Date   

Re: Logging

Jerry N9AVY
 

Joe:

On 20m anything less than 2 KW in qrp !  :-)

Jerry



From: "'ljl2002@...' joe_molon@... [070]" <070@...>
To: "070@..." <070@...>
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 3:04 PM
Subject: Re: [070] Logging

 
Jerry,

That will work if you are not trying for your ragchewers endorsement!
Joe
KA1PPV  #1482


On Thursday, February 25, 2016 4:02 PM, "Paul Butzi kg7stv@... [070]" <070@...> wrote:


 
So for the 24x7 award, a QSO cannot count toward more than one hour slot?

I only ask because my intuition would be that if you start a QSO on at, for example, 1445 and end it half an hour later at 1515 that QSO would have occurred in two different hour slots and count for both hour slots.

The description on the podxs070.com available endorsements page is ambiguous, as its worded “ Work each of the 168 (24*7) dayofweek-hour slots.

-p KG7STV
73, don’t forget to smile and have fun



On Feb 25, 2016, at 12:44 PM, David Westbrook dwestbrook@... [070] <070@...> wrote:


The only thing that uses TIME_OFF is the "Ragchewers 3/30" ...   All other endorsements use TIME_ON.

73!
--david
KJ4IZW

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Matthew King - KK4CPS mrk.twg@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 

I'm 99% sure that the checker looks at both start and stop times when it matters (i.e. Ragchewer award). 

The scorer, I believe, looks at start times. I'm not sure why folks have started doing the stop time, as that's never been accepted practice to the best of my limited knowledge.

I think also that many of the programs that say "logged at XX:XX MM/DD/YY" etc... are actually using the start time as the time logged, and just displaying the time the logging is occurring as a separate value. I can't swear to that, but I believe it's true.

Personally, I find that particular line or two of information to be the superfluous-est of superfluous, but that's just this guy's opinion.

Carry on with the QSO'n, y'all!

73

Matthew King
KK4CPS 070 #1708
PODXS 070 Club Executive Director

This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. 
www.avast.com



On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Jim Innis jinnis@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 
I have made probably 10 contacts over the last 10 years prior to 2016.

I was always taught that you logged the contact showing the time of the 
initial contact. Now I see stations logging the time as the time at the 
end of the contact.

Some of my qso's have been lengthy, and this makes my log time different 
from the other operators, and as a result no match found when logs uploaded.

So, what is the correct protocol for logging time? Have I been doing it 
wrong since I got my license (1974)?

Jim, K5SP











Re: Logging

Jerry N9AVY
 

I agree that STOP time is  wrong. It's when you tart the QSO that matters.  I knocked stop time from my logs. Think it may happen because people send the stop time at end of QSO in their macro and then it gets logged that way.  Is there really a need to even send time of QSO  since most of us can figure out when we made the QSO without any help ???

I don't see this happening in other modes (SSB/CW/RTTY).  Thinkis is digital thing newbies/lazies started,


Jerry  N9AVY



From: "Matthew King - KK4CPS mrk.twg@... [070]" <070@...>
To: 070@...
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: [070] Logging

 
I'm 99% sure that the checker looks at both start and stop times when it matters (i.e. Ragchewer award). 

The scorer, I believe, looks at start times. I'm not sure why folks have started doing the stop time, as that's never been accepted practice to the best of my limited knowledge.

I think also that many of the programs that say "logged at XX:XX MM/DD/YY" etc... are actually using the start time as the time logged, and just displaying the time the logging is occurring as a separate value. I can't swear to that, but I believe it's true.

Personally, I find that particular line or two of information to be the superfluous-est of superfluous, but that's just this guy's opinion.

Carry on with the QSO'n, y'all!

73

Matthew King
KK4CPS 070 #1708
PODXS 070 Club Executive Director

This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com



On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Jim Innis jinnis@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 
I have made probably 10 contacts over the last 10 years prior to 2016.

I was always taught that you logged the contact showing the time of the
initial contact. Now I see stations logging the time as the time at the
end of the contact.

Some of my qso's have been lengthy, and this makes my log time different
from the other operators, and as a result no match found when logs uploaded.

So, what is the correct protocol for logging time? Have I been doing it
wrong since I got my license (1974)?

