Why not use 'em all? (LoTW, eQSL, ClubLog, hard card)
Although hard QSLs have a nice physical presence, I can only say a handful of
the hard cards I get are not computer generated, most also for award purposes.
Of the hundreds that roll in, maybe a half dozen have a neat design, or better
yet
Why not do both, Eddy...I enjoy QSL cards, too...but LOTW has not prevented
me from getting the QSL cards. It has relieved me of the burden of a big
part of card checking for the DXCC awards that I want. While it is true
that if you confirm on LOTW someone may not initiate sending a card to you
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 9:05 AM, gedk...@aol.com wrote:
It's simple why some don't use LOTH it's called $ $ $ $
___
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
It doesn't cost anything to upload your log to LOTW. The only time $ $ $
$ is a factor is if
Like VE3XZ I like real cards. But, striking out for my goal of over 300
on each HF band, less 160 where I don't have enough goo nor enough
years, I concluded the expense could be better directed toward making
the QSO, than confirming it.
My logger (DXLabSuite) shows in its packet application
LotW is great for topband as it removes the PIA factor from getting a qsl card
credited for DXCC. The extra steps involved for topband and deleted entities to
be checked (send to league hq or wait for a convention with DXCC hq staff
attending) is outdated, inconvenient, and an affront to the
It's easy enough to upload logs and take care of
the Ham on the other end who may not use real QSLs.
Thank you Julius.
I am known as a dinosaur to my friends. I do not readily adopt new
technologies and ways of doing things. But LoTW is my salvation, lest I leave
the hobby altogether. I
I have been reading the responses to my previous post on LOTW and find some of
them curiously interesting. First I am at a point in my life that I wont want
any more clutter. Second and more importantly I have made enough contacts over
the years (46 come september) and sent a lot of cards
The only time $ $ $ $ is a factor is if someone chooses to use a
LOTW verified QSO for award purposes.
$ $ $ $ applies to well known Dollar Bill Collectors and so called
QSL Managers that hold confirmations hostage for cash.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 2/17/2012 10:00 AM, Kenneth Grimm wrote:
On 17/02/2012 9:16 AM, Eddy Swynar wrote:
...But what if the ARRL, and others, was to suddenly announce that
they'd no longer issue hard copy certificates---virtual awards only,
viewable on-line...? I wonder if that might cool one's enthusiasm for
ANY paper-chasing. We now have virtual QSL
On 02/17/2012 09:16 AM, Eddy Swynar wrote:
Great! But what if the ARRL, and others, was to suddenly announce that they'd
no longer issue hard copy certificates---virtual awards only, viewable
on-line...? I wonder if that might cool one's enthusiasm for ANY
paper-chasing. We now have
Hi Eddy,
One could argue when those quaint lowfer beacons first started that tape loops
and the like were exotic. I do remember tape loops becoming a big deal in
contesting, but for a newbie, they presented a cost obstacle. One can say the
same for RTTY back in the day.
Pining for the old
On 2012-02-17, at 11:01 AM, N1BUG wrote:
So by the same token, why would anyone deny the thrill of a LoTW
confirmation to a ham who may not be able to chase confirmations by more
traditional means? It costs nothing to upload to LoTW...
Hi Paul,
And therein lies the rub...!
Imagine if you
Logger32 will send and download your log to ARRL without you having to do a lot
of work, Click Click Click.
Spots are also high lighted as LOTW users
I worked an FK8 on 6 meters and he says:
For direct return postage to some countries, sorry but USD2 is not sufficient.
USD3 is OK. Euros are
Tree, you have done a great job with this list. I wish you much success in
your new job. Likewise, anything you can do to improve the chance of getting
Zone 22 would be greatly appreciated.
Other than a handful of contacts in the mid-1990's, I was new on 160 in October
2008. I don't
It's simple why some don't use LOTH it's called $ $ $ $
What are you possibly talking about? LOTW is FREE for all users. So is
logging software that makes is very easy to use. I use DXKeeper for my
main log, which uploads to LOTW and eQSL at the push of a couple of
buttons. DXKeeper is
It has been asked: Why don't more people use LOTW?
I put it off using LOTW for years because I feared, incorrectly, that it would
be difficult to set up and use. Just last week, I finally got up the nerve to
try it. Much to my pleasant surprise, LOTW was very easy to set up. So,
using
Don't forget,
Most libraries have PCs (paid for by the taxpayer- You)
and coffee shops, even McDonalds has free internet
available to upload logs using that old used flea market
laptop you bought :-))
jim / W1FMR
--- On Fri, 2/17/12, Jim Brown j...@audiosystemsgroup.com wrote:
From:
Some of the dxpeditions are allowing u to request a qsl on line with a PayPal
fee as an option of sending thru the mail. Its been very reasonable and
efficient to me when the option is there. I am also still getting lots of buro
qsls that were already confirmed on LOTW.
Sent from my iPhone
Where eQSL has been useful to me is the QSo's I didn't have in my pc log from 5
years ago when I had a paper log. I then see which of those I needed and it
turned out many were in LOTW too and I just needed to add my record for that
QSo's. That enabled me to harvest a dozen or so.
Sent from
As a matter of interest, my confirmed rate on LOTW is around 26% even though I
upload all logged QSOs. I think this method of confirming a QSO is really
great; however, with such a small percentage of hams using LOTW, it is still
necessary to send out paper to obtain cards for awards. This is
I am lucky (?) with a condo antenna and QRP on 160m there is
not much of a demand for my QSL :-(
But interesting to note that I received an LOTW confirmation
for a contact made back in 1982.
jim / W1FMR
___
Hi all,
...really bothering to getting 10-20 messages daily about the LOTW on
the
TB related mailing list. Sorry but I am thinking about unsubscribing
from there
cos the discussion is not devoted to the Topband technically focused
topics.
73 - Petr, OK1RP
I have operated a beacon on 186 kHz - - back in about 1999. I used a
HyTower for the vertical element and then a loading coil to get it to
match. Wait until you see what it takes to build a reasonable Q loading
coil at 630 meters !!!
Start saving 5 gallon plastic pails now and read a bit about
23 matches
Mail list logo
