we
      decide upon) would be helpful. That way you don't have to type all this
      stuff by hand and risk screwing up the format. It would be lots of fun
      to see what kinds of "rates" you could get run on MS in the random hours
      and in the VHF contests themselves. I am happy to help design the GUI
      interface (I do java best, but I could write it using glade or something
      else), though I don't know much about interfacing it with the existing
      WSJT backend. I'm happy to kick out a "dummy" program later this week
      that would generate the proper messages from a simple user interface. I
      think it would be lots of fun to try something like this in the June and
      September contests when the meteors have potential for much better
      propagation. We could have some really wild times.

      Thoughts? Comments?

      Andy





      --
      No virus found in this outgoing message.
      Checked by AVG Free Edition.
      Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.21/236 - Release Date: 1/20/2006
    • Rex Moncur
      Hi All Andy remarked: (I seem to remember some of the VK s doing something like this a while back. Any wisdom to share?). In VK we normally work two stations
      Message 2 of 7 , Jan 24, 2006

        Hi All

         

        Andy remarked:

         

         (I seem to remember some of the VK's doing something like
        this a while back.  Any wisdom to share?).

         

        In VK we normally work two stations at a time during out activity sessions with a format like:

         

        VK2AWD/26 VK4CDI/R27 VK7MO

         

        Once callsigns are exchanged we abbreviate them as follows:

         

        AWD/RRR CDI/73 VK7MO

         

        Of course the longer messages mean you do not always get what you want in a single ping so it is slower to work individual stations but our feeling is you can increase your rate of contacts by around 50% - we would typically work 4 or 5 stations in an hour on two meters with this technique. I suspect this technique would work even better on 6 meters with the longer pings. WSJT limits one to working two stations at a time due to the message length constraints.

         

        You will notice that we do not repeat the reports so as to have a better chance of getting everything you need in a single ping.  This is not much of a limitation as if you have good decodes each side of a report you can be reasonably confident about it.

         

        73 Rex VK7MO

         


      • Russ K2TXB
        Actually, we already have a scheme for this. If in QSO on the calling frequency (or elsewhere when there is more than one caller), the correct procedure is to
        Message 3 of 7 , Jan 24, 2006
          Actually, we already have a scheme for this. If in QSO on the calling
          frequency (or elsewhere when there is more than one caller), the correct
          procedure is to use the suffix of the station you are working when sending
          reports, rogers, and 73's.

          So if I were working K0SM, I would send "SM RFM29", or SM RRR" or "SM 73".
          (Of course we do not use short hand messages in this situation.)

          This way, whenever any station copies any or your transmissions they can
          tell if you are working them, or someone else.

          If a station realizes that you are working someone else, then they can
          either continue calling, or wait until they hear you send RRR or 73. I
          would prefer that people continue calling as it is easy to copy both at once
          and I can then begin calling the second station in lieu of sending 73 to the
          first one.

          I think that covers it. However there is a somewhat related situation I
          would like to comment on. During the January contest I observed several
          stations calling CQ on 144.140. None of them, except me, were using offset
          frequencies. Why not? A contest is the right time to use this method
          because it relieves a lot of QRM on the calling frequency. As it was, I
          decided to wait until two close by stations finished working a station
          before I could call another station who was CQ'ing. I do not mind if
          stations call at the same time I am working someone (on the same sequence),
          and I think that most people who frequent this reflector and Ping Jockey,
          know that is acceptable practice. But these other guys were contest
          stations who do not normally work HSMS at non contest times. I was afraid
          that they would take my calling at the same time they were working someone
          as deliberate interference.

          This would not be an issue if everyone would use the offset frequency
          method!