Jim, K5SP





Re: Logging

ljl2002@att.net
 

Jerry,

That will work if you are not trying for your ragchewers endorsement!
Joe
KA1PPV  #1482


On Thursday, February 25, 2016 4:02 PM, "Paul Butzi kg7stv@... [070]" <070@...> wrote:


 
So for the 24x7 award, a QSO cannot count toward more than one hour slot?

I only ask because my intuition would be that if you start a QSO on at, for example, 1445 and end it half an hour later at 1515 that QSO would have occurred in two different hour slots and count for both hour slots.

The description on the podxs070.com available endorsements page is ambiguous, as its worded “ Work each of the 168 (24*7) dayofweek-hour slots.

-p KG7STV
73, don’t forget to smile and have fun



On Feb 25, 2016, at 12:44 PM, David Westbrook dwestbrook@... [070] <070@...> wrote:


The only thing that uses TIME_OFF is the "Ragchewers 3/30" ...   All other endorsements use TIME_ON.

73!
--david
KJ4IZW

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Matthew King - KK4CPS mrk.twg@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 

I'm 99% sure that the checker looks at both start and stop times when it matters (i.e. Ragchewer award). 

The scorer, I believe, looks at start times. I'm not sure why folks have started doing the stop time, as that's never been accepted practice to the best of my limited knowledge.

I think also that many of the programs that say "logged at XX:XX MM/DD/YY" etc... are actually using the start time as the time logged, and just displaying the time the logging is occurring as a separate value. I can't swear to that, but I believe it's true.

Personally, I find that particular line or two of information to be the superfluous-est of superfluous, but that's just this guy's opinion.

Carry on with the QSO'n, y'all!

73

Matthew King
KK4CPS 070 #1708
PODXS 070 Club Executive Director

This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. 
www.avast.com



On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Jim Innis jinnis@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 
I have made probably 10 contacts over the last 10 years prior to 2016.

I was always taught that you logged the contact showing the time of the 
initial contact. Now I see stations logging the time as the time at the 
end of the contact.

Some of my qso's have been lengthy, and this makes my log time different 
from the other operators, and as a result no match found when logs uploaded.

So, what is the correct protocol for logging time? Have I been doing it 
wrong since I got my license (1974)?

Jim, K5SP









Re: QRP Question

John Etling
 

OK, was not aware credit was given for working a /QRP even if I am not, am I interpreting that correctly? Seems to me that If that is correct, then I would already have the QRP endorsement… 

The KX3 is a QRP rig, (although I could work up to 10w). I am experimenting trying to get some QRP contacts. I see calls claiming QRP but have a real time convincing myself they are QRP when an 8 call in MI says they are  yet  booming in so loudly, poorly running AGC and wiping the waterfall.

For clarification purposes: I must have K3JAE/QRP as my call, and does it matter if the responding station is not QRP? And, obviously. running 5 watts or less on my end.

73’s de K3JAE
John Etling

K3JAE’s Weather Station


From: "David Westbrook dwestbrook@... [070]" <070@...>
Reply-To: <070@...>
Date: Thursday, 25 February 2016 at 14:42
To: <070@...>
Subject: Re: [070] QRP Question

 

Barry gets the gold star for "TX_PWR" :)

For the "QRP" sticker, need 1 QSO where your <TX_PWR> (that's the ADIF field) is >0 and <=5.

For the QRP Tri-Band,  need 3 QSOs total, each on a different band, each with a different callsign.
  And each qso needs to have    ( 0< TX_PWR <=5)  AND (  0

--david
KJ4IZW


On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:35 PM, boat.anchor@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 

John

If you use /QRP you will get a much higher response rate as stations tend to favour the /QRP.
You can also make sure your TX power is stated as 5W. This is an ADIF field.
Barry



---In 070@..., wrote :

Use it.  For example k4lea/qrp

Les k4lea 1746

On 2/25/2016 14:19, 'John Etling' john@... [070] wrote:
 

Stupid question maybe but in order to get QRP endorsements, does one have to have /QRP after their call? Or can it be placed in comments?

 

I have 2 QRP now (received my new KX3) and am working a few stations getting used to them. Uploaded to the checker and not getting QRP credits. I am NOT currently using the /QRP designator.

 

… I’m just sayin’

 

73 de K3JAE

John Etling

k3jae@...

070 #1820   LONP #321

PODXS 070 – Nobody Special – Just a Member

 

 

 




Re: Logging

Paul Butzi <kg7stv@...>
 

So for the 24x7 award, a QSO cannot count toward more than one hour slot?

