Al and others...
I see three inter-related issues in the discussion regarding how to sign as
a mobile. A procedure that is good for one area can have negative impact on
another area(s).
1) How to designate what county you are currently operating from
2) How a persons logging program deals with identifying mobile dupes
3) How the eQSL and LoTW systems deal with the variety of logging methods
operators use
As has been stated, there is no universal published standard that addresses
all three areas. Different people sign different ways for different reasons.
I don't know if there is a universal "solution" that could be defined and
implemented at this point in time. But here's my thoughts...
You said you sign KØAD/DAK to designate you are mobile in Dakota county.
That satisfies #1 & #2, but it creates extra work for #3. If you activate 20
counties, you need 20 LoTW certificates from ARRL because each /CTY creates
a unique callsign in their system. Also, you have to separate your log into
the 20 segments and upload each one using the appropriate /CTY designator.
Although this is "doable", I doubt many mobile stations take the time to do
this.
Likewise, whether to sign KØAD/M or not adds another variable. Jim Reisert
AD1C created a utility that takes QSO Party files and processes them into a
standard ADIF format. It strips all /DESIGNATORS back to a /M and populates
the Secondary Administrative District with the official county designator
defined in the ADIF specification. This is a BIG step forward because it
reduces the need for 20 certificates down to 2, KØAD and KØAD/M.
http://software.ad1c.us/ It doesn't eliminate the task of splitting your log
into 20 parts, creating 20 locations in tQSL, and uploading 20 files though.
But it does ensure you get proper credit in your daily logging program for
all the counties you worked.
Someone posted the "solution" to one-half of the #3 problem (it might have
been on the LoTW reflector). He said LoTW should be reprogrammed to discard
any /DESIGNATORS and only use the root callsign and the tQSL assigned
location. In other words, in reality KØAD and KØAD/DAK are the same station.
And /DAK is redundant information because the location is already identified
in the tQSL profile you create. So KØAD/DAK is really not necessary for #3,
but if that's what is sent, that is what is usually logged.
My suggestion to use KØAD DAK (without the slash) would help #1 and #3. That
is, you send your root callsign so that is what gets logged and uploaded to
the LoTW system. It eliminates the need for 20 certificates. You are also
sending your current location, but as a separate information element, not
part of your callsign. But contest logging issues (dupe checking) will force
some operators to solve the problem by inserting the slash anyway!
I believe appending the /DESIGNATOR for QSO Parties was a natural extension
of the old FCC requirement to identify your operating location, i.e.,
KØAD/6. That rule was removed many years ago (stateside). But old habits are
tough to change, especially when you are trying to change thousands of them!
BTW, sending KØAD DAK is faster than KØAD/DAK. :-)
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
----- Original Message -----
From: <aldewey@aol.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 5:50 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] In-state stations in QSO Parties...
>
>
> I might be missing something here but I certainly don't see anything wrong
> with rovers simply signing something like K0AD/DAK when they are roving.
> I have been doing that for years in MNQP. The logging software I use
> (Writelog) recognizes it as a unique station and does not list it as a
> dupe.
>
> When I hear a station calling CQ W4XYZ/CTY it is clear to me that they are
> in the state having the QSO party and what county they are in.
>
> When MNQP first started, we had two character county designaters. We did
> get some comments that signing something like K0AD/DL could give the
> impression you are DX. But with 3 character designators, I think that
> problem goes away.
>
> 73,
>
> AL, K0AD
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Chudek - K0RC <k0rc@citlink.net>
> To: Jimk8mr@aol.com; mike@n0hi.net; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Sent: Tue, Apr 27, 2010 10:45 pm
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] In-state stations in QSO Parties...
>
>
> Jim,
> "Better to sign W3WW/4 or W3WW/FL."
> This doesn't make any sense to me.
> W3WW/4 could be in any of the eight 4-land states. It doesn't tell me he's
> in Florida.
> W3WW/FL tells me he's a DX station in a French Department somewhere or
> maybe
> he's in Florida can't tell for sure.
> W3WW/?? Slash anything, causes callsign synchronization issues when
> uploading to eQSL or LoTW.
> W3WW BRE tells me he is a station in Brevard county and YES I want to know
> that he hasn't moved to another county. As soon as I type his callsign, my
> contest software shows me all the contacts I have made with that station,
> no
> matter which band, mode, or county.
> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Jimk8mr@aol.com>
> To: <mike@n0hi.net>; <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 8:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] In-state stations in QSO Parties...
>
> I would suggest that in state stations should not sign /CTY if they are
> not mobile or otherwise changing counties. Every time I hear that from a
> station that I do not think is a mobile, I have to check to see if that
> /CTY is the same as when I worked him before.
>
> Better to sign W3WW/4 or W3WW/FL.
>
> 73 - Jim K8MR
>
>
>
> In a message dated 4/27/2010 7:36:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> mike@n0hi.net writes:
>
> FL QP is different in that an out of state station can actually run FL
> stations to rate. I was doing this on Sunday when NQ4I called me, gave
> me
> 5nn GA, I gave him 5nn MA, and we both probably realized around the same
> time, "oops...this one don't count!" Then Rick called me on phone a few
> minutes later just to make sure.
>
> The "CQ FQP" or "CQ FL" is a fine line...I thought stations signing with
> their county in the CQ made things easier. The stations signing /county
> added some confusion the first few times; maybe just "CQ FQP NA4XYZ BRE"
> makes more sense.
>
> In any case, it was fun.
>
> --
> Mike DeChristopher, N0HI
> http://www.n0hi.net
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|