Topics

FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW

Joseph LaFerla
 

Hi
Can someone help me with this.  I have some FT4 messages that keep getting rejected by LOTW as "not found in logbook".  Following suggestions on this list, I changed the mode to FT4 using an editor and have FT4 in my ADIFmodes.txt.  But each time I download from LOTW, they get rejected.  The qso's are indeed in my log because I can find them there.  Thanks for any help.

Joe VA3JLF

Bob
 

In the ADIFModes.txt FT4 must be a submode of MFSK. Like this ... SeventyThree(s).


On November 2, 2019 at 9:50 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

Hi
Can someone help me with this.  I have some FT4 messages that keep getting rejected by LOTW as "not found in logbook".  Following suggestions on this list, I changed the mode to FT4 using an editor and have FT4 in my ADIFmodes.txt.  But each time I download from LOTW, they get rejected.  The qso's are indeed in my log because I can find them there.  Thanks for any help.

Joe VA3JLF

 

Joseph LaFerla
 

It is Bob.  This is the relevant portion of my adifmodes.txt.  LOTW changes the mode to DATA and rejects the qso’s.

 

Joe

 

 

FM

FT8

FSK441

HELL       =FMHELL,FSKHELL,HELL80,HFSK,PSKHELL

ISCAT    =ISCAT-A,ISCAT-B

JT4          =JT4A,JT4B,JT4C,JT4D,JT4E,JT4F,JT4G

JT6M

JT9          =JT9-1,JT9-2,JT9-5,JT9-10,JT9-30,JT9A,JT9B,JT9C,JT9D,JT9E FAST,JT9F,JT9F FAST,JT9G,JT9G FAST,JT9H,JT9H FAST

JT44

JT65       =JT65A,JT65B,JT65B2,JT65C,JT65C2

MFSK    =FSQCALL,FT4,JS8,MFSK4,MFSK8,MFSK11,MFSK16,MFSK22,MFSK31,MFSK32,MFSK64,MFSK128

MSK144

MT63

OLIVIA  =OLIVIA 4/125,OLIVIA 4/250,OLIVIA 8/250,OLIVIA 8/500,OLIVIA 16/500,OLIVIA 16/1000,OLIVIA 32/1000

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Bob
Sent: November 2, 2019 10:24 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW

 

In the ADIFModes.txt FT4 must be a submode of MFSK. Like this ... SeventyThree(s).

 

On November 2, 2019 at 9:50 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

Hi
Can someone help me with this.  I have some FT4 messages that keep getting rejected by LOTW as "not found in logbook".  Following suggestions on this list, I changed the mode to FT4 using an editor and have FT4 in my ADIFmodes.txt.  But each time I download from LOTW, they get rejected.  The qso's are indeed in my log because I can find them there.  Thanks for any help.

Joe VA3JLF


 

 

Bob
 

I am a conscientious objector where anything ARRL/LoTW is concerned - I wouldn't touch it (not even with your 20ft pole) ... I seem to recall conversation here way back when FT4 was a new mode, and the ADIF meisters hadn't yet decided what to do with it, that LoTW defaulted to DATA as the nom de guerre. That was a long time ago. How they remedied this, I have no idea. Isn't there some LoTW software that you need to run on your PC (eQSL or something, but maybe I'm confusing that with another QSLing mechanism I have never used) that translates the data and provides the necessary Fort Knox level encryption? Is that version sensitive? Anyway, lotsa folks on here (those with no shame or self esteem) use LoTW, it's just a matter of one of them actually putting pen to paper (so to speak) and explaining how. SeventyThree(s).

On November 2, 2019 at 10:44 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

It is Bob.  This is the relevant portion of my adifmodes.txt.  LOTW changes the mode to DATA and rejects the qso’s.