I only ask because my intuition would be that if you start a QSO on at, for example, 1445 and end it half an hour later at 1515 that QSO would have occurred in two different hour slots and count for both hour slots.

The description on the podxs070.com available endorsements page is ambiguous, as its worded “ Work each of the 168 (24*7) dayofweek-hour slots.

-p KG7STV
73, don’t forget to smile and have fun



On Feb 25, 2016, at 12:44 PM, David Westbrook dwestbrook@... [070] <070@...> wrote:


The only thing that uses TIME_OFF is the "Ragchewers 3/30" ...   All other endorsements use TIME_ON.

73!
--david
KJ4IZW

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Matthew King - KK4CPS mrk.twg@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 

I'm 99% sure that the checker looks at both start and stop times when it matters (i.e. Ragchewer award). 

The scorer, I believe, looks at start times. I'm not sure why folks have started doing the stop time, as that's never been accepted practice to the best of my limited knowledge.

I think also that many of the programs that say "logged at XX:XX MM/DD/YY" etc... are actually using the start time as the time logged, and just displaying the time the logging is occurring as a separate value. I can't swear to that, but I believe it's true.

Personally, I find that particular line or two of information to be the superfluous-est of superfluous, but that's just this guy's opinion.

Carry on with the QSO'n, y'all!

73


Matthew King

KK4CPS 070 #1708

PODXS 070 Club Executive Director


This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. 
www.avast.com



On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Jim Innis jinnis@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 

I have made probably 10 contacts over the last 10 years prior to 2016.

I was always taught that you logged the contact showing the time of the 
initial contact. Now I see stations logging the time as the time at the 
end of the contact.

Some of my qso's have been lengthy, and this makes my log time different 
from the other operators, and as a result no match found when logs uploaded.

So, what is the correct protocol for logging time? Have I been doing it 
wrong since I got my license (1974)?

Jim, K5SP







Re: K8TOM, LONPer extraordinaire

ljl2002@att.net
 

Jerry & Group,

It's like my friend Forrest says...."It's like a box o' choclates."  "Ya never know what you'll get."
Joe
KA1PPV  #1482


On Thursday, February 25, 2016 3:56 PM, "'ljl2002@...' joe_molon@... [070]" <070@...> wrote:


 
You are a true trailblazer Tom.
CUL
Joe
KA1PPV  #1482


On Thursday, February 25, 2016 2:57 PM, "Jerry n9avy@... [070]" <070@...> wrote:


 
Probably distracted by work, etc, huh ?  :-)

jerry  n9avy



From: "Jim Innis jinnis@... [070]" <070@...>
To: 070@...
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: [070] K8TOM, LONPer extraordinaire

 
Ashamed of myself!  LONP#58 in 2007, and only have 250.

Jim K5SP

On 2/25/2016 11:34 AM, David Westbrook dwestbrook@... [070] wrote:
 
Here's the LONP leaderboard:
  http://www.podxs070.com/lonp/members-of-lonp

W3HF, NO8R, K8TOM are in class by themselves of 1100+ !!


The front page lists all recent achievements for all endorsements as well:

73!
--david
KJ4IZW

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:58 AM, WA4STO wa4sto@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 
Congrats to K8TOM for yet another LONP total. He now has 1153!

Phew!

73

Luck, WA4STO
PODXS 070 Awards Manager

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus










Re: N9AVY

Jerry N9AVY
 

Yes Alan, you're in the log !   Solid copy here in lower 48.  Must be QRM from those Ice Road Truckers, HI !

Jerry N9AVY



From: "asorum@... [070]" <070@...>
To: 070@...
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 2:23 PM
Subject: [070] N9AVY

 
Jerry - I did print you and answered back several times...

Alan WL7CG



Re: K8TOM, LONPer extraordinaire

ljl2002@att.net
 

You are a true trailblazer Tom.
CUL
Joe
KA1PPV  #1482


On Thursday, February 25, 2016 2:57 PM, "Jerry n9avy@... [070]" <070@...> wrote:


 
Probably distracted by work, etc, huh ?  :-)

jerry  n9avy



From: "Jim Innis jinnis@... [070]" <070@...>
To: 070@...
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: [070] K8TOM, LONPer extraordinaire

 
Ashamed of myself!  LONP#58 in 2007, and only have 250.

