Regarding Observation 750318 …
I’m fairly sure that the systems were operating appropriately, so I hesitate to put a failed rating on it. What’s the sanctioned way to rate a negative acquisition to distinguish it from a sat/hardware/ground failure?
this is an observation of the voice frequency, and I do not believe there was a scheduled contact during that period. This should be vetted as “bad” (although it really is just “not observed”).
–Roy
K3RLD
I’ll mark it bad, but it hurts my feelings :D. I have worked as a satellite controller, and rating negative acquisition as bad hurts ground station metrics as it could be interpreted poorly.
Yep, I agree. However the vetting guidelines are clear. No signal observed = “bad”. I believe this is changing in the not so distant future, however.
No way!
“Bad” counts on the transmitter statistics 
1 Like
Exactly this, good and bad vetting affects the satellite metrics, which is translated to:
good = observed
bad = not observed
Please take a look at this vetting guide.
PS there is an open discussion about vetting here, feel free to add your feedback.
1 Like
FWIW I do wonder if this is what underlies the strong feelings on deletion, as if someone schedules an observation on your station when there is no scheduled activity (like way outside an ARISS window or SSTV) then vets them (correctly) as Bad, I wonder if a lot of station owners would delete those historically.
Well, if they ARE doing that, they they simply just don’t get it…
1 Like
I agree… but I do suspect that this happened.