 

Joe

 

 

FM

FT8

FSK441

HELL       =FMHELL,FSKHELL,HELL80,HFSK,PSKHELL

ISCAT    =ISCAT-A,ISCAT-B

JT4          =JT4A,JT4B,JT4C,JT4D,JT4E,JT4F,JT4G

JT6M

JT9          =JT9-1,JT9-2,JT9-5,JT9-10,JT9-30,JT9A,JT9B,JT9C,JT9D,JT9E FAST,JT9F,JT9F FAST,JT9G,JT9G FAST,JT9H,JT9H FAST

JT44

JT65       =JT65A,JT65B,JT65B2,JT65C,JT65C2

MFSK    =FSQCALL,FT4,JS8,MFSK4,MFSK8,MFSK11,MFSK16,MFSK22,MFSK31,MFSK32,MFSK64,MFSK128

MSK144

MT63

OLIVIA  =OLIVIA 4/125,OLIVIA 4/250,OLIVIA 8/250,OLIVIA 8/500,OLIVIA 16/500,OLIVIA 16/1000,OLIVIA 32/1000

 

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Bob
Sent: November 2, 2019 10:24 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW

 

In the ADIFModes.txt FT4 must be a submode of MFSK. Like this ... SeventyThree(s).

 

On November 2, 2019 at 9:50 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

Hi
Can someone help me with this.  I have some FT4 messages that keep getting rejected by LOTW as "not found in logbook".  Following suggestions on this list, I changed the mode to FT4 using an editor and have FT4 in my ADIFmodes.txt.  But each time I download from LOTW, they get rejected.  The qso's are indeed in my log because I can find them there.  Thanks for any help.

Joe VA3JLF


 

 

 


 

Jim Cox
 

LOTW FT4 works fine here Bob..  Not sure what the problems is on Joe’s end.  Jim K4JAF
 

From: Bob
Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 10:08 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW
 
I am a conscientious objector where anything ARRL/LoTW is concerned - I wouldn't touch it (not even with your 20ft pole) ... I seem to recall conversation here way back when FT4 was a new mode, and the ADIF meisters hadn't yet decided what to do with it, that LoTW defaulted to DATA as the nom de guerre. That was a long time ago. How they remedied this, I have no idea. Isn't there some LoTW software that you need to run on your PC (eQSL or something, but maybe I'm confusing that with another QSLing mechanism I have never used) that translates the data and provides the necessary Fort Knox level encryption? Is that version sensitive? Anyway, lotsa folks on here (those with no shame or self esteem) use LoTW, it's just a matter of one of them actually putting pen to paper (so to speak) and explaining how. SeventyThree(s).
On November 2, 2019 at 10:44 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

It is Bob.  This is the relevant portion of my adifmodes.txt.  LOTW changes the mode to DATA and rejects the qso’s.

 

Joe

 

 

FM

FT8

FSK441

HELL       =FMHELL,FSKHELL,HELL80,HFSK,PSKHELL

ISCAT    =ISCAT-A,ISCAT-B

JT4          =JT4A,JT4B,JT4C,JT4D,JT4E,JT4F,JT4G

JT6M

JT9          =JT9-1,JT9-2,JT9-5,JT9-10,JT9-30,JT9A,JT9B,JT9C,JT9D,JT9E FAST,JT9F,JT9F FAST,JT9G,JT9G FAST,JT9H,JT9H FAST

JT44

JT65       =JT65A,JT65B,JT65B2,JT65C,JT65C2

MFSK    =FSQCALL,FT4,JS8,MFSK4,MFSK8,MFSK11,MFSK16,MFSK22,MFSK31,MFSK32,MFSK64,MFSK128

MSK144

MT63

OLIVIA  =OLIVIA 4/125,OLIVIA 4/250,OLIVIA 8/250,OLIVIA 8/500,OLIVIA 16/500,OLIVIA 16/1000,OLIVIA 32/1000

 


 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Bob
Sent: November 2, 2019 10:24 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW

 

In the ADIFModes.txt FT4 must be a submode of MFSK. Like this ... SeventyThree(s).

