December 2005 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:13395] Re: LoTW
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 09 Dec '05

09 Dec '05

Nice score, Joel. For a non-contest data point, so far 24.2% of my February VP2V/K1ZZ QSOs (385 out of 1590) have been confirmed via LoTW. A few more show up every week. Dave K1ZZ ________________________________ From: Joel Harrison [mailto:w5zn@arrl.org] Sent: Thu 12/8/2005 8:51 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:13387] LoTW Has LoTW become popular? This past weekend I worked 1046 Q's in the ARRL 160 meter contest. Sunday afternoon when I finished my log and sent it in, I also imported the contest log into my station log, then uploaded the updated file to my LoTW account. I immediately had 22 LoTW QSL's from contest QSO's with an hour left in the contest (of course, 160 was dead then). Last night, just three days after the contest, I have 122 LoTW QSL's from contest QSO's. I think LoTW is a keeper, and the expansion needs to continue! 73 Joel W5ZN

1 0

[arrl-odv:13394] Re: LoTW
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 09 Dec '05

09 Dec '05

Jim, we agree on the need to greatly expand overseas participation. It is indeed a bit more bureaucratic for amateurs outside the US to register for LoTW, for the reason you cite: to maintain the integrity of the confirmation process. We can verify an FCC licensee's license status directly from FCC data. In most cases we can't do that for others. If we stopped requiring copies of licenses we would need some other system for verification such as trusted agents overseas. The principal problem in encouraging overseas participation has been the language barrier. We've made some headway in getting explanations of how to sign up for LoTW disseminated in languages other than English. A second issue is, of course, the need to add more awards. If you can only use LoTW credits for DXCC it isn't interesting to upload your US, German, Japanese, etc. QSOs. LoTW was never intended to completely replace the exchange of QSL cards. A QSL exchange after one's first QSO should still be the standard courtesy. 73, Dave K1ZZ ________________________________ From: Joel Harrison [mailto:w5zn@arrl.org] Sent: Fri 12/9/2005 1:07 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:13393] Re: LoTW Thanks for the clarification, Jim. 73 Joel -----Original Message----- From: Jim Weaver,K8JE [mailto:k8je@arrl.org] Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 9:41 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:13392] Re: LoTW Joel, My wording was less than totally clear. What I was trying to say is that it is not nearly so easy as I understand for many overseas DXers to register to use LoTW as it is for us . . . and some others. The issue, again as I understand it, is maintaining the integrity of LoTW as part of the DXCC program. I, too, have received many LoTW "acknowledgments," but to meet the ultimate goal for this innovative program, we need to get many, many additional overseas DXers signed up. Verstehen sie? Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director 5065 Bethany Rd., Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org; Tel: 513-459-0142 ARRL Great Lakes Division ARRL, the Reason Amateur Radio is! Members, the Reason ARRL is!

1 0

[arrl-odv:13393] Re: LoTW
by Joel Harrison 09 Dec '05

09 Dec '05

Thanks for the clarification, Jim. 73 Joel -----Original Message----- From: Jim Weaver,K8JE [mailto:k8je@arrl.org] Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 9:41 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:13392] Re: LoTW Joel, My wording was less than totally clear. What I was trying to say is that it is not nearly so easy as I understand for many overseas DXers to register to use LoTW as it is for us . . . and some others. The issue, again as I understand it, is maintaining the integrity of LoTW as part of the DXCC program. I, too, have received many LoTW "acknowledgments," but to meet the ultimate goal for this innovative program, we need to get many, many additional overseas DXers signed up. Verstehen sie? Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director 5065 Bethany Rd., Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org; Tel: 513-459-0142 ARRL Great Lakes Division ARRL, the Reason Amateur Radio is! Members, the Reason ARRL is!

