[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The state QSO Party thread [TN QP]

From: Nate Bargmann
Subject: Re: The state QSO Party thread [TN QP]
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2021 20:35:15 -0500

* On 2021 06 Sep 17:41 -0500, Doug Smith wrote:
> For years I was the adjudicator for the TNQP and still am the backup guy.  I
> haven't run Nate's log through the checking software yet but it looks
> straightforward & I don't remember having significant issues with TLF output
> in the past.

Hi Doug.

That is great to know.

> One thing I did notice is the LOCATION: tag in the Cabrillo header is
> "Kansas".  N1MM puts one's ARRL section on this tag, and the adjudication
> software we use will kick out a log that doesn't have a valid ARRL section.
> (in Nate's case, "KS" -- but if you're in New York which has multiple ARRL
> sections, "NY" will NOT work.  It needs to be NLI or ENY or WNY or NNY.)
> The LOCATION: tag is interchangeable with the ARRL-SECTION: tag but it must
> contain a valid ARRL section either way.  For entrants outside the U.S. and
> Canada, the appropriate entry is "DX".
> It might be a bit more trouble to fix than it's worth, but it would be
> helpful both for the adjudicators and new-to-QSO-Party entrants if somehow
> one could be forced (or at least guided) to enter a valid section.
> This really doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but that's the way the
> third-party packages work.....

Please don't blame Tlf here.  That is totally my doing as that is the
data I put in for that field in my local template.

Looking at the relevant Cabrillo V 3 specification[1], I see that
Location has three categories, ARRL sections as mentioned, IOTA island
name, and RDA number. That's it.  Now, if Tlf can be faulted to any
degree it would be that it does not validate this field against those
lists, at a minimum ARRL sections, I would think.

Thanks for the good info and insight, Doug.  I've not seen much
commentary over the years of those in your position so this kind of
feedback is very helpful.  I think I'll need to resubmit my CO QP log as
I made the same error.

> I don't see that Nate worked any of our mobiles more than once on the same
> band/mode.  We don't allow county-line operations in our contest. (well,
> technically they're permitted but only if you can figure out how to park
> your car so the radio *and* the antenna are both exactly on the border!)  If
> he had, the adjudication software would have accepted multiple 40CW QSOs
> with W4NZ as valid if different counties had been logged.

The differences in the QPs is one of the fun parts.  Being used to KS QP
this branching out is useful.

> Final nit pick:)  The file we received was N0NB.cbr.  N1MM uses the .log
> extension.  Obviously it is not a big deal for the adjudicator to rename the
> file:)  (the adjudication software ignores any files without the .log
> extension)

That is generated by Tlf internally and can be changed.  However, WWOF
states either .log or .cbr is valid (bottom of the page)[2].  In that
light it would appear the adjudication software is overly restrictive.

Also, Tlf uses the .log extension for its internal log written to disk.

> Again, none of this is serious.  Nate, thanks for entering!  (and thanks for
> working me on 80 meters.  100 watts to a VOCF antenna 1.8m above ground
> behind a fence.  "VOCF"=VERY off-center fed.)

You had a very good signal here, Doug, s9+ as I recall.  Funny thing, I
wasn't sure you were instate or not so I looked up your call before I
hit F6!  Then today going back through the TN QP rules there is your
call in a few places.  D'oh!

73, Nate


"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."
GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]