Email Detail

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/3RPRQSV6I6CBYLR4SL5OMP7LUCIB7PIY/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "3RPRQSV6I6CBYLR4SL5OMP7LUCIB7PIY",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/VC5KVFUIZLVJ2IPZCDYVOA3MXJ5AKMWW/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "w5pfg (a) amsat.org",
        "mailman_id": null,
        "emails": null
    },
    "sender_name": "Clayton W5PFG",
    "subject": "Re: [amsat-bb] LoTW still a big failure for checking satellite QSOs",
    "date": "2017-02-25T18:16:41Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/W6KMACZVQ36TVZBUOIV3JO5BZHXSLC3W/?format=api",
    "children": [
        "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/OGXUYUCKKDJFNWASXYAOAN342NLKAET4/?format=api",
        "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/RUGWF37Q5FYHQ3IQZ7SSZXQX56KOWDWM/?format=api"
    ],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "It is not luck, Ed. I have had the same thing happen to me on at least \ntwo occasions.  I am 100% confident my upload contained the PROP_MODE \nand SAT_NAME fields. The other station did not upload with those fields. \nThe contact became a QSL record in the LoTW system as a terrestrial QSO. \nFortunately I was able to assist the two stations to correct and \nre-upload. The QSL's then were corrected to a satellite contact.\n\nI have encountered some other special cases like this from time to time \nin the LoTW system. It is not perfect but it generally works well and \nfaster than postal card exchanges.\n\n73\nClayton\nW5PFG\n\nOn 2/25/2017 11:50, Eduardo PY2RN wrote:\n> Paul, may be I am the \"lucky\" one, but I have plenty of examples in LoTW here.One of the most interesting is a QSO between PY and CT made via AO-40 satellite, where I have set satellite name and propagation mode correctly, but the other station not, LoTW just credited terrestrial qso between PY and CT on 1.2GHz.\n>\n> | Call Sign |   | PY2RN |\n> | DXCC |   | BRAZIL |\n> | CQ Zone |   | 11 |\n> | ITU Zone |   | 15 |\n> | Grid |   | GG66LW |\n> | Worked Station |\n> | Worked |   | CT1--- |\n> | DXCC |   | PORTUGAL (272) |\n> | CQ Zone |   | 14 |\n> | ITU Zone |   | 37 |\n> | Grid |   | IM67-- |\n> | Date/Time |   | 2002-11-08 23:50:00 |\n> | Mode |   | SSB (PHONE) |\n> | Band |   | 23CM |\n> | QSL |   | 2016-10-13 11:33:07 |\n> |  |\n> | Record ID 570561985 Received: 2016-10-13 11:33:07\n>\n>  |\n>\n>\n> 73 - Ed PY2RN\n>\n>       From: Paul Stoetzer <[email protected]>\n>  To: Eduardo PY2RN <[email protected]>\n> Cc: \"[email protected]\" <[email protected]>\n>  Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2017 2:37 PM\n>  Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] LoTW still a big failure for checking satellite QSOs\n>\n> Ed,\n>\n> LoTW will not confirm a QSO when the propagation mode and satellite\n> name don't match.\n>\n> 73,\n>\n> Paul, N8HM\n>\n> On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Eduardo PY2RN <[email protected]> wrote:\n>> This has been already taken to LoTW admins at ARRL but they insist in blaming the \"sat operator\" as she/he registered the QSO with wrong/missing information, which is true, but the system, LoTW the case, should avoid confirming a match between two stations when one of them does not specify PROPAGATION MODE = SAT. What LoTW actually does when one station specifies it and the other not is to confirm a match QSO but the credit goes to the terrestrial VUCC on VHF, UHF, etc. which, in my opinion, put high risk to terrestrial VUCC credibility through LoTW confirmations.\n>>\n>> 73 - Ed PY2RN.\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> Sent via [email protected]. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed\n>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.\n>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\n>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> Sent via [email protected]. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available\n> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed\n> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.\n> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\n> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n>\n",
    "attachments": []
}