Hi Ed:
I think that the problem is that you signed the W2SZ/1 (FN32) certificate as
W2SZ.
It should have been signed as W2SZ/1 so that it didn't conflict with the Jan VHF
Contest Q's from FN22.
I think your big problem is that W2SZ never signs /1 during the contests from
FN32.
I always have to ask W2SZ if they are /1 and log them as W2SZ/1.
Basically I think you need to create 3 LoTW certificates:
W2SZ - FN22 - ??? - NY - Jan Contest
W2SZ - FN32 - MA, Berkshier - Jun, Aug, & Sep Contests
W2SZ/1 - FN32 - MA, Berkshier - Jun, Aug,& Sep Contests
Are you going to submit the real W2SZ logs from FN22 ???
May this will help shed some light on you low returns.
BTW, I've been working W2SZ and W2SZ/1 since 1990.
73
Bob, K1VU
At 17:53 2/2/2008, Ed Parish K1EP wrote:
>I have recently uploaded the logs for the last 15 years of W2SZ/1
>operations for June, August, and September VHF/UHF contests. From
>the over 77,000 QSOs submitted, there are about 2100 QSLs. Compared
>to my personal (mostly HF) LoTW statistics, the hit rate is low. I
>attribute that to several things. I think very few VHF operators and
>contesters load their logs to LoTW. The only awards currently
>available via LoTW are WAS and DXCC. (Curiously, we do have 45
>states and 5 countries confirmed via LoTW.) VUCC is not supported at
>this time through LoTW.
>
>Another area of concern that I have is the nature of computer QSO
>matching. LoTW must have an exact match of many variables in order
>to issue a QSL for a QSO. Callsign and mode are two of those
>variables that I have issues with. With respect to callsign, I
>perceive some issues. Unfortunately, we don't always log a rover as
>/R in the log. Sometimes it is our fault, we are lazy or just our
>rate is high and we don't log it. Sometimes the station doesn't
>identify themselves as a rover and we don't realize it until maybe
>the next time we have a QSO or maybe never at all. Maybe the other
>station doesn't submit their log as callsign/R and we do have /R in
>the log. In any of these cases, an exact match will not take place
>and LoTW will not create a QSL. Our log is also submitted as W2SZ
>and not as W2SZ/1. If you have /1 in your logs, there won't be an
>exact match. That is something I can take care of and will
>shortly. I will create another entry for us as W2SZ/1 and submit the
>entire log a second time in order to avoid that inconvenience on
>everyone else's part. The other thing that will come up will be
>mode. Our logs sometimes show a voice contact as PHone and doesn't
>always distinguish between SSB and FM. At times we have mixed mode
>contacts, one log may show CW while the other log shows
>phone. Again, LoTW will not show those as matches. I really don't
>know what to do in those situations and other pure log entry error
>situations, other than to submit all the logs multiple times with
>different modes for all QSOs. If anyone who has submitted their logs
>to LoTW, expects a QSL and hasn't received one, feel free to email me
>direct. If there are other suggestions as to how to make this
>process a little smoother or deal with the above situations, feel
>free to discuss it here.
>
>_______________________________________________
>VHFcontesting mailing list
>VHFcontesting@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|