[Moon] Decode at what level?

Fri Dec 18 18:02:30 CET 2015

I don't send T9 at all times. During aurora I 
send A instead of 9 which is a good way to indicate another propagation mode.

New rigs don't always sound great. It is often a 
soft or RF-modulated powersupply that is the 
cause. Or it could be a problem with a 
transverter that is badly overdriven. In those 
instances I send anything from a T5 to T8, 
depending on the tone, to let the operator at the 
other end know that something is wrong.

At one time I got an RST 427 report on 23cm EME, 
letting me know that I had a problem with my 
amplifier. Sure enough, there was a problem with 
the biasing of the final tube. This was in my 
early days of 23cm EME and I was just not paying 
enough attention to how I sounded when hearing my 
weak echoes. I was glad for the T7 report as it 
pointed me to a problem with my TX signal that I eventually could fix.

Sending T9 is not the problem - the problem is 
people who are not sending T5 - T8 when they 
really should.. just because they don't want to 
make the operator at the other end unhappy.

73
Peter SM2CEW

At 01:35 2015-12-18, Edward R Cole wrote:

>Thanks for that link.  Actually found I had 
>already saved the G3SEK note but useful to 
>review when starting out on a new mode (and for eme newcomers).
>
>I have one question about signal reports and it 
>is why are Tone reports still used?  Everyone 
>sends RST as **9.  T never is some other number 
>but always 9.  I understand the historical use 
>of it but with modern equipment there is almost no need to send tone reports.
>
>So why not just RS = 59 or 35 or ?  Seems like 
>unnecessary info which can only confuse and not 
>add to coherence of communication.  SSB never 
>sends the tone or audio quality number.
>
>Of course "its always been that way" but really 
>why is it continued for CW-eme.  Too hard to change?
>
>73, Ed - KL7UW
>I have some other question on current practise 
>on CW-eme but will hold them for a future time.
>
>At 09:21 AM 12/17/2015, Peter Sundberg wrote:
>>Hi Matej, pse take a look at the Prague 
>>recommendations at http://www.zen70432.zen.co.uk/Initials/index.html
>>
>>The G3SEK notes explain the report system 
>>pretty well. That is the basic scale I am using when sending a report.
>>
>>However, it is all relative, and these days 
>>really big signals are more of a norm on 70cm 
>>and especially on 23cm than in 2002. The 
>>S-meter on my TS-2000X is indeed showing S9 for 
>>the really strong stations. Again, all relative 
>>of course, I have not calibrated the S-meter.
>>
>>73
>>Peter SM2CEW
>>
>>
>>
>>At 08:54 2015-12-17, you wrote:
>>>Hi Peter, I don't want to attend to senseless 
>>>talksÂ about the oftenÂ telegraphy vs JT65 
>>>topic, but I would like to ask you about the 
>>>EME reports. First there isÂ recommended RST 
>>>scale defined in IARU REGON 1 1978 Document 
>>>M/T 63, where is noted how many dBm are equal 
>>>to 1S. This scale can be seen for an example 
>>>at: 
>>>http://www.ok2kkw.com/00003016/rst_1978.png 
>>>(http://www.ok2kkw.com/00003016/rst_1978.png) 
>>>As most of the readers know, due to this table 
>>>is different definition of 1S on SW,HF and 
>>>above 30 MHz (1S correspondent to -121dBm or 
>>>0,21uVÂ  below 30MHz and -141dBm or 0,02uV 
>>>above 30 MHz). It's important to remind it 
>>>because the most of EME stations above 70cm 
>>>are using transverters with HF radio on IF. As 
>>>the result they can't use their Smeters to 
>>>tell the true value ofÂ S (and I would 
>>>continue with question about the ordinary 
>>>Smeter calibration..). Next thing is gain of 
>>>LNA, who is using attenuator to have 
>>>calibrated 0S of the Smeter with the LNA's 
>>>gain? Next think is setting of AGC and the 
>>>fast changing of signal levels. What is marked 
>>>in S/N log, peak or average? How long 
>>>average?... So this was the IARU definition. 
>>>But when I start with CW EME, I learned that 
>>>there is different definition of RST for EME 
>>>by ARRL Handbook ( 
>>>http://www.qsl.net/kl6m/emeops.htm 
>>>(http://www.qsl.net/kl6m/emeops.htm)Â ) Due to 
>>>this scale is the maximal report on EME 569. 
>>>When I was studying the old EME papers I 
>>>learned that that was due to used ERP in 70's 
>>>as at that time nobody was able to deliver S9 
>>>(-93dBm) signal off the Moon to the receiver. 
>>>Today when I'm reading K2UYH's NL (tnx for fb 
>>>work AL btw), I'm often reading about 599 
>>>reports on CW EME and I'm confused. Are 599 
>>>reports on EME wrong or not? They cannot be 
