eHam

eHam Forums => Contesting => Topic started by: N4RSS on March 07, 2011, 08:09:28 AM



Title: Other than "5-9"
Post by: N4RSS on March 07, 2011, 08:09:28 AM
Because lying doesn't come easy to me I like to just report the signal I see on the meter.

I caused one eastern european station some consternation on 15 meters over the weekend by giving him a 5-3 report after he gave me a 5-9.  He was perfect copy.

He asked me what receiver I was running (7600) and then suggested I send it in to get fixed.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: KE4JOY on March 07, 2011, 09:07:55 AM
Maybe your meter is lying to you...  ;D

Pepole just use the 59 exchange in contests because its fast, easy, and expected.

I too like to give 'accurate' reports but if your contesting it can really stumble things up.

"Get your receiver checked"  ;D funny. How does he know you don't have a paper clip for an antenna.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: AE4RV on March 07, 2011, 09:24:17 AM
"People just use the 59 exchange in contests because its fast, easy, and expected. "

An excellent answer and I think 'Expected' is the best reason. A serious contest op will get annoyed if you don't go with the flow on this one. Think of it as a pass/fail report. If you complete the contact you passed.



Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: N4NYY on March 07, 2011, 09:30:54 AM
Damn, Did you record it and can you play it back? I am dying to hear that exchange. Please do not tease us with this !


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: VE3CX on March 07, 2011, 10:02:35 AM
I am not sure where the idea of what the S-meter reads should be part of the report.  Its Readability, Strength.  From the list, http://www.radioing.com/hamstart/rst.html, 9 is "Extremely strong signals".  No mention of what your S-meter reads.  On 10 meters for example, a person can be perfectly readable, yet not move the S-meter at all.  There is no "5-0" report.  RS(T) is rather subjective - in the eye (or ear) of the sender.

FWIW - this part of the exchange is generally considered a preamble in a contest setting.  Think of it as "exchange will follow".  Anything other than 59(9) is unexpected.

I would also add - I would *not* consider a person a lid for giving something other than 59(9).  A lid is a "poor operator".  Giving an exchange of other than 5-9 might make him a bit green, or a newbie (yes - we have ALL been there), but definitely not a lid.

Hope everyone had fun with the great opening on 10 last weekend.

Tom - VE3CX



Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: N3QE on March 07, 2011, 12:45:29 PM
There are several well-known (not the rarest DXCC but also far from common) DX ops that either give all reports as 579, or give honest signal reports.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: N4KC on March 07, 2011, 12:55:32 PM
I'm with Tom.  A contest is no place for a "real" signal report.  I, too, have wondered when a numerical report began to equate to an S-meter reading.  I still hear stations saying, "Yes, you are 5-by-9 plus 20."  OK, maybe the station really is 5-9, and really is reading 20 dB over S9 on the S-meter, but the two...as Tom notes...does not necessarily have anything to do with each other.

Don't even get me started on CW RST.  How many of you could tell me what the 1 through 9 for the last digit in RST reports stands for?

73,

Don N4KC
www.n4kc.com
www.donkeith.com
http://n4kc.blogspot.com
 
 
 


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: KE4JOY on March 07, 2011, 01:06:27 PM
I'm with Tom.  A contest is no place for a "real" signal report.  I, too, have wondered when a numerical report began to equate to an S-meter reading.  I still hear stations saying, "Yes, you are 5-by-9 plus 20."  OK, maybe the station really is 5-9, and really is reading 20 dB over S9 on the S-meter, but the two...as Tom notes...does not necessarily have anything to do with each other.

Don't even get me started on CW RST.  How many of you could tell me what the 1 through 9 for the last digit in RST reports stands for?

73,

Don N4KC
www.n4kc.com
www.donkeith.com
http://n4kc.blogspot.com
 
 
 

Tone.. but I think you could get a 599 report out of a spark gap generator these days  ;D


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: N4NYY on March 07, 2011, 02:38:38 PM
I got a 3-3 report once! LOL


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: N4KC on March 07, 2011, 02:43:15 PM
True about the spark gap!  But I meant the actual numbers 1 through 9.  I know I couldn't tell you what they were without reference, and I admit I have given some pretty janky CW sigs a "599.".  Even then, how many can tell the different between "60 cycle AC or less, very rough and broad" and "Filtered rectified AC but strongly ripple-modulated?"  N4NYY, I probably gave you "59"...if I needed your grid square!