 

On November 2, 2019 at 9:50 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

Hi
Can someone help me with this.  I have some FT4 messages that keep getting rejected by LOTW as "not found in logbook".  Following suggestions on this list, I changed the mode to FT4 using an editor and have FT4 in my ADIFmodes.txt.  But each time I download from LOTW, they get rejected.  The qso's are indeed in my log because I can find them there.  Thanks for any help.

Joe VA3JLF


 


 

 


 

Jim Cox
 

Just thought of something that may be pertinent.  You have to be using the latest version of the TQSL software from ARRL..   Jim K4JAF
 

From: Bob
Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 10:08 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW
 
I am a conscientious objector where anything ARRL/LoTW is concerned - I wouldn't touch it (not even with your 20ft pole) ... I seem to recall conversation here way back when FT4 was a new mode, and the ADIF meisters hadn't yet decided what to do with it, that LoTW defaulted to DATA as the nom de guerre. That was a long time ago. How they remedied this, I have no idea. Isn't there some LoTW software that you need to run on your PC (eQSL or something, but maybe I'm confusing that with another QSLing mechanism I have never used) that translates the data and provides the necessary Fort Knox level encryption? Is that version sensitive? Anyway, lotsa folks on here (those with no shame or self esteem) use LoTW, it's just a matter of one of them actually putting pen to paper (so to speak) and explaining how. SeventyThree(s).
On November 2, 2019 at 10:44 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

It is Bob.  This is the relevant portion of my adifmodes.txt.  LOTW changes the mode to DATA and rejects the qso’s.

 

Joe

 

 

FM

FT8

FSK441

HELL       =FMHELL,FSKHELL,HELL80,HFSK,PSKHELL

ISCAT    =ISCAT-A,ISCAT-B

JT4          =JT4A,JT4B,JT4C,JT4D,JT4E,JT4F,JT4G

JT6M

JT9          =JT9-1,JT9-2,JT9-5,JT9-10,JT9-30,JT9A,JT9B,JT9C,JT9D,JT9E FAST,JT9F,JT9F FAST,JT9G,JT9G FAST,JT9H,JT9H FAST

JT44

JT65       =JT65A,JT65B,JT65B2,JT65C,JT65C2

MFSK    =FSQCALL,FT4,JS8,MFSK4,MFSK8,MFSK11,MFSK16,MFSK22,MFSK31,MFSK32,MFSK64,MFSK128

MSK144

MT63

OLIVIA  =OLIVIA 4/125,OLIVIA 4/250,OLIVIA 8/250,OLIVIA 8/500,OLIVIA 16/500,OLIVIA 16/1000,OLIVIA 32/1000

 


 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Bob
Sent: November 2, 2019 10:24 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW

 

In the ADIFModes.txt FT4 must be a submode of MFSK. Like this ... SeventyThree(s).

 

On November 2, 2019 at 9:50 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

Hi
Can someone help me with this.  I have some FT4 messages that keep getting rejected by LOTW as "not found in logbook".  Following suggestions on this list, I changed the mode to FT4 using an editor and have FT4 in my ADIFmodes.txt.  But each time I download from LOTW, they get rejected.  The qso's are indeed in my log because I can find them there.  Thanks for any help.

Joe VA3JLF


 


 

 


 

Bob
 

Jim, didn't I see on here somewhere that the LoTW eQSL (or whatever it is) needed to be upgraded (wonder how much they charged for that?). SeventyThree(s).

