Call Search

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Friends Remembered
Survey Question

DX Cluster Spots

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

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]   Go Down
Author Topic: LOTW little used outside NA - I have a 2.6% response rate :(  (Read 28117 times)

Posts: 621


« Reply #90 on: January 11, 2012, 03:27:54 AM »

I just checked my LotW QSOs. I have 2 QSOs with HSO stations, neither confirmed via LotW. HS0AC last uploaded to LotW in 2009. Other stats:

YB - 8 QSOs, 3 LotW QSL
9M - 6 QSOs, 4 Lotw QSL
JA - 70 QSOs, 24 LotW (skewed downward my multiple ragchews with JA1NUT!)
BY - 8 QSOs, 4 Lotw QSL (skewed up by BY/VO1AU)
VU - 8 QSOs, 5 Lotw QSL

Total for this sample 100Qs, 40 LotW QSLs = 40%

This is out of a total of 39,946 QSOs in Lotw with 17,750 QSLs which = 44% return rate

Just for grins I looked at 9A: 310 QSOs, 42 LotW QSLs or 13.5%

There are some other countries where the return rate is low, but I don't I can find any country of any size where my LotW return rate is lower than 5%.

John K3TN

Posts: 1415

« Reply #91 on: January 13, 2012, 04:07:32 AM »

Although having to get a separate certificate for /M may make him like LoTW less...

In fact, you may have just hit upon the reason.  My LOTW certificate is for HS0ZIB and I upload my logs using that contact.  The fact that I am /M some 400 metres away from my base QTH should not require me to require a separate certificate.  That's silly, (especially since LOTW awards do not recognise /M as a separate entity from the home call sign)

I have no idea if my contacts are uploading to LOTW with my call as HS0ZIB or HS0ZIB/M.  LOTW would have to be failing me (and my contact) VERY badly if it fails to recognise that HS0ZIB and HS0ZIB/M are the same person, especially if the QSO falls within the correct time frame and operating band.  (Actually, now reading N3QE's post seems to indicate that no contact has uploaded logs with the call HS0ZIB/M ...)

There seems to be no way to test this theory, other than by obtaining a second signed certificate for my /M suffix and then uploading all my /M logs again on the faint hope that some of these may match up, (and then I seem to have no way of deleting my incorrect logs that omit the /M suffix....

Suddenly, my interest in using LOTW has dropped - significantly



This kinda falls under the "well when did it last work and what did you change" category.

The last time it worked was for a QSO that I made 2 years ago where my contact specifically asked (via eQSL) for me to upload the QSO to LOTW.  I uploaded that QSO about 5 months ago and the QSO matched up fine.  Since that date ==> nada to every QSO that I uploaded Sad

Simon, I had to get the second certificate for N5UD/M. I then linked the two. The problem appears to be the uploads. If I worked HS0XYZ while mobile, and he leaves off /M in his upload. I don't get a match. So I have to upload again as N5UD hoping for the match. The award credits all got to my main call N5UD.

In real practice, every QSO I have made since LOTW was started, has been from MOBILE.

It is really a big pain in the ---.
73 Tony N5UD /M

Posts: 163

« Reply #92 on: January 13, 2012, 09:39:37 AM »

Here are my LOTW response rates:

Overall 66.5%
DX (DXCC ID <> 291) 52.3%
JT65 DX 47.9%
PSK31 DX 34.2%
RTTY DX 57.8%

I only operate digital modes, mainly PSK31 and JT65 with some low-key RTTY contesting.

Best regards, Tom, AB0DI

how are you obtaining these figures?  I would like to check mine too...

Ok figured this out....
card sent   card cfm  card   cfm%     eQSL upld   eQSL cfm  eQSL cfm%     LotW upld   LotW cfm  LotW cfm%

Total            75         71     95%         6172         1398           23%          6020             1373        23%   
« Last Edit: January 19, 2012, 03:13:15 AM by HS0ZJU » Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]   Go Up
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!