          73, Russ K2TXB

          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
          > [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrew T.
          > Flowers, K0SM
          > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 2:57 AM
          > To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: [wsjtgroup] Working more people
          >
          > David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD wrote:
          >
          > > wonder if we can all agree on a "symbol" that could be
          > added to one of
          > >the messages that would designate that more than one station was
          > >calling.
          > >
          > >at least then, they could exercise much more patience
          > before giving up.
          > >
          > >
          > David, fellow Ping Jockeys;
          >
          > We found ourselves in that situation too. I put some thought
          > into it and it occured to me that we could double or triple
          > our QSO efficiency by working more than one person at a time.
          > It doesn't make any sense to one station at a time when time
          > is precious. This is especially true on 6m where to the
          > bursts are long enough to support the necessary overhead. (I
          > seem to remember some of the VK's doing something like this a
          > while back. Any wisdom to share?).
          >
          > To do this we would need to:
          > 1) agree on an an unambiguios, realtively intuitive message format
          > 2) make the format well known in advance and get it into
          > practice (more on this below)
          >
          > I sat down an wrote out some ideas of how we might modify the standard
          > procedure:
          >
          > 1) Let's say K1ABC calls CQ and gets a response from KT4JA.
          >
          > This is straightforward. K1ABC starts to send: "KT4JAK1ABC FN31"
          >
          > 2) On the next RX period K1ABC sees that KT4JA is also answering him,
          > and he receives a R FM15 from WD4KPD. Instead finishing the
          > QSO with
          > David before moving onto KT4JA, why not send to both stations?
          > I was thinking of proceding each message with the station it
          > is addressed too and the sending callsign, when needed always
          > proceeded by "DE".
          >
          > ...WD4KPD RRR KT4JA FN31 DE K1ABC....
          >
          > Of course the other stations should now realize that more
          > than one station is on frequency and should ID *their*
          > messages to avoid confusion:
          >
          > WD4KPD would respond with "ABC KPD 73 or maybe just "KPD 73",
          > KT4JA would respond with "ABC JA REL97" or just "JA REL97"
          >
          > I can see several advantages to doing things this way:
          >
          > 1) "Tailending" doesn't require any waiting around--stations
          > won't blow you off because you came back to someone else
          > first, and they could call you in the middle of a QSO
          > (something many of us encourage anyway)
          > 2) You can double- or triple-up your skeds and still finish
          > in the same amount of time.
          > 3) DXpeditions work more people in the same amount of time
          > 4) Encourages random QSOs
          > 5) Encourages more contesters to do WSJT. I know several
          > single-ops who don't do FSK either because it's not worth it
          > to loose the sleep or because they don't like the idea of
          > making skeds. We can take down both of those barriers.
          >
          > As for making it common knowledge and practice, I think
          > changing the interface to make it easy to properly format the
          > messages (whatever we decide upon) would be helpful. That
          > way you don't have to type all this stuff by hand and risk
          > screwing up the format. It would be lots of fun to see what
          > kinds of "rates" you could get run on MS in the random hours
          > and in the VHF contests themselves. I am happy to help
          > design the GUI interface (I do java best, but I could write
          > it using glade or something else), though I don't know much
          > about interfacing it with the existing WSJT backend. I'm
          > happy to kick out a "dummy" program later this week that
          > would generate the proper messages from a simple user
          > interface. I think it would be lots of fun to try something
          > like this in the June and September contests when the meteors
          > have potential for much better propagation. We could have
          > some really wild times.
          >
          > Thoughts? Comments?
          >
          > Andy
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > --
          > No virus found in this outgoing message.
          > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
          > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.21/236 - Release
          > Date: 1/20/2006
          >
          >
          >
          > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
          > wsjtgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > Activity Periods http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/
          > NAHSMS Contest Page http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/Rally/NAHSMS.htm
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • Andrew T. Flowers, K0SM
          ... I guess what I m proposing is that it makes sense to just have both stations continue simultaneous QSOs no matter what state the first QSO is in. If I
          Message 4 of 7 , Jan 24, 2006
            Russ K2TXB wrote:

            >If a station realizes that you are working someone else, then they can
            >either continue calling, or wait until they hear you send RRR or 73. I
            >would prefer that people continue calling as it is easy to copy both at once
            >and I can then begin calling the second station in lieu of sending 73 to the
            >first one.
            >
            I guess what I'm proposing is that it makes sense to just have both
            stations continue simultaneous QSOs no matter what state the first QSO
            is in. If I have a station with 50w and a dipole call me it's going to
            take a little longer to finish the QSO. I could probably work a couple
            big stations very quickly in the meantime. Why should they have to wait
            because I'm working a diffulcult QSO? I can start the QSO with the
            little guy, work the big guns quickly when they call, all the while
            sending the appropriate information to the little guy as we crawl
            through our QSO.

            Assuming you are K2TXB and K0SM is a puny station running 50w and a wet
            noodle, your transmitted messages might look something like this as you
            work K2DRH and W0VB in the meantime:

            (Hear K0SM responding to CQ)
            K0SM FM29 K2TXB FM29
            (next sequence you hear K2DRH also responding to CQ)
            K0SM FM29 K2DRH FM29 DE K2TXB
            (Hear R EN41 from K2DRH, nothing from SM yet)
            K0SM FM29 DRH RRR DE K2TXB
            (Hear 73 from DRH, hear W0VB calling, still nothing from SM)
            K0SM FM29 W0VB FM29 DE K2TXB
            (Hear R EN10 from K0SM, nothing from W0VB)
            SM RRR W0VB FM29 DE K2TXB
            (Hear R EN34 from W0VB)
            SM RRR W0VB RRR DE K2TXB
            (Hear 73 from W0VB)
            SM RRR

            You just worked three stations in 7 minutes. If you worked them
            linearly it would have taken about 15. I'm willing to bet that if it
            took 30 min for you to complete with K0SM you would have lost the QSOs
            with Terry and Bob because they would have had other places to be. I
            guess I really want to encourage us to get away from the
            first-in-first-out mentality as it really doesn't have to apply to
            FSK441. I think most of us would agree that on 6m these messages are
            not too long.