On November 2, 2019 at 11:23 AM Jim Cox <jcox123@...> wrote:

LOTW FT4 works fine here Bob..  Not sure what the problems is on Joe’s end.  Jim K4JAF
 
From: Bob
Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 10:08 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW
 
I am a conscientious objector where anything ARRL/LoTW is concerned - I wouldn't touch it (not even with your 20ft pole) ... I seem to recall conversation here way back when FT4 was a new mode, and the ADIF meisters hadn't yet decided what to do with it, that LoTW defaulted to DATA as the nom de guerre. That was a long time ago. How they remedied this, I have no idea. Isn't there some LoTW software that you need to run on your PC (eQSL or something, but maybe I'm confusing that with another QSLing mechanism I have never used) that translates the data and provides the necessary Fort Knox level encryption? Is that version sensitive? Anyway, lotsa folks on here (those with no shame or self esteem) use LoTW, it's just a matter of one of them actually putting pen to paper (so to speak) and explaining how. SeventyThree(s).
On November 2, 2019 at 10:44 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

It is Bob.  This is the relevant portion of my adifmodes.txt.  LOTW changes the mode to DATA and rejects the qso’s.

 

Joe

 

 

FM

FT8

FSK441

HELL       =FMHELL,FSKHELL,HELL80,HFSK,PSKHELL

ISCAT    =ISCAT-A,ISCAT-B

JT4          =JT4A,JT4B,JT4C,JT4D,JT4E,JT4F,JT4G

JT6M

JT9          =JT9-1,JT9-2,JT9-5,JT9-10,JT9-30,JT9A,JT9B,JT9C,JT9D,JT9E FAST,JT9F,JT9F FAST,JT9G,JT9G FAST,JT9H,JT9H FAST

JT44

JT65       =JT65A,JT65B,JT65B2,JT65C,JT65C2

MFSK    =FSQCALL,FT4,JS8,MFSK4,MFSK8,MFSK11,MFSK16,MFSK22,MFSK31,MFSK32,MFSK64,MFSK128

MSK144

MT63

OLIVIA  =OLIVIA 4/125,OLIVIA 4/250,OLIVIA 8/250,OLIVIA 8/500,OLIVIA 16/500,OLIVIA 16/1000,OLIVIA 32/1000

 


 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Bob
Sent: November 2, 2019 10:24 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW

 

In the ADIFModes.txt FT4 must be a submode of MFSK. Like this ... SeventyThree(s).

 

On November 2, 2019 at 9:50 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

Hi
Can someone help me with this.  I have some FT4 messages that keep getting rejected by LOTW as "not found in logbook".  Following suggestions on this list, I changed the mode to FT4 using an editor and have FT4 in my ADIFmodes.txt.  But each time I download from LOTW, they get rejected.  The qso's are indeed in my log because I can find them there.  Thanks for any help.

Joe VA3JLF


 


 

 


 

 

Jim Cox
 

Sent you a reply on the TQSL software which must be the latest version...  TQSL software (including Logger32) is one of the free things in life, of course to use it you must be ARRL member so maybe just Logger32 is one of the few few few free things in life......   Jim K4JAF
 

From: Bob
Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 10:27 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW
 
Jim, didn't I see on here somewhere that the LoTW eQSL (or whatever it is) needed to be upgraded (wonder how much they charged for that?). SeventyThree(s).
On November 2, 2019 at 11:23 AM Jim Cox <jcox123@...> wrote:

LOTW FT4 works fine here Bob..  Not sure what the problems is on Joe’s end.  Jim K4JAF
From: Bob
Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 10:08 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW
I am a conscientious objector where anything ARRL/LoTW is concerned - I wouldn't touch it (not even with your 20ft pole) ... I seem to recall conversation here way back when FT4 was a new mode, and the ADIF meisters hadn't yet decided what to do with it, that LoTW defaulted to DATA as the nom de guerre. That was a long time ago. How they remedied this, I have no idea. Isn't there some LoTW software that you need to run on your PC (eQSL or something, but maybe I'm confusing that with another QSLing mechanism I have never used) that translates the data and provides the necessary Fort Knox level encryption? Is that version sensitive? Anyway, lotsa folks on here (those with no shame or self esteem) use LoTW, it's just a matter of one of them actually putting pen to paper (so to speak) and explaining how. SeventyThree(s).
On November 2, 2019 at 10:44 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

It is Bob.  This is the relevant portion of my adifmodes.txt.  LOTW changes the mode to DATA and rejects the qso’s.

