Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: "Please - No LOTW"  (Read 3793 times)
N3QE
Member

Posts: 2029




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: April 03, 2013, 03:52:55 PM »

I wonder if thats the problem with hams from Bulgaria, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Montenegro, Hungary, ect, ect. DO ANY of those guys use LOTW?  Every time I start checking my logs to see who owes a card, the list is MOSTLY hams from those countries, who just dont seem to use LOTW.  WHY?HuhHuhHuhHuh??

All of those countries are filled with very active stations (multi-multi superstations even) that are prominent LOTW users and active in every contest. At least on RTTY and CW, I don't know much about phone. They also tend to be pretty thorough in paper cards via buro, I have huge stacks here under my call, and they show up very commonly when I help my sorter ferry around cards too.

Montenegro may be the highest LOTW success rate I've ever seen (95%+ of 4O QSO's are confirmed by LOTW in my logs.)

(Incidentally I don't want anyone to think I'm anti-paper. I think the buro system is the best thing since sliced bread and I'm so so happy when I get a stack of pretty cards from my sorter.)

Logged
KE8G
Member

Posts: 149




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: April 03, 2013, 04:06:49 PM »

Some non-US hams are offended at the thought of sending an ID document and a copy of their licence to get setup on LoTW.

I would suggest to ARRL that they have some other process that could help in this regard. For example, they could allow card checkers to validate LoTW credentials.

I wonder if thats the problem with hams from Bulgaria, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Montenegro, Hungary, ect, ect. DO ANY of those guys use LOTW?  Every time I start checking my logs to see who owes a card, the list is MOSTLY hams from those countries, who just dont seem to use LOTW.  WHY?HuhHuhHuhHuh??

73, Gene AF3Y

Gene/AF3Y,
I did a quick search on my LoTW confirmations on the countries you mentioned, and found that I have no less than 10 for any one of them.  So, there are many stations that use LoTW.  I would suggest maybe look for the special event stations, as they appear to use LoTW quite often.

73 de Jim - KE8G
Logged
AC2EU
Member

Posts: 319


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #17 on: April 03, 2013, 04:54:59 PM »

Believe it or not, there are some HAMs who can't figure out why they can't login and use LOTW. I tell them "read the directions, there's a process involved". A year later one guy is still baffled!  Shocked

I'm a new guy on the HAM block, but of 214 QSOs I've loaded, there are only 49 confirmed QSLs.
That will make WAS or anything else a lot more difficult to get with a 23% QSL rate...

I like the concept, it's just too bad that others don't put the effort into it.
Logged

N6ORB
Member

Posts: 242




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: April 03, 2013, 05:22:11 PM »

"I wonder if thats the problem with hams from Bulgaria, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Montenegro, Hungary, ect, ect. DO ANY of those guys use LOTW?  Every time I start checking my logs to see who owes a card, the list is MOSTLY hams from those countries, who just dont seem to use LOTW.  WHY???

73, Gene AF3Y"

I have all of these countries confirmed on LOTW, but I was surprised to see I had only 20M confirmed for 4O3A. I logged in to LOTW and did a search for 40* and got a hit for 403A on 10M. I then realized that I had entered a zero in my search instead of an O, but it turned up the same typing error for the 10M contact in 2011. I uploaded the corrected QSO info to LOTW and quickly got a match. So, thanks for your comment, Gene. Thanks to you I now have another band confirmed for Montenegro.  Smiley

By the way, I was also in the ASA as a 98C, so I've had a lot of experience working with garbled call signs.

Dave, N6ORB
Logged
AF3Y
Member

Posts: 3676




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: April 03, 2013, 06:30:55 PM »

"I wonder if thats the problem with hams from Bulgaria, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Montenegro, Hungary, ect, ect. DO ANY of those guys use LOTW?  Every time I start checking my logs to see who owes a card, the list is MOSTLY hams from those countries, who just dont seem to use LOTW.  WHY???

73, Gene AF3Y"

I have all of these countries confirmed on LOTW, but I was surprised to see I had only 20M confirmed for 4O3A. I logged in to LOTW and did a search for 40* and got a hit for 403A on 10M. I then realized that I had entered a zero in my search instead of an O, but it turned up the same typing error for the 10M contact in 2011. I uploaded the corrected QSO info to LOTW and quickly got a match. So, thanks for your comment, Gene. Thanks to you I now have another band confirmed for Montenegro.  Smiley

By the way, I was also in the ASA as a 98C, so I've had a lot of experience working with garbled call signs.

Dave, N6ORB

Glad to help you out there with a bandfill Dave!  I guess I just pick the wrong Bulgarians, etc. to work hi hil I will have to try a few morel

Some days I still think about ASA and the guys I worked with. Wow, that was 50 years ago!
It was a good trip Grin.

73, Gene AF3Y
Logged
K9AIM
Member

Posts: 915




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: April 03, 2013, 09:30:18 PM »

Interesting to me that "Please - No LOTW" is a common refrain among many prominent DX stations.

  https://www.google.com/search?q="please+no+lotw"

I wonder if this just a language issue and they really mean "I do not use LOTW". Or if they really didn't want me to upload their QSO info (along with the rest of my log) to LOTW.