Just for reference, the "T" in RST is supposed to be:

1              Sixty cycle a.c or less, very rough and broad.

2              Very rough a.c., very harsh and broad.

3              Rough a.c. tone, rectified but not filtered.

4              Rough note, some trace of filtering.

5              Filtered rectified a.c. but strongly ripple-modulated.

6              Filtered tone, definite trace of ripple modulation.

7              Near pure tone, trace of ripple modulation.

8              Near perfect tone, slight trace of modulation.

9              Perfect tone, no trace of ripple or modulation of any kind.

Don N4KC
www.n4kc.com
www.donkeith.com


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: K0IZ on March 07, 2011, 03:03:13 PM
Most of the contest logging programs will automatically load 599 or 59 into log.  Anything else requires the logger to edit that entry.  No serious contester wants to take the time to do that.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: N3QE on March 08, 2011, 05:47:24 AM
Most of the contest logging programs will automatically load 599 or 59 into log.  Anything else requires the logger to edit that entry.  No serious contester wants to take the time to do that.
A lot of contest programs automatically pre-fill other fields based on information from previous QSO's or even on information downloaded from the Internet. Being too lazy to update any pre-filled exchange field with actual exchange info isn't by any means "cheating", it's just lazy, because every discrepancy will be assessed as a busted exchange and (depending on the contest) you'll get penalties too.

I use N2MM and updating a pre-filled field (including changing either side's report from the "599" default), is literally just a couple keystrokes.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: WG7X on March 08, 2011, 07:36:00 AM
Because lying doesn't come easy to me I like to just report the signal I see on the meter.

Lying? Come on dude, there's a world of difference between a contest exchange and lying. To the casual observer, it would seem that you have an axe to grind and it's not about "lying"

Quote
I caused one eastern european station some consternation on 15 meters over the weekend by giving him a 5-3 report after he gave me a 5-9.  He was perfect copy.

If he was perfect copy then, by definition he was S-9. You're splitting some very fine hairs here.

Quote
He asked me what receiver I was running (7600) and then suggested I send it in to get fixed.

... and then you come here to stir up more folks. Making yourself a problem to one station wasn't enough?

Since the ARRL contest last week-end, there has been a flurry of posts like yours, here and in other places. The bottom line here on all these posts is that the author seems to want to claim some sort of moral high ground by complaining about imagined problems with signal reports.

In a contest, a signal report is simply a preamble to the real exchange. IOW it serves to get the other station ready to hear the real exchange, which in the case of the ARRL test was simply our state or in the case of the DX the power level. I've heard folks doing the "Please copy" routine too. That surely takes more time than "59 WA".

It has nothing to do with the actual "meter" reading. In some contests the signal report is not given, because it makes no difference.

Look, if you want to participate in a contest, do so and follow the contest rules. Do as the others in the contest are doing. In the middle of a contest is not the time or place to go on a crusade. Doing so simply makes you, the only guy in the crusade, look like a fool.

Coming to a ham radio website to further the crusade will only solidify the foolish label.

Contests are here to stay, they have been a part of ham radio since its inception. If you really have an axe to grind, take it to the contest sponsor.

Good luck with that, and in the meantime you're "5X9 WA!"

73 Gary


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: N4RSS on March 08, 2011, 08:27:36 AM
Because lying doesn't come easy to me I like to just report the signal I see on the meter.

Lying? Come on dude, there's a world of difference between a contest exchange and lying. To the casual observer, it would seem that you have an axe to grind and it's not about "lying"

Quote
I caused one eastern european station some consternation on 15 meters over the weekend by giving him a 5-3 report after he gave me a 5-9.  He was perfect copy.

If he was perfect copy then, by definition he was S-9. You're splitting some very fine hairs here.

Quote
He asked me what receiver I was running (7600) and then suggested I send it in to get fixed.

... and then you come here to stir up more folks. Making yourself a problem to one station wasn't enough?

Since the ARRL contest last week-end, there has been a flurry of posts like yours, here and in other places. The bottom line here on all these posts is that the author seems to want to claim some sort of moral high ground by complaining about imagined problems with signal reports.

In a contest, a signal report is simply a preamble to the real exchange. IOW it serves to get the other station ready to hear the real exchange, which in the case of the ARRL test was simply our state or in the case of the DX the power level. I've heard folks doing the "Please copy" routine too. That surely takes more time than "59 WA".

