dt wrote:
> With all the talk about qsl'n ,
> I am surprised someone has not revived the
> question of why some of us are not enthusiastic
> about LOTW.
>
>
> When we were originally forced to go through all
> the 'hoops', it was a real hassle for us, but we
> eventually managed.
>
>
>
I finally bite the bullet and signed up to LOTW and although it was not
easy at first to navigate all the requirements it has saved me with a
ton of paper work getting my DXCC upgrade. I have now uploaded 12K
qso's mostly 160 meter contests in the past 4 years. The thing that
bugs me is the application fees which reappears each time I apply for
new credits. The platform is awesome but be sure your dates and times
are correct as there does not appear to much leeway on this.
I do wish that HQ would decide to allow log checking as this would be
very helpful and reduce the bandwidth usage of "time jumping" on my
uploads. If the DX-peditions log check shows contacts and you log
agrees why can't you use LOTW to get the time in the box. My logger
jumped with DST on the computer which was my mistake and now I check the
time with every log on.. However, some DX-pedition might put you in the
log and you did not log it because of a qrmer on the report. You keep
calling and get the station again 20 minutes later and log them but they
remember giving you a report and don't log you again because you show up
as a dupe. this is just an excample of what can go wrong with LOTW time
and date stamps that may be off from you submission.
I also noticed that some countries more than other do not use LOTW. I
went through 98 OM contacts before I found one hit with LOTW. Nor does
Bosnia operations and regulars like E74AW show up on the look up box. I
did however get credits for TX0DX, 1A4A, N8S, 4W6WW, and T33C. So it
was extremely valuable to try to get enough cards in to get back on the
honor roll.
73
Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ
_______________________________________________
160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - TF4M
|