|
New to Ham Radio?
My Profile
Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Speak Out
Strays
Survey Question
Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation
Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers
Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net
|
|
1-10 of 15 messages
|
Page 1 of 2
Next
|
|
SIGNAL REPORTS
|
Reply
|
|
by KE6AEE on April 26, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Im not a contester but I do listen a lot on contest weekends, and the one thing I have noticed is "EVERY" report is a 59. Now we know from our many years in hame radio all contacts cant be a 59, but somehow contesters always give the 59 report. We all know these are bogus reports that dont relfect reality so why are they required as one of the contact log items?
Richard
|
| |
|
RE: SIGNAL REPORTS
|
Reply
|
|
by WB2WIK on April 26, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It is silly.
Not all contests include a signal report. Field Day, Sweepstakes, various Sprints, VHF contests, etc. use other data instead, which I think it much smarter.
Maybe some of the HF contest folks will ultimately change this. You're right, in some of the major HF contests, everyone is "59."
|
| |
|
RE: SIGNAL REPORTS
|
Reply
|
|
by KB9CRY on April 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
so why are they required as one of the contact log items?
Because.....they are required by the regulations of the contest. They are just following the rules.
I wouldn't let it bother you if you can.
|
| |
|
RE: SIGNAL REPORTS
|
Reply
|
|
by W0GLB on April 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Pretty sure its been said here before, but in practice, the "59" is akin to saying, "pay attention, the important stuff is next!" Usually, right after the report will come the variable of the exchange, be it the serial #, S/P/C, zone, or whatever the contest requires.
Maybe that is not an excuse for the practice, but it is a reason.
73, W0GLB
Gordon
|
| |
|
RE: SIGNAL REPORTS
|
Reply
|
|
by K8AC on April 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
It wasn't always that way. Before computerized logging, it wasn't unusual to give a real signal report. You may have noticed that this "you're 59" habit has spilled over into DXing outside of contests. Everyone gives the DXpedition a 59 even if he's just above the noise level. I suspect a lot of new guys have no idea what the 59 means, but everyone else is sending it so they do as well.
|
| |
|
RE: SIGNAL REPORTS
|
Reply
|
|
by KG6MZS on April 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It is amusing to hear two stations go at it again and again just to dig the call out of the mud and they have them give each other a 59!
Sometimes I feel like it is a macho thing too. Like I feel dared to give them anything less than a 59.
73 de Eric, KG6MZS
|
| |
|
RE: SIGNAL REPORTS
|
Reply
|
|
by KB3LIX on May 1, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Of course 5-9 signal reports on each Q are silly,
but I suspect they have been a part of a given contests exchange for SO LONG, they have become part of the "heritage" of the contest and will never be removed.
The days of accurate signal reports are gone forever.
I have had people give me something other than a 5-9, and I just ignore the report and let the logging program default to 5-9 or 5-9-9 as the case may be.
|
| |
|
RE: SIGNAL REPORTS
|
Reply
|
|
by K9NW on May 2, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>Of course 5-9 signal reports on each Q are silly
Perhaps, but.....
>The days of accurate signal reports are gone forever.
Which signal report would you like? The one with:
- my 5/5 stack pointed at you?
- your signal off the back of my beam?
- your signal on the low RX dipole?
- your signal on one of the four Beverage RX antennas?
- your signal with AGC turned off?
Basically, if I'm operating a contest and I can hear you, you're gonna get 59(9). Purists may not like that....so be it. I'm not going to flip through all my antenna combinations on every QSO to see which one gives the best meter deflection. My goal in a contest is to make the QSO and move on the next one, not stimulating the S meter. Most of the time I'm not even looking at the S meter - I'm watching the computer screen, turning a rotator, chomping on a potato chip, drinking a soda, checking out the ballgame on TV across the room....whatever.
>I have had people give me something other than
>a 5-9, and I just ignore the report and let the
>logging program default to 5-9 or 5-9-9 as the
>case may be.
Why? It's easy to change the "default" report. I log the report that the other guys sends.
Some like to blame computer logging for the proliferation of 59 or 59(9) but it's been the norm long before computers were a common accessory for the ham shack. Computer logging didn't really hit the mainstream until the early 90s. In the dozen or so years prior, I have lots and lots of paper contest logs and DXpedition QSOs with lots and lots of 59 or 59(9).
Just log it and move on. Enjoy the contest!
|
| |
|
RE: SIGNAL REPORTS
|
Reply
|
|
by KB1LKR on May 4, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
59 or 599 (5NN) are just placeholders in contesting practice, to maximize the speed with which required "info" can be exchanged even though they they carry no real information. When in Rome (on a contest weekend), do as the Romans I suppose.
|
| |
|
RE: SIGNAL REPORTS
|
Reply
|
|
by K0RS on May 10, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This question (comment really) arises fairly frequently and invariably on internet forums. It always comes across as a troll more than a legitimate question.
There is a simple answer which, of course, you already know if you would think about it. Two words:
Maximize rate.
Look, nobody sponsors a rag chew contest. The idea, as if you didn't know, is to exchange the required info as quickly...and accurately...as possible.
One obvious way to faciltate this need is to eliminate variables that lead to "busted" contacts. No contest that I know of requires just a signal report and nothing else. There's always other data that must be copied correctly, most obviously the other station's call. Additionally, some other piece of data...a serial number, state, zone, name, *something*...will be required. There's plenty that needs to be logged accurately (or lose points). Why make it harder? Invariably in every contest some PIA with something to prove is handing out 5x5's or 5x1's or some other dumbass thing. As if those were any more accurate than 5x9s.
Someone said that it's humorous to listen to two stations struggle to get an exchange across when both signal reports are 59. I would contend: What better reason to standardize reports? How much harder would it be if one station was trying to send "You're 53, 53,53 in Kukumonga" and the other was trying to send "4 by 6, 4 by 6, Buttocks, TX!"
Please.
You tip your hand by prefacing your editorial, "I'm not a contester, but...." Yeah, no kidding.
Not all contests require signal reports, but when the contest sponsor does...well...it's just easier to make it easier. Ultimately any data that a sponsor decides to include in the exchange is arbitrary. There's a CW contest where the exchange is one's name. This contest allows team competition. Well, one team decided that everyone on the team was named "Ed." The Talking Eds. Do you understand CW well enough to see the advantage of sending Ed rather than, say, Jebidiah?
If you have an issue with including signal reports in some particular contest, why don't you contact the sponsor and suggest changing their format instead of making a snarky post here? Make sure to explain, "I'm not a contester, but..."
If you don't like signal reports in contests, try a VHF contest...none required. Just grids. Or better yet, try ARRL Sweepstakes. *LOTS* of info required, but nary a signal report in sight. Try it after 36 or 48 hours of nonstop operating. Try it on CW. You *do* CW, right?
I gotta disagree with WIK who says it's silly. No, it's not silly...there's a *reason* for it. He knows that too. He was just trying to be nice.
The problem with playing dumb in order to exercise your passive/aggresive tendencies is that you sound, well, dumb.
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
Forum, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Forum Manager.
|
|
|