Jim K5SP

On 2/25/2016 11:34 AM, David Westbrook dwestbrook@... [070] wrote:
 
Here's the LONP leaderboard:
  http://www.podxs070.com/lonp/members-of-lonp

W3HF, NO8R, K8TOM are in class by themselves of 1100+ !!


The front page lists all recent achievements for all endorsements as well:

73!
--david
KJ4IZW

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:58 AM, WA4STO wa4sto@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 
Congrats to K8TOM for yet another LONP total. He now has 1153!

Phew!

73

Luck, WA4STO
PODXS 070 Awards Manager

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus








Re: Logging

David Westbrook
 

The only thing that uses TIME_OFF is the "Ragchewers 3/30" ...   All other endorsements use TIME_ON.

73!
--david
KJ4IZW

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Matthew King - KK4CPS mrk.twg@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 

I'm 99% sure that the checker looks at both start and stop times when it matters (i.e. Ragchewer award). 

The scorer, I believe, looks at start times. I'm not sure why folks have started doing the stop time, as that's never been accepted practice to the best of my limited knowledge.

I think also that many of the programs that say "logged at XX:XX MM/DD/YY" etc... are actually using the start time as the time logged, and just displaying the time the logging is occurring as a separate value. I can't swear to that, but I believe it's true.

Personally, I find that particular line or two of information to be the superfluous-est of superfluous, but that's just this guy's opinion.

Carry on with the QSO'n, y'all!

73


Matthew King

KK4CPS 070 #1708

PODXS 070 Club Executive Director


This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com



On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Jim Innis jinnis@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 

I have made probably 10 contacts over the last 10 years prior to 2016.

I was always taught that you logged the contact showing the time of the
initial contact. Now I see stations logging the time as the time at the
end of the contact.

Some of my qso's have been lengthy, and this makes my log time different
from the other operators, and as a result no match found when logs uploaded.

So, what is the correct protocol for logging time? Have I been doing it
wrong since I got my license (1974)?

Jim, K5SP




Re: Logging

Dan Morris - KZ3T
 

Totally agree Matt — I’m also not sure about the end time and you could also be right about the time is just the logging of the end of that contact.   

Ha, I used to have that superfluous stuff at the end of my macros also but I got wise (or a bit more knowledgeable maybe??) and got rid of that.   Even though I have been doing psk for a number of years now (since mid/late 2009) I’ve learned a lot and I still occasionally tweak my macros.  

Dan Morris   KZ3T   070-1065 LONP# 158




On Feb 25, 2016, at 3:38 PM, Matthew King - KK4CPS mrk.twg@... [070] <070@...> wrote:


I'm 99% sure that the checker looks at both start and stop times when it matters (i.e. Ragchewer award). 

The scorer, I believe, looks at start times. I'm not sure why folks have started doing the stop time, as that's never been accepted practice to the best of my limited knowledge.

I think also that many of the programs that say "logged at XX:XX MM/DD/YY" etc... are actually using the start time as the time logged, and just displaying the time the logging is occurring as a separate value. I can't swear to that, but I believe it's true.

Personally, I find that particular line or two of information to be the superfluous-est of superfluous, but that's just this guy's opinion.

Carry on with the QSO'n, y'all!

73


Matthew King

KK4CPS 070 #1708

PODXS 070 Club Executive Director


This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. 
www.avast.com



On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Jim Innis jinnis@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 

I have made probably 10 contacts over the last 10 years prior to 2016.

I was always taught that you logged the contact showing the time of the 
initial contact. Now I see stations logging the time as the time at the 
end of the contact.

Some of my qso's have been lengthy, and this makes my log time different 
from the other operators, and as a result no match found when logs uploaded.

So, what is the correct protocol for logging time? Have I been doing it 
wrong since I got my license (1974)?

Jim, K5SP





Re: QRP Question

David Westbrook
 

Barry gets the gold star for "TX_PWR" :)

For the "QRP" sticker, need 1 QSO where your (that's the ADIF field) is >0 and <=5.