It has nothing to do with the actual "meter" reading. In some contests the signal report is not given, because it makes no difference.

Look, if you want to participate in a contest, do so and follow the contest rules. Do as the others in the contest are doing. In the middle of a contest is not the time or place to go on a crusade. Doing so simply makes you, the only guy in the crusade, look like a fool.

Coming to a ham radio website to further the crusade will only solidify the foolish label.

Contests are here to stay, they have been a part of ham radio since its inception. If you really have an axe to grind, take it to the contest sponsor.

Good luck with that, and in the meantime you're "5X9 WA!"

73 Gary

I thought a signal report WAS part of the exchange and should be reported accurately, yes.  If that's incorrect then I stand corrected.  I'm aware that the history of signal strength wasn't predicated on an S meter, but that seems to have gone by the wayside and I'm with the majority on the current practice.

Stirring the pot a little sure, what of it ?

Doing as others do in the contest...well probably want to do a bit better than that given some of the behaviors

Edit: I just checked the rules for the contest and it included a signal report exchange, so the signal report is an integral part of the exchange.
  I also checked the signal strength guide on ARRL and I think S3, defined as a "weak signal" corresponds reasonably well to an S meter reading of 3, especially given that there were much stronger signals than his who happened to be above 9 on the S meter.  There is no stipulation that one can't use the S meter as a proxy for signal strength, it's just a tool.

Perfect copy is readability "5", not signal strength.  I have had many 100% copy signals on the higher bands where the signal strength was nonexistant.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: AE4RV on March 08, 2011, 09:36:02 AM
No one said that it is technically incorrect to give an 'honest' signal report, it just isn't done for reasons repeated several times above. Below I will sum up how I felt about it when I started dabbling in contests.

Three stages of learning the truth about contest signal reports:

1. Confusion: Everyone is a 59? That's not how it's supposed to work!

2. Grief: But I like honest signal reports, I want to know how I'm getting out!

3. Acceptance: Oh well, It's like that, and that's the way it is.

(Apologies to Run DMC).

73



Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: N4RSS on March 08, 2011, 09:57:41 AM
Damn, Did you record it and can you play it back? I am dying to hear that exchange. Please do not tease us with this !

No I didn't.  Actually, this happened once before several months ago I think in a noncontesting setting also on a higher band.  I think the guy then asked if I were using a dummy load for an antenna.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: KB1TXK on March 10, 2011, 12:12:35 PM
I was where you were OP, until it came time to give my first RS report...then I caved because I didn't want to be "that guy".

Any normal exchange, I'm honest. Contests...everyone is 5-9. Its conformist, yes.  But its like visiting someones home and choking down their terrible meal. Just do it and get it over with then get some McDonalds on the way home ;)


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: KD8GKR on March 15, 2011, 09:22:54 AM
How many ops in a contest goes back to edit from 5-9 to what ever the other op said? I assume if most have there logs set for 5-9 and someone says 4-4, they tap the space bar or enter and it is saved as automatic 5-9. So does anyone change it?


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: N3OX on March 15, 2011, 10:07:42 AM
How many ops in a contest goes back to edit from 5-9 to what ever the other op said? I assume if most have there logs set for 5-9 and someone says 4-4, they tap the space bar or enter and it is saved as automatic 5-9. So does anyone change it?

That almost certainly depends on whether or not the RST is actually a required piece of information in the exchange.  Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.  If the contest doesn't require RST, writing down the "real one" you gave is kind of like writing down your name if you give it.  Not useful for the serious contester, so unlikely to get any attention.

But in some contests, maybe they spot-check RST between logs when it's available.   In that case, maybe you run the risk of getting dinged points for having the wrong one.

 I don't know which contests require RST and I don't know which ones CHECK to see if the reported numbers are accurate when both parties submit their logs.  But I can assure you that any serious contester in any contest that DOES check the reported numbers will record your given report.



Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: AA4HA on March 15, 2011, 11:47:40 AM
The entire RST exchange is a joke. I have had contacts where the other station has asked me to phonetically pronounce many of the words and still get a "59" report.

Heck, I knew my signal was weak. I was running 20 watts to a contact four states over. An honest appraisal wold have been much more helpful. I have worked some stations that were barely heard through the static crashes, QRN and QRM. Those are the fun ones to make. Not Billy-Bob down the road who always works with a 1.5 KW amp.

I would prefer to hear an RSL and SNR value. At least to my engineers mind that means something.

Tisha Hayes
AA4HA


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: KH6AQ on March 15, 2011, 12:50:53 PM
Maybe your meter is lying to you...  ;D

Pepole just use the 59 exchange in contests because its fast, easy, and expected.

I too like to give 'accurate' reports but if your contesting it can really stumble things up.

"Get your receiver checked"  ;D funny. How does he know you don't have a paper clip for an antenna.

By the law of reciprocity if each station is running the same transmit power the received signal strength will be the same at each end fo the link. If he runs a beam and 100 watts and you run a vertical and 100 watts and he induces 50 uV at your receiver you induce 50 uV at his receiver. So why such a difference in signal reports? A defective receiver, someone doesn't have the preamp switched ON, non-reciprocal propagation (claimed to be rare)?


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: W8JX on March 17, 2011, 03:50:48 PM
I have given out a lot of 55's 56's 57's as well as 59+5 or+20 as well as some 43's and 44's too. Point is what is the purpose or bother of saying they are all 59 because they are not.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: AD6KA on March 18, 2011, 07:15:03 PM
Quote
He asked me what receiver I was running (7600) and then suggested I send it in to get fixed.
That reminds me of a time I was hunting & pouncing during a contest.
I came across a guy transmitting; "Is this frequency in use?"
And the reply was: "Is your receiver in use?"   ;D

As to the topic, 59 or 599 is the default contest signal report and always will be.
Either get over it, quit contesting, or start your own "Honest-To-God Signal Report Contest." 
Wanna guess how many contestants will STILL send 59? 


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: KG4LMZ on March 19, 2011, 07:39:11 PM
By the law of reciprocity if each station is running the same transmit power the received signal strength will be the same at each end fo the link.

I don't think that's necessarily true.  It applies only if both directions' signals use exactly the path (not just the physical, 3D arc it travels, but the entirety of the electromagnetic environment it experiences on that arc).  In practice, in the Earth's atmosphere, transmission paths are not always the same in both directions, sometimes not even throughout a transmission. If you really want to be pedantic, they may not even be the same in one direction through the length of a dah.  Scatter and Auroral would be extreme examples.  And even when both directions use the same path, the two paths aren't always "electromagnetically reciprocal".  If my memory is correct, this non-reciprocity is even discussed in the current Gordon West prep book for the Extra exam.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: K4KYV on April 22, 2011, 08:58:02 PM
I have NEVER YET seen anything mentioned in any published contest rules saying that all reports are to be 5-9 or 599 when signal reports are part of the mandatory exchange.  They just say "signal report". Look in any ARRL handbook to learn the definitions of the numbers 1-5 and 1-9 in signal reports.

I don't do a lot of contest operating, but you can be damned sure that when I do, I'll give an honest, bona fide signal report based on the standard definitions of R, S and T.  Get over it.

Don k4kyv


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: KX5JT on April 23, 2011, 02:25:59 AM
I am a believer in honest signal reports.  A previous response makes me wonder about what to give an operator who has a great signal but the problem is the THICK ACCENT.  I have to ask the operator to repeat things due only to his accent.   That is not a signal issue but it IS a readability issue.  Do I still give this operator a 5 if his signal is fine?  Or do I drop it down to a 4 or 3 due to accent readability?

hmmmmm


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: NN4RH on April 23, 2011, 05:48:41 AM
They just say "signal report".

Yes. Just "signal report".

Doesn't say "Precise and Accurate RST Signal Report Strictly According To Official ARRL Handbook Criteria Averaged Over A Period of 10 Minutes With Filters and RF Gain Set According to Standard Settings as Read on a NIST Calibrated S-Meter".

RST is subjective.  It's based on opinion of someone's signal, not on a calibrated hardware definition.

I only work stations in contests that are in my opinion "59", so all my signal reports are totally honest.  How you going to prove me wrong?


I think most of the time in contests people ask for repeats because there was QRM, which is extremely common during contests, and not because the signal was anything less than a R5  Look at the ARRL RST definition. It makes no allowances for the effects of QRM on the signal readability. Therefore the ARRL RST system is not even applicable to contests.

Do you ragchew? Have you ever been in a QSO where the "signal report" changes with time? Maybe you start out at R5 then the signal dips and he's an R3 for awhile, then comes back up and R5 again.