Maybe they don't grok LOTW in the same way I do, where I just upload everything. I do know several hams who only upload to LOTW upon special request and/or payment.

Tim.

If you have a list of hams who only upload to LoTW upon special request or payment please post their callsigns. I only verify using LoTW so if some of the DX I have worked will confirm if I email or pay, I would love to know which ones and how much if anything it will cost me... 

Some do find the LoTW registration process too complicated, though late last year I heard someone was working on making that process more user-friendly.  Over the coming years, I would think the LoTW system will improve and become easier to use without compromising security. 

One thing I have always wondered about is what is in it for the DX station that works ridiculous and often rude pile-ups week after week after week? Not the DXpeditions, but the people who reside in, and are licensed by, these rare entities...  If and when all QSL'ing goes virtual will that de-incentivize these op.s or is it wrong-headed to think they are motivated by green-stamps? Maybe it is neat to help hams around the world get the thrill of working a rare one and also to get a good feel for radio propagation based on who is calling, etc.   "59, thanks" and stations calling over and over even when you say "only (insert prefix here)" has to get pretty old...
Logged
VK3HJ
Member

Posts: 553




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: April 03, 2013, 09:41:55 PM »

I've found that generally, all those former communist bloc countries have lots of great CW operators, and find no shortage of them to work on air, every day (except Turkmenistan, HI).
My preferred QSL is LotW - almost no effort required for confirmations. Getting set up on LotW is a bit involved, and it seems to beat some people.
My QSL rate I think is ok. I have over 15k Q's in the system, of which about 3100 were after my return to radio and are mainly local (VK/ZL) Q's from local contests, etc., so lots of repeat Q's. Discounting those, I have nearly 30% of  DX Q's confirmed in LotW. Lots of DXers are "coming over" to LotW, and I find the participation much better than eQSL (which I think is a nice system too).
Statistically, of 307 DXCC worked (all confirmed), LotW accounts for 279, eQSL 185 and paper 251.
The LotW server is generally working quite well after the recent upgrade, and I see more and more DXers using it. It may never be "universal" but it is the best out there now. Those who don't want to use if for whatever reason are free to do so. HRD Logbook now shows which callsigns are in LotW, and you can also also check HB9BZA's LotW User list. Just seek out and work another one, if the station you just worked just wants GS sent their way.
The only paper cards I am chasing up now are for a few Top Band unconfirmed countries.
Yes, I do like to see QSL cards turn up in my mailbox, but I only have a smallish "wait list". The pile that arrives from the bureau from time to time makes me break out in a sweat!
Oh, and WAS Nets, the "bang-bang 22" reports I've heard, sent me off at a gallop!
73,
Luke VK3HJ
Logged
NU1O
Member

Posts: 2564




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: April 03, 2013, 10:21:34 PM »

As mentioned in other threads. more and more DX stations are subscribing to LoTW.  I've found a number of DX ops who state "no LoTW" upload eventually.  They just wait a bit to see if they get cards w/green stamps first.  I'm not implying they are in it for the $$$; it just may be their way of handling QSLs. 


What would be the reason other than $$ to hold off on uploading to LoTW?

73,

Chris/NU1O
Logged
NU1O
Member

Posts: 2564




Ignore
« Reply #23 on: April 03, 2013, 10:35:27 PM »

Some non-US hams are offended at the thought of sending an ID document and a copy of their licence to get setup on LoTW.

I would suggest to ARRL that they have some other process that could help in this regard. For example, they could allow card checkers to validate LoTW credentials.

The ID is what keeps LoTW honest.

I have never submitted QSLs to a card checker. Must a US ham show his license or an ID in the US and can a foreign ham get QSLs checked overseas and must they show a license or ID?

If the protocol is different between the way it's done in the US, and overseas, I can see why a foreign station would feel like they aren't being trusted.

I don't recall the protocol when I signed up for LoTW.  Did I have to include a copy of my ham license or an ID?

73,

Chris/NU1O

Logged
K3TN
Member

Posts: 278


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #24 on: April 04, 2013, 03:22:46 AM »

Many reasons touched on why more DX hams don't use LotW - some (like the $$ aspect, or no computer logging or just traditionalist) aren't going to change.

One that can change is the ARRL making LotW a bit easier to use for non-English speaking hams, and to have some outreach to the other IARU clubs to encourage usage.

The ARRL has formed an LotW Ad Hoc Committee, with the following charter: Logbook of The World ad hoc Committee: The Board voted to create the Logbook of The World (LoTW) ad hoc Committee. This committee has been tasked with reviewing policies and practices associated with how LoTW runs today (including the fixed and variable costs), issues concerning user interface and usability, and economic value of an LoTW award point or credit. The committee will provide the ARRL Board with a progress report and preliminary recommendations at the 2013 Second Meeting in July..

N1TA is the LotW person at the ARRL, below are the members of this committee:

  • •Gregory P. Widin, K0GW, Dakota Division Director, Chairman
    •Barry J. Shelley, N1VXY, Chief Financial Officer
    •Rick Niswander, K7GM, Treasurer
    •Michael Keane, K1MK, Information Technology Manager
    •David Patton, NN1N, Membership & Volunteer Programs Manager

All of them can be reached at callsign@arrl.net and to be safe you can always copy hq@arrl.net - send them your thoughts!

