[CQ-Contest] Cabrillo format
scace at uu.net
Fri Oct 1 12:22:33 EDT 1999
1. Why is it named "Cabrillo format"? I'm missing a piece of contesting
2. My understanding of the discussion to date is that Cabrillo format log
submissions do not list any QSOs which would be dupes. If that is correct,
how does the log checker handle the following scenario:
-- I work RA3AUU at 01/1234z and log him. But, in fact, I did NOT get
logged by RA3AUU for some reason.
-- Later, RA3AUU calls me at 02/1405z and I work him again. Both of us
log this QSO properly. The dupe contact is logged by my logging software.
-- In my log submission in Cabrillo format, the second RA3AUU contact at
02/1405z is not included because it is a dupe.
-- The log checker determines that my first contact is invalid and
According to my understanding, since the log checker can not see my
second claimed contact in the Cabrillo-format log, that contact at 02/1405z
does not get converted from 'dupe' to valid. And, if RA3AUU was my only QSO
on that band for the multiplier, I lose the multiplier(s) as well.
In other log submission formats that included dupes (marked as such), I
would not lose the second QSO or multiplier credit.
If my understanding is correct, then the Cabrillo format doesn't seem
like it's doing the right thing in this case. After all, I did (eventually)
work RA3AUU correctly in the contest.
Thanks for any clarifications.
-- Eric R3/K3NA
scace at uu.net
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest