Hi Paul and the group... I can understand and respect your reasons for doing as you do... At the same time you have to respect the fact that life is about growth and LOTW is a natural expression of Amateur Radio embracing technology in a meaningful manner and moving forward.
As one who has been a ham not as long as you, only 33 years... (as if it matters) I love QSLs and awards as much as anyone.... What I detest is having to deal with QSLs in such a inneficent manner as paper, pen, stamps, and envelopes. As one who makes several thousand QSO's a year between HF and VHF contesting (not to mention a healthy 6M Es addiction) QSLing has always been a heavy burden that I dont do well. Traditionally... all QSL's recieved go in a box and when its full I sit down and in a few days empty out the box. The box is not even looked at during 6M Es season or during the time period between CQ WW DX SSB and the ARRL 10M Contest. Some people have been quite vocal about my "Lack of QSLing" which has never been the case... But i have a deffinant "Delay in QSLing" that at time lasts months and can be hard for some to understand. Live in a rare state, activate rare grids a few times, and you will understand. I do them ON MY TERMS or not at all. With the advent of LOTW support for VUCC and FFMA, I hope the future VHF+ QSL burden drops by at least half, which will be a huge help. Unlike many of you, my days are filled with painfull headaches (remants from a bad car crash) which limits my ambitions to mainly the things that must be done to survive and QSLing is NOT anywhere near the top of that list. The ultimate purpose for any QSL is to apply for an award of one type or another... LOTW spares me the Paper QSLIng Burden while still allows me to keep chasing those awards and thankfully lets me focus what little energy I have to where it belongs... Finding work, Operating, Station building, and fighting pain. LoTW is NOT ruining existing QSLing, its improving it with many more options.... And my take on the cost associated with using LOTW... It takes time, effort, energy, manpower, equipment, infrustructure, and more to run a program as large as LOTW... The fact we only pay to use the service when we elect to use QSO credits for awards make perfect sense to me.... I know hams are notoriously cheap but this is one case I think we are getting what we pay for... 73s and GL de Tim - K7XC - DM09nm... sk ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Kiesel To: John Geiger ; [email protected] ; Amsat-Bb@Amsat. Org ; 'VHF REFLECTOR' ; Tim Marek Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 10:15 PM Subject: Re: [VHF] Re: [amsat-bb] Re: VUCC costs Tim, I'm not a LotW doubter. I'm a LotW rejecter. I've been in ham radio for 52 years and have always loved QSLing. I like to QSL. I look at every card I receive and look forward to receiving cards for the QSOs I make. There have been times when the QSLiing chores were intense, like after working hundreds of JAs during the F2. Yeah, it was work, but I looked forward to receiving their cards and I know that they enjoyed receiving mine. QSLing has always had a cost.. Nowadays, it would cost me a lot to send cards to everyone that I work and pay for it out of my own pocket. That's why I require an s.a.s.e. from those domestic hams who want my card. But, I don't have a problem doing that. I figure if you want to apply for major awards like VUCC and FFMA, and need my card, you can send me an s.a.s.e. I don't necessarily think that using LotW is all that efficient. I do not computer log except in contests.. The only reason I do it in contests is because contest sponsors want electronic submissions, and since I would have to transcribe my hand-written logs into electronic form after the fact, I choose to computer log to save work. But, I would rather log via pencil and paper during contests. Personally, I'm disappointed that the ARRL has chosen to create this LotW thing. It is aimed at ruining one of the classic enjoyments of ham radio. 73, Paul, K7CW --- On Mon, 1/24/11, Tim Marek <[email protected]> wrote: From: Tim Marek <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [VHF] Re: [amsat-bb] Re: VUCC costs To: "John Geiger" <[email protected]>, [email protected], "Amsat-Bb@Amsat. Org" <[email protected]>, "'VHF REFLECTOR'" <[email protected]> Date: Monday, January 24, 2011, 11:36 AM John and the rest of you LOTW doubters... The costs to use LOTW for VUCC, DXCC, or WAS contact credits IS NOTHING compared to the time, effort and money needed to collect cards the old fashioned way! At near a buck a card domestically (Over 2$ Internationally) for the stamps to send them and as well as a SASE for their return..... all the waiting.... Lost or stolen mail, People who NEVER reply, followed by dealing with the cards after their collected, the hand sorting and filling in paper forms... what a royal pain and more importantly... a very inneficient way to do things... With the new LOTW system, you simply upload your logs, wait for them to cross confirm with other uploaded logs, spend less than 20 cents per QSO to INSTANTLY use those QSL credits for awards, with little muss or fuss... I really dont see what the problems is.... Its faster, safer, cheaper, and your log data is backed up forever.... Talk about a lasting legacy of your efforts! Compared to the OLD FASHIONED way of handling the laborious chore of QSLing, LOTW is a God send saving me much time, money, and alot of hand writing that I truly hate. (Try living in a rare state and you will understand) As one who has personally activated 57 grids at one time or another (Alot of them RARE), there is now a incentive to sort out and upload all those logs from the past 20 years. Not only will it help others who need those rare grids (CM86, CM95, CM96, CN90, CN91, CN92, DN00, DN10, DN11, DN20, DM07, DM17, DM18, DM19, DM27, DM28, and DM29 just to name a few) but... I can now file for additional 6M VUCC's from several of those grids as they were June Contest efforts from tall mountains with large antennas and KW power where more than 100 Grids was easily accomplished... Think about it... "Nothing Is Free"... the prices they ask are reasonable, and once uploaded who better to back up your logs than those whom you apply to for the awards! Personally, I dont understant why everyone isn't getting setup right now to dump their logs online to (at the very least protect those rare and precious contacts from being lost forever) and collect those contact credits w/o lifting a pen to paper or licking a single stamp... 73s de Tim - K7XC - DM09nm.... sk PS: I have been pushing LOTW for years to make this happen. Its not perfect, but compared to the old ways, its a VAST IMPROVEMENT! ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Geiger" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]>; "Amsat-Bb@Amsat. Org" <[email protected]>; "'VHF REFLECTOR'" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 2:07 PM Subject: [VHF] Re: [amsat-bb] Re: VUCC costs > I WAS going to get an endorsement for my satellite and six meter VUCCs, but given that it would cost me around 35 dollars each to get an endorsement for an extra 150 grids, I don't think so. Hope this new insane fee schedule doesn't kill VUCC submissions. I think AMSAT awards will be getting much more popular. 73s John AA5JG > > ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 12:25 PM > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: VUCC costs >> Nice explanation of the costs for VUCC in the Jeff Yanko blog. However, I did not see what happens with LOTW submisions. >> If the cost of awards keep going up, maybe the ARRL should offer award insurance as well as equipment insurance. Just a thought. :>) >> Merle, AA4QE ------ Submissions: [email protected] Subscription/removal requests: [email protected] Human list administrator: [email protected] List rules and information: http://www-w6yx.stanford.edu/vhf/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1202 / Virus Database: 1435/3400 - Release Date: 01/24/11 _______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
