One would think that submitting your QSL's through a field checker
would give a faster turn-around. Can anyone verify this by personal
experience?
Dave Miller W1GDQ
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
**It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money
No difference.
Everything, whether field checked or HQ checked or partial LOTW or full
LOTW, gets processed along with all other submissions received at the same
time.
Now there is one trick to get you in sooner - it eliminates a mail
delay.submit a partial LOTW submission. The minute you push
There is little difference in processing time when submitting via a DXCC
field checker. In fact, it may take a little longer via a checker if the
field checker doesn't submit the application quickly. At HQ, there is
virtually no difference. The application goes into the queue along with all
Best advantage is you will not lose your cards in the mail and you save the
postage fees.
Bill W4WX
- Original Message -
From: wmills
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; dx-chat@njdxa.org
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 12:02 PM
Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] Re: Card Checkers
There is little
Only in terms of saving in mailing the cards and getting
them back. Once the app is processed by the field
checker, it still goes thri the process First in first out
So even if the chceker mails them in the next day, if the
process time is 6 weeks.
Steve KF2TI
NNJ DXCC Field Checker
Don:
That is not quite true. My last submittal was what they call a Hybrid
submittal consisting of a few LOTW credits added to the main part of the
submittal which is 92 QSO's that were field checked. My field checked paperwork
was mailed within a couple of days of when they were field checked
David:
You would think so. Given the large backlog lately, I made a very friendly
suggestion to Bill Moore that they sort the submittals into 2 piles (Field
Checked and Physical Cards), and have the bulk of their effort directed at
Physical Card submittals. My belief was that the time required
If you submit a LoTW-only application, it will likely be processed
immediately.
When you submit a LoTW application that indicates that cards or a field
check will also be submitted, the LoTW app will NOT be marked ready.
Rather, it will remain in the computer until the system is queried. When
The fastest way of all is to bring them to the ARRL HQ. in person wait while
the cards are checked ( if I remember right there is an extra small fee ). Once
a year I call the day before so they expect me then do a LoTW submission fill
in the # of paper cards I'll be bringing. Then the
Some of the grumbling has apparently worked its way upstream. I understand that
a couple of more employees have now been assigned to checking cards at HQ. It
will still take them a long time to work their way out of the hole. I made the
LOTW portion of a dual application on March 6th. Without the
One aspect of the problem hasn't been discussed before that I know of. A lot of
the aps are people who were at the Top of the Honor Roll who are simply
submitting an ap to cover a new entity that came along (FJ, etc.) and they want
to get back on top. These aps are 1 or 2 cards at the most.
Please reread carefully
All I said is that the queue date is from LOTW submission, not the date from
field checking.
My example - I submitted 11/29/2007 via LOTW but I didn't even get the cards
to my checker until 12/29 (we meet every month at WVDXC).
My date at HQ was 11/29/2007, not the week
And your submittal date should be the LOTW submission date, not the date the
application was received from the field, checker..this is what I have
already stated. You can't have waited until after field checking to do the
LOTW - there is a box on the form that must be checked for hybrid submission
So you suggest those that get field checked go to the head of the line?
And the HQ-checked get put off until later?
That line's pretty deep. To do so means that the HQ-checked submission would
somehow get less priority. This seems to put those submitters who don't have
access to a field
And one clarification - this was my bad. I arrived at the field checking
time on 11/29 inadvertently missing two QSLs needed for the DXCC 80
certificate. I had to put off field checking to the next month's wvdxc
meeting.
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
It makes business sense to charge apps individually. Two apps, two charges.
As long as apps are charged individually, the parts of a hybrid app, LoTW
and paper, must be combined before the app can be processed. Otherwise, two
charges will result. The LoTW part isn't going to be processed
It might be interesting if the staff at HQ could determine what portion of the
workload is attributable to multiple band country applications,as opposed to
entity/mode requests.Perhaps it is time to consider placing the Challenge and
related listings in a separate grouping,perhaps even with
One of the could be developments associated with LoTW that could be done
to speed DXCC processing is for applicants to enter their apps on a
DXCC/LoTW Website. Once the applicant has entered the data, it is checked
against the cards by a checker, and the checker approves the application.
Since
When I got my app ready in December, I downloaded my received QSL's
database into Excel, sorted out the cards I was going to use, and then
printed a nice looking listing to make it easier for the card checker. (And
then had to go find the cards in the bins, of course!) All K3AIR had to do
was
Wayne
That makes good sense - saves someone at HQ entering text for all the cards.
And for those submitting cards-only for HQ, why not allow them to send a
CD/DVD with the same data. Your checkers would only have to verify it was
correct. No different actually from the comparison they make
The word we've seen as checkers is that there are changes coming.
Gerry VE6LB/VA6XDX
DXCC Field Checker-Southern Alberta
VE/VA6 QSL Bureau Team
(403) 251-0384
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.qsl.net/ve6lb/
- Original Message -
From: Don
To: 'wmills' ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL
Many recent DXpeditions have, in my opinion, over-studied the data to serve
under served
areas, have propagation charts, and be extra aware of their important
position as the only
(last?) hams to be at that locale. One effect is the extensive use of
DIRECTIONAL CQs... usually
only
At 10:52 PM 3/16/2008, Charles Harpole wrote:
Many recent DXpeditions have, in my opinion, over-studied the data
to serve under served areas, have propagation charts, and be extra
aware of their important position as the only (last?) hams to be
at that locale. One effect is the extensive use
I would say that at the moment, NA and EU contain the largest concentrations
of active DX'ers. And when considering that the last two Pacific
DXpeditions -- specifically, VP6DX Ducie and TX5C Clipperton -- basically
had to shoot OVER NA to get to EU, AF AS... directional CQ's become a
little
One thing I noted that at least one or two of the VP6DX team did was to mix
in the directional calls. For example, on 30 meters, at the time I worked
them, the op did about 5 minutes of UP EU, about the same just UP, then
the same UP NA, then UP only again... with an occasional SA mixed in
there.
25 matches
Mail list logo
