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] 4 5 6 7 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: LOTW little used outside NA - I have a 2.6% response rate :(  (Read 13997 times)
KE8G
Member

Posts: 151




Ignore
« Reply #30 on: January 02, 2012, 12:51:11 PM »

I haven't seen it asked in any of the posts (I may have missed it though), to have a low return rate of 2.6%, I wonder if you are not logging in UTC.  Could that be the problem?

I have approximately a 42% return rate from DX stations, after the US stations are removed from the total.

100% of those are CW, as that is the only mode I use.

LoTW is a quick, easy, and cheap way to get a QSO confirmed, but I like to have a real card in my hands.  I send out a lot of cards via the buro, another great ARRL value!   If I really need the cards for DXCC, I'll upload LoTW and send for one direct.

Hope you find out what the problem is, I would hate to see you give up on LoTW. 

LoTW is a great tool we have at our disposal.

73 de Jim - KE8G
Logged
N3QE
Member

Posts: 2196




Ignore
« Reply #31 on: January 02, 2012, 03:03:48 PM »

I find a DX response rate of 35-40% overall, of a QSL being verified in LOTW within a year or two. Yeah, some linger on out past a few years (my record right now is a 1978 QSO being confirmed in LOTW in 2011!)

Most of my QSO's are contests, specifically CW contests.

The rate from "casual DX", just chatting with the DX, is closer to 20%. Some casual DX (e.g. Australia, Japan) is better than other casual DX (e.g. random southern European countries).

Many DXpeditions eventually confirm via LOTW, but aren't speedy. See Jan 2012 QST article by Wayne N7NG.

LOTW rates in digital/RTTY contests will generally be better than 50%.
Logged
WS4T
Member

Posts: 182




Ignore
« Reply #32 on: January 03, 2012, 03:34:02 AM »

I too find a "response rate of 2.6%" strange and my first thought was that there must be a UTC error. But the original poster says that is definitely not the case.

HS0ZIB: I would be thrilled to work you, especially since I don't have Thailand confirmed via LotW. Grin Are you on 10m these days?

Gary, ES1WST
Logged
HS0ZIB
Member

Posts: 418




Ignore
« Reply #33 on: January 03, 2012, 04:40:35 AM »

Gary - it's definitely not a UTC error - I log the QSO in my local time which is UTC+7 and I double-check the UTC time on Google.

It may be that the stations I am working simply do not use LOTW - I can check this on QRZ.com but sometimes people do not complete these details on QRZ.com.

Tomorrow my homebrew hexbeam should be installed at my new airport hotel QTH, including 10 metres.  I'm looking forward to installing my base station (Kenwood TS-850S) and working NA on 10 (and other bands)

Simon
Logged
WS3N
Member

Posts: 691




Ignore
« Reply #34 on: January 03, 2012, 05:52:56 AM »

Gary - it's definitely not a UTC error - I log the QSO in my local time which is UTC+7 and I double-check the UTC time on Google.

It may be that the stations I am working simply do not use LOTW - I can check this on QRZ.com but sometimes people do not complete these details on QRZ.com.

Tomorrow my homebrew hexbeam should be installed at my new airport hotel QTH, including 10 metres.  I'm looking forward to installing my base station (Kenwood TS-850S) and working NA on 10 (and other bands)

Simon

What are you using to generate your logs? If it's not a problem with the time, what about the frequency? Check the QSO details on LoTW.

I had a case where I was waiting for a confirmation and had checked and verified that the other party had already uploaded. I looked at the details of the QSO that I had uploaded. I found that it was listed as a cross-band contact. I checked my log and found that the frequency of the second VFO had unintentionally been logged as the receive frequency. I corrected the log and uploaded the new QSO information. I had my confirmation within a few minutes.

Jack
Logged
WS4T
Member

Posts: 182




Ignore
« Reply #35 on: January 03, 2012, 05:54:31 AM »

Simon, I'm in Estonia for now.

Here's propagation charts from HS to ES:
- Short-path: http://www.voacap.com/predictions/4f03083f7bd5b/
- Long-path: http://www.voacap.com/predictions/4f03085802478/

Hope to work you!

Cheers,
Gary, ES1WST
Logged
N3QE
Member

Posts: 2196




Ignore
« Reply #36 on: January 03, 2012, 06:26:11 AM »

I too find a "response rate of 2.6%" strange and my first thought was that there must be a UTC error. But the original poster says that is definitely not the case.