1 0

[arrl-odv:13392] Re: LoTW
by Jim Weaver,K8JE 09 Dec '05

09 Dec '05

Joel, My wording was less than totally clear. What I was trying to say is that it is not nearly so easy as I understand for many overseas DXers to register to use LoTW as it is for us . . . and some others. The issue, again as I understand it, is maintaining the integrity of LoTW as part of the DXCC program. I, too, have received many LoTW "acknowledgments," but to meet the ultimate goal for this innovative program, we need to get many, many additional overseas DXers signed up. Verstehen sie? Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director 5065 Bethany Rd., Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org; Tel: 513-459-0142 ARRL Great Lakes Division ARRL, the Reason Amateur Radio is! Members, the Reason ARRL is! -----Original Message----- From: Jim Weaver,K8JE [mailto:k8je@arrl.org] Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 9:55 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:13390] Re: LoTW I'm very pleased over the success of LoTW as well as with its use. The next major step would be to enhance the ability of DX stations to be able to register to use it. I understand a few steps have been taken (e.g. certifying some officials in foreign organizations to register overseas DXers in LoTW). I think we need to continue to seek new, creative ways to enroll vastly larger numbers of foreign DXers in LoTW to expand greatly its use and usefulness while maintaining the credibility of the DXCC operation. This, it seems to me, is the overall challenge. One "shortcoming" of LoTW in some people's minds seems concurrently to be one of its strengths. No QSLs are needed. The fact that no QSLs are required in the operation of LoTW does not, of course, preclude exchanging them, but I wonder if it would be desirable somehow to link or at least associate LoTW with an optional exchange of electronic QSLs. This would maintain the cost-containing aspect of LoTW while acknowledging the desire many people have for exchanging QSLs. We could even consider a collaborative effort with e-QSL. (God, forgive me the thought!) Just some off-hand thinking for what, if anything, it may be worth. Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director 5065 Bethany Rd., Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org; Tel: 513-459-0142 ARRL Great Lakes Division ARRL, the Reason Amateur Radio is! Members, the Reason ARRL is! -----Original Message----- From: Tom Frenaye [mailto:frenaye@pcnet.com] Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 6:24 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:13388] Re: LoTW At 03:51 PM 12/8/2005, you wrote: >Has LoTW become popular? I hear HC8N and 5J1W (NN1N) had significant confirmations when they submitted their LOTW logs from CQWW CW. In the 20% range. Last time I looked, I had about 6-8% of my 3100 CQWW M/S QSOs confirmed. Still - it's successful without a whole lot of energy on our part - it'll be great to have WAS included for awards submission by the end of the year. And we've yet to tie into awards from other organizations. -- Tom ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

[arrl-odv:13391] Re: LoTW
by Joel Harrison 09 Dec '05

09 Dec '05

Jim, I don't understand what you mean by making it available to overseas DX'ers. I've received several DXCC credits already from overseas stations that are already have LoTW accounts set up. Joel -----Original Message----- From: Jim Weaver,K8JE [mailto:k8je@arrl.org] Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 8:55 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:13390] Re: LoTW I'm very pleased over the success of LoTW as well as with its use. The next major step would be to enhance the ability of DX stations to be able to register to use it. I understand a few steps have been taken (e.g. certifying some officials in foreign organizations to register overseas DXers in LoTW). I think we need to continue to seek new, creative ways to enroll vastly larger numbers of foreign DXers in LoTW to expand greatly its use and usefulness while maintaining the credibility of the DXCC operation. This, it seems to me, is the overall challenge. One "shortcoming" of LoTW in some people's minds seems concurrently to be one of its strengths. No QSLs are needed. The fact that no QSLs are required in the operation of LoTW does not, of course, preclude exchanging them, but I wonder if it would be desirable somehow to link or at least associate LoTW with an optional exchange of electronic QSLs. This would maintain the cost-containing aspect of LoTW while acknowledging the desire many people have for exchanging QSLs. We could even consider a collaborative effort with e-QSL. (God, forgive me the thought!) Just some off-hand thinking for what, if anything, it may be worth. Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director 5065 Bethany Rd., Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org; Tel: 513-459-0142 ARRL Great Lakes Division ARRL, the Reason Amateur Radio is! Members, the Reason ARRL is! ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

