Date   

Re: assuming LoTW confirmations "count" for IOTA might not be a good idea

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

those requirements may be enough for IOTA to consider a QSL as a confirmation but I'm not sure just those attributes will be enough for an accepted IOTA confirmation. For example their requirements for paper cards are much stricter in that the IOTA reference must be printed on the original card, i.e. writing it on afterwards is not acceptable, the information must be provided by the DX station. See https://www.iota-world.org/islands-on-the-air/qsl-card-requirements.html . I would be surprised if LoTW matches would be acceptable without an IOTA reference from the DX station.

+ DXLab's realtime award tracking for IOTA requires each QSO to specify an IOTA tag. The question is whether IOTA will require your QSO partner to have specified an IOTA tag in the "Station Location" used to submit your QSO.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Re: 60mtrs in DXView?

Dave / NR1DX
 

Be that as it may I now have 122 countries worked and 113 confirmed 0n 60M.  I only need 6 more states to have WAS on 60M. Looks like a "real"  band to me 8^)

Dave
NR1DX

On 5/21/2020 2:46 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

Dave has previously indicated that 60 M would not be added to DXView
or the real time progress tables until the US has a real "band" (as
opposed to five discrete channels) and ARRL adds a single band 60 M
award to the DXCC program.

To paraphrase his comments, 60 meters is not suitable for DXing given
the current allocations and sharing requirements.

In the meantime, one can filter the log for 60 M QSOs and run a
DXCC Progress report on the filtered log.  If that is being done
often, it is relatively easy to create a script to automate the
process.

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV


On 2020-05-21 1:06 PM, Brian Bowers G0VAX wrote:
Hi Dave,
Would it be possible to add 60Mtrs to the DXView Info tables?
I find it so useful when querying worked or confirmed band/mode spots.

Best Wishes

Brian G0VAX


--
Dave
Manuals@...
www.ArtekManuals.com
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


Re: URE QDure paper QSL System

Herman / PA3BFH
 


Hi Carl,

Yes I know, but....

What I need is the option "N" in the QSL rcvd Box...
It is available in the QSL sent box, but for what I want to do the QDure system triggers on the QSL rcvd Box.
QSL rcvd = Y means you have received an incoming QSL and you want to answer: "tks QSL" on the card,
QSL rcvd = N means no QSL received, so you're requesting one: "pse QSL".. This is what I need, but not
p[ossible (?).

And in the advanced sorts, filters & modifiers, Modify QSOs in Log Page Display, Item name QSL_Rcvd/Item new value options available are R,Y,S,V,I and X, so no "N" and also not possible to add the "N" in the blank spot...

I sent the original batch with QSL_sent as "R"equested, but QDure wants an upload as above..

Any ideas??

Tks/73,
Herman
PA3BFH

-------- Doorgestuurd bericht --------
Onderwerp: Re: [DXLab] URE QDure paper QSL System
Datum: Thu, 21 May 2020 09:01:58 -0700
Van: Carl - WC4H via groups.io <wc4h.dx@...>
Antwoord-naar: DXLab@groups.io
Aan: DXLab@groups.io


Hi Herman.

If you click on  the QSL check box on the upper right of the Log QSOs tab, it will open the display of the QSL panel on the left side. You will see "sent" and "rcvd" dropdown boxes there.  You can select the Y among other values.

You can also do a mass change if you desire.

73.
Carl - WC4H


Re: 60mtrs in DXView?

Joe Subich, W4TV
 

Dave has previously indicated that 60 M would not be added to DXView
or the real time progress tables until the US has a real "band" (as
opposed to five discrete channels) and ARRL adds a single band 60 M
award to the DXCC program.

To paraphrase his comments, 60 meters is not suitable for DXing given
the current allocations and sharing requirements.