The defintion of readability does not include a time-scale requirement. You may ask for a repeat several times and not be able to read what he's saying, but then the last time you hear it clearly. So what signal report do you log? Well of course the only one that counts, the last one where you read him 100%. The previous attempts are irrelevant.

By definition, if you eventually copy the full exchange, he's an R5. 100% copy. Definition of "R" doesn't specify how many tries it takes.

As for the S9, that's actually fairly arbitrary.  The S number I perceive depends on how I have my filters and RF gain set up. I can make a signal very loud or very soft just by turning knobs. So I simply turn the knobs and punch the buttons until it's the strongest signal in my pass band, which makes it by definition an S9.



Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: NN4RH on April 23, 2011, 06:12:41 AM
So "59" makes perfect sense to a contester.

What I think is super ridiculous is the practice mostly on 75 and 40 meter phone nets of telling someone they're "40 over S9". or "40 over 9" or other nonsense.

That's like giving a signal report of "You're 10 thousand times stronger than Extremely Strong". It's be equivalent to something like an S17. Nonsense!

I can't find anything in the ARRL Handbook RST definition that says that a signal can be stronger than S9 "Extremely Strong".

The guy who they think is "40 over" is really S9, because he's the strongest signal. Everyone else weaker than that (even if they're "20 over") would by the ARRL Definition be less than S9.

So should we call people who like to work nets liars because they're not giving "accurate" signal reports ?


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: WG7X on April 23, 2011, 09:40:44 AM
This whole thing is extremely silly.

The "real" signal report versus the "fake" one is just a red herring.

In fact, considering that the original poster put this on the "Contest" forum, it is a troll pure and simple.

So it's done what was intended, and that was to get the two groups arguing with each other.

Congratulations to the original poster.

What's next, a CW troll?

Maybe an anti CB troll?

How about the old internet standby: Spelling and grammar?

Geeze Louise!

Stop the insanity!

I'll got get my meds...

73 Gary


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: K3STX on April 28, 2011, 09:44:06 AM
I operated in a 160 M contest back in 1990 using 100 watts to a random wire out my apartment window. I got LOTS of 559 reports, (I probably deserved 429 reports!), but I don't think I have logged much other than 599 in YEARS. I agree, it is like a preamble, like "get ready to copy".

paul


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: KH6DC on April 29, 2011, 08:12:00 PM
I never lie on my signal reports and don't expect people to do the same for rsending them.  I gave and received 2-2 reports before, LOL.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: AE4RV on April 30, 2011, 10:18:02 AM
"I gave and received 2-2 reports before, LOL."

Me, too, but not during a typical contest or for most of the DX that I work. Some of the club sprints encourage slower speeds and honest reports, however, and I *try* to accommodate that, but the urge to give a quick 59(9) is sometimes hard to resist.

It's like school, some classes give a letter grade, and some are pass/fail. If you make it in to the log, you passed. I go with the flow on this one.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: W7ETA on May 05, 2011, 05:14:08 PM
"I am a believer in honest signal reports."

I'm a believer of accurate reports except to contest stations.  I know they want to make as many Qs as possible.  SO, to make it faster for them, and because they aren't interested in an accurate report, I give them the standard 5nn or 59.

Believe me when I say I don't believe I'll worry about what other ops believe about giving signal reports.

Best from Tucson
Bob


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: NN4RH on May 06, 2011, 03:55:13 AM
Signal reports are subjective anyway. How can something subjective be "accurate"?

Another mistake people tend to make is assuming that a signal report is some measure of the other guy's transmitted signal. It's not. It's what is being received. Any given transmission can be a 5-9  or  1-1 or anything in between depending on location, antennas, equipment, filters, RF gain, etc. . . . How can anything be "accurate" if there's no way to "calibrate" it.

Personally I think the traditional RST signal report was never meant to be "accurate". There's no way it can be.
 


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: KB3LIX on May 10, 2011, 10:51:57 AM
I have had people give me reports like 5-6...5-7 in contests before,
and they go in the logging program as 5-9.
I am not taking the time to change the default.
In all my LCR's, I have never had a Q bounced because the RST
was "WRONG"

I chalk it up to a contest NOOBIE and move on.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: AE4RV on May 10, 2011, 11:07:23 AM
I have had people give me reports like 5-6...5-7 in contests before,
and they go in the logging program as 5-9.
I am not taking the time to change the default.
In all my LCR's, I have never had a Q bounced because the RST
was "WRONG"

I chalk it up to a contest NOOBIE and move on.