For the QRP Tri-Band,  need 3 QSOs total, each on a different band, each with a different callsign.
  And each qso needs to have    ( 0< TX_PWR <=5)  AND (  0

--david
KJ4IZW


On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:35 PM, boat.anchor@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 

John

If you use /QRP you will get a much higher response rate as stations tend to favour the /QRP.
You can also make sure your TX power is stated as 5W. This is an ADIF field.
Barry



---In 070@..., wrote :

Use it.  For example k4lea/qrp

Les k4lea 1746

On 2/25/2016 14:19, 'John Etling' john@... [070] wrote:
 

Stupid question maybe but in order to get QRP endorsements, does one have to have /QRP after their call? Or can it be placed in comments?

 

I have 2 QRP now (received my new KX3) and am working a few stations getting used to them. Uploaded to the checker and not getting QRP credits. I am NOT currently using the /QRP designator.

 

… I’m just sayin’

 

73 de K3JAE

John Etling

k3jae@...

070 #1820   LONP #321

PODXS 070 – Nobody Special – Just a Member

 

 

 




Re: Logging

Matthew King - KK4CPS <mrk.twg@...>
 

I'm 99% sure that the checker looks at both start and stop times when it matters (i.e. Ragchewer award). 

The scorer, I believe, looks at start times. I'm not sure why folks have started doing the stop time, as that's never been accepted practice to the best of my limited knowledge.

I think also that many of the programs that say "logged at XX:XX MM/DD/YY" etc... are actually using the start time as the time logged, and just displaying the time the logging is occurring as a separate value. I can't swear to that, but I believe it's true.

Personally, I find that particular line or two of information to be the superfluous-est of superfluous, but that's just this guy's opinion.

Carry on with the QSO'n, y'all!

73


Matthew King

KK4CPS 070 #1708

PODXS 070 Club Executive Director


This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com



On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Jim Innis jinnis@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 

I have made probably 10 contacts over the last 10 years prior to 2016.

I was always taught that you logged the contact showing the time of the
initial contact. Now I see stations logging the time as the time at the
end of the contact.

Some of my qso's have been lengthy, and this makes my log time different
from the other operators, and as a result no match found when logs uploaded.

So, what is the correct protocol for logging time? Have I been doing it
wrong since I got my license (1974)?

Jim, K5SP



Re: Logging

David Westbrook
 

eQSL is 1 hour:



To the general question of "which should i log?",  I would say "both"  :)   and that the software should being recording a start and end date,  which is supported in ADIF as the QSO_DATE, TIME_ON,  QSO_DATE_OFF, TIME_OFF  fields.

73!
--david
KJ4IZW




On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Dan Morris dbmorris315@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 

Jim - I see the same thing during or at the end of the QSO and it appears that a lot of stations are using the end of the transmission as their times of contact.  With that said I believe, unless the QSO is extremely long, that LoTW and eQSL both use somewhere around a 20 or 30 minute leeway on the times of contact.


Dan Morris   KZ3T   070-1065 LONP# 158




On Feb 25, 2016, at 2:54 PM, Jim Innis jinnis@... [070] <070@...> wrote:

I have made probably 10 contacts over the last 10 years prior to 2016.

I was always taught that you logged the contact showing the time of the 
initial contact. Now I see stations logging the time as the time at the 
end of the contact.

Some of my qso's have been lengthy, and this makes my log time different 
from the other operators, and as a result no match found when logs uploaded.

So, what is the correct protocol for logging time? Have I been doing it 
wrong since I got my license (1974)?

Jim, K5SP




Re: QRP Question

boat.anchor@...
 

John
If you use /QRP you will get a much higher response rate as stations tend to favour the /QRP.
You can also make sure your TX power is stated as 5W. This is an ADIF field.
Barry



---In 070@..., <kd4sfd2@...> wrote :

Use it.  For example k4lea/qrp

Les k4lea 1746

On 2/25/2016 14:19, 'John Etling' john@... [070] wrote:
 

Stupid question maybe but in order to get QRP endorsements, does one have to have /QRP after their call? Or can it be placed in comments?

 

I have 2 QRP now (received my new KX3) and am working a few stations getting used to them. Uploaded to the checker and not getting QRP credits. I am NOT currently using the /QRP designator.

 

… I’m just sayin’

 

73 de K3JAE

John Etling

k3jae@...

070 #1820   LONP #321

PODXS 070 – Nobody Special – Just a Member

 

 

 



Re: QRP Question

John Etling
 

Thanks Les.

