[CQ-Contest] Incomplete LoTW QSL Records, Worthless ???

Dick Green dick.green at valley.net
Fri Feb 6 13:23:06 EST 2004

A few quick comments on this thread:

1. Paper QSLs can be incomplete, too -- no county, grid, zone, etc.

2. Incomplete station data in LoTW isn't the only problem. Sometimes the
station data is incorrect. My log program (XMlog)can check the LoTW QSL
records against my log records and display a report showing differences in
QTH info. The largest percentage of errors comes from incorrect zone,
usually ITU switched with CQ. Then next largest source of error is in the
state for US stations. Most likely, these are caused by the sender simply
configuring station data for his/her current QTH and not realizing the log
contains QSOs that took place from other QTHs. The grid and iota errors are
usually format errors.

3. Please check your log and TQSL station information to make sure you've
uploaded the correct information and all of it that you can find. The
correct procedure is to extract your log records so that the QSOs from each
QTH are in a separate file. Then create a station location for each unique
location, being sure to fill in *all* information correctly -- make sure the
CQ and ITU zones are correct, spell the County correctly, find and enter the
grid square and iota (if applicable) correctly. Go to
http://www.arrl.org/locate/grid.html to computes your grid square from your
longitude/latitude. When you sign each segment, select the matching station
location. It's a bit of work, but only has to be done once. If you got it
wrong the first time, just do redo and upload again. LoTW will automatically
replace your old QSO records and the new data will show up in the matching
QSL records.

73, Dick WC1M

> -----Original Message-----
> From: R Johnson [mailto:k1vu at tmlp.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 8:44 PM
> To: N7MAL; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Incomplete LoTW QSL Records, Worthless ???
> Hi Mal:
> Your missing my point. It has nothing to do with how or what 
> logging program was used.
> People are not including ALL of their "Station" data when 
> setting up TQSL !!!
> Assume that I did not fill in the "STATE Field" in TQSL when 
> I set it up. Then I digitally signed my log and created a 
> ".TQ8" file and uploaded it to LoTW.
> Now you come along and up load your log to LoTW and find that 
> we have a "MATCH" for a QSO.  When you look at the QSO 
> Details on LoTW you will find MY STATE DATA MISSING therefor 
> you couldn't use that QSL towards your ARRL WAS Award.
> That makes My QSL Worthless to you !!!
> If you download YOUR LoTW report and look it you will 
> probably find that you ALSO have about 30% incomplete LoTW QSL's !!!
> So what I'm saying is about 30% of the 6000 users screwed up 
> the TQSL setup and are STILL screwed up and are sending bad QSL's.
> All they have to do is edit their "Station" data in TQSL and 
> then re-sign and re-submit their logs and everything works FB !!!
> 73
> Bob, K1VU 
> At 19:00 2/5/2004 , N7MAL wrote:
> >I have not seen any of these problems with LOTW. I have 
> uploaded logs 
> >from XMLOG, Logger32, and directly from CT contest logs. I 
> have 10% of 
> >my QSO's confirmed by LOTW. I think the reason the 
> participation is not 
> >as good as it could be is because LOTW doesn't count for 
> anything, so 
> >far. Somehow, someway 6000 guys have figured it out (even me) so it 
> >can't be to difficult. I do know I had a start-up problem 
> and the LOTW 
> >guys responded very fast and corrected the problem within hours. You 
> >might try contacting them directly.
> >
> >MAL                N7MAL
> >www.citlink.net/~suzyq/N7mal.htm
> >www.geocities.com/n7mal
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "R Johnson" <k1vu at tmlp.com>
> >To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> >Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 3:39 AM
> >Subject: [CQ-Contest] Incomplete LoTW QSL Records, Worthless ???
> >
> >
> >Hi:
> >I had originally posted this message on the LoTW reflector. Several 
> >hams suggested that I might that I might also want to post 
> this message 
> >on some other mailing lists so that more would be aware of 
> the problem.
> >
> >Basic Problem:
> >People are not completely filling in the "STATION" info in 
> LoTW's TQSL 
> >program thus causing incomplete QSL records.
> >
> >After noting several of my LoTW QSL confirmations were 
> lacking complete 
> >"Station" info !!! I decided to download my latest "LoTW 
> Report" and do 
> >some analysis of the situation.
> >
> >I must admit that I was a bit surprised at how bad this problem was.
> >
> >Of my 356 LoTW QSL's, 30% of them(108) had incomplete "Station Data" 
> >making many of the QSL's useless for Awards other than DXCC !!!
> >
> >Here is a breakdown of my 108 bad QSL's:
> >No Grid = 22
> >No County = 2
> >No County & Grid = 1
> >No ITU Zone = 11
> >No CQ Zone = 3
> >No ITU & CQ Zones = 56
> >No Grid & BOTH Zones = 5
> >No Grid & ITU Zone = 8
> >
> >Note: I have no means (yet) of checking for missing IOTA data.
> >
> >So what is the bottom line ???
> >
> >I don't know, but as far as I can see these type of 
> statistics tend to 
> >make LoTW useless as far as being able to use LoTW QSL's for 
> credit on 
> >awards other than the
> >ARRL DXCC, WAS and WAC Awards !!!
> >
> >The ARRL VUCC Award is questionable due to lack of grid info AND the 
> >fact the LoTW has very little acceptance by the VHF/UHF/SHF 
> community, 
> >but that another story !!!
> >
> >Use of LoTW for Non-ARRL Awards is also up for grabs.  CQ Magazines 
> >Awards and County Hunters will need some of the missing 
> data.  I don't 
> >know about US Islands, Canadian
> >Islands and IOTA awards.  Awards like 10-10, SMIRK and FISTS 
> are not even
> >supported by
> >providing a place to enter their #'s in the "Station" info.
> >
> >I think it is up to LoTW to make sure that the "Submitted 
> Logs" contain 
> >all of the "Station" information.
> >
> >This could be accomplished in a number of ways:
> >
> >1-LoTW could review (electronically) all of the currently received 
> >records and ask
> >    submitter to update his "Station" info (supply ALL info) 
> and resign 
> >and resubmit
> >    their logs.
> >
> >2-Anyone finding incomplete info on a LoTW QSL could submit 
> a list of 
> >the offending
> >    callsigns to LoTW and LoTW could ask them resign and 
> resubmit their 
> >logs or have
> >    them rejected.
> >
> >3-LoTW could refuse to accept any NEW submissions lacking complete 
> >"Station" data.
> >    This might cause some of the current "offending" users to take 
> >notice and resign
> >    and resubmit their logs on their own.
> >
> >4-LoTW could make the importance supplying ALL of the "Station" data 
> >better know in
> >    the setup instructions. I consider it a poorly documented point.
> >
> >I support LoTW, but I'm starting to see it bogging down in a 
> quagmire.
> >
> >So far there are less than 6000 Hams worldwide using LoTW at 
> this time, 
> >so I see that this is the ideal time to make changes.
> >
> >73
> >Bob, K1VU
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> >     The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
> >THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!
> >        http://home1.pacific.net.sg/~jamesb/
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >CQ-Contest mailing list
> >CQ-Contest at contesting.com 
> >http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list