[Trlog] Duplicate Numbers in 6.78

[Tim Totten, N4GN]

As another data point, K9GX experienced both of these problems in SS 
phone.  I guess the NONCW (or NONSSB in his case) issue is old news, 
particularly for Icoms and Icom-speaking radios like the Omni-VI.  But 
Mark said the duplicate serial number problem also somehow seemed to be 
related to the radio comm link.  He was SO1R with an Icom IC-746.

Unfortunately, Mark wasn't thinking about the way Cabrillo logs are 
checked in today's world, so he decided to start doing math in his head 
and adding the running total of duplicates to each serial number that he 
sent.  (I can't imagine!)  Now I guess he's going to renumber QSOs after 
the fact and hope the new numbers correspond to the math he was doing in 
his head for each QSO.

Somehow I suspect K9GX will be added to the list of "don't trust the sent 
serial number" call signs for cross-checking purposes this year.  Tree, is 
there a way to get added to this list in advance?!

73,

Tim Totten, n4gn at n4gn.com
http://www.n4gn.com

On Sat, 12 Nov 2005, Dale Martin wrote:

>
> Twice, during SS CW, TRLog (6.78) issued duplicate numbers:
>
> 40CW  06-Nov-05 23:18  588  N8SR           166  B 68 Mi
> 2
> 40CW  06-Nov-05 23:20  589  K5NA          1221  M 58 STx
> 2
> 20CW  06-Nov-05 23:22  589  W3PH           255  A 61 Mdc
> 2
> 20CW  06-Nov-05 23:23  590  W3PH           255  A 61 Mdc
> 0
> 20CW  06-Nov-05 23:24  591  K0HW           359  U 61 Sd
> 2
> 20CW  06-Nov-05 23:30  592  VE7NH          375  A 47 Bc
> 2
>
> In the case above, I caught it sending 589 and corrected it with W3PH to
> 590.  I then left the duplicate line in as a reminder to send this note.
>
> 20CW  06-Nov-05 15:02  396  WE9V        *  190  U 90 Wi
> 2
> 20CW  06-Nov-05 15:04  397  W4MR            47  B 76 Nc
> 2
> 20CW  06-Nov-05 15:07  397  VE5ZX       *  368  A 63 Sk
> 2
> 20CW  06-Nov-05 15:09  398  W1AO           238  A 58 Me
> 2
>
> Here's the other occurrence of a duplicate number sent.  Sadly, I did not
> notice it until after the contest.  I don't know if the contest-checking
> software will nail me for it, but so it goes.
>
> I also got and did not notice two NONCW's.  I guessed they were made on the
> band surrounding the QSO's. Hopefully, they weren't second radio QSO's or
> I'm out those QSO's, too.
>
> 73,
> Dale, kg5u