I haven't really used it for VHF rovering, but I have used it for HF rovering,
AKA county hunting. I have done QSO parties from as many as 16 counties, which
is a reasonable comparison to a rover in a VHF contest. Yes, it is a PITA.
But, once you set up a key for each grid or county, it is set up. And that
doesn't take much time. Then you segregate your log by grid square and upload
each one via the appropriate key. Maybe a better way would be to have the
TRANSMITTED information (such as TX grid or TX county) as part of the ADIF or
Cabrillo uploaded information. That information is part of the key at this
time. Of course, there are those who only have one key and upload all of their
logs via that key. I have discovered LoTW QSLs for states/grids that I know I
haven't worked because of that. So, I sometimes question the integrity of
LoTW, it is just as fallible as paper QSLs, just in different ways. Of course,
LoTW doesn't yet support VUCC, which I think that they s
hould, as it would increase activity.
At 7/18/2006 02:28 AM, you wrote:
>A "diversion" from the present thread...are there any ROVERS who have
>used/are using LoTW?
>
>As I understand...a "Separate" "Key" (or security certificate) is needed for
>EACH Location (Grid Square) from which a ROVER wants to enter QSOs...a real
>PITA (that's Pain In The Anterior or you may select a different "A" word) if
>you ask me. Seems like there's GOT to be a BETTER way to to do that withOUT
>degrading the "integrity" of the LoTW system.
>
>If my understanding is wrong, I welcome correction/clarification!
>
>73, JK
>
>
>>From: KA6AMD <ka6amd@earthlink.net>
>>To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
>>Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] WAHOO - LoTW Double Whammy(and a half)
>>Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 22:18:50 -0700
>>
>>I definitely think that if LoTW supported VUCC, then a lot more VHFers
>>would use it.
>>
>>I am currently converting all of my old paper logs to LoTW and got a QSL
>>tonight from way back in 1979!
>>73, Erich KA6AMD
>>DM15
>>
>>R Johnson wrote:
>> > [snip]
>> >
>> > LoTW works FB as far as it presently goes.
>> >
>> > It works better when you supply all of your station info !!!
>> >
>> > It would work even better if it supported "VUCC" !!!
>> > [snip]
>> >
>> > 73
>> > Bob, K1VU
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>VHFcontesting mailing list
>VHFcontesting@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|