Zack,
> Anyone else having issues getting into LoTW?
Now that you mentioned it, yes - I'm not able to bring up that site.
The ARRL web site comes up as normal, but no response from
the p1k.arrl.org server used for the LOTW system.
73!
Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK
http://www.wd9ewk.net/
___
Exactly what I found... oh well.
Zack
-Original Message-
From: Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 4:16 PM
To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LoTW?
Zack,
> Anyone else having issues getting into LoTW?
Now that you mentioned it, yes -
at-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On
Behalf Of Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 13:17
To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LoTW?
Zack,
> Anyone else having issues getting into LoTW?
Now that you mentioned it, yes - I'm not able to bring up that site.
The
Hi Bob,
The old paper cards are nice, but the postage getting them where they need
to go is getting out of hand and will likely get worse.
73,
Jeff WB3JFS
- Original Message -
From: "Bob Herrell"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 2:11 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] LoTW
> Hi a
Jim,
There is no notification if a QSO record does not
match in LOTW. You can run queries on the LOTW web page
to see which QSOs matched and those that aren't matched
with the other station, and that is it. If people
start posting that QSOs are in LOTW (or eQSL, for those
using that), then others
Got a bunch from you Patrick!
I have over 4000 QSO's uploaded to LOTW for satellite.
Less than 100 confirmations so far, but some are coming in each
day. And only 11 countries confirmed out of about 86 worked!
Even the 6 meter stuff is disappointing! There are a lot of 6 meter
DXCC QSO's be
Hi Kevin!
> Pretty easy like I said I was discouraged for a long time but now I am glad I
> tried it.
Ever since ARRL added support for the VUCC awards in LOTW, I have put
all my satellite QSOs into that system. It didn't take much to convert my
spreadsheet log into the ADIF format used in LOTW
i think
band is 2m, 70cm, 13cm (which is for the rx frequency)
mode fm or ssb
satname is so50, ao51, ao27 etc
prop mode is sat anything else have to be changed (i have only logged the rx
frequency,
not the tx frequency) 73...bruce
Sorry but "BAND" is the transmit band and "RX_BAND" is receive ba
On 03/11/2014 11:12 PM, Bruce wrote:
i have only logged the rx frequency, not the tx frequency
In MY country, the ham license mandates that a log be kept, including
the TX frequency. They really don't care who you listen to, or whether
you listen to anyone at all. But if you're going to gen
: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 1:31 AM
To: AMSAT-BB@amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: lotw
i think
band is 2m, 70cm, 13cm (which is for the rx frequency)
mode fm or ssb
satname is so50, ao51, ao27 etc
prop mode is sat anything else have to be changed (i have only logged the rx
frequency,
not the tx
Bruce,
You don't have to manually check the paper receipts against your LoTW
records. Link your LoTW VUCC account to your VUCC record and your
existing VUCC credits will be added to your LoTW VUCC account.
If your last VUCC application was before 2000, the staff will have to
manually enter it fro
Sounds like I have more confirmations to download :-)
> Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:55:55 -0500
> From: kk...@arrl.net
> To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
> Subject: [amsat-bb] LoTW
>
> i had so much fun the past few weeks loading all my satellite qso's up
> on lotw that i thought i would do it for my daug
Hi George!
> Although the LoTW FAQ shows "ARISS" and "AO-7" as the valid satellite names,
> TQSL bounced all of my QSOs for those two for "Invalid Satellite Name"... I
> looked in the ADIF file, and the Sat_Name fields are all correct, and it
> processed all of my other QSOs successfully. I also
Pete, as I understand it, there are two important lines in the .adi file
which must be included for LOTW to recognize it as a sat contact...
examples are shown below:
Propagation Mode: SAT
Satellite Name: AO-7
I've found that some logging software does _not_ have these two items
available as "
The ARRL does a nice job of spelling out the parameters here:
http://www.arrl.org/files/file/LoTW%20Instructions/N5JB.pdf
The band that matters ( according to the ARRL ) is the band you transmit on,
not the band you receive on.
Here is the data you need to log the contact and have it count in LO
Hi Gary,
Thanks for the reply - that helps me get a better understanding of how it
works. I have never entered the propagation mode into HRD, so I would have
to manually go through and update each entry (329 since Oct. 24), so I think
I am going to update and upload only my portable operation
o: zack.kd8...@hotmail.com; amsat-bb@amsat.org
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:52:00 -0600
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LoTW Questions
>
> The ARRL does a nice job of spelling out the parameters here:
> http://www.arrl.org/files/file/LoTW%20Instructions/N5JB.pdf
>
> The band that matters ( acc
Anybody notice a hang-up in LOTW yesterday or today?