            As for the offset method, I agree with you wholeheartedly. We CQed with
            the offset all the time with good success on both 6 and 2m. The nice
            thing about QSYing in a crowded area is that it gives other local
            stations a chance to listen on the "other half" of the minute every now
            and again. Here in the northeast most everyone CQs on the 2nd half of
            the minute. Unfortunately, some of those down south are also CQing
            there on the same half. If nobody QSYed, the result is that we would
            never make contact because the nearby local stations are constantly
            TXing on that half of the minute, either CQing or in a QSO. If we allow
            ourselves to QSY off that frees up some listening time on the other half
            of the minute.

            I have to say that we were blown away by the random activity on 6m.
            K2AXX is only about 40 miles from W2FU, yet we worked people left and
            right and didn't cause each other any problems even though we are nearly
            line of sight and running KWs. We even got a chance to work some of the
            4's who were CQing on the same half of the minute because AXX or I would
            QSY off of .260 to work someone. I know we made at least 15 random QSOs
            on 6m at W2FU, mostly in the span of two hours! It's kinda scary to
            think this, but that far outweighs the value of staying on SSB/CW at
            that time because the QSO rate is just about the same and every QSO is a
            new multiplier. Have a look at K7BV's soapbox comments to get some
            perspective on what was available out there.

            Andy




            --
            No virus found in this outgoing message.
            Checked by AVG Free Edition.
            Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.22/238 - Release Date: 1/23/2006
          • Randy Tipton
            Russ, I agreee with all your comments, including... Snip: I ... The above method has worked for me many times and is more reliable than tring to tailend
            Message 5 of 7 , Jan 24, 2006
              Russ, I agreee with all your comments, including...

              Snip: I
              > would prefer that people continue calling as it is easy to copy both at
              > once
              > and I can then begin calling the second station in lieu of sending 73 to
              > the
              > first one.

              The above method has worked for me many times and is more reliable than
              tring to tailend because some stations don't listen after completing. Also
              when the other stations does complete he can start with TX2 provided he
              copied your pings while completing the other qso's.

              Example, last Saturday I copied KE2N during Random Hour on six meters. He
              was calling offset so I immediately started calling him. The distance is
              1302 miles. We knew there were probably only going to be pings every 5 - 10
              minutes at that distance. We continued calling Ken the entire time that he
              worked 4 or 5 other stations. Finally after he completed the easy ones, Ken
              called me and we made the contact.

