RBN-induced confusion

Yesterday (Sunday) I travelled to France for some radio fun. However, despite my best efforts to make my activities clear, it seems that RBNgate has conspired to muddy the waters and induce some chasers to believe they worked a SOTA station when they had not. Let me explain.

As the weekend was the annual Coupe du REF contest, I decided to take the opportunity to combine some SOTA activity with a bit of contesting in order to increase my DXCC totals if possible. Despite the weather forecasts predicting torrential rain and storm-force winds, I was on-the-road at 0415 towards the Tunnel. Dawn broke, with amazing red skies, just as I approached my target summit of F/NO-026 Mont Le Communale. As it was a Sunday, with no lorries permitted, I drove away from the road at the Ferti Opale sign (see Resources for more details) and parked about 500m along the track alongside a small wooded area. The combination of wet weather and heavy traffic has made this track rather uncomfortable, and I do not recommend its use unless you are driving a 4x4.

The temperature was +2C and the wind was already noticeable, so I set up fairly close to the car using the edge of the wood as an antenna support. By 0800 UTC I was ready to go, so I self-spotted by SMS using the callsign F/G3VQO/P on 10MHz. So far, so good. Luckily the chasers arrived quickly, and I soon had twenty callsigns in the log. I was pleasantly surprised to be called by an Australian station who was a genuine 599, and louder than other simultaneous callers. He was a new DXCC for me from France. I was, however, extremely glad when the frequency went quiet as, despite numerous layers of clothing, I was feeling extremely cold. I quickly dismantled the station and retreated to the car.

Now, using the FT-847 with higher power, and a mag-mount mobile whip, it was time for some contesting. I thought I was being clever by amending my callsign to F/G3VQO to avoid triggering the RBNgate -> SOTAwatch interface. Unfortunately, it became apparent that this ruse did not achieve the planned result. As I called CQ TEST DE F/G3VQO there was a steady trickle of familiar SOTA chasers interspersed with normal contest callers on both 40m and 20m. Some sent a full contest exchange, others just a report, but only two actually asked SOTA? to which I replied NO. Finally, after eighty-five contest QSOs, the choice was to change the antenna to try 15m or dismantle and head for home. I was so thoroughly cold by then that it was a no-brainer! So, back to the Tunnel it was, and some hot food to revive the inner man.

It was only when I reached home, and turned on the computer, that I saw what RBNgate had done. It had correctly spotted me as F/G3VQO, but had associated it with the earlier self-spot for F/G3VQO/P. That is either very clever or very stupid, depending on your point of view, but it caused obvious confusion to chasers using SOTAwatch, for which I apologise. To reiterate the situation, the only valid SOTA QSOs were those on 30m with F/G3VQO/P. Any QSOs on 40m or 20m were from the comfort(?) of the car and are non-SOTA. Please correct your chaser logs where appropriate.

73 de Les, F/G3VQO

In reply to G3VQO:
Thanks Les - after our 40m QSO I listened further and realised you were not operating for SOTA. I was pleased to give you a point though in the contest!

73 Phil

In reply to G3VQO:

The RBN logic works from limited knowledge and infers the most likely outcome. For 99% of SOTA uses it’s fine. This is the kind of operating that is guaranteed to confuse it. It’s simply how it works. It’s designed to work on seeing an alert or spot, applying a time-window to the alert/spot and spotting you if heard by the skimmers in the time-window. If we had guaranteed comms outwith our SOTA RF then we could self spot and there’d be no need for an inferrence engine like RBN to spot us in the first place.

Off the top of my head the fixes are:

  • request no RBN spotting for this activation only in the alert
  • set short validity period in the alert so RBN doesn’t see contest ops
  • use a different callsign for the differing activations

As you can self-spot you could have done it without RBN help, that would have solved the issue. If you can use a club call etc. for SOTA, you can alert for that, RBN will spot it, you get a SOTA pileup and the points etc. go to your account. Operate in the contest with a different call and RBN ignores you.

It’s not an easy problem to solve. Nor is the problem of ensuring the chaser actually listens to what is sent. It’s arguable that you may have been on the summit playing SOTA then contesting later on from the summit, so chasers hearing you send CQ TEST but believing you are on a summit would still log you for SOTA. They should have sent SOTA? when hearing CQ TEST but the chance of a point clouds the mind. Well in my case it does.

Still, at least you got out. We had rain, wind, sleet, wind, rain, rain, silly rain, sun, rain, sun, rain, rain and wind. The WX was good here, you didn’t need to go much further North to hit proper cold and snow.