I uploaded about 300 QSO's last night, they never showed up on
my count yet. So I uploaded them again this morning, same thing.
BTW I also uploaded all the RS-13 mode T QSO's and a bunch of
older AO-27 QSO's this week, about 4000 QSO's
It does happen sometimes. I wouldn't say that it hangs up but just slow
processing the logs.
I've been using LOTW since the beginning and have seen where it may take
anywhere from a few minutes to a day for the totals to update. The CQWW 160
contest ended Sunday night and the server/database
.
Jim
Ke4kol
-Original Message-
From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On
Behalf Of Zachary Beougher
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 9:45 PM
To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LoTW Questions
Hi Gary,
Thanks for the reply - that helps me get a better
Hi!
>> Is anyone else using HRD for logging? I am and after entering the mode as
> >Satellite, I have to load the database into Microsoft Access and edit the
> >mode field from Satellite to SAT. Then LOTW will accept it.
>
> Zach,
> You might want to use MS Access to mass change the field of th
-boun...@amsat.org] On
Behalf Of Zachary Beougher
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 9:45 PM
To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LoTW Questions
Hi Gary,
Thanks for the reply - that helps me get a better understanding of how it
works. I have never entered the propagation mode into HRD, s
Yes,
My logging program became confused and threw an error. All seems well now.
73,
Joe kk0sd
-Original Message-
From: k6yk [mailto:k...@juno.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 10:50 AM
To: k7trkra...@charter.net
Cc: aa...@arrl.net; gary_mayfi...@hotmail.com; zack.kd8...@hotmail.co
ept it.
Zach,
You might want to use MS Access to mass change the field of the mode to SAT.
Jim
Ke4kol
-Original Message-
From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On
Behalf Of Zachary Beougher
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 9:45 PM
To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Sub
Kevin,
I have been doing LOTW for quite a while. My side of our QSOs are
in there.
How you upload them is up to you. Most guys do them in batches. I
have been using the N3FJP logging software which makes it VERY easy, but I
have done it uploading ADIF files as well.
http://www
.org
> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 21:54:00 -0600
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW Help
>
> Kevin,
>
> I have been doing LOTW for quite a while. My side of our QSOs are
> in there.
>
> How you upload them is up to you. Most guys do them in batches. I
> have been using the N
Kevin,
Once you have received your certificate, you can upload QSOs in two ways.
You can enter them manually with the TQSL software (that's what I do) or, if
you are using a compatible logging program (if it generates Cabrillo files,
it is), you can do it automatically by uploading the Cabrill
John,
It is not hard, once you get it set up :) I have been doing it for
some time now. I always start folks here:
http://www.arrl.org/files/file/LoTW%20Instructions/N5JB.pdf
The two fields you really need and don't already have are:
Propagation Mode: SAT
Satellite Name: AO-7 (example)
Hi Larry!
> Any body know why LOTW will not accept HO-68 as a sat name?
ARRL has not added it to LOTW. Same with SO-67. All work on
LOTW was stopped in the push to get the new ARRL web site
running, but so far ARRL has not said anything else about adding
the new satellites to LOTW. Now that th
It needs to be updated by the LoTW folks. My understanding is that all the
IT resources have been occupied with the cutover to the new ARRL web site.
It wouldn't hurt to drop a polite note to the LoTW folks. Squeaky wheel and
all. ;)
Alan
WA4SCA
-Original Message-
From: amsat-bb-boun
Contacts through the ISS repeater also do not register
-Original Message-
From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On
Behalf Of Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 4:58 PM
To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LoTW & H
Very well thought out post John. I do have another question, though. Why
did VUCC take the rate hit when DXCC probably uses LOTW the most, and is now
very cheap compared to the VUCC. For example, I can make 1 DXCC submission
each year of 120 QSOs for $12. That covers any endorsements I get on my
ce to those who want to use it?
73,
Jeff WB3JFS
- Original Message -
From: "John Geiger"
To: "John Papay"
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 12:44 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW & VUCC Discussion
> Very well thought out post John. I do have anot
The cost for "credits" for LOTW DXCC filings is:
0-49 $.25/each
50-99 $.225/each
100-249 $.20/each
250-499 $.175/each
500-$.15/each
LOTW for VUCC is $.16/credit no matter how many you submit.
If you submit 100 credits for DXCC, it's $20 for the qso's.
If you submit 100 credits for VUCC, it's
y, January 25, 2011 10:08 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW & VUCC Discussion
> The cost for "credits" for LOTW DXCC filings is:
> 0-49 $.25/each
> 50-99 $.225/each
> 100-249 $.20/each
> 250-499 $.175/each
> 500- $.15/each
>
> LOTW for VUCC is $.16/credit no m
On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 09:00 +, P.H. wrote:
> I'm trying to validate my callsign on LOTW however to do this, as I am
> outside the US I need to mail some supporting documents. The help file
> directs me to https://www.arrl.org/lotw/docreq however this url does
> not exist!