 

Joe

 

 

FM

FT8

FSK441

HELL       =FMHELL,FSKHELL,HELL80,HFSK,PSKHELL

ISCAT    =ISCAT-A,ISCAT-B

JT4          =JT4A,JT4B,JT4C,JT4D,JT4E,JT4F,JT4G

JT6M

JT9          =JT9-1,JT9-2,JT9-5,JT9-10,JT9-30,JT9A,JT9B,JT9C,JT9D,JT9E FAST,JT9F,JT9F FAST,JT9G,JT9G FAST,JT9H,JT9H FAST

JT44

JT65       =JT65A,JT65B,JT65B2,JT65C,JT65C2

MFSK    =FSQCALL,FT4,JS8,MFSK4,MFSK8,MFSK11,MFSK16,MFSK22,MFSK31,MFSK32,MFSK64,MFSK128

MSK144

MT63

OLIVIA  =OLIVIA 4/125,OLIVIA 4/250,OLIVIA 8/250,OLIVIA 8/500,OLIVIA 16/500,OLIVIA 16/1000,OLIVIA 32/1000

 


 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Bob
Sent: November 2, 2019 10:24 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW

 

In the ADIFModes.txt FT4 must be a submode of MFSK. Like this ... SeventyThree(s).

 

On November 2, 2019 at 9:50 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

Hi
Can someone help me with this.  I have some FT4 messages that keep getting rejected by LOTW as "not found in logbook".  Following suggestions on this list, I changed the mode to FT4 using an editor and have FT4 in my ADIFmodes.txt.  But each time I download from LOTW, they get rejected.  The qso's are indeed in my log because I can find them there.  Thanks for any help.

Joe VA3JLF


 


 

 


 

 

Ramon Paradell, EA3JI
 

In my lotwreport received all FT4 and FT8 are as DATA mode, but Logger32 accept it and flags as LOTW RCVD.
Have added FT4 in Edit Bands and Modes? It is as Stats = Y in all bands?

Jim Cox
 

Further clarification, anyone can use the TQSL into to send and download their QSOs, only need to be an ARRL member to get awards using LOTW info...  Jim K4JAF
 

From: Jim Cox
Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 10:31 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW
 
Sent you a reply on the TQSL software which must be the latest version...  TQSL software (including Logger32) is one of the free things in life, of course to use it you must be ARRL member so maybe just Logger32 is one of the few few few free things in life......   Jim K4JAF
 
From: Bob
Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 10:27 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW
 
Jim, didn't I see on here somewhere that the LoTW eQSL (or whatever it is) needed to be upgraded (wonder how much they charged for that?). SeventyThree(s).
On November 2, 2019 at 11:23 AM Jim Cox <jcox123@...> wrote:

LOTW FT4 works fine here Bob..  Not sure what the problems is on Joe’s end.  Jim K4JAF
From: Bob
Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 10:08 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW
I am a conscientious objector where anything ARRL/LoTW is concerned - I wouldn't touch it (not even with your 20ft pole) ... I seem to recall conversation here way back when FT4 was a new mode, and the ADIF meisters hadn't yet decided what to do with it, that LoTW defaulted to DATA as the nom de guerre. That was a long time ago. How they remedied this, I have no idea. Isn't there some LoTW software that you need to run on your PC (eQSL or something, but maybe I'm confusing that with another QSLing mechanism I have never used) that translates the data and provides the necessary Fort Knox level encryption? Is that version sensitive? Anyway, lotsa folks on here (those with no shame or self esteem) use LoTW, it's just a matter of one of them actually putting pen to paper (so to speak) and explaining how. SeventyThree(s).
On November 2, 2019 at 10:44 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

It is Bob.  This is the relevant portion of my adifmodes.txt.  LOTW changes the mode to DATA and rejects the qso’s.

