http://elecraft.85.s1.nabble.com/K3-S-Meter-behavior-tp5295728p5298920.html
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.
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.
If you don't change direction you WILL arrive exactly where you're headed!! Susan Meckley, Skipper W7KFI-mm AFA9SM USSV DHARMA
> From: Gary Dezern <
[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 S Meter behavior
> To: "The Smiths" <
[hidden email]>
> Cc: "Elecraft Reflector" <
[hidden email]>
> 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:
[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by:
http://www.qsl.net> Please help support this email list:
http://www.qsl.net/donate.html>