Is that normal for contest sponsors to not check signal reports, and is that maybe how the 59(9) thing got started?

The only test (sprint, actually) that I submit logs to (so far) is one of the few that encourages honest signal reports. I don't mind honest reports I just don't want to log them when I'm holding a frequency. But I recently discovered that the RST is NOT part of the log submission. They don't check it. So now I can go ahead and give any report I think they deserve (and them to me) and I won't sweat it because it is getting logged as 599 X 2.

Glad I finally figured that out...



Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: KB3LIX on May 11, 2011, 07:23:08 PM
I have no idea how they accomplish the log checking,
but if available, I always check my Log Checking Report,
and I have never seen a contact bounced.

I have also been in contests where some participants apparently
didn't READ the rules and specifically the EXCHANGE Section because
they insist on sending an RST when RST is NOT part of the exchange.

I chalk them up to noobies too.

In normal DXing, a correct RST is fine by me, but in a contest
situation where the idea is to make Q's as fast as possible, trying to
give HONEST RST is just a waste of valuable time.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: NN4RH on May 12, 2011, 03:34:54 AM
In normal DXing, a correct RST is fine by me,


About all I ever hear in DX pileups is "59", too.

I wonder how many of these people who complain that contesters don't give "honest" signal reports, would refuse a QSL card from a needed DX entity if during the contact they asked for repeats then gave a 59 report? Wouldn't they think that accepting a QSL card under those circumstances is "fraudulant"?



Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: NN3W on May 12, 2011, 04:46:39 AM
Hell, on many DXpedition QSLs, the 599 or 59 is PRE-PRINTED on the card.

The QSL manager simply circles which one it was - depending on the mode.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: NN4RH on May 12, 2011, 01:58:53 PM
And by the way, ARRL's Logbook Of The World doesn't even include RST in the data records as far as I can tell. Obviously as far as ARRL LOTW is concerned, RST is not necessary to make an "official" QSO, so why worry about whether it's "accurate" or not? 

Are we going to also insist that people report "accurate" antenna heights? "accurate" age? 


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: N5MOA on May 13, 2011, 05:36:51 AM
Other than 5-9?

Depends. Preamp on or off? AGC on or off? With the AGC off, everyone is a "0" on the meter.  :P

I just go with whatever the dx wants. If they want a "real" report, I'll look at the meter, and tell them what it shows. Otherwise, I 5-9 and move on.

Contest are always 59/599.

 Most dxpeds, not all, H40FN comes to mind in wanting a "real" rst, (got and gave some pretty weak reports from the mobile on that one) just want to 59/599 and go.

I've worked other dx stations that got/gave different reports, then received the qsl card with 59 in the rst column.

The only dxped that I can remember that cared about a "real" signal report was a Pacific dxped op I worked on 17m late one evening. He had just shown up on the band, and wanted to know which antenna was stronger toward NA.
Not spotted yet, no one else calling,  we had a nice 5 minute chat while he A/B checked his antennas. He was 5/7 on one, 5/5 on the other.

Of course, that all happened after we had exchanged 5/9 reports.


Title: RE: Other than "5-9"
Post by: N7VEA on May 13, 2011, 06:01:33 AM
59 or 5NN is the least important part of the QSO in my opinion, especially in a contest.  After all, once I log his call, name, serial number, CQ zone, ITU zone, 10-10 number, state and county or whatever other exchange is required, does it really matter?  We communicated the other stuff just fine.  A signal report might have been important info a few decades ago when the rigs weren't as sophisticated as they are today, but I'm not so sure today.  I don't lose alot of sleep over it...

I understand the dx station interested in which antenna was working better, although that is a bit subjective as well.  He might get a different opinion here in 7land than he would where you live, and I'll guarantee that he'll get a better reception report from the guy 3 miles west of me with the 3 50' towers loaded with beams than he'll get from my little backyard vertical.  We won't talk about the other guy who pumps out a kw on his 350 mile ragchew.  5x9 and 20 over OM.  But you're throwing a blanket over half the band and nobody can copy the dx stations, or anything else for that matter.  That's "Other than '5-9'" to me  ;)