Here's part of the email I sent to that committee:

I was glad to see the ARRL has formed the LotW Ad Hoc Advisory Committee and look forward to continued improvements and reach of LotW. I've been an enthusiast user and advocate of LotW for 4 years now and have some recommendations I'd like to make:

Most importantly, please communicate with the other IARU clubs to try determine ways to encourage greater participation by non-US hams. This may include language issues, usability issues, privacy issues, etc. that could be easily overcome. There are many hams who will just not use electronic QSLing for a wide variety of other reasons that will not change, but if the committee focuses on these areas I think the number of non-US users can greatly increase.

Please don't raise LotW pricing before you solve the increased participation issue. Increase market share first, raise prices later! If fiscal reasons require additional funds, reach out to the DX and contesting communities for donations, or get increased sponsorship/advertising on the LotW site. The "value" of an LotW QSL increases dramatically only when both sides of the QSO are using LotW!

Personally, I did not find LotW hard to initiate but of course I work in Internet security! I don't think there is a real need to change the underlying mechanism or process, but I think the help information could be much better. I also think there are many "Volunteer LotW Coordinators" would be willing to "Elmer" hams having problems, perhaps the League could support/broker such a process.

The performance of LotW has been phenomenal since the recent hardware upgrades. The next big improvement needs to be doubling the number of non-US hams that participate. I look forward to recommendations from the committee that focus on that goal and would be glad to provide any help that you might need.

73 John K3TN
Logged

John K3TN
N2RJ
Member

Posts: 1135




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: April 04, 2013, 06:19:02 AM »

As mentioned in other threads. more and more DX stations are subscribing to LoTW.  I've found a number of DX ops who state "no LoTW" upload eventually.  They just wait a bit to see if they get cards w/green stamps first.  I'm not implying they are in it for the $$$; it just may be their way of handling QSLs. 


What would be the reason other than $$ to hold off on uploading to LoTW?

73,

Chris/NU1O


Hassle.

It's easy for US hams but foreign hams need to go through additional steps that we don't have to. The certificate/tqsl process can also be daunting for some, especially folks who really don't do much with a computer.
Logged
N3QE
Member

Posts: 2029




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: April 04, 2013, 06:57:08 AM »

If you have a list of hams who only upload to LoTW upon special request or payment please post their callsigns.

From recent memory (meaning past week or two): 4Z5PJ will upload individual QSO's but you have to E-mail him. LZ9W has detailed instructions on their QRZ page about how to get a paper QSL and a LOTW upload. Both are very prompt (e.g. just a day or two) if you follow their instructions.

I've remarked about my poor record-keeping in the past, and would basically be lost if I didn't upload everything to LOTW and clublog and let them sort it out. I am not the kind of guy who gets honor roll by carefully making just 350 QSO's :-). Before LOTW I had accumulated thousands of paper QSL's in several decades as a ham, but had absolutely no rhyme or reason to organizing them. I was sending paper requests with GS to entities I had confirmed many times over, and I was neglecting to chase confirmations for the ones I really needed. After joining LOTW I had DXCC and WAS electroncially confirmed in just a few months. Clublog is very useful when combined with LOTW; it tells me the handful of DXCC's I need to confirm by paper.
Logged
WA8UEG
Member

Posts: 331




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: April 04, 2013, 07:41:27 AM »

Don't know about other log programs but mine (Logger32) shows which stations QSL via LOTW, makes it pretty easy to get confirmations via LOTW or work toward awards cheaply. It also automatically uploads to LOTW & will download from LOTW and update all records in the log. Heck it will automatically upload to Eqsl after each log entry without doing anything if you want. 
Logged
V47JA
Member

Posts: 102




Ignore
« Reply #28 on: April 04, 2013, 08:13:44 AM »


Hi,

The only real additional step for "foreign stations", is to send a copy of your license/operating permit to the ARRL for verification. Other then that it has the same "hassles" to get on LoTW.

From my 53+ years of operating all I had, before LoTW. was a stack of shoe boxes full of QSL's with no organization or system.  LoTW has turned out to be a blessing for me, at a glance I can see all the awards for which I qualify (not that I ever apply).

Personally, the 2000+ QSL's a year requests I get, and send out, is not real fun, but it keeps the postman busy. I wish all my contacts Uploaded to LoTW as do I, especially other DX stations.

See you at Dayton.

73 and DX,

John   W5JON - V47JA - J68JA - V31FB - G0AOH
« Last Edit: April 04, 2013, 08:21:42 AM by V47JA » Logged
K7KB
Member

Posts: 605




Ignore
« Reply #29 on: April 04, 2013, 08:26:40 AM »

I don't recall the protocol when I signed up for LoTW.  Did I have to include a copy of my ham license or an ID?

73,
Chris/NU1O

No, you didn't. But it's fairly easy for the ARRL to tap into the FCC database to find all of your licensing info. That's not the case for all amateurs outside of the US.

John K7KB
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!