>
> Can anyone tell m
This is the correct URL: https://p1k.arrl.org/lotw/docreq
73
Glenn AA5PK
"P.H." wrote:
> I'm trying to validate my callsign on LOTW however to do this, as I am
> outside the US I need to mail some supporting documents. The help file
> directs me to https://www.arrl.org/lotw/docreq however t
Thanks Glenn
73
Pete
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Glenn AA5PK wrote:
> This is the correct URL: https://p1k.arrl.org/lotw/docreq
> 73
> Glenn AA5PK
>
> "P.H." wrote:
>> I'm trying to validate my callsign on LOTW however to do this, as I am
>> outside the US I need to mail some support
How about the ISS repeater?
73,
Joe kk0sd
-Original Message-
From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On
Behalf Of John Boudreau
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 4:46 PM
To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] LoTW and HO-68
It seems that ARRL finally brough
Hi Bill!
> I just upload several hundred sat contacts to LOTW. Many matches were
> returned,
> BUT many of them were credited for "VUCC 144 mhz" or "VUCC 432 mhz" and NOT
> for "VUCC Satellite", which is how they should be credited.
>
> Does this mean that the person on the other side of the QSO
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
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
To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Sent: Mon, February 21, 2011 11:19:29 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW - improperly code
Bill,
> 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 think the queries they use for VUCC "account
M,
You probably had already worked and been credited for the grids of the contacts
that were blank in the VUCC column.
What were you using before the Elk?
B
--- On Mon, 2/21/11, Marvin Tamez wrote:
From: Marvin Tamez
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW - improperly coded satellite contacts
Bill, all of my matches, besides the 3 blanks, are coming back VUCC SAT. Maybe
someone else can answer the why yours are coming back VUCC144 or 432?? Not sure
where the imput error is, if there is one! Maybe the Propagation is being
recorded as 144 or 432 enstead of "SAT" Sorry can't be of more
Reid,
I emailed the ARRL and was told not to expect HO-68 support anytime soon, as
they are "too busy working on the new web page" to update the software.
73, Bill NZ5N
> From: Reid Crowe
> Subject: [amsat-bb] LoTW Support of HO-68
> To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
> Message-ID: <4bc225b3.8090...@gma
Reid,
Although LoTW support is not in my baliwick, it is inconceivable that it and
other recently launched satellites will not eventually be supported. Hoewever,
one hundred percent of ARRL IT department resources are committed to the launch
of the renovated web site at this time.
It will c
It has rejected mine. As well as ISS "repeater" and SO-67 contacts.
73,
Joe kk0sd
-Original Message-
From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On
Behalf Of Reid Crowe
Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2010 2:41 PM
To: amsat-bb@amsat.org
Subject: [amsat-bb] LoTW Support o
Hi Joe,
For RS-10/11, I'd recommend just using RS-10. I don't recall ever hearing the
"11" side of that bird on during the several years that I worked it.
They did a lot of switching around of RS-12 and 13, especially towards the end
of its life, so that one will be harder to select.
Greg K
- Original Message -
From: "Gary "Joe" Mayfield"
To: "'AMSAT'"
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 9:36 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] LOTW Satellites from the Old Days
> One of my winter projects is to get all of my OSCAR contacts back to 1989
> in LOTW. Unfortunately, my older logs are not avail
From: Bob- W7LRD
To: i8cvs
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2012 7:51 AM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW Satellites from the Old Days
Hi Domenico..Just wondering...did we every work on AO-40?
73 Bob
Message-
From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On
Behalf Of i8cvs
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2012 12:35 AM
To: Gary "Joe" Mayfield; 'AMSAT'
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW Satellites from the Old Days
- Original Message -
From: "
> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW Satellites from the Old Days
>
> Domenico,
>
> The recordings sound neat.
>
> I would have not known at the time of the QSO if I were talking on RS-10 or
> RS-11. As you know they were multiple satellites, but physically connected
> toget
Op 8-1-2012 15:07, Gary "Joe" Mayfield schreef:
Domenico,
The recordings sound neat.
I would have not known at the time of the QSO if I were talking on RS-10 or
RS-11. As you know they were multiple satellites, but physically connected
together as one orbiting object, they may have even had on
- Original Message -
From: "Andre"
To:
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2012 7:57 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LOTW Satellites from the Old Days
> Op 8-1-2012 15:07, Gary "Joe" Mayfield schreef:
> > Domenico,
> >
> > The recordings sound neat.
> >
55 matches
Mail list logo
