Observation 300186: PCSAT (26931)

Regarding Observation 300186 … will someone vett this properly?

@motionlab :slight_smile:

To update your vetting of this observation, please visit

See https://wiki.satnogs.org/Operation#Rating_observations

  • Good
    You should mark observations as “Good” when it is clear from the waterfall and/or audio recording that a satellite is present.
  • Bad
    You should mark observations as “Bad” when by examining the waterfall and/or audio it is obvious that there was no satellite detected in this observation.:
  • Failed
    You should mark observations as “Failed” when the station failed entirely: the waterfall and/or audio is empty or not present, or there’s too much noise.

There are different noise sources in the waterfall, nevertheless the signal is visible.


I think they are testing their ML algorithm again.
It would be less stressful for others if they do this on network-dev. :wink:

1 Like


I am very sorry to cause troubles. This was me trying to support, please see by comment at