[DXBase] More 2005 LoTW import stuff

Sun, 2 May 2004 16:30:41 -0400

Stu,
Well, we along with many others have been discovering that LoTW currently
does not do very much in the way of data content validation. It seems to
accept just about anything. Someone told us that they will be doing
something about Canadian info being placed in the wrong ADIF field.
Also, the Alaskan county situation is probably out of control because the
county hunter program does not recognize Alaskan counties but instead
represents Alaska as four geographic regions. As we see it, there are only
a few possible solutions:
1. County Hunter Award folks need to start using Alaskan counties.
2. LoTW submissions need to use the region instead of the Alaskan County.
3. Just add the Alaskan counties to DXbase but this distorts the county
award info.
4. Just forget it... hahahahah
Quite frankly, we don't have the answer but we did code DXbase in such a way
that the county inconsistencies between the County Hunter Award and LoTW do
not hurt anything in DXbase.
Cheers,
Courtney
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stuart Santelmann KC1F" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 4:17 PM
Subject: [DXBase] More 2005 LoTW import stuff
> Not to make everyone's head explode, or bore everyone, but here are the
> results of my importing my .adi file from LoTW:
>> I had 4791 good domestic QSLs from LoTW (I'm an HF contester) out of about
> 126K QSOs that I've put onto LoTW from domestic operations and
Dxpeditions.
> My FS/KC1F logs are on LoTW from 1989/90, BTW, if anyone needs them. Out
of
> the 4791 imported to DXB, I got 156 "warnings", where the QSO in DXbase
was
> updated to show LoTW confirmed, but where there was some kind of data
error
> (I'm sure it's on the League's or someone else's end - I trust Jack and
the
> crew !).
>> All of the 156 QSOs appear to be contest QSOs, made by CT, if that
matters.
> The great majority appear to be where DXbase was looking for a "state"
from
> a Canadian station, with predictable results. All of the rest, except for
> about 5, were county errors for Alaskan stations (KL7AC, KL7RA, KL1V, WL7M
> and NL7G have indicated that they are in counties not shown in DXbase - if
> anyone cares I can give you the details), and the remaining few were
> apparently similar county errors from Virginia and a couple of other
states.
> "Digital" QSOs seem to be disproportionately represented in the errors.
txt
> file.
>> Finally, in the cases where the county error was noted, LoTW did NOT cause
> DXbase to change the county in my DXbase log, I guess because it wasn't
> obvious what to change it to.
>> Not sure what all of this means, but it may be of some value to someone...
>>> Stu KC1F
>>> _______________________________________________
> DXBase Reflector - Please visit us on the web at www.dxbase.com
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To UNSUBSCRIBE please visit:
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dxbase
>