[CQ-Contest] More CQWW anomalies...

Teijo Murtovaara teijo.murtovaara at netikka.fi
Sun Jul 20 04:59:31 EDT 2008

Laurent Ferracci kirjoitti:
> Yuri VE3DZ a écrit :
>> The call that was used in the contest is DK1F(see header of the LOG).
>> However, in Cabrillo file there is DL9LR call everywhere... That means NILs 
>> for all who worked him...
> No ! (i worked DK1F and didn't get a NIL)
> Only the CALLSIGN header field is taken into account by the robot.
> - If we have DL9LR in all QSO lines, but DK1F in the header, those who 
> logged DK1F will be OK.
> - If we have UN7MMMM in the header, those who logged UN7MMM will receive 
> a NIL, even if all QSO lines say UN7MMM in his log.
> Laurent, F1JKJ

Same here,

DK1F was ok for me also, but I was also dinged for incorrect call with 

Another anomaly that I found was YO5OHY. His log had incorrect date for 
the first day (Oct 28th instead of Oct 27th) and it seems like the log 
checking software rejected the second day totally. In his log I can find 
my call on the second day logged at the correct time but incorrectly as 
OF8NIO instead of OF6NIO. Still I got a NIL and the penalty.

There certainly seems to be some issues with the log-checking procedure.

Teijo, OH6NIO

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list