[amsat-bb] Re: LOTW - improperly coded satellite contacts?

Bill Dzurilla billdz.geo at yahoo.com
Mon Feb 21 09:19:29 PST 2011

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 it, as LOTW demands perfection.  The slightest error (e.g., writing vo-52 instead of VO-52, AO51 instead of AO-51) and the entry is rejected.

73, Bill NZ5N
> Most likely, the other station didn't include one or both
> of the fields
> used to mark a QSO as a satellite QSO (Propagation Mode,
> Satellite
> Name).  I've seen this on a handful of QSOs I've
> uploaded in the past
> few weeks.
> > Anyone know how this is handled?
> Assuming your log has all the necessary fields for a
> satellite QSO (all
> of the QSLs I've gotten from you are showing as satellite
> QSOs, so I
> don't think your logs are missing anything), there is only
> one way to fix
> this - the other station has to upload the QSO record(s)
> again, this time
> making sure those additional ADIF fields are in their
> log.  As long as the
> other QSO details like date, time, your call, etc. are the
> same, the new
> upload replaces what was originally uploaded.
> If the other station's log has the satellite-related
> fields, then an e-mail to
> lotw-help @ arrl.org is necessary.  There could be
> errors in how ARRL's
> database queries run to match up QSO records and make
> will not fix problems with other stations' log uploads, and
> everything has
> to be in there correctly in order to use the resulting QSLs
> toward awards.


More information about the AMSAT-BB mailing list