CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Contest Logger Thoughts

To: "BobK8IA@aol.com" <BobK8IA@aol.com>, Trent Sampson <vk4ts@outlook.com>, "CQ-Contest@contesting.com" <CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Contest Logger Thoughts
From: Trent Sampson <vk4ts@outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 21:25:03 +0000
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Hi Bob,



I just responded privately to another person and it answers your questions -



To sort out the reporting :



Post Contest I have subscribed to www.qscope.org<http://www.qscope.org>



We have found throughout the reporting of N1MM anomalies in Multi ops - such as 
operators listed under the Runs report and not listed under the rates report



The rates in different parts of N1MM are not consistent - if you are using 1, 
10 and 60 Minutes then this should be the only standard.



The Max rates report in a Multi op gives the callsign of the first operator in 
the sequence - some slight extra coding to show the individuals would be awesome



This is not a new occurrence as both myself and Phil have been asking for this 
to be rectified for some time now.



While we may not move on we are looking for alternatives.



To us operator management is a primary concern:  Most of the downfall is live



We would like to see a Bum in chair time as per Writelog even with negative for 
those not on air ie how long off the rig.



Looking at other packages is very interesting ; for example on feature of 
WINTEST is an integration with HAMCAP that forecasts prop to arrange skeds with 
a Multiplier



This feature is called QSY Wizard 
http://docs.win-test.com/wiki/Menu:Windows#QSY_Wizard



The search continues



Score at this stage from private emails



N1MM - 2

Writelog - 3

Wintest - 5





Regards





Trent Sampson

VK4TS

Po Box 275 Mooloolaba QLD 4557

Mobile 0408497550




From: BobK8IA@aol.com [mailto:BobK8IA@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, 5 November 2016 7:13 AM
To: vk4ts@outlook.com; CQ-Contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Contest Logger Thoughts

Hi Trent,

A small group of us Arizona Outlaws have been doing M/2 for over 7 years here. 
(N7AT and several other calls). We have used N1MM/N1MM+ that entire time. We 
find the networking ability quite good, very robust, and the reporting suiting 
our operation.

What about the N1MM reporting is inadequate for your needs?

73, Bob K8IA
Arizona Outlaws Contest Club



In a message dated 11/3/2016 6:16:16 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, 
vk4ts@outlook.com<mailto:vk4ts@outlook.com> writes:
Looking around at various contest Loggers and considering a change - We have 
used N1MM for some time but the reporting leaves me cold.

We mainly operate Multi Operator - so need good networking, good comms, and 
good reporting for each operator.

What do you use ? Why ? and what are its best features ?


Trent Sampson
VK4TS
Po Box 275 Mooloolaba QLD 4557
Mobile 0408497550


_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>