[amsat-bb] Re: LOTW - improperly coded satellite contacts?

[Marvin Tamez]

Patrick, I mentioned to Bill earlier, off group, that three of 
my confirmed QSL's are blank in the "VUCC" column. What could have caused that? 
Leaving out Propagation=SAT, maybe? Also on the 10th of this month I started 
using an ELK-L5 and it has made a noticable difference! Hearing at much lower 
elevations and making QSO's at and below 10*.  Thanks for all your help and 
advice. 


73,
Marvin
K5MLT




________________________________
From: Bill Dzurilla <billdz.geo at yahoo.com>
To: amsat-bb at amsat.org
Sent: Mon, February 21, 2011 11:19:29 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW - improperly coded satellite contacts?

Thanks, Patrick,, I have already sent an email to LOTW.  If the other station 
failed to include Propagation Mode or Satellite Name, there should be no match 
at all.  There is no basis for me to be credited with a 144mhz or 432 mhz grid.

I spent a lot of time going through my log before uploading it, as LOTW demands 
perfection.  The slightest error (e.g., writing vo-52 instead of VO-52, AO51 
instead of AO-51) and the entry is rejected.

73, Bill NZ5N
> 
> Most likely, the other station didn't include one or both
> of the fields
> used to mark a QSO as a satellite QSO (Propagation Mode,
> Satellite
> Name).  I've seen this on a handful of QSOs I've
> uploaded in the past
> few weeks.
> 
> > Anyone know how this is handled?
> 
> Assuming your log has all the necessary fields for a
> satellite QSO (all
> of the QSLs I've gotten from you are showing as satellite
> QSOs, so I
> don't think your logs are missing anything), there is only
> one way to fix
> this - the other station has to upload the QSO record(s)
> again, this time
> making sure those additional ADIF fields are in their
> log.  As long as the
> other QSO details like date, time, your call, etc. are the
> same, the new
> upload replaces what was originally uploaded.
> 
> If the other station's log has the satellite-related
> fields, then an e-mail to
> lotw-help @ arrl.org is necessary.  There could be
> errors in how ARRL's
> database queries run to match up QSO records and make
> QSLs.  ARRL
> will not fix problems with other stations' log uploads, and
> everything has
> to be in there correctly in order to use the resulting QSLs
> toward awards.



      

_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB at 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