[ct-user] CT log outputs versus ARRL requirements

[Gilmer, Mike]

Did you try WRITEARRL instead of WRITELOG?

I think this is the correct command for ARRL-specific formats.
Mike N2MG


> Group:
> 
> With the ARRL's new-found fervor for enforcing log format and deadline
> 
> requirements, I wanted to make sure the multi-two log I send in to the
> 
> league is in compliance.  The requirements from the ARRL web page
> include 
> the following:
> 
> 
> ****
> 
> Great.  So, I did a "writelog" in CT as usual and found the following:
> 
> * the .log output does not include:
> 
>       * the transmitted "state" information;
>       * an indication of which station made the QSO.
> 
> So that won't work.  CT also produces the two files , one for each 
> transmitter.  But, they include header information and page breaks.
> And 
> that information does note include the transmitted state OR signal
> report.
> 
> Thus it appears that CT doesn't produce ARRL-compliant logs for the 
> multi-two category.  It also appears like I have a lot of work ahead
> of 
> me with a text editor, either:
> 
> * adding the transmitted State and the station designation to the .log
> 
> file;
> 
> OR
> 
> * deleting the header and page break information from each page of the
> 
> two logs, and adding the transmitted information.  
> 
> Before I get started with this task...any chance of the ARRL waiving
> this 
> requirement for the 1999 log entries, assuming that CT becomes "Y2K" 
> compliant in the sense of the log format for multi-two meeting ARRL 
> requirements?
> 
> Standing by, awaiting a ruling from Newington...
> 
> 73, Jim  N6IG
> 

--
Submissions:              ct-user@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  ct-user-REQUEST@contesting.com
WWW:                      http://www.contesting.com/ct/
Questions:                owner-ct-user@contesting.com