[FQP] [ARRL-LOTW] Mobiles
sblary at yahoo.com
Wed Apr 28 04:09:20 PDT 2010
> I would love to see the State Party sponsors require
> proper LoTW
submission as a requirement
If that were to be the case then I for one would probably no longer participate in the QSO party seeing how I do not use LOTW. Maybe if they come up with easier to understand documentation/procedures that will change.
If I "owe" anyone a QSL please shoot me an email - I know I've been pretty slack about it at times! Part of my problem is the logging software I use for the QSO party fails to import the county data when I import it into my main log ...
From: FireBrick <w9ol at billnjudy.com>
To: LoTW List <ARRL-LOTW at yahoogroups.com>; fqp at kkn.net
Sent: Wed, April 28, 2010 6:14:34 AM
Subject: Re: [FQP] [ARRL-LOTW] Mobiles
I love to work QSOParties, cw mode.
But I get almost no LoTW qsl from any Rovers no matter how I enter their
I wish they would all submit as /M which would help a lot.
But they would still have to separate their logs by county and submit each
separately and changing the county for each log section.
Very few Rovers do that....I almost decided not to work Rovers at all.
The idea is to work counties, but the Rovers rarely ever give me a
I would love to see the State Party sponsors require proper LoTW submission
as a requirement. Or maybe offer extra points for submitting?
What do you QSOP guys think?
On 4/26/2010 7:04:24 PM, Peter Laws (plaws0 at gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 19:00, Richard DiDonna <nn3w at cox.net [link:
> mailto:nn3w at cox.net]> wrote:
> > Is there a consensus as to if one should add the /information when
> loading a log to LoTW???
FQP mailing list
Send mail to - FQP at kkn.net
Change/edit subscription info - http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/fqp
FQP Web site - www.floridaqsoparty.org
Facebook - http://tinyurl.com/y4azlqf
More information about the FQP