Came across some interesting observations out in the blogosphere re: LOTW, whether its worth the hassle and such, by VE3OIJ and KB6NU. I shared some thoughts a few months ago not long after I got LOTW working. Some time has passed so I did some logbook analysis on my contacts since getting back on the air (16 June through the 30 November) to see if things got better or worse.
Every QSO in my logbook for this time period (379 total) has been uploaded to both eQSL.cc and LOTW. Here's what I got for my trouble:
- Confirmations via eQSL: 118 (31.1% return rate)
- Confirmations via LOTW: 113 (29.8% return rate)
- QSOs confirmed via both eQSL and LOTW: 55
- QSOs confirmed via eQSL but not LOTW: 25
- QSOs confirmed via LOTW but not eQSL: 58
- DXCC entities confirmed by both eQSL and LOTW: 16
- DXCC entities confirmed via eQSL but not LOTW: 10
- DXCC entities confirmed via LOTW but not eQSL: 14
So what does this prove? Nothing, really, except that more than two thirds of the stations I've worked in the past 6 months don't use either method of electronic QSLing, or simply haven't bothered to upload their logs yet. As for those who do QSL electronically, just under half use both LOTW and eQSL. Unless and until more logging software integrates automatic uploading, I don't see how electronic QSLing will be a viable replacement for the analog method.
I'm sure more electronic QSLs will trickle in over the next few months, but in my experience I've found that most people who use eQSL and/or LOTW will upload their logs pretty soon after the QSO. Therefore, I don't expect the percentages to skew drastically either way. Whether my experience is in any way representative of reality, I can't say. I'm curious to know how other hams are faring. Is my 30% return rate typical?
Meanwhile, I'm sitting on a pile of cards ready to go out to DX stations but I haven't had a burning desire to cough up the $150+ for postage (including the return postage that most DX stations ask for), nor have I sent off any cards to the outgoing bureau. I've been happy thus far to sit back and watch the LOTW verifications trickle in and my DXCC and WAS totals slowly increase.
In a perfect world, the ARRL would accept eQSL as a legitimate confirmation method. But in reality, this would net me very few "new ones" since many of those 10 eQSL-only countries were already verified when I was QRV from New Jersey, years before either LOTW or eQSL.cc were a gleam in their programmers' eyes.
(From 1978 WRTH)
Posts
7 comments:
I joined eQSL and found eCards waiting for me from my N2DCO days, the earliest being from 1981 !! That was a huge surprise.
Even if the hit rate is low, it's far easier to use than mailing things to the far corners of the Earth. And I guess not as much fun either... but that's the trade off.
73 de K2ER
Yeah, it's pretty cool when you first get on LOTW and eQSL and find a bunch of QSLs already in the inbox. My earliest LOTW QSL is AL7GA, 20-Mar-1988; next oldest after that is ON4AEK, 25-Oct-1995. On eQSL, oldest is HB9BYZ, 12-Feb-1988, only about a month after I first got on HF.
Not such a great return rate from those early QSOs, though -- back then fewer people were using computers to log. I had typed my old N2HIE log into an Excel spreadsheet years ago, so I just had to do the ADIF conversion.
31% is great, if you ask me. As I noted on my blog, I'm only at 13% (1160 QSLs / 8928 QSOs). I don't know if that's a function of the number of QSOs I've uploaded or what. Maybe I'm just not talking to the right people!
73, Dan KB6NU
Tnx for your input Dan.
My 31% refers only to QSOs since this past June -- my total LOTW return rate is around 20% with loggings going back to 1988, but LOTW doesn't include all of my QSOs because I've lost a good number of computerized logs from the 90s. These would probably have doubled my number of QSOs and dropped my return rate even lower, closer to your 13% which I think may be more typical.
I work a mix of contesting, casual DX chasing, and casual ragchewing.
For some contest events - e.g. SS or NAQP - LOTW participation is way over 50%.
For other events - e.g. Field Day - LOTW participation is near zero.
Some DXPeditions upload their logs to LOTW same day, others do not upload logs except for those who contributed money, and others never upload their logs. Guess which DXPeditions I will be contributing to in the future? :-)
73, Tim N3QE
My overall average return rate is right now at 36% over the past two years.
Tnx Tim. I've discovered this as well. In just 3 days following last weekend's RTTY Roundup I've received 60 LOTW confirmations out of 103 QSOs (58%, and still trickling in). In the 2009 PSK Deathmatch, LOTW returned 139 out of 213 QSOs (65%).
2009 CQ WWDX SSB (27/72 = 37.5%)) and 2009 WAE RTTY (18/45 = 40%) return rates weren't quite as high.
Since my original post my LOTW return rate since June has jumped to 45.5% (360/791). I have to attribute this to the contests I've been playing in.
73 de WW2PT
I think a very simple reason why many contests have such high LOTW participation, is that so many people are using computer logging already which makes it very quick and easy to upload the logs.
The exception to this rule is Field Day. I'm guessing that many of the club calls are not "together enough" that they know how to get the club call certificated and to upload an electronic log.
And US contest participation in LOTW is the highest. Although there are some foreign countries and foreign contest stations that have near 100% LOTW rate. I'm guessing the ops there are particularly well-connected electronically, and probably get a big payoff from reducing their paper QSL hassle.
Other, ultra-supercompetitive contest ops regard uploading a log to LOTW as "giving information to the enemy" it seems, and they have told me that they will never ever upload their logs to LOTW.
73, Tim, N3QE
Post a Comment