[CQ-Contest] LotW and contesters (and data quality)

[Jan Almedal]

I will not contribute to the discussion if LotW is to complicated or not.
But, I will remind all that contesters probably are the best LotW user
group! How can I tell?

Some statistics from this springs DX-pedition:

I operated CQ WPX SSB as VQ5L, and made 3.002 QSO. As of today I have 516
confirmations - that is 17,2% !!!

Outside the contest I operated as VP5/LA9HW and made 2.572 QSOs. For this,
I have 252 confirmations - this gives only 9,8%.


When I first started using LotW last fall, I found it a bit rigid to
getting started, but fully managable. Requesting the certificate for LA9HW
was quite easy, and sending copy of license via snail mail is OK. It takes
a few days, but who's in a hurry? As soon as the certificate was received,
I sent a new request for an earlier novice license (LB1G), and the
certificate was received the day after. Pretty simple! If I operate from
another CEPT country, it will be similar easy to get a new certificate.

After my expedition to Turks & Caicos Islands, I requested certificates for
the two calls, and sent copy of the licenses via snail-mail. Again it took
a few days, but who cares.

I find it quite satisfying to be able to get confirmation of QSOs pretty
much every day. And I have received confirmation of several nice DX
stations, from which I haven't received QSL (not requested either). BS7,
BP9, H40 to mention some.


For the future of LotW I support those who have mentioned that
implementation of more awards are important. WAS, WAZ, IOTA and som others
have been mentioned.

But here we have a problem. Or ARRL has given us.

For callsigns, in LotW, there have been mide stright rules for the format.
I can enter VP5/LA9HW, but I cannot use VP5-LA9HW, LA9HW-VP5 or LA9HW VP5
or some other alternatives. For other input fields there is no such input
control. In the fields CQ Zone, ITU Zone, IOTA, Grid, State/County one can
enter almost anything!

To give you some examples. It's amazing how many east-coast US stations
operating from ITU zone 5 (without signing /VE.....) Almost as many
east-coast US stations are operating from CQ zone 8 without signing
portable any island in the Carribean. How come? For most east-coast
stations the zones are 5 (CQ) and 8 (ITU).  -   5 and 8  is the key! What's
the problem? LotW input fields are in the opposite order! First ITU, and
the CQ. We are not used to this, and it causes a lot of wrong input data!
Not only for 5 and 8 of course. I have received fellow LA's giving CQ zone
as 18 (Asiatic Russia) and ITU zone as 14 (South America)......

For the other fields, it's similar problems. I have been operating a lot of
IOTA from EU-061. But LotW will accept input as EU061, EU 061 or anything
else. And it is not verified!

For grid locators it is even worse. Am I in JO48AD or in JO 48. Or in JO 48
AD, JO-48 and so on...... No input control! I have even received IOTA
references in this field.

US states and couties should be easy. Or not? I recently received
AK,MATANUSKA SUSITNA as county. If it is Inuit or something else for one of
the AK judicial districts I don't know, but whatever, my log program don't
recognise it. Would LotW?

So, unfortunately, before we can hope for any new awards in LotW, ARRL has
a huge job to do on the standardisation and verification of data. May be
too huge. If so, LotW will just remain an electronic supplement for DXCC.



73 de
Jan / LA9HW