… I’m just saying’

73 de K3JAE
John Etling
070 #1820   LONP #321
PODXS 070 – Nobody Special – Just a Member

From: "Les Alverson kd4sfd2@... [070]" <070@...>
Reply-To: <070@...>
Date: Thursday, 25 February 2016 at 14:17
To: <070@...>
Subject: Re: [070] QRP Question

 

Use it.  For example k4lea/qrp

Les k4lea 1746

On 2/25/2016 14:19, 'John Etling' john@... [070] wrote:
 

Stupid question maybe but in order to get QRP endorsements, does one have to have /QRP after their call? Or can it be placed in comments?

 

I have 2 QRP now (received my new KX3) and am working a few stations getting used to them. Uploaded to the checker and not getting QRP credits. I am NOT currently using the /QRP designator.

 

… I’m just sayin’

 

73 de K3JAE

John Etling

k3jae@...

070 #1820   LONP #321

PODXS 070 – Nobody Special – Just a Member

 

 

 



Re: Logging

Dan Morris - KZ3T
 

Jim - I see the same thing during or at the end of the QSO and it appears that a lot of stations are using the end of the transmission as their times of contact.  With that said I believe, unless the QSO is extremely long, that LoTW and eQSL both use somewhere around a 20 or 30 minute leeway on the times of contact.

Dan Morris   KZ3T   070-1065 LONP# 158




On Feb 25, 2016, at 2:54 PM, Jim Innis jinnis@... [070] <070@...> wrote:

I have made probably 10 contacts over the last 10 years prior to 2016.

I was always taught that you logged the contact showing the time of the 
initial contact. Now I see stations logging the time as the time at the 
end of the contact.

Some of my qso's have been lengthy, and this makes my log time different 
from the other operators, and as a result no match found when logs uploaded.

So, what is the correct protocol for logging time? Have I been doing it 
wrong since I got my license (1974)?

Jim, K5SP



N9AVY

Alan Sorum WL7CG
 

Jerry - I did print you and answered back several times...


Alan WL7CG


Re: QRP Question

Les Alverson <kd4sfd2@...>
 

Use it.  For example k4lea/qrp

Les k4lea 1746

On 2/25/2016 14:19, 'John Etling' john@... [070] wrote:
 

Stupid question maybe but in order to get QRP endorsements, does one have to have /QRP after their call? Or can it be placed in comments?

 

I have 2 QRP now (received my new KX3) and am working a few stations getting used to them. Uploaded to the checker and not getting QRP credits. I am NOT currently using the /QRP designator.

 

… I’m just sayin’

 

73 de K3JAE

John Etling

k3jae@...

070 #1820   LONP #321

PODXS 070 – Nobody Special – Just a Member

 

 

 



Re: Logging

Jerry N9AVY
 

I log time of QSO start.  It's always worked for me.

LOTW  will give youa 30 minute window each side of your log time.


Jerry  N9AVY



From: "Jim Innis jinnis@... [070]" <070@...>
To: 070@...
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 1:54 PM
Subject: [070] Logging

 
I have made probably 10 contacts over the last 10 years prior to 2016.

I was always taught that you logged the contact showing the time of the
initial contact. Now I see stations logging the time as the time at the
end of the contact.

Some of my qso's have been lengthy, and this makes my log time different
from the other operators, and as a result no match found when logs uploaded.

So, what is the correct protocol for logging time? Have I been doing it
wrong since I got my license (1974)?

Jim, K5SP




Re: K8TOM, LONPer extraordinaire

Jerry N9AVY
 

Probably distracted by work, etc, huh ?  :-)

jerry  n9avy



From: "Jim Innis jinnis@... [070]" <070@...>
To: 070@...
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: [070] K8TOM, LONPer extraordinaire

 
Ashamed of myself!  LONP#58 in 2007, and only have 250.

Jim K5SP

On 2/25/2016 11:34 AM, David Westbrook dwestbrook@... [070] wrote:
 
Here's the LONP leaderboard:
  http://www.podxs070.com/lonp/members-of-lonp

W3HF, NO8R, K8TOM are in class by themselves of 1100+ !!


The front page lists all recent achievements for all endorsements as well:

73!
--david
KJ4IZW

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:58 AM, WA4STO wa4sto@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
 
Congrats to K8TOM for yet another LONP total. He now has 1153!

Phew!

73

Luck, WA4STO
PODXS 070 Awards Manager

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus