Topband: 160 meter activity

[Bill Cromwell]

On 08/25/2013 07:44 PM, Bob Kupps wrote:
> Well I applaud your making the effort at giving an "honest" report. It seems to me that 599 is reported far too casually these days and I certainly attempt to give "honest" reports even in a (non contest) pile up. Although R reports are fairly easy - I give 3 if I'm struggling, 4 if I have to pay attention and 5 if it's easy. But S reports, especially on the low bands where we are often using preamps, attenuators or both make an objective report a bit tougher.
>
> The other night I was chatting with my pal W6YA on 20. My 100 watts to a 5/5 stack always gets a better report on his K3 than his 1500W to a 4 el gets on my K3 until he finally said that he always uses his preamp on the high bands because the K3 S meter is factory calibrated with the preamp on, and he like I strive to give meaningful reports.
>
> Anyway, I would be interested in how other ops (who care) try to give meaningful reports - objective vs subjective. Also my compliments to N4ZR and the RBN guys who are providing a great service to the ham DX community in this regard.
>
> 73 Bob HS0ZIA
>
Hi There is idea that S9 is 50 microvolts at the antenna terminal - is 
that 50 ohms or? - and that is truly objective. However, I don't give 
the S-meters a lot of credence in that regard. And I have operated 
(still operate) teceivers that don't have an S-meter. There are winky 
blinky lights or anything. If I have an S-meter it gets a vote but my 
ears have the bigger say. With no S-meter my ears have ALL of the say.

I have actually heard on the air reports of S-0 (that's a zero). Huh? 
What! I thought tha guy was doing a good job copying a signal that 
didn't exist! We can give in to the canned QSO contest style and always 
give out 599 or we can just do our best with an *estimation* of signal 
strength. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

73,

Bill  KU8H