20yr log transcription and LoTW


Jon Gefaell
 

I mentioned earlier that I was doing a project to get my buddy's logs of 20yrs from paper to digital form. He and his wife both have DXCC/VUCC but only applied with enough cards at the time for those. By now, these logs hold a lot of work, and we're eager to see what confirmations await in LoTW.

They kept things in different logbooks. We're focusing on the 6-meter logs currently, and have all of those entered into DXK! Also, the LoTW certificate and postcard have arrived. I've provisioned a separate notebook computer for his station, and I'm acting as his QSL manager. They live off-grid with solar power, limited cell phone, etc... So it's on me. ;) 

I'm anxious to continue and upload the log to LoTW, but that could be a very bad idea. I'll bet that Dave has a walkthrough in the wiki for this? My surmise is that a log validation needs to be done, to ensure all logged items are valid and congruous. For instance, a recompute operation complains about a number of issues with a missing band or such.

Oh! So... Those we transcribed were one batch that's in the current DXK log. Another was transcribed by another fellow some years ago with unknown methods and I imported that ADIF. Those may be the only ones that have those issues because DXK wouldn't allow such to be entered. Right?

So, I think my first step is to separate the log into 6M contacts and export those. And then export the rest into another file. Then import the 6M file, and focus solely on those. Is that a good plan? See? I've already messed up, but this is reverseable. LoTW can be updated, but only to a degree.

A very important concern here is that station information from 20yrs can change. Grid squares are important for 6M of course, though his focus is on DXCC. I have my own DXK "Handling of LoTW QSL detail inconsistencies" to overwrite. I figure it's what they've logged ultimately that matters, they know where they were at the time. Is that right?

So, I figure that if I set that for his log, and upload QSOs to LoTW, then Update QSLs from LoTW, would make the most sense overall?

I think the idea will be to do small batches at a time, to gauge the results. Regardless of confidence in the strategy. To limit the impact of unforeseen behavior. But this may be a lot more straightforward than I imagine. I really don't want to flummox LoTW with multiple QSOs logged trying to 'get it right'.

 

Thank you very, very much. Sorry this is so rambling. Would be much easier to describe conversationally. :)

Jay is anxious for us to proceed, but I just don't want to screw the pooch here.


w6de
 

There are several how-to-do-it articles in the DXLab Wiki that might help.

There is a semi-automated process that can identify apparent errors, sorting the errors may take manual intervention.  It can take a while to get all the issues sorted out as you have to make decisions on each and every error.  One of the most important things is to set the award objectives before running these tools.

The entire process is described here:

http://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxlabwiki/AwardTracking

This is a rather exhaustive list of things to setup and check settings on in order to proceed to the next article.

 

The first pass and manual tracking is described here:

http://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxlabwiki/AnalyzeDXCCCredits

 

After using the manual process for a bit, you get some confidence in how the process works and you can try the Automated Linking next:

http://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxlabwiki/AutoLinkDXCCCredits

 

It took me several sittings over several days to get my initial logs sorted out multiple years ago.  As I have doubled the size of my log since 2011, I periodically re-run Analyze DXCC Credits and I’m always surprised to find a few errors some are mine, some are ARRL’s, and some are my QSO partner’s errors.

 

73,

Dave, w6de

 

 

From: DXLab@groups.io [mailto:DXLab@groups.io] On Behalf Of Jon Gefaell via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2021 20:43
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: [DXLab] 20yr log transcription and LoTW

 

I mentioned earlier that I was doing a project to get my buddy's logs of 20yrs from paper to digital form. He and his wife both have DXCC/VUCC but only applied with enough cards at the time for those. By now, these logs hold a lot of work, and we're eager to see what confirmations await in LoTW.

They kept things in different logbooks. We're focusing on the 6-meter logs currently, and have all of those entered into DXK! Also, the LoTW certificate and postcard have arrived. I've provisioned a separate notebook computer for his station, and I'm acting as his QSL manager. They live off-grid with solar power, limited cell phone, etc... So it's on me. ;) 

I'm anxious to continue and upload the log to LoTW, but that could be a very bad idea. I'll bet that Dave has a walkthrough in the wiki for this? My surmise is that a log validation needs to be done, to ensure all logged items are valid and congruous. For instance, a recompute operation complains about a number of issues with a missing band or such.

Oh! So... Those we transcribed were one batch that's in the current DXK log. Another was transcribed by another fellow some years ago with unknown methods and I imported that ADIF. Those may be the only ones that have those issues because DXK wouldn't allow such to be entered. Right?

So, I think my first step is to separate the log into 6M contacts and export those. And then export the rest into another file. Then import the 6M file, and focus solely on those. Is that a good plan? See? I've already messed up, but this is reverseable. LoTW can be updated, but only to a degree.

A very important concern here is that station information from 20yrs can change. Grid squares are important for 6M of course, though his focus is on DXCC. I have my own DXK "Handling of LoTW QSL detail inconsistencies" to overwrite. I figure it's what they've logged ultimately that matters, they know where they were at the time. Is that right?

So, I figure that if I set that for his log, and upload QSOs to LoTW, then Update QSLs from LoTW, would make the most sense overall?

I think the idea will be to do small batches at a time, to gauge the results. Regardless of confidence in the strategy. To limit the impact of unforeseen behavior. But this may be a lot more straightforward than I imagine. I really don't want to flummox LoTW with multiple QSOs logged trying to 'get it right'.

 

Thank you very, very much. Sorry this is so rambling. Would be much easier to describe conversationally. :)

Jay is anxious for us to proceed, but I just don't want to screw the pooch here.


Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

I mentioned earlier that I was doing a project to get my buddy's logs of 20yrs from paper to digital form. He and his wife both have DXCC/VUCC but only applied with enough cards at the time for those. By now, these logs hold a lot of work, and we're eager to see what confirmations await in LoTW.

They kept things in different logbooks. We're focusing on the 6-meter logs currently, and have all of those entered into DXK! Also, the LoTW certificate and postcard have arrived. I've provisioned a separate notebook computer for his station, and I'm acting as his QSL manager. They live off-grid with solar power, limited cell phone, etc... So it's on me. ;)

I'm anxious to continue and upload the log to LoTW, but that could be a very bad idea. I'll bet that Dave has a walkthrough in the wiki for this?

+ Serving as a QSL Manager by using DXKeeper on a separate computer is no different than the way you use DXKeeper yourself.

My surmise is that a log validation needs to be done, to ensure all logged items are valid and congruous.

+ DXKeeper prevents you from logging a QSO with a serious error or omission.

For instance, a recompute operation complains about a number of issues with a missing band or such.

+ The Recompute function identifies errors that are not considered fatal. See

https://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxkeeper/Help/LogIntegrity.htm

+ My general advice is to correct any errors as you create them. So after spending an evening using the Main window to enter already-completed QSOs from a paper logbook, click the Broke button in the Filter panel at the bottom of the Main window's "Log QSOs" tab and correct whatever errors it displays.


Oh! So... Those we transcribed were one batch that's in the current DXK log. Another was transcribed by another fellow some years ago with unknown methods and I imported that ADIF. Those may be the only ones that have those issues because DXK wouldn't allow such to be entered. Right?

+ DXKeeper won't stop you from logging a QSO with a Russian station that specifies an invalid Oblast. It will stop you from logging a QSO with a Russian station that specifies an invalid date.


So, I think my first step is to separate the log into 6M contacts and export those. And then export the rest into another file. Then import the 6M file, and focus solely on those. Is that a good plan? See? I've already messed up, but this is reverseable. LoTW can be updated, but only to a degree.

+ After you enter a batch of new QSOs from a paper logbook and correct any errors reported by the Broke filter, there is no reason to not submit them to LoTW/eQSL/ClubLog.

A very important concern here is that station information from 20yrs can change. Grid squares are important for 6M of course, though his focus is on DXCC. I have my own DXK "Handling of LoTW QSL detail inconsistencies" to overwrite. I figure it's what they've logged ultimately that matters, they know where they were at the time. Is that right?

+ By "they know where they were at the time", does "they" refer to QSO partners? If so, I'd say that while they always know where they are, whether they conveyed and accurate grid square, and whether the conveyed grid square was accurate logged is less than 100% certain.


So, I figure that if I set that for his log,

+ To what does the word "that" refer?

and upload QSOs to LoTW, then Update QSLs from LoTW, would make the most sense overall?

I think the idea will be to do small batches at a time, to gauge the results. Regardless of confidence in the strategy. To limit the impact of unforeseen behavior. But this may be a lot more straightforward than I imagine. I really don't want to flummox LoTW with multiple QSOs logged trying to 'get it right'.

+ If you run the Broke filter before submitting each newly-entered batch of QSOs to LoTW, there shouldn't be much if any subsequent error correction required.

+ Before you proceed any further, decide how you want the "Subdivision validity checking" option set in the "Other Awards" panel on the Configuration window's Awards tab:

https://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxkeeper/Help/Configuration.htm#Subdivisions%20box

73,

Dave, AA6YQ