VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] Logging Rovers vs the log checking robots

To: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Logging Rovers vs the log checking robots
From: "Bruce Richardson" <w9fz@w9fz.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 16:00:05 -0600
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Hi Jay and all:

As a rover, I went ahead and got a "child" certificate for "W9FZ" as
"W9FZ/R".  Personally, I never upload VHF+ logs with the plain callsign but
always with the /R.  I will say that in HF State QSO parties, I've uploaded
with plain, /M, and /XXX where XXX is a 3-letter abbreviation for the
county.  Of the successful LOTW QSL's (in those QSO parties), about 33%
comes from each version of my callsign.

There is another more tedious reason that many rovers never upload (or
successfully upload) for LOTW is that, really, for each grid, another
"Location" has to be built.

Since I revisit rover spots over the years, I'm able to re-use some of the
locations I've built.  I build the locations in TQSL.  They have a unique
name that I'll recognize, the grid, and I even do the county and the two
zone numbers correctly.  I believe county and zones are optional.  Since I
go to the level of detail of county and zones, Sometimes I have to build
different locations within the same grid.  A rover who operates "on the fly"
could build locations but it would never really be accurate at the county
level.

I like LOTW and I like supplying grids as a rover.  I like going the extra
tedious mile and making locations and signing just portions of the entire
log with the appropriate location/grid.

73
Bruce Richardson W9FZ/R

_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

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