              Tip



              > -----Original Message-----
              > From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On
              > Behalf Of Russ K2TXB
              > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 2:02 PM
              > To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
              > Subject: RE: [wsjtgroup] Working more people
              >
              > Actually, we already have a scheme for this. If in QSO on the calling
              > frequency (or elsewhere when there is more than one caller), the correct
              > procedure is to use the suffix of the station you are working when sending
              > reports, rogers, and 73's.
              >
              > So if I were working K0SM, I would send "SM RFM29", or SM RRR" or "SM 73".
              > (Of course we do not use short hand messages in this situation.)
              >
              > This way, whenever any station copies any or your transmissions they can
              > tell if you are working them, or someone else.
              >
              > If a station realizes that you are working someone else, then they can
              > either continue calling, or wait until they hear you send RRR or 73. I
              > would prefer that people continue calling as it is easy to copy both at
              > once
              > and I can then begin calling the second station in lieu of sending 73 to
              > the
              > first one.
              >
              > I think that covers it. However there is a somewhat related situation I
              > would like to comment on. During the January contest I observed several
              > stations calling CQ on 144.140. None of them, except me, were using
              > offset
              > frequencies. Why not? A contest is the right time to use this method
              > because it relieves a lot of QRM on the calling frequency. As it was, I
              > decided to wait until two close by stations finished working a station
              > before I could call another station who was CQ'ing. I do not mind if
              > stations call at the same time I am working someone (on the same
              > sequence),
              > and I think that most people who frequent this reflector and Ping Jockey,
              > know that is acceptable practice. But these other guys were contest
              > stations who do not normally work HSMS at non contest times. I was afraid
              > that they would take my calling at the same time they were working someone
              > as deliberate interference.
              >
              > This would not be an issue if everyone would use the offset frequency
              > method!
              >
              > 73, Russ K2TXB
              >
              > > -----Original Message-----
              > > From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
              > > [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrew T.
              > > Flowers, K0SM
              > > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 2:57 AM
              > > To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
              > > Subject: [wsjtgroup] Working more people
              > >
              > > David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD wrote:
              > >
              > > > wonder if we can all agree on a "symbol" that could be
              > > added to one of
              > > >the messages that would designate that more than one station was
              > > >calling.
              > > >
              > > >at least then, they could exercise much more patience
              > > before giving up.
              > > >
              > > >
              > > David, fellow Ping Jockeys;
              > >
              > > We found ourselves in that situation too. I put some thought
              > > into it and it occured to me that we could double or triple
              > > our QSO efficiency by working more than one person at a time.
              > > It doesn't make any sense to one station at a time when time
              > > is precious. This is especially true on 6m where to the
              > > bursts are long enough to support the necessary overhead. (I
              > > seem to remember some of the VK's doing something like this a
              > > while back. Any wisdom to share?).
              > >
              > > To do this we would need to:
              > > 1) agree on an an unambiguios, realtively intuitive message format
              > > 2) make the format well known in advance and get it into
              > > practice (more on this below)
              > >
              > > I sat down an wrote out some ideas of how we might modify the standard
              > > procedure:
              > >
              > > 1) Let's say K1ABC calls CQ and gets a response from KT4JA.
              > >
              > > This is straightforward. K1ABC starts to send: "KT4JAK1ABC FN31"
              > >
              > > 2) On the next RX period K1ABC sees that KT4JA is also answering him,
              > > and he receives a R FM15 from WD4KPD. Instead finishing the
              > > QSO with
              > > David before moving onto KT4JA, why not send to both stations?
              > > I was thinking of proceding each message with the station it
              > > is addressed too and the sending callsign, when needed always
              > > proceeded by "DE".
              > >
              > > ...WD4KPD RRR KT4JA FN31 DE K1ABC....
              > >
              > > Of course the other stations should now realize that more
              > > than one station is on frequency and should ID *their*
              > > messages to avoid confusion:
              > >
              > > WD4KPD would respond with "ABC KPD 73 or maybe just "KPD 73",
              > > KT4JA would respond with "ABC JA REL97" or just "JA REL97"
              > >
              > > I can see several advantages to doing things this way:
              > >
              > > 1) "Tailending" doesn't require any waiting around--stations
              > > won't blow you off because you came back to someone else
              > > first, and they could call you in the middle of a QSO
              > > (something many of us encourage anyway)
              > > 2) You can double- or triple-up your skeds and still finish
              > > in the same amount of time.
              > > 3) DXpeditions work more people in the same amount of time
              > > 4) Encourages random QSOs
              > > 5) Encourages more contesters to do WSJT. I know several
              > > single-ops who don't do FSK either because it's not worth it
              > > to loose the sleep or because they don't like the idea of
              > > making skeds. We can take down both of those barriers.
              > >
              > > As for making it common knowledge and practice, I think
              > > changing the interface to make it easy to properly format the
              > > messages (whatever we decide upon) would be helpful. That
              > > way you don't have to type all this stuff by hand and risk
              > > screwing up the format. It would be lots of fun to see what
              > > kinds of "rates" you could get run on MS in the random hours
              > > and in the VHF contests themselves. I am happy to help
              > > design the GUI interface (I do java best, but I could write
              > > it using glade or something else), though I don't know much
              > > about interfacing it with the existing WSJT backend. I'm
              > > happy to kick out a "dummy" program later this week that
              > > would generate the proper messages from a simple user
              > > interface. I think it would be lots of fun to try something
              > > like this in the June and September contests when the meteors
              > > have potential for much better propagation. We could have
              > > some really wild times.
              > >
              > > Thoughts? Comments?
              > >
              > > Andy
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > --
              > > No virus found in this outgoing message.
              > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
              > > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.21/236 - Release
              > > Date: 1/20/2006
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
              > > wsjtgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              > >
              > > Activity Periods http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/
              > > NAHSMS Contest Page http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/Rally/NAHSMS.htm
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Yahoo! Groups Links
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
              > wsjtgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > Activity Periods http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/
              > NAHSMS Contest Page http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/Rally/NAHSMS.htm
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.