In the meantime, one can filter the log for 60 M QSOs and run a
DXCC Progress report on the filtered log. If that is being done
often, it is relatively easy to create a script to automate the
process.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 2020-05-21 1:06 PM, Brian Bowers G0VAX wrote:
Hi Dave,
Would it be possible to add 60Mtrs to the DXView Info tables?
I find it so useful when querying worked or confirmed band/mode spots.
Best Wishes
Brian G0VAX


Re: An iota of work for Dave ...

w6de
 

Joe, Peter:
Thank you pointing out my errors and I offer my apology to the group.

73,
Dave, w6de

-----Original Message-----
From: DXLab@groups.io [mailto:DXLab@groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
Sent: 21 May, 2020 02:17
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] An iota of work for Dave ...


On 2020-05-20 7:47 PM, w6de wrote:

However, US hams have to be members of the ARRL to use the LotW
program, so in essence you are already a LotW supporter.
*THAT IS ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE!*

There is no requirement to be an ARRL member to use (upload) to LotW
in any country. The only requirement is that a US amateur must be an
ARRL member in order to apply for/receive ARRL awards (DXCC, WAS, VUCC).

73,

... Joe, W4TV
---------------------------------------------
Um, no. When I use LOTW credits for WAS, I pay a fee for using those credits ON TOP OF the fee for the award. When I use LOTW credits for DXCC, I pay a fee for using those credits ON TOP OF the fee for the award. Same for VUCC. I have claimed all of those (multiples of WAS and DXCC) via LOTW. In these cases, the LOTW fees and the award fees all go to the ARRL.

When I finally apply for WPX using LOTW credits, I will I pay a fee for using them to ARRL. To get the award, I will pay a fee to CQ magazine, issuers of the WPX award. I'm sure this is true for WAZ as well, but since I am still 4 or 5 CQ Zones short, I've never looked into it.

Everyone else is freeloading off of the ARRL.

--
Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!

---------------------------------------------
On 2020-05-20 7:47 PM, w6de wrote:
The fees paid are for awards issued by the organization collecting the fees. ARRL does not manage the IOTA program and does not issue IOTA Awards.
You pay IOTA for IOTA Awards, you pay ARRL for ARRL Awards, you pay CQ for CQ Awards (e.g., WAZ, WPX).
The IOTA pulling QSO information from LotW is information about your potential IOTA Awards that you will pay IOTA for.
If you already upload your DXKeeper QSOs to ClubLog the IOTA can get your QSO information from ClubLog and you don't need to give the IOTA your ARRL LotW credentials.
Note: YOU as an IOTA member initiate these IOTA queries to LotW and/or ClubLog from within your IOTA log-on.

If you are concerned about supporting the ARRL LotW program you can always make donations to the ARRL. However, US hams have to be members of the ARRL to use the LotW program, so in essence you are already a LotW supporter.

73,
Dave, w6de


60mtrs in DXView?

Brian Bowers G0VAX
 

Hi Dave,
Would it be possible to add 60Mtrs to the DXView Info tables?
I find it so useful when querying worked or confirmed band/mode spots.

Best Wishes

Brian G0VAX


Re: URE QDure paper QSL System

Carl - WC4H
 

Hi Herman.

If you click on  the QSL check box on the upper right of the Log QSOs tab, it will open the display of the QSL panel on the left side. You will see "sent" and "rcvd" dropdown boxes there.  You can select the Y among other values.

You can also do a mass change if you desire.

73.
Carl - WC4H


LotW sent field is set to U but QSOs are not in LotW

Steve K8JQ
 

Dave,

I made some contacts in each of the three CWTs yesterday. Uploaded to LotW per the instructions on UploadLotWLogPageDisplay - DX Lab Suite Wiki , or so I thought. The 1300Z and 0300Z logs appear to have uploaded and sync'ed OK.

The 1900Z CWT appears not to have been successful. The LotW sent field is set to U for all of these QSOs. But when I look at the LotW web page Your QSOs, they are not in LotW.

How can I recover from this?

Thank you.

Steve, K8JQ


URE QDure paper QSL System

Herman / PA3BFH
 

Hi Dave (All),

Since GlobalQSL seems to have stopped working I'm checking other QSL services.

The QDure sytem by the Spanish club URE (https://qsl.ure.es/en/) is one of these.

I sent a batch in and noticed the item PSE QSL/TKS QSL was not working, and I had to manually tick the box for PSE QSL.... (76 times ough...)

Checking with URE they informed me an adif field <QSL_RCVD:1>Y for TKS QSL and a field ,QSL_RCVD:1>N for PSE QSL is expected...

Well none of the QSLs received in DXKeeper was marked as "N"....

I can't find this option in DXKeeper, is it possible to add??

Or do I need new glasses??

Tks / 73,

--
Herman van den Berg / PA3BFH
Hoofdweg 132
1433 JX kudelstaart
Tel 0297 322011


Re: Failure to Upload Qs to LOTW

Fred - NA2U
 

Good morning. Mine are # below.

73 from the desert,

Fred/NA2U

On May 20, 2020, at 11:32 PM, Dave AA6YQ <@AA6YQ> wrote:

+ AA6YQ comments below

Thanks, Dave. I imported adif into DXKeeper, used “Add requested” to put Qs in the queue, then “Upload to LOTW”. Got message that all had been uploaded, queue is empty. Only one W ended up in LOTW. I tried uploading another of the Qs and upload aborted because program thinks they we already uploaded. I uploaded a second Q but had to select upload Q already uploaded (or similar).

How can I upload the balance with doing so individually, please?

+ First, let's determine why your QSOs weren't accepted the first time you submitted them to LoTW:

1. On the Main window's QSL tab, click "Sync LoTW QSOs", and wait for it to complete
#DONE

2. On the Main window's "Lot QSOs" tab, click the Filter panel's LoTW button; this will filter the Log Page Display to contain QSOs uploaded to LoTW, but not accepted by LoTW

+ How many QSOs are now present in the Log Page Display?
#6590

+ What is specified in the "Station Callsign" items of the QSOs in the Log Page Display?
#NA2U

+ What is specified in the "Station Callsign" box in the TQSL panel at the bottom of the "QSL Configuration" window's LoTW tab?
#NA2U

73,

Dave, AA6YQ




____________________________________________________________
Sponsored by https://www.newser.com/?utm_source=part&utm_medium=uol&utm_campaign=rss_taglines_more

FedEx Driver: I Was Fired After Video of Customer Dust-Up
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5ec685842389e583052bst02duc1
Illinois Lawmaker's Refusal to Wear Mask Has Consequences
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5ec685843e213583052bst02duc2
CDC Issues New Guidance on Coronavirus on Surfaces
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5ec6858458b97583052bst02duc3


Re: assuming LoTW confirmations "count" for IOTA might not be a good idea

Carl - WC4H
 

Hi Bill.

Below is the last paragraph of the page dave sited.  Seems to indicate that they do accept "LoTW matched QSOs" and then credit them to your IOTA Award account.

"Once IOTA Management has accepted the LoTW matched QSOs and any others in your application that are supported by QSL cards, it will credit the QSOs to your IOTA Award account. It will also issue any awards or certificates for which you have applied and qualified. "

73.
Carl - WC4H


Re: assuming LoTW confirmations "count" for IOTA might not be a good idea

IK1ADH
 

Hello Dave,

----- Original Message -----
From: Dave AA6YQ
To: DXLab@groups.io
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2020 4:59 AM
Subject: Re: [DXLab] assuming LoTW confirmations "count" for IOTA might not
be a good idea


+ AA6YQ comments below
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 06:27 PM, BILL KENNAMER wrote:
Actually, it probably better to use Club Log for IOTA. They’re already doing
it, they know what counts for what IOTA, and dates of operation. I don’t
think that LOTW would have that information unless it was uploaded by the
user

+ LoTW has all the information that IOTA says it need to accept LoTW
confirmations: callsign, mode, and band. See this IOTA document:
https://www.iota-world.org/info/lotw_qso_matching-en.pdf

I am afraid that is not the case.
The fields specified in the PDF document (callsign, band and mode) are
not mandatory, they simply allow the user to search for a specific
operation and/or for QSOs made on specific bands and/or modes.

The information IOTA needs to accept paperless QSLs for IOTA credit are:
DX callsign, island name, IOTA reference, date & time of the first QSO,
and date & time of the last QSO.

Operations whose DXCC Entity in its entirety matches only one IOTA Group
(e.g. EA8, EA6, OY, ZD7, ZD8, D6, T33, VK9N, VK9L, HC8, P4, VP9, ZF and
many, many others) are not a problem, as they are identified by their
unique DXCC Entity Code.

When the DXCC Entity includes two or more IOTA Groups, investigations are
needed. This is what the IOTA Operations Manager is doing in order to
allow LoTW Matching for thousands of other activities. The island name is
mandatory.

As for the use of LoTW, "ARRL Director of Operations Norm Fusaro, W3IZ,
points out that LoTW has, for years, allowed award sponsors access to a
utility that lets them verify contacts in LoTW. 'The IOTA folks have
begun using this utility, but still check the QSOs against known IOTA
operations,' he explained, noting that applicants cannot apply for IOTA
awards through LoTW". (Source: ARRL)

73

Valeria, IK1ADH




73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Re: assuming LoTW confirmations "count" for IOTA might not be a good idea

g4wjs
 

On 21/05/2020 03:59, Dave AA6YQ wrote:

+ AA6YQ comments below

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 06:27 PM, BILL KENNAMER wrote:

Actually, it probably better to use Club Log for IOTA. They’re already doing it, they know what counts for what IOTA, and dates of operation. I don’t think that LOTW would have that information unless it was uploaded by the user

+ LoTW has all the information that IOTA says it need to accept LoTW confirmations: callsign, mode, and band. See this IOTA document:

<https://www.iota-world.org/info/lotw_qso_matching-en.pdf>

       73,

              Dave, AA6YQ

Hi Dave,

those requirements may be enough for IOTA to consider a QSL as a confirmation but I'm not sure just those attributes will be enough for an accepted IOTA confirmation. For example their requirements for paper cards are much stricter in that the IOTA reference must be printed on the original card, i.e. writing it on afterwards is not acceptable, the information must be provided by the DX station. See https://www.iota-world.org/islands-on-the-air/qsl-card-requirements.html . I would be surprised if LoTW matches would be acceptable without an IOTA reference from the DX station.

73
Bill
G4WJS.


--
73

Bill

G4WJS.


Re: Failure to Upload Qs to LOTW

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

Thanks, Dave. I imported adif into DXKeeper, used “Add requested” to put Qs in the queue, then “Upload to LOTW”. Got message that all had been uploaded, queue is empty. Only one W ended up in LOTW. I tried uploading another of the Qs and upload aborted because program thinks they we already uploaded. I uploaded a second Q but had to select upload Q already uploaded (or similar).

How can I upload the balance with doing so individually, please?

+ First, let's determine why your QSOs weren't accepted the first time you submitted them to LoTW:

1. On the Main window's QSL tab, click "Sync LoTW QSOs", and wait for it to complete

2. On the Main window's "Lot QSOs" tab, click the Filter panel's LoTW button; this will filter the Log Page Display to contain QSOs uploaded to LoTW, but not accepted by LoTW

+ How many QSOs are now present in the Log Page Display?

+ What is specified in the "Station Callsign" items of the QSOs in the Log Page Display?

+ What is specified in the "Station Callsign" box in the TQSL panel at the bottom of the "QSL Configuration" window's LoTW tab?

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Re: Failure to Upload Qs to LOTW

Fred - NA2U
 

Thanks, Dave.  I imported adif into DXKeeper, used “Add requested” to put Qs in the queue, then “Upload to LOTW”.  Got message that all had been uploaded, queue is empty.  Only one W ended up in LOTW.  I tried uploading another of the Qs and upload aborted because program thinks they we already uploaded.  I uploaded a second Q but had to select upload Q already uploaded (or similar).  

How can I upload the balance with doing so individually, please?

73 from the desert,

Fred/NA2U

On May 20, 2020, at 7:55 PM, Dave AA6YQ <aa6yq@...> wrote:



+ AA6YQ comments below

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 06:19 PM, Fred - NA2U wrote:

I’ve been uploading ADIFs for years without incident. Today, however, I uploaded one of today’s CWOps ADIF file and only ONE QSO of more than 60 made it to LOTW. NO error messages. Everything looked normal. Message said all had been uploaded. The uploaded Q was not the first or last Q in the file. I later tried uploading another one, checking the box to upload QSO already uploaded. It uploaded. It then appeared in LOTW.

+ How did you submit your "CWOps ADIF file"? Did you use DXKeeper, or did you use TQSL directly?


Dave, we have discussed using that check-box in the past but this instance is different. What might have caused this behavior? I know I’ll now have to upload the others one-at-a-time. It’s a PITA. 

+ I seen no grounds for concluding that you must upload each of your QSOs one at a time.

         73,

                Dave, AA6YQ

 




Re: assuming LoTW confirmations "count" for IOTA might not be a good idea

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 06:27 PM, BILL KENNAMER wrote:

Actually, it probably better to use Club Log for IOTA. They’re already doing it, they know what counts for what IOTA, and dates of operation. I don’t think that LOTW would have that information unless it was uploaded by the user

+ LoTW has all the information that IOTA says it need to accept LoTW confirmations: callsign, mode, and band. See this IOTA document:

<https://www.iota-world.org/info/lotw_qso_matching-en.pdf>

       73,

              Dave, AA6YQ

 

 

 


Re: Failure to Upload Qs to LOTW

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 06:19 PM, Fred - NA2U wrote:

I’ve been uploading ADIFs for years without incident. Today, however, I uploaded one of today’s CWOps ADIF file and only ONE QSO of more than 60 made it to LOTW. NO error messages. Everything looked normal. Message said all had been uploaded. The uploaded Q was not the first or last Q in the file. I later tried uploading another one, checking the box to upload QSO already uploaded. It uploaded. It then appeared in LOTW.

+ How did you submit your "CWOps ADIF file"? Did you use DXKeeper, or did you use TQSL directly?


Dave, we have discussed using that check-box in the past but this instance is different. What might have caused this behavior? I know I’ll now have to upload the others one-at-a-time. It’s a PITA. 

+ I seen no grounds for concluding that you must upload each of your QSOs one at a time.

         73,

                Dave, AA6YQ

 


Re: assuming LoTW confirmations "count" for IOTA might not be a good idea

Joe Subich, W4TV
 

On 2020-05-20 8:39 PM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:

+ Thanks, Valeria! I'm taking the liberty of posting your response to
the DXLab Group so I can solicit comments on the wisdom of
considering LoTW confirmations as "counting" for IOTA.
The case of stations that "request a delay for QSO matching purposes"
is no difference than potential DXCC "counters" that have not submitted
the necessary documentation.

Seems unnecessary to me for DXKeeper to *not* count LotW confirmations
where the IOTA reference is known - either by "unique" DXCC (e.g. DXCC
database) or the operator's entry in a callbook (e.g. QRZ).