 

Joe

 

 

FM

FT8

FSK441

HELL       =FMHELL,FSKHELL,HELL80,HFSK,PSKHELL

ISCAT    =ISCAT-A,ISCAT-B

JT4          =JT4A,JT4B,JT4C,JT4D,JT4E,JT4F,JT4G

JT6M

JT9          =JT9-1,JT9-2,JT9-5,JT9-10,JT9-30,JT9A,JT9B,JT9C,JT9D,JT9E FAST,JT9F,JT9F FAST,JT9G,JT9G FAST,JT9H,JT9H FAST

JT44

JT65       =JT65A,JT65B,JT65B2,JT65C,JT65C2

MFSK    =FSQCALL,FT4,JS8,MFSK4,MFSK8,MFSK11,MFSK16,MFSK22,MFSK31,MFSK32,MFSK64,MFSK128

MSK144

MT63

OLIVIA  =OLIVIA 4/125,OLIVIA 4/250,OLIVIA 8/250,OLIVIA 8/500,OLIVIA 16/500,OLIVIA 16/1000,OLIVIA 32/1000

 


 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Bob
Sent: November 2, 2019 10:24 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW

 

In the ADIFModes.txt FT4 must be a submode of MFSK. Like this ... SeventyThree(s).

 

On November 2, 2019 at 9:50 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

Hi
Can someone help me with this.  I have some FT4 messages that keep getting rejected by LOTW as "not found in logbook".  Following suggestions on this list, I changed the mode to FT4 using an editor and have FT4 in my ADIFmodes.txt.  But each time I download from LOTW, they get rejected.  The qso's are indeed in my log because I can find them there.  Thanks for any help.

Joe VA3JLF


 


 

 


 

 

Joseph LaFerla
 

You may have something there.  I do not have ft4 in edit bands and modes.  Where do I add it? in all the bands?  Interestingly I don't have ft8 either but that does not get rejected.


Joe VA3JLF

Radio Ktwonf
 

If not done already, make sure that you have the latest TQSL file from LOTW installed AND the latest TQSL Configuration file loaded into TQSL.  These are separate downloads from the LOTW site.  The FT4 enhancements to LOTW are in the latest Configuration files

On Saturday, November 2, 2019, 11:36:49 AM EDT, Jim Cox <jcox123@...> wrote:


Further clarification, anyone can use the TQSL into to send and download their QSOs, only need to be an ARRL member to get awards using LOTW info...  Jim K4JAF
 
From: Jim Cox
Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 10:31 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW
 
Sent you a reply on the TQSL software which must be the latest version...  TQSL software (including Logger32) is one of the free things in life, of course to use it you must be ARRL member so maybe just Logger32 is one of the few few few free things in life......   Jim K4JAF
 
From: Bob
Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 10:27 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW
 
Jim, didn't I see on here somewhere that the LoTW eQSL (or whatever it is) needed to be upgraded (wonder how much they charged for that?). SeventyThree(s).
On November 2, 2019 at 11:23 AM Jim Cox <jcox123@...> wrote:

LOTW FT4 works fine here Bob..  Not sure what the problems is on Joe’s end.  Jim K4JAF
From: Bob
Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 10:08 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW
I am a conscientious objector where anything ARRL/LoTW is concerned - I wouldn't touch it (not even with your 20ft pole) ... I seem to recall conversation here way back when FT4 was a new mode, and the ADIF meisters hadn't yet decided what to do with it, that LoTW defaulted to DATA as the nom de guerre. That was a long time ago. How they remedied this, I have no idea. Isn't there some LoTW software that you need to run on your PC (eQSL or something, but maybe I'm confusing that with another QSLing mechanism I have never used) that translates the data and provides the necessary Fort Knox level encryption? Is that version sensitive? Anyway, lotsa folks on here (those with no shame or self esteem) use LoTW, it's just a matter of one of them actually putting pen to paper (so to speak) and explaining how. SeventyThree(s).
On November 2, 2019 at 10:44 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

It is Bob.  This is the relevant portion of my adifmodes.txt.  LOTW changes the mode to DATA and rejects the qso’s.

 

Joe

 

 

FM

FT8

FSK441

HELL       =FMHELL,FSKHELL,HELL80,HFSK,PSKHELL

ISCAT    =ISCAT-A,ISCAT-B

JT4          =JT4A,JT4B,JT4C,JT4D,JT4E,JT4F,JT4G

JT6M

JT9          =JT9-1,JT9-2,JT9-5,JT9-10,JT9-30,JT9A,JT9B,JT9C,JT9D,JT9E FAST,JT9F,JT9F FAST,JT9G,JT9G FAST,JT9H,JT9H FAST

JT44

JT65       =JT65A,JT65B,JT65B2,JT65C,JT65C2

MFSK    =FSQCALL,FT4,JS8,MFSK4,MFSK8,MFSK11,MFSK16,MFSK22,MFSK31,MFSK32,MFSK64,MFSK128

MSK144

MT63

OLIVIA  =OLIVIA 4/125,OLIVIA 4/250,OLIVIA 8/250,OLIVIA 8/500,OLIVIA 16/500,OLIVIA 16/1000,OLIVIA 32/1000

 


 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Bob
Sent: November 2, 2019 10:24 AM
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW

 

In the ADIFModes.txt FT4 must be a submode of MFSK. Like this ... SeventyThree(s).

 

On November 2, 2019 at 9:50 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

Hi
Can someone help me with this.  I have some FT4 messages that keep getting rejected by LOTW as "not found in logbook".  Following suggestions on this list, I changed the mode to FT4 using an editor and have FT4 in my ADIFmodes.txt.  But each time I download from LOTW, they get rejected.  The qso's are indeed in my log because I can find them there.  Thanks for any help.

Joe VA3JLF


 


 

 


 

 

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

Sent you a reply on the TQSL software which must be the latest version... TQSL software (including Logger32) is one of the free things in life, of course to use it you must be ARRL member so maybe just Logger32 is one of the few few few free things in life......

+ Not only are LoTW and TQSL free, there is no requirement to be an ARRL member to use them. See the first sentence in the second paragraph of

<https://lotw.arrl.org/lotw-help/>

+ Any version of TQL released within the past 3 years will support FT4; one need only have downloaded and installed the latest (free) "Configuration Data" file:

<https://lotw.arrl.org/lotw-help/configxml/>

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Bob
 

If you have expectations of seeing statistics that include FT4 and/or FT8 (like DXCC for FT4, include FT8 QSOs in your DXCC_DIGITAL calculations) then yes, you do need FT4 and FT8 in your personal BandPlan.  On all bands that you operate FT4 and FT8, make entries like this:  SeventyThree(s).


On November 2, 2019 at 11:52 AM Joseph LaFerla <joe@...> wrote:

You may have something there.  I do not have ft4 in edit bands and modes.  Where do I add it? in all the bands?  Interestingly I don't have ft8 either but that does not get rejected.


Joe VA3JLF

 

Bob
 

Dave, it never fails ... I rave and rant about the ARRL & ADIF and it's guaranteed to get you out of the woodwork to share some pearls of wisdom with us. Thanks for that. SeventyThree(s).

On November 2, 2019 at 12:02 PM Dave AA6YQ <@AA6YQ> wrote:


+ AA6YQ comments below

Sent you a reply on the TQSL software which must be the latest version... TQSL software (including Logger32) is one of the free things in life, of course to use it you must be ARRL member so maybe just Logger32 is one of the few few few free things in life......

+ Not only are LoTW and TQSL free, there is no requirement to be an ARRL member to use them. See the first sentence in the second paragraph of

<https://lotw.arrl.org/lotw-help/>

+ Any version of TQL released within the past 3 years will support FT4; one need only have downloaded and installed the latest (free) "Configuration Data" file:

<https://lotw.arrl.org/lotw-help/configxml/>

73,

Dave, AA6YQ



Joseph LaFerla
 

HI Bob et al

I fixed my problem, if was indeed an outdated version of tqsl.  Once I fixed that, all is now well.  Thanks for all your help.