[arrl-odv:13390] Re: LoTW
by Jim Weaver,K8JE 09 Dec '05

09 Dec '05

I'm very pleased over the success of LoTW as well as with its use. The next major step would be to enhance the ability of DX stations to be able to register to use it. I understand a few steps have been taken (e.g. certifying some officials in foreign organizations to register overseas DXers in LoTW). I think we need to continue to seek new, creative ways to enroll vastly larger numbers of foreign DXers in LoTW to expand greatly its use and usefulness while maintaining the credibility of the DXCC operation. This, it seems to me, is the overall challenge. One "shortcoming" of LoTW in some people's minds seems concurrently to be one of its strengths. No QSLs are needed. The fact that no QSLs are required in the operation of LoTW does not, of course, preclude exchanging them, but I wonder if it would be desirable somehow to link or at least associate LoTW with an optional exchange of electronic QSLs. This would maintain the cost-containing aspect of LoTW while acknowledging the desire many people have for exchanging QSLs. We could even consider a collaborative effort with e-QSL. (God, forgive me the thought!) Just some off-hand thinking for what, if anything, it may be worth. Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director 5065 Bethany Rd., Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org; Tel: 513-459-0142 ARRL Great Lakes Division ARRL, the Reason Amateur Radio is! Members, the Reason ARRL is! -----Original Message----- From: Tom Frenaye [mailto:frenaye@pcnet.com] Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 6:24 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:13388] Re: LoTW At 03:51 PM 12/8/2005, you wrote: >Has LoTW become popular? I hear HC8N and 5J1W (NN1N) had significant confirmations when they submitted their LOTW logs from CQWW CW. In the 20% range. Last time I looked, I had about 6-8% of my 3100 CQWW M/S QSOs confirmed. Still - it's successful without a whole lot of energy on our part - it'll be great to have WAS included for awards submission by the end of the year. And we've yet to tie into awards from other organizations. -- Tom ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

[arrl-odv:13389] Re: LoTW
by Kramer, Harold, WJ1B 09 Dec '05

09 Dec '05

We are still on target to have LOTW WAS by the end of the year! Harold Harold Kramer, WJ1B Chief Operating Officer ARRL - ARRL - The National Association for Amateur Radio 225 Main Street Newington , CT 06410 860 594 0220 www.arrl.org ________________________________ From: Tom Frenaye [mailto:frenaye@pcnet.com] Sent: Thu 12/8/2005 6:23 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:13388] Re: LoTW At 03:51 PM 12/8/2005, you wrote: >Has LoTW become popular? I hear HC8N and 5J1W (NN1N) had significant confirmations when they submitted their LOTW logs from CQWW CW. In the 20% range. Last time I looked, I had about 6-8% of my 3100 CQWW M/S QSOs confirmed. Still - it's successful without a whole lot of energy on our part - it'll be great to have WAS included for awards submission by the end of the year. And we've yet to tie into awards from other organizations. -- Tom ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

[arrl-odv:13388] Re: LoTW
by Tom Frenaye 08 Dec '05

08 Dec '05

At 03:51 PM 12/8/2005, you wrote: >Has LoTW become popular? I hear HC8N and 5J1W (NN1N) had significant confirmations when they submitted their LOTW logs from CQWW CW. In the 20% range. Last time I looked, I had about 6-8% of my 3100 CQWW M/S QSOs confirmed. Still - it's successful without a whole lot of energy on our part - it'll be great to have WAS included for awards submission by the end of the year. And we've yet to tie into awards from other organizations. -- Tom ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

[arrl-odv:13387] LoTW
by Joel Harrison 08 Dec '05

08 Dec '05

Has LoTW become popular? This past weekend I worked 1046 Q's in the ARRL 160 meter contest. Sunday afternoon when I finished my log and sent it in, I also imported the contest log into my station log, then uploaded the updated file to my LoTW account. I immediately had 22 LoTW QSL's from contest QSO's with an hour left in the contest (of course, 160 was dead then). Last night, just three days after the contest, I have 122 LoTW QSL's from contest QSO's. I think LoTW is a keeper, and the expansion needs to continue! 73 Joel W5ZN

1 0

[arrl-odv:13386] Final 2005 Expense Reimbursement Reports
by Shelley, Barry, N1VXY 08 Dec '05

08 Dec '05

We are fast approaching the end of another year and it's time for the annual reminder about filing final expense reimbursement reports for 2005. We would appreciate your mailing all expense reports for 2005 for receipt at Headquarters no later than Monday, January 9, 2006. This will insure that we have all the appropriate information to include in the financial reports we present to the Board at the January meeting. As ususal, there will be invoices for proper 2005 expenses that you will not have by that date (e.g. telephone bills) and we will accept estimates of those expenses so that we may include them in the year-end numbers. Please e-mail those estimates directly to me before January 9th as well. Thank you in advance for your help in this matter. 73, Barry, N1VXY

1 0