Stuart Thomas, KB1HQS, joined me back in February to chat about the NPOTA (National Parks on the Air) ARRL Event. This time he’s back to share with us an entire years worth of Portable Operation from NPOTA. Hear Stuarts Lessons Learned, Funny Stories, Favorite Parks and more in this episode of Ham Radio 360 Podcast. Listen Link Here Show Notes and Links Here Thanks and 73 Cale/K4CDN
I did a NPOTA trip to Zion last July-- but I do not have LOTW (nor see the need for it). It is unfortunate that this is the only 'travel' activity that requires LOTW, rather than logs of another kind. Other ARRL OTA activities, such as VUCC and DXCC, do not require LOTW. It seems odd that this one required it. 73 Chip W1YW
I am also disappointed that no other logs were allowed to be submitted. ARRL kinda got a little too narrow nosed on this one. Very nice certificate from ARRL. Randy KA4AQM Chesapeake Va.
LoTW is simple to set up and use and it's use allowed for easy tracking of activations and confirmations by all participants. I don't understand why any ham would refuse to use it other than their own refusal to enter the 21st century.
Yes, I can see you do not understand it. The fact is, I work on a computer and play on a radio. I prefer NOT to use my computer as part of the radio. I RESPECT that others do so, and that's fine But I ENJOY paper logs and have NEVER experienced a failure with them--many, many failures with computers. Just to give you a calibration point, you should know that the BEST SELLING ARRL publication is the full format LOGBOOK, and hence lots of people who have at least a remote awareness of the ARRL are NOT using LOTW. Nothing wrong with having BOTH options (QSLs too!;-) (I love QSL's: I remember when I was poor and just out of grad school, how going thru a box of old QSLs took me on journeys outside of my modest confines and distracted me from the 'Allentown' era of the 1980's: "..the graduations hang on the wall but they never really helped us at all.."). 73 Chip W1YW
I used a paper log for many of my NPOTA activations for weight and simplicity out in the field. It was not a problem to enter in those QSOs for confirmation. I entered and uploaded about 600 QSOs from 8 different sites with about an hour's worth of work. That was a lot less work than sending paper cards, that's for sure.
Well, you must also be one who sends Christmas cards as e-mail That's OK, but some folks still like the personal touch: paper with my DNA on it;-) The fact is, unless you are juicy DX, only fraction of QSO's produce the desire for cards. I'm OK with LOTW, just pointing out the need for more than one option. 73 Paul, de Chip W1YW
For anyone who worked me during this event, I'm more than happy to send a paper QSL. I think I had around 1500 QSO's, about 1000 from various parks, and another 500 working parks. All of them were logged on paper, and it typically took me about 10 minutes to type in the calls and upload them after an activation. The use of electronic logging made the event more interesting, IMHO, since most of the contacts were confirmed within a day or so. Again, even though I'm happy to send a QSL to anyone who wants one, it really would have been impractical to have any significant number of the confirmations by by paper QSL. I confirmed about 320 different parks, and I wouldn't have bothered sending QSL's to most of them. And as an activator, it would have been a huge burden to send out QSL's to the thousand stations who worked me. If somebody wants one, that's great. But just sending them out so that someone needs a Minnesota card for an award is kind of a waste. There were over a million NPOTA QSO's, and that's a lot of paper and postage.
I know of several longtime hams that got signed up for LoTW for the first time *because* of NPOTA. I only did one activation, but responded back with QSL cards for anyone who sent me one. I also put a note on the card thanking them for the contact, and letting them know they needed LoTW to get credit for NPOTA. To me, it was fair game - ARRL and the participants got near realtime leaderboards and stats for a yearlong contest. I scratch my head about people who won't use LoTW, the same way I scratch my head when I lookup someone on QRZ that won't send cards. It's not for you, it's a courtesy for the other guy.
Well, that's ridiculous--its not tenable to assert that LOTW needs to be done 'for the other guy'. CONFIRMATION--in any valid form-- needs to be secured 'for the other guy'. Don't confuse mechanism with validation please. This reminds me of the failed attempt to eliminate business cards by scanning badges at trade shows. Guess what: people STILL do biz cards...too. With due respect, IMO LOTW is being now used by the ARRL as a draw for membership--which is fine: I am a LM. But one should not confuse an operating ACTIVITY with a mechanism for validation--which is what happened with NPOTA. Look: you can't sell thousands of log books a year and ALSO confine people to logging with LOTW. This is what the ARRL does in this example. Don't you see that weird contradiction? The other bizarre aspect is the ARRL wants to find a cool $1M in donations to expand the computer services end--read: LOTW-- NPOTA was used to force the issue of NEED to justify the DONATION. Also,ARRL used NPOTA as a backhanded way to get more people to sign up for membership, as a 'draw'. Wasn't that obvious? Again, these are all good things, but restricting validation thru a single option is just not realistic. 73 Chip W1YW
I resisted LoTW and did not like that it was the only option. I did it anyway and I had my share of learning curve challenges. That being said I grew to like it and I am glad that I did it. I'm a warm and fuzzy type. There were lots of us involved in NPOTA. Many no-code hams became "know code" hams because of CW activations. Other new amateurs gained experience in handling a pileup. I am glad that I was involved, I am sorry that it is over and I hope that it can continue along the lines of VUCC, WAS, DXCC and other programs. 73, Tim K0PG
Sorry, I disagree. "Any valid form" is meaningless to the guy who wants/needs it on LoTW for an award. It's a courtesy. Think about it the other way around - Dennis Rodman get's his license and they let him operate in North Korea, you work him and he told you sorry, no card, I only do LoTW. It's valid confirmation, right?
Dont buy it. I am NOT being discourteous if I dont use LOTW.Thats where your point goes...l am not being convinced via insult. Are there others Lotw arguments that are logical and compelling?
Tom, How do you account for the ARRL selling thousands of logbooks a year? Again, its their best seller. If its 'discourteous' to NOT use LOTW, shouldn't the ARRL 'walk the walk' and discontinue publication of logbooks? I honestly feel you are confusing an ARRL business decision with a form of QSO validation. Again here is that situation: 1) The ARRL has the lowest percentage of members vs US ham base that its had in modern times--it needs MORE members; 2) Operating events pegged to being an ARRL member are a way to increase membership; 3) REQUIRING LOTW for the-- event-- essentially restricts it to ARRL members, in a practical sense; 4) Operating events thus drive new members to join the ARRL; 5) The ARRL has the highest margin and high income from its paper logbooks and there is no chance they will discontinue publication. IOW, both NPOTA via LOTW (only) AND publication of paper logs are business decisions devoted to bringing more revenue into the ARRL (the ARRL lost money in 2016, so its not a bad thing to make more revenue). There is nothing wrong with that, but restricting to LOTW is contradictory to that. So let's see it the other way: if you use a paper log (reporting) for these operating events then you pay a fee, not inclusive of membership. That makes sense, doesn't it? Again, more than one validation option is just the reality. 73 Chip W1YW
Actually I have several DX stations that are LOTW only--I just write them off. The reason DX is almost never LOTW only is money: donations, to a large degree, get pegged to the availability of QSLs, hence the cottage industry of OQRS. Paper for money as the exchange. Notice, for example, the prominence of 'QSL PREVIEWs' on Dx-world.net. And I would never QSO Dennis Rodman. He is, IMO, a foolish person. Your opinion may differ. 73 Chip W1YW
