Observation 4208856: SNUGLITE (43784)

Regarding Observation 4208856 is this the signal we are looking for but just with frequency offset? Looks like with properly corrected Doppler shift as transmissions is visible along vertical line. Shall I mark that receptiion as with signal or this comes from a different satellite? Maybe from the modulation it is visible that it is say not correct but I cant judge yet.

1 Like

Too me this observation looks like two different satellites but not Snuglite.

Look here https://network.satnogs.org/observations/4057019/
I would also vet this as good.

1 Like

The signal is probably from M6P or CSIM, but it needs further investigation.

So shall this observation be vetted as without signal?

I see people vetting green observations with completely nothing on the waterfall.

Is number of successful observations make station better than other which cause people vetting green no matter wat?

yes, the signal on waterfall should be the one of the observed satellite.

Unfortunately that happens for several reasons and is something that we discussing (in developers level for now), so we can improve the situation.

For current station statistics good or bad observations count as successful, as not receiving a satellite is also a valid observation. So, no difference if someone vet a waterfall with or without signal for the station statistics. By the way, the current stats for station are too simple and were created at the first days of SatNOGS, we need also, with vetting system, to improve them and make them more useful for all the parties that use SatNOGS (station owners, operators etc).