Re: The fine art of RST


From: Mont Pierce (
Date: Sun Nov 20 1994 - 04:46:55 EST

> All told, then, it appears to me that the components of a signal report are
> subjective at best, whether one relies on the occasional S-meter or not.
> Well, then, why put so much emphasis on it? Ultimately, it is meaningless
> because it is the interpretation of the operator (or designer of the meter
> system). I suppose if you work the same station, and the operator is
> consistent in his interpretations, you may be able to get some meaningful
> data.
> Other than that, it is, at best, a fuzzy indication of how well you two can
> hear each other.

This could get quite funny... Yes RST reports are subjective, but that
does not mean they are meaningless. If you watch a skating contest and
5 judges all give different scores, does that mean that only one of them
is right and the other 4 judges are wrong because they didn't give the
same report?? Now if one judge always gives the highest score, no
matter how good or bad a perfomance might be, that is a truly worthless

Now stop laughing at me! I do not mean to say that we are in a scoring
contest trying to beat one another, but it is sort of a contest... An
operator with his equipment and skills pitted against distance, sun-
spot cycles, and probagations...

So you need to take at RST reports with a grain of salt. It's sort of
like taking a survey. You throw away the 599 reports you think are bogus,
and avaerage the rest. I like one guy's sig on the list, "if RST > 519,
then reduce power".

72 es great qrping to u,

Mont Pierce

+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Ham Call: KM6WT Internet: | | bands: 80/40/20/15/10/2 | | modes: cw,ssb,fm | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Search QRP-L Archives

[ QRP-L Archive | ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 ]


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 on Fri Jun 02 2000 - 11:27:09 EDT