Andy
MM0FMF

In reply to MM0FMF:

I’m not actually complaining about RBNgate Andy, I’m just trying to explain what happened.

I suppose I could have added RBNN to my initial SMS spot, but didn’t think of that. Likewise I could have set a validity period, but doubt that I could have remembered the format on a cold summit!

I though that I’d covered the problem by using a different callsign, as you suggest. However, it just wasn’t different enough!

Live and learn!

73 de Les

In reply to G3VQO:

I realise that Les. Discussing these kind of issues is often useful in that they spike the old grey matter into action. Someone may have an idea that solves the problems for everyone for the minimal effort. Well minimal user effort.

An example would be on the database. When you change your callsign (licence upgrade etc.) you have to log out and log in again or you get nasty error messages. I explain this regularly when explaining how to change callsigns in emails to users. I sat looking at the code thinking how to fix it so it would allow a callsign change and still function. It seemed quite messy to fix till someone said “if you have to logout and login, don’t tell people to do that, just log them out by force.” I tried that and it works beautifully and it’s a 1-line fix to the code. It’s guaranteed to work and solve all the issues although it’s not as elegant as being able to continue. It’s implemented in next update that will feature SWL logging. I doubt I’d have thought of it as it wasn’t a real fix to the design, but a pragmatic fix to the problem.

Andy
MM0FMF

In reply to MM0FMF:

It’s not an easy problem to solve.

It is easy. Just refrain from ever posting any advance alerts. That is what I have done since the advent of RBN-gate. I now just rely upon real-time spots on the day.

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

In reply to G3NYY:

Not that easy Walt. The RBN-gate will treat a self-spot as an alert.

The solution is as Les points out - put “RBNN” in the comments field in your alert. For a more permanent solution, email KU6J and ask him to put your callsign on the excluded activators list.

More here: RBNGate by KU6J - Automatic SOTA Spotting

For me personally, I welcome the facility. I try to alert as best I can or be reasonably on time going QRV, and if not I try to edit the times of my alerts acordingly.

Tom M1EYP

In reply to M1EYP:

Not that easy Walt. The RBN-gate will treat a self-spot as an alert.

Yes, but at least the information in a real-time self-spot is likely to be accurate and up-to-date.

The solution is as Les points out - put “RBNN” in the comments field
in your alert. For a more permanent solution, email KU6J and ask him
to put your callsign on the excluded activators list.

But, as I have commented before, why should we have to do either of these things? Surely RBNGate should default to excluding everyone UNLESS they have specifically asked to be included. When I started using SOTAwatch, there was no RBNGate. It was imposed upon us by its developer. I do not recall ever being consulted about the pros and cons of it.

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

In reply to G3NYY:
“It was imposed upon us by its developer.”

That’s one way to look at it I suppose Walt but I doubt that many share your view. It does sound a little like your views on repeaters. SOTA has been imposed on you by its developers too, as has SOTAwatch and all its associated infrastructure. I suspect that if developers needed to consult you at each stage of the way, developments would grind to a halt pretty quickly!

Cheers Richard G3CWI

Surely RBNGate should default to excluding everyone UNLESS they have specifically asked to be included.

I don’t think that makes sense. RBNgate takes information from skimmer spots, and the idea of skimmers is that they hear as much of everything as possible.

There are 3 simple opt-out options. So simple that it would take longer to grumble about the RBNgate on here than it would to opt-out. So take your pick from:

  1. Write ‘RBNN’ in the comments field
  2. Email KU6J and ask to be permanently blocked
  3. Use SSB (will be popular with many chasers)

Tom M1EYP

In reply to M1EYP:

Email KU6J and ask to be permanently blocked

Done.

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

In reply to G3CWI:

It does sound a little like your views on repeaters.

Indeed.

Views to which I am perfectly entitled. I respect other people’s views and I expect them to respect mine.

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

In reply to G3NYY:

In reply to G3CWI:

It does sound a little like your views on repeaters.

Indeed.

Views to which I am perfectly entitled. I respect other people’s
views and I expect them to respect mine.

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

An attitude that is one of the foundations of civilisation. I do not do CW, but if that ever changes I suspect I would follow your example.

73

Brian G8ADD

In reply to M1EYP:
Tom,
Can an initial default status of allowing RBN to spot you be turned off in a subsequent self-spot? eg. if you proposed an operation as described, ie. first a SOTA activation, then a bit of mobile or other portable operation not SOTA-compliant, could you allow the usual RBN spotting for your SOTA operation, but turn it off by self-spotting at the end of your SOTA operation with the RBNN tag in the comments field?

