Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2293 invoked from network); 7 Apr 1999 16:35:07 +0100 Received: from magnet.plus.net.uk (HELO magnet.force9.net) (195.166.128.26) by guiness.force9.net with SMTP; 7 Apr 1999 16:35:07 +0100 Received: (qmail 18961 invoked from network); 7 Apr 1999 15:36:02 -0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com (194.75.130.70) by magnet.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 7 Apr 1999 15:36:02 -0000 Received: from troy.blacksheep.org ([194.75.183.50] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 2.04 #3) id 10UuKY-00081A-01; Wed, 7 Apr 1999 16:33:30 +0100 Received: (from root@localhost) by troy.blacksheep.org (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA26562 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing; Wed, 7 Apr 1999 15:33:24 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from post.thorcom.com (root@post.unica.co.uk [194.75.183.70]) by troy.blacksheep.org (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA26558 for ; Wed, 7 Apr 1999 15:33:22 GMT Received: from mailserv.cc.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.8.44]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 2.04 #3) id 10UuJw-0007tU-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 7 Apr 1999 16:32:52 +0100 Received: from LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be (LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.80.15]) by mailserv.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id RAA16970 for ; Wed, 7 Apr 1999 17:33:57 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.19990407162756.085fba66@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-Sender: pb623250@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (16) Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 16:27:56 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" Subject: Re: LF: SLOW-CW pile-ups In-reply-to: <199904070955_MC2-70E2-BEDA@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org At 09:55 7/04/99 -0400, you wrote: >DL-activity from JO40BP (April 10th-11th, 1999) > >Hi all, > >when DA0LF was testing last weekend I encountered a problem which was >rather new to me: pile-ups in SLOW-CW! >I know how to handle this in regular CW - but even though I was able to >hear 4 stations at the same time there were two more calling exactly on top >of each other (within <0.5 Hz). Is there anyone who could tell me from his >own experience what to do in SCW if this happens again next weekend? I have >a certain idea, please carry on reading. > >The announcement of the DL-expedition has brought some direct feedback >(thanks!) but at the same time also has created some fear in my heart >we might probably hear you all but can only reply to one caller at a time > Hallo Peter, da ist bei deiner Mail irgend was 'schiefgelaufen' da es halbwegs im Satz plötzlich aufhört. Eine Bitte meinetwegen : köntet ihr bei einer nächsten Aktivität von DA0LF auch in 'normal-CW' QRV sein. Am montag habe ich euch mit 549 in slow-CW gehört, aber wie du schon erwänt hast war da ein gewaltiges 'pile-up'. Ein slow-CW QSO dauert 20 Minuten oder länger, in 'normal CW' etwa 1 Minute. Da ist 'normal CW doch etwas effizienter wenn beide Stationen sich hören können. Wie wäre es mit den Vorschag nach jedes 'slow-CW' QSO das Band mahl kurz (einige Minuten) ab zu hören ob nicht einer in normal-CW ruft ? 73, Rik ON7YD Rik Strobbe ON7YD rik.strobbe@fys.kuleuven.ac.be Villadreef 14 B-3128 Baal BELGIUM (JO20IX)