I can think of several combinations where I expect QSL rates below 3% just inside the US:

VHF FM operations outside contests
Field day
Many other mobile/field activities that aren't necessarily contests

I understand that in Southeast Asia that there is a good amount of portable low-band VHF equipment that is commonly used by hams and even DX'ing on those bands that you or me might never ever notice here in the states. Some of the low band VHF stuff, you and me have probably never heard of (e.g. I know there's a community of 70MHz users in Europe; I have no idea if LOTW even can track these QSO's; I have no idea what oddball bands might be used in SE Asia.)

Tim.

Logged
K3STX
Member

Posts: 981




Ignore
« Reply #37 on: January 03, 2012, 06:52:01 AM »

If he works primarily rag-chewers and not contest ops/DXers I can easily see 2.6%. I ONLY keep my contest logs on a computer, I suspect many many many Hams are just like me. So none of my ragchew logs, or DXing logs, are on computer so are not on LOTW.

paul
Logged
N0AZZ
Member

Posts: 241




Ignore
« Reply #38 on: January 03, 2012, 10:33:23 AM »

All I log is DX and Contest entries don't bother with a rag chew what very few I do.


FRED/N0AZZ
Logged
KJ4FUU
Member

Posts: 162




Ignore
« Reply #39 on: January 03, 2012, 10:45:42 AM »

A low response rate can also come from the way the call sign is sent, can't it? For instance, is KJ4FUU/M the same as KJ4FUU? I was told that it wasn't. My response rate is probably just under 40% overall. I'm wondering if some are being sent to KJ4FUU/QRP (what my card says) vs. KJ4FUU (what I'm set up for in LoTW).

I do know that I worked a station that was portable to Bermuda, and I didn't get the LoTW confirmation until I logged it as VP9/call sign.

-- Tom
Logged
W5DQ
Member

Posts: 1209


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #40 on: January 03, 2012, 02:55:29 PM »

While my stats are not broken out by continent, etc., I do upload every QSO to LOTW. I operate mainly CW and RTTY these days but have roughly an even number of QSO for all 3 main modes (SSB, CW and RTTY). My response rate is 46.7% (7,471 QSO uploaded with 3,496 QSL recv'd). I'm not sure why someone would see less than 10% response from LOTW. That seems mighty slim and I think I'd be on the phone or email to ARRL HQ / DXCC Desk to find out if there is a problem for sure.  Huh

Gene W5DQ
 
Logged

Gene W5DQ
Ridgecrest, CA - DM15dp
www.radioroom.org
HS0ZIB
Member

Posts: 418




Ignore
« Reply #41 on: January 03, 2012, 05:51:16 PM »

Actually after scrutinising my QSOs and QSLs it looks even worse!  The last confirmed QSO was from 2 years ago and that was specifically after the other ham emailed me to ask me to confirm via LOTW.  Every single QSO since that date has not been verified, (although I made few QSOs until perhaps 3 months ago).

Since only 47,000 hams in the world use LOTW and since there are millions of hams worldwide, the lack of response with LOTW maybe is not surprising.

Simon
Logged
N7SMI
Member

Posts: 330




Ignore
« Reply #42 on: January 03, 2012, 05:57:16 PM »

Something is most certainly wrong with your set up. I suspect that your call or location or something has been set up incorrectly. Do your QSOs show up when you log into LoTW? It's impossible to have that many QSOs and that poor of a response rate.

I've been on HF for 6 months - mostly DX chasing and contesting. My QSL rate is 52%.
Logged
WW3QB
Member

Posts: 696




Ignore
« Reply #43 on: January 03, 2012, 06:54:35 PM »

Actually after scrutinising my QSOs and QSLs it looks even worse!  The last confirmed QSO was from 2 years ago and that was specifically after the other ham emailed me to ask me to confirm via LOTW.  Every single QSO since that date has not been verified, (although I made few QSOs until perhaps 3 months ago).

Since only 47,000 hams in the world use LOTW and since there are millions of hams worldwide, the lack of response with LOTW maybe is not surprising.

Simon

Go to http://www.hb9bza.net/lotw-users-list and see if you worked any hams known to use LoTW. I bet you have worked many. You must have a configuration problem. Also use the Find Call on the LoTW web site for stations in your log.
Logged
HS0ZIB
Member

Posts: 418




Ignore
« Reply #44 on: January 04, 2012, 02:41:15 AM »

Quote
Go to http://www.hb9bza.net/lotw-users-list and see if you worked any hams known to use LoTW. I bet you have worked many. You must have a configuration problem. Also use the Find Call on the LoTW web site for stations in your log.

OK - After searching my last 50 QSOs on that user list, not a single callsign was found as an LOTW user.  I seem to be very unlucky to have only worked stations who do not use LOTW.

Bear in mind that I have not worked any NA stations yet from my HS location.  But there are plenty of VKs, ZLs, VUs and EU stations.  None of them is on that LOTW user list Sad

Simon
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 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!