[digitalradio] digital modes and signal reports
Hello, First a quick intro. Eventhough this is my first post, I've been lurking here since about the end of 2007, meanwhile studying for my licence, for which I did exam April 16th 2008, and passed. So today I'm a Novice radio amateur in the Netherlands, which puts me on 70cm/2mtr/10mtr/20mtr/40mtr. Being mostly interested in digital modes, I'm usually active on 20 mtr doing psk31 and some JT65a. Yesterday I logged psk31 QSO #200, and went to take a closer look at my log, and found that all but one of them had RSQ 599 given, and received. So being as guilty as everyone else in my log, I went to take a closer look at how to give accurate RSQ reports, and after some reading, spent most of today, just staring at the waterfall while trying to judge all the signals with an honest RSQ report, and - surprise suprise - only very few signals were actually a true 599 Thinking back to some QSOs I had, to places like Kazakhstan, Canada, and the US, with only a humble magnetic loop mounted in the attic, and a max allowed output of 25 Watts, I can't help but wonder about the importance of RSQ reports, it certainly looks like it's not being taken all that serious. I'm going to at least change that on my end, I've seen too many stations splattering all over my passband who deserved an accurate report so they could have sorted their ALC, power, or whatnot, which brings me to my question. With QSOs as short as they often are on 20 mtr / psk31, what's the point in giving a report at the beginning of the QSO? Shouldn't the report reflect the quality of the whole QSO, rather than just the beginning? Wouldn't it make more sense to give the report at the end, together with the 73? RSQ 579, 73, good health, good dx, sk Or am I just looking at a long standing tradition of giving each other the best possible report, so to be friendly? 73, Eric PD9EL
Re: [digitalradio] digital modes and signal reports
By your own admission, most psk qso's are short. In addition, the band can change rapidly, so most of us want to get that report in at the beginning, because you may not get a chance otherwise. I agree that a generic report of 599 for everyone doesn't do any good. I try to give accurate reports - the true information is much more useful, and if you're getting consistent 599's then you're doing good! Jeff -- KE7ACY CN94ib - Original Message - From: ekkonl Hello, [snip] Shouldn't the report reflect the quality of the whole QSO, rather than just the beginning? Wouldn't it make more sense to give the report at the end, together with the 73? RSQ 579, 73, good health, good dx, sk Or am I just looking at a long standing tradition of giving each other the best possible report, so to be friendly? 73, Eric PD9EL .
RE: [digitalradio] digital modes and signal reports
Eric, I too have a lot of 599's in my log and think I know why at least for the hams using MixW if you leave it set for default RSQ it will send 599. I set my reply so it asks me to enter the RSQ before the macro runs and I try to read an actual signal report of the scope in the MixW screen. Seems to work. MixW will seldom show a 599. Last night I saw a couple of nice QSO's on the waterfall that it showed as 589 and 579, these guys had really clean signals with IMD readings above -26 in both cases. I'll look for you on the waterfall next time 20 opens to the east. 73, Curt Curt Givens KC8STE, AAR5VR Army MARS Earthdog and Special Programs Director GCDOC/GCAC Dayton, OH Registering lawful Americans who possess a gun to stop armed criminals, is like registering virgins to stop prostitution. -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ekkonl Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 12:55 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] digital modes and signal reports Hello, snip Being mostly interested in digital modes, I'm usually active on 20 mtr doing psk31 and some JT65a. Yesterday I logged psk31 QSO #200, and went to take a closer look at my log, and found that all but one of them had RSQ 599 given, and received. snip 73, Eric PD9EL ___ No viruses found in this outgoing message Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.3.5 http://www.iolo.com