>>>right in ARRL EME scale. But (!).. And the 
>>>definition by IARU about the RST scale was set 
>>>for IARU Region 1 area and how about IARU R2 
>>>or R3?Â  :-) If I take RST scale for EME by 
>>>the ARRL, how is different definition what is 
>>>4 - fairÂ  vsÂ 5 - good? As the result RST 
>>>used in telegraphyÂ EME is very relative for 
>>>me (it's relative in MGM of course too) and I 
>>>ratherÂ use TMO.. Peter just one question, 
>>>when you areÂ using RST on EME, which kind of 
>>>RST scale are you using: ARRL scale for EME or 
>>>IARU scale? (on EME I've been using ARRL 
>>>definition yet). Or do you use only the RST 
>>>definition as the comparison of your S/N 
>>>measuring? 73 Matej, OK1TEH ---------- 
>>>PÅ¯vodnÃ zprÃ¡va ---------- Od: Peter 
>>>Sundberg <sm2cew at telia.com> Komu: 
>>>moon at moonbounce.info Datum: 16. 12. 2015 
>>>20:32:31 PÅ™edmÄ›t: [Moon] Decode at what 
>>>level? "Long time ago moonbouncers were more 
>>>concerned with noisefigure and antenna gain 
>>>and G/T merits. Now it seems like the only 
>>>merit an EME'er is interested in is the level 
>>>at which WSJT Deep Search is decoding (ho-hum) 
>>>a message with two calls and a locator. We 
>>>constantly hear stories about quad processors, 
>>>VAC, extra hot soundcards, super hot drivers 
>>>etc. A comparison to CW is often made, just to 
>>>point out how Deep Search excells in copying 
>>>over a CW operator. Some days ago I read 
>>>someone saying that the difference is 10-15dB. 
>>>The guy who gave this statement was cheered on 
>>>by a his good buddy in Canada with these kind 
>>>words (dismissing the rest of the EME 
>>>community): "Joe remember we are nothing 
>>>without you!!!" Good to know. However, it is 
>>>interesting to note what K1JT said some time 
>>>ago: "The FEC code used by JT65 is a low-rate 
>>>code (r = 12/63) and consequently it, too, 
>>>benefits greatly from an ability to "copy on 
>>>the QSB peaks"." Remember that Deep Search 
>>>requirement to make a guess in relation to the 
>>>database is just fragments of the full 
>>>message, not unlikely to be presented at a 
>>>short libration QSB peak. We are not talking 
>>>about a full decode. And Rex VK7MO says: 
>>>"While the majority of stations are stable to 
>>>within a few Hz quite a few drift 20 Hz or 
>>>more. While the AFC on WSJT can follow this on 
>>>a strong signal - those who drift should be 
>>>aware that they are giving up the last few dB 
>>>of performance(signal reports are misleading 
>>>in measuring performance as a drifting signal 
>>>may decode at -30 dB when its real level is 
>>>-20 dB)." In another forum G4SWX states the 
>>>following: "Having watched the CW vs JT 
>>>received signal strength discussions for many 
>>>years and at the risk of fuelling another 
>>>heated debate I have been dismayed that the 
>>>same issue of simulation vs real world EME 
>>>also exists. With CW signals reflected off the 
>>>moon a good operator will recognise characters 
>>>and part characters on Libration peaks 
>>>although the average signal level can be below 
>>>their audible threshold. This clearly can 
>>>result in a greater 'sensitivity' for reading 
>>>EME CW signals over that of simple 
>>>simulations. So my million dollar question is 
>>>- of what importance are these computer 
>>>generated magic S/N numbers, when we can 
>>>clearly see that they are all over the place 
>>>due to real world factors? Are they of 
>>>marketing or EGO purposes only? Or are they a 
>>>TRUE figure of merit for a moonbounce station? 
>>>If not, why are we seeing these endless 
>>>reports of S/N decode levels on the cluster, 
>>>loggers and forums? If they are true figure of 
>>>merit, why not start making Deep Search decode 
>>>(ho-hum) S/N measurements at EME meetings 
>>>instead of NF measurements. Because this seems 
>>>to be the thing that people are most 
>>>interested in these days. For me it's TMO or 
>>>RST - because CW is King! 73 Peter SM2CEW 
>>>_______________________________________________ 
>>>  Moon mailing list Moon at moonbounce.info 
>>>http://lists.moonbounce.info/listinfo/moon" 
>>>_______________________________________________ 
>>>  Moon mailing list Moon at moonbounce.info 
>>>http://lists.moonbounce.info/listinfo/moon
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Moon mailing list
>>Moon at moonbounce.info
>>http://lists.moonbounce.info/listinfo/moon
>
>73, Ed - KL7UW
>http://www.kl7uw.com
>     "Kits made by KL7UW"
>Dubus Mag business:
>     dubususa at gmail.com
>