I have to agree....it UPSETS me that almost every station gives 599 or 40/9 sig reports but asks for call signs three or four times.
My usual response...."sorry, no qso with lids" and I change frequency. Cranky? yes!, out of tune with the times? Maybe!...but having been on the air steady for over 56 years, and being 75 years old...yep, that's me. I give accurate "how I hear you" reports...many times that is enhance by the radio I am using, "communications" is the operative word. Grandmaw Susan. If you don't change direction you WILL arrive exactly where you're headed!! Susan Meckley, Skipper W7KFI-mm AFA9SM USSV DHARMA --- On Thu, 7/15/10, Gary Dezern <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Gary Dezern <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 S Meter behavior > To: "The Smiths" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Elecraft Reflector" <[email protected]> > Date: Thursday, July 15, 2010, 8:13 AM > As this drifts further from the > original topic... > > I find it amusing that a station will ask me to repeat my > callsign and name several times, and then give me a "59" > report. > > I think I messed up several people over the weekend contest > by giving them "5-7 08" reports instead of what they > expected. One station actually lost their "contest > tempo" when I came back with "45 zone 8." > > Working back toward the original topic... > > I generally give signal reports based on what I think the > signal would be with the RF gain fully clockwise, and > attenuator and preamp both turned off. To me, that > would be the "natural" and unmodified smeter reading. > (I've never given better than 57 on 10 > meters.) This best meets my understanding > of what that portion of the signal report should be: A > report of signal level as it is received by my rig (and not > a signal level as my rig has modified it.) > > Of course, I'm a "newbie" ham, so I'm probably doing it all > wrong. > > 73 - Gary / k3wow > > On Jul 15, 2010, at 1:21 PM, The Smiths wrote: > > > > > Exactly! > > > > Regardless of the fact that in 1934 (as was indicated > to me in off reflector email) we used to not use the meter > for the S report, at some time (1970's when proper > calibration and standardizations' came about) we were able > to shift that OLD antiquated 1934's definition over to a > STANDARDIZED S meter reading as part of the RST. > > > > Now R is just that, Readability. How well can > you copy someone. S is Strength of the meter, which > everyone should have set to the same approximate level, and > T for quality of tone. > > > > Some old habits die hard. Not everything first > invented in Ham radio has to be forced until the world > ends. Much to some peoples Chagrin, we DO evolve as > ham radio operators. > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[email protected] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
