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

Re: Satellites and the LoTW



 What I hate about the whole LOTW vs. eqsl mess is that to me, it causes 
problems in chasing awards. Some folks confirm contacts via LOTW  and 
eqsl while others just use one or the other.  It's pretty aggravating to 
be chasing WAS and realize you have a whole bunch of confirmations on 
LOTW but the guys from those last few states you need have confirmed via 
eqsl and refuse to use LOTW. It's a shame that there couldn't have been 
some kind of universal credit system worked out but the way I got it, 
eqsl refused to live up to the authentication and security measures ARRL 
wanted.
73,
Michael, W4HIJ

Steve wrote:
> In the Sept. 2005 QST magazine, Ward Silver N0AX writes that (as of that
> date) the LOTW database holds 14 million QSO's under 15,000 different call
> signs.
> I don't know how big the eQSL database is but it looks to me like LOTW has a
> strong marketplace position.
>
> I agree that eQSL is probably easier to use but I believe that's because of
> the tighter security standards of LOTW. Thousands of hams have managed to
> use LOTW successfully, so I'd say it's probably user friendly enough to be
> practical.
>
> I'm sure eQSL has a place in amateur radio, I just don't think it's a
> replacement for LOTW.
>
> Steve .. AI7W
> lm #2270
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sco@sco-inc.com [mailto:sco@sco-inc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 16:21 UTC
> To: Steve
> Subject: RE: [amsat-bb] Re: Satellites and the LoTW
>
>
>
> well eQSL is much much easier to use and they have their own awards.
> i have attempted a couple of times to upload to LOTW. eQSL even sends
> me an email when a card comes into their system. The marketplace may
> decide the issue here between LOTW and eQSL. I love eQSL and hate
> (not quite) using LOTW.
>
> I am giving priority in my logging software programs development to
> eQSL before LOTW.
>
> Les
>
> At 10:32 AM 1/25/2007, you wrote:
>   
>> "eQSL" is not accepted for DXCC or other ARRL award programs.
>> It doesn't come up to the ARRL's standards for security and accuracy.
>>
>> Steve .. AI7W
>> lm #2270
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org]On
>> Behalf Of sco@sco-inc.com
>> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 05:51 UTC
>> To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
>> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Satellites and the LoTW
>>
>>
>>
>> There is an excellent substitute for LOTW. It is called "eQSL.cc".
>> It even will print and mail you a real card plus you can download or
>> upload the image of the real card.
>> It is very easy to use and i prefer it over LOTW.
>>
>> Les W4SCO
>> www.logwindow.com
>> www.myweblinks.cc
>>
>>
>> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>     
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>
>
>   

_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home