[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: LOTW



I don't think its as big a difference as you might think within LOTW.
Non-satellite QSOs have to match Call, Mode, Date/time, and Band.
Satellites require an additional field, Prop_Mode, which is used to flag
LOTW to match based on SAT_NAME instead of BAND.  Also if you are applying
for an award such as single band WAS, DXCC or 5BDXCC then the BAND is a
factor even in paper QSLing.  Maybe someday we can get to a position that we
start needing 5SatWAS and 5SatDXCC.

They did at least give up on trying to require BAND and BAND_RX matching on
satellites.


>From ARRL's https://www.arrl.org/lotw/faq#datamatch
What constitutes a QSO "match?"

To match, the two QSO records (yours and the other station's) must have:

  a.. Call of each QSO matches own call of the other (including portable
identifiers)
  b.. The modes are in the same mode group (e.g., SSB and PHONE match
because both are PHONE)
  c.. The date/time values are the same within 30 minutes (all times are
UTC)
In addition, if the QSO is a satellite QSO (indicated by the propagation
mode):

  a.. Both QSOs must be satellite mode
  b.. Satellite name must be the same
and if the QSO is a nonsatellite QSO:
  a.. Each QSO's band and RX band must match the values of the other QSO
  or


  b.. Each QSO's band and RX band values must match the opposite values of
the other QSO (that is, the band of one must match the RX band of the other
and the RX band must match the other's band).

73,
Lee-KU4OS

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stan" <stan@capecod.com>
To: <kk5do@arrl.net>
Cc: <amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org>
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 13:07 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] LOTW


> Hello Bruce,
>
> I hope you and yours have the very best of this holiday season.
>
> For the ARRL DXCC, WAS,  and VUCC programs with a separate SATELLITE
> designation, the only special  requirement is  that the
> QSL indicates a satellite QSO, in addition to the normal QSL
> information. Why make things more complex with LOTW ?
>
> As I have mentioned in a prior posting, the LOTW unfairly discriminates
> against these satellite qso's by requiring more
> and different details than any other ARRL award.
>
> For example, a 20M operator has a valid  RTTY QSO and is applying for a
> RTTY DXCC award.
> There is only the requirement to indicate RTTY on the QSL card or with
> the LOTW data entered.
> There is NO requirement to indicate the RTTY fsk split, or the specific
> mod/demod used.
>
> The LOTW needs to "keep things simple". Use only the designation of
> "SAT" or "SATELLITE".
>
> Other supplementary data in a comments column may include the exact
> satellite designation like
>  AO-40 or AO40, SAUDI SAT 1C,  or whatever
>
> The LOTW needs to be reprogrammed to facilitate recognition of valid
> satellite QSO's.
>
> Only with AMSAT leadership (emphasis) can this faux paux (sp) be
corrected.
>
> Stan, WA1ECF
>
>
>
>
>
> Bruce Paige wrote:
>
> >Here is the list of the valid Satellite Names and the Valid Dates for the
> >QSO's. No other satellites are valid for LOTW.
> >
> >73...bruce
> >
> ----
> Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org
----
Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home