Subsequent summits: if you drove onwards to your second SOTA location and wanted RBN to resume spotting you, would a new alert or spot for your new SOTA site then resume normal RBN operation?

Andrew VK1DA

In reply to VK2UH:

Can an initial default status of allowing RBN to spot you be turned
off in a subsequent self-spot? eg. if you proposed an operation as
described, ie. first a SOTA activation, then a bit of mobile or other
portable operation not SOTA-compliant, could you allow the usual RBN
spotting for your SOTA operation, but turn it off by self-spotting at
the end of your SOTA operation with the RBNN tag in the comments
field?

Subsequent summits: if you drove onwards to your second SOTA location
and wanted RBN to resume spotting you, would a new alert or spot for
your new SOTA site then resume normal RBN operation?

This FAQ question covers this scenario (and just about every other one).

It’s a shame that few people seem to read the excellent FAQ :slight_smile:

Q. If I’m on a summit and want to tell RBNGate to stop spotting me, is there any way to do that?

A. Yes. Spot yourself to Sotawatch and include either of the following anywhere in your spot’s comment (without the quotes, case-insensitive): “RBNN” or “NoRBNGate”. This will disable spotting based on any of your current Sotawatch alerts or prior self-spots. Your “current Sotawatch alerts” are the ones in which the current time is within 1 hour before or 3 hours after their estimated time of arrival. If you have alerts entered for times farther out into the future, RBNGate spotting will resume for those. It will also resume if you spot yourself again and do not include “RBNN” or “NoRBNGate” in the comment for your self-spot.

Post of 27th January 2014, timed 1444, above. Click on the link folks!

Tom M1EYP

In reply to M1EYP:

Post of 27th January 2014, timed 1444, above. Click on the link
folks!

Tom M1EYP

Or go back a bit further, 7th October 2012 :-?

http://www.sotawatch.org/reflector.php?topic=7322#60981

In reply to G4ISJ:

Or go back a bit further, 7th October 2012 :-?

http://www.sotawatch.org/reflector.php?topic=7322#60981

…which post also explains why “/P” didn’t make the difference Les expected it to make.

73, Rick M0LEP

In reply to M0LEP:

…which post also explains why “/P” didn’t make the difference Les
expected it to make.

73, Rick M0LEP

Yes, and for quick reference this item in the FAQ (linked to by Tom above) also points out that portable designators are ignored when RBNGate decides whether or not to spot the station:


Q: The callsign in my Sotawatch alert is W1ABC but I may call CQ as W1ABC/P or W2/W1ABC/P. Will I still get spotted?

A: Yes. Portable designators are ignored by RBNGate when it checks for callsign matches between RBN spots and Sotawatch alerts, or between RBN spots and your self-spots. They are NOT ignored for the purpose of posting the spot itself: you will be spotted with whatever variant of your callsign that the RBN skimmer heard you send.

73,

Eric KU6J

===========================================
Free SOTA Spot Monitor Software + RBNGate FAQ:
http://www.ku6j.com

Just when I think I finally understand how RBNgate works, a situation occurs that totally confuses me!

Take the situation around noon today.

There were two relevant alerts showing –
10:00 I/F6HBI/P on I/LG-309 - [edit] 10.122-cw
then move to F/AM-512 (Posted by F6HBI)
12:00 F6HBI/P on F/AM-512 - [edit] 10.122-cw
Time approx, also FFF-188 and other Bands (Posted by F6HBI)

Sure enough, the following spots were listed by RBNgate –
Thu 10:19 I/F6HBI/P on I/LG-309 - [edit] (Posted by KU6J) 10.122 cw
Thu 10:34 I/F6HBI/P on I/LG-309 - [edit] (Posted by KU6J) 7.034 cw
Thu 10:47 I/F6HBI/P on I/LG-309 - [edit] (Posted by KU6J) 14.0591 cw

Followed by –
Thu 12:18 F6HBI/P on I/LG-309 - [edit] (Posted by KU6J) 10.1221 cw

The final spot is the one that confuses me. I believed that, with two or more valid alerts, RBNgate will associate the spot with the nearest alert. Therefore, any RBNgate spot after 11:00 should include the 12:00 alerted summit F/AM-512, and certainly the spot at 12:18 (after the second alert time) should be for the French summit.

Is this a glitch, or is it another “feature” that we need to be aware of?

Confused of Sussex
Les, G3VQO

P.S. There it goes again!
Thu 13:09 F6HBI/P on I/LG-309 - [edit] (Posted by KU6J) 21.0441 cw

WIHIH?