If one submits an application and a QSQ is rejected, the user can always
set IOTAvfy=I.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2020-05-20 8:39 PM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:
+ AA6YQ comments below
DXKeeper 15.5.9 made its homework all right. But the results do not reflect the actual situation. See the attachement.
If a QSO is confirmed by LoTW , it means that it MIGHT be also confirmed for IOTA . There are a few factors to be taken into consideration.
Contacts with operations where the DXCC Entity in its entirety matches only one IOTA Group (e.g. EA6, ZD8, D6, etc.) will be allowed credit. There are about 100 such Entities, which of course are identified by their unique DXCC Entity Code regardless of the callsign. It is only in these cases that confirmed by LoTW equals to confirmed for IOTA .
Then there are thousands of other operations/callsigns that need to be processed by the IOTA Operations Manager, and added to the Accepted Activations listing. This exercise will take quite an amount of time over the next few months. That means that initially many matches will not be available for credit. In these cases confirmed by LoTW means hopefully confirmed for IOTA, sooner or later, but who knows if and when .
Finally there are those cases when the operators request a delay for QSO matching purposes: confirmed by LoTW means not confirmed for IOTA for the time being, maybe in the next few weeks/months, or maybe never .
Under such circumstances, I suspect that extending DXKeeper to consider QSOs confirmed via LoTW as confirmed for IOTA might be confusing or even mystifying and misleading.
73, and thank you for a great piece of software.
Valeria, IK1ADH
+ Thanks, Valeria! I'm taking the liberty of posting your response to the DXLab Group so I can solicit comments on the wisdom of considering LoTW confirmations as "counting" for IOTA.
+ Note to DXLab users: DXKeeper 15.5.9 has not yet been publicly released.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ


Re: An iota of work for Dave ...

Joe Subich, W4TV
 

On 2020-05-20 7:47 PM, w6de wrote:

However, US hams have to be members of the ARRL to use the LotW
program, so in essence you are already a LotW supporter.
*THAT IS ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE!*

There is no requirement to be an ARRL member to use (upload) to LotW
in any country. The only requirement is that a US amateur must be an
ARRL member in order to apply for/receive ARRL awards (DXCC, WAS, VUCC).

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2020-05-20 7:47 PM, w6de wrote:
The fees paid are for awards issued by the organization collecting the fees. ARRL does not manage the IOTA program and does not issue IOTA Awards.
You pay IOTA for IOTA Awards, you pay ARRL for ARRL Awards, you pay CQ for CQ Awards (e.g., WAZ, WPX).
The IOTA pulling QSO information from LotW is information about your potential IOTA Awards that you will pay IOTA for.
If you already upload your DXKeeper QSOs to ClubLog the IOTA can get your QSO information from ClubLog and you don't need to give the IOTA your ARRL LotW credentials.
Note: YOU as an IOTA member initiate these IOTA queries to LotW and/or ClubLog from within your IOTA log-on.
If you are concerned about supporting the ARRL LotW program you can always make donations to the ARRL. However, US hams have to be members of the ARRL to use the LotW program, so in essence you are already a LotW supporter.
73,
Dave, w6de


Re: Is a mass Callbook address update possible?

Jim Wysocki
 

On 5/20/2020 4:42 PM, ND9G Mike wrote:
Press the Alt button while clicking the CBA button on the log page display. This will update all QSOs on the log page display.

Caution: Depending on how old many of your QSOs are, you may update with information for a new holder of the call. Make a backup of your log first, and perhaps think about limiting to QSOs within the last few years.

73,
Mike ND9G


On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 6:26 PM Jim Wysocki <wysocki1@...> wrote:
I just bought and installed a new Radio Amateur Callbook CD, replacing
all of the many-years-old data on the computer's hard drive.  Over the
years there have been lots of QSOs logged with blanks in their address
field.  Now I'd like to do a mass update, replacing as much of the blank
data as possible.  But I can't readily find instructions for doing so in
the help files, so I'll ask here.  How can an automated address update
be done using the new Callbook data?

73, Jim  W9FI




Thanks, Mike.  Good information.  After backing up the log first I'll put date limits on the QSO display and do the update about a year at a time.  That old callbook is about five years old, so I'll stop updating records that are older than that.

73,  Jim  W9FI