Joe VA3JLF

Jeff Wilson
 

I noticed that all my FT4 contacts were not confirmed and the latest LOG ADIF shows the correct format for MODE.  I had to update TQSL...install a patch from the summer that may be part of the latest version...read the TQSL page.  Then I made a partial log adi file of just my FT4 QSOs and uploaded them to LOTW again (you can sort your log by mode, just click on the mode heading in the log window and scroll up to FT4).  Next day all my FT4 QSO were confirmed on LOTW.  Probably a simpler way, but this worked for me.......
73 Jeff VE3CV

Michael Harris
 

Not so. I'm not an ARRL member an have completed a DXCC award application on line.

I doubt that many DX (none ARRL member) operators would bother with LoTW if all they were doing was feeding ARRL member award applicants.

Regards,

Mike VP8NO

On 02/11/2019 12:36, Jim Cox wrote:
Further clarification, anyone can use the TQSL into to send and download their QSOs, only need to be an ARRL member to get awards using LOTW info... Jim K4JAF

Gary Hinson
 

LoTW is free of charge and accessible to all, courtesy of ARRL. It is supported by excellent software such as Logger32 and Club Log, automating most of the activities and checks involved in confirming and validating QSOs. It substantially reduces the cost, time, effort and global warming involved in printing, completing, mailing, distributing, reading, checking, filing and eventually destroying physical QSL cards, and improves data accuracy. It is optional, though, as is QSLing and QSOing in general. Cranky stick-in-the-mud Luddites can simply turn a blind ear.

Among the changes to LoTW currently under consideration is the possibility of allowing third parties (such as award and contest managers) to validate claimed QSOs electronically, using an interface to LoTW: this would encourage even more of us to use LoTW. ARRL may charge for this service to help fund the development and operating costs, but again automating QSO validation cuts down on the time and effort required for manual validation. Cranky stick-in-the-mud Luddites may find it progressively harder to persuade award and contest organizers to accept their claims scrawled on scraps of paper and mailed-in, especially as we edge ever closer to real-time logging and validation of QSOs. Or they may not. We'll see.

For the DXCC awards, "ARRL membership is required for DXCC applicants in the US, its possessions, and Puerto Rico. ARRL membership is not required for foreign applicants." See http://www.arrl.org/files/file/DXCC/DXCC%20Rules.pdf There are fees for the DXCC awards, with discounts for ARRL members: see http://www.arrl.org/dxcc-awards-fees. DXCC is a popular, globally-respected award scheme for DXers, and participation is entirely optional, a matter of personal choice. However, as with any other award, applicants are quite reasonably expected to comply with the rules, which may be incompatible with crankiness, mud-sticking and Luddism.

Meanwhile, many of us shamelessly and selflessly participate in, support and further the hobby in whatever ways we can ... generally with good humour and grace. If all the hard work that goes on behind the scenes to enable us to continue enjoying the hobby were chargeable, we'd all be a lot poorer - and not just financially.

73
Gary ZL2iFB

-----Original Message-----
From: hamlogger@groups.io <hamlogger@groups.io> On Behalf Of Michael Harris via Groups.Io
Sent: 03 November 2019 08:01
To: hamlogger@groups.io
Subject: Re: [hamlogger] FT4 qso's rejected by LOTW

Not so. I'm not an ARRL member an have completed a DXCC award application on line.

I doubt that many DX (none ARRL member) operators would bother with LoTW if all they were doing was feeding ARRL member award applicants.

Regards,

Mike VP8NO

On 02/11/2019 12:36, Jim Cox wrote:
Further clarification, anyone can use the TQSL into to send and
download their QSOs, only need to be an ARRL member to get awards
using LOTW info... Jim K4JAF