[Elecraft] The Old RST

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

> It's been nearly a century since the T report had any meaning, yet we
> Hams still use it.

It's a shame Tone doesn't mean something these days ... there's still a
place for accurate reports.  There's a 9Y with a very "whoopy" sounding
note, and an N4 this weekend that was all broadband noise - sounded
like it could have been a spark signal.  Both would certainly merit
other than "T9" reports.  Of course, both were getting the canned "5NN"
reports ...

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 2/19/2012 11:02 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:
> Of course, RST readings started "by ear" but one of the first ways to
> "automate" the strength report was used by an early National SW-3 regen from
> the late 20's or early 30's. It had a volume control calibrated in "S"
> units. You adjusted it for comfortable listening and looked at the knob for
> the signal strength, Hi!
>
> I have always preferred what the commercial CW operators used, the QSA
> report. QSA1 for audible but unreadable to QSA5 for perfect copy. The QSA
> report considered both the strength and the 'copyability' of the signal. A
> huge signal but a lousy "fist" might merit a QSA2. A much weaker signal but
> in the clear with a good fist might deserve a QSA5.
>
> There was no reference to the "T" for tone. That came in with the push for
> d-c voltage on the plates of tubes in the early 20's. It was common for many
> hams to run A-C right from a transformer (or the mains) on the plates of
> their tubes, producing a very harsh modulated CW signal. But, since many
> Hams were still running spark, it wasn't considered a spectrum hog.
>
> As time went by and spark was phased out, there was big push for a clear "dc
> tone" from Hams as indicated by T-9 in the RST scale. It was unimportant for
> most commercial use because ships commonly used modulated CW. Indeed,
> modulated CW was *required* on the distress frequencies.
>
> It's been nearly a century since the T report had any meaning, yet we Hams
> still use it.
>
> It's 'tradition' :)
>
> Ron AC7AC
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> And speaking of how ham radio must be changing over the years, what the heck
> did people do about signal reports before they had S meets to read? Bear in
> mind that this question is mostly rhetorical. I don't bother with S meter
> readings myself, but I do try to give honest signal reports anyway. BTW,
> you'll note that many if not most contests don't use signal reports as part
> of the exchange anymore precisely because of the "599 problem". (Obviously,
> the current, or recently finished, is an exception.)
>
> I predict an end of thread message shortly.
> --
> Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
> Phone: (814) 860-3194 or 888-75-BUDDY
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>