Email Detail

GET /hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/OGXUYUCKKDJFNWASXYAOAN342NLKAET4/
HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/OGXUYUCKKDJFNWASXYAOAN342NLKAET4/",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "OGXUYUCKKDJFNWASXYAOAN342NLKAET4",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/VC5KVFUIZLVJ2IPZCDYVOA3MXJ5AKMWW/",
    "sender": {
        "address": "dave (a) w0dhb.net",
        "mailman_id": null,
        "emails": null
    },
    "sender_name": "David W0DHB",
    "subject": "Re: [amsat-bb] LoTW still a big failure for checking satellite QSOs",
    "date": "2017-02-25T20:36:40Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/3RPRQSV6I6CBYLR4SL5OMP7LUCIB7PIY/",
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "The biggest issue I run into is when the band specification entry is the\nDownlink frequency rather than the uplink frequency (which seems to be the\naccepted convention)\nI believe these do not confirm at all.\n\nI've also had people tell me when using eqsl.cc the convention is the\nopposite.\n\nDave W0DHB\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: AMSAT-BB [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Clayton\nW5PFG\nSent: Saturday, February 25, 2017 11:17\nTo: [email protected]\nSubject: Re: [amsat-bb] LoTW still a big failure for checking satellite QSOs\n\nIt is not luck, Ed. I have had the same thing happen to me on at least two\noccasions.  I am 100% confident my upload contained the PROP_MODE and\nSAT_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 re-upload.\nThe QSL's then were corrected to a satellite contact.\n\nI have encountered some other special cases like this from time to time in\nthe LoTW system. It is not perfect but it generally works well and faster\nthan 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\nhere.One of the most interesting is a QSO between PY and CT made via AO-40\nsatellite, where I have set satellite name and propagation mode correctly,\nbut the other station not, LoTW just credited terrestrial qso between PY and\nCT 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 \n> 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\nblaming the \"sat operator\" as she/he registered the QSO with wrong/missing\ninformation, which is true, but the system, LoTW the case, should avoid\nconfirming a match between two stations when one of them does not specify\nPROPAGATION MODE = SAT. What LoTW actually does when one station specifies\nit and the other not is to confirm a match QSO but the credit goes to the\nterrestrial VUCC on VHF, UHF, etc. which, in my opinion, put high risk to\nterrestrial 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. \n>> Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the\nofficial views of AMSAT-NA.\n>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite\nprogram!\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. \n> Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the\nofficial 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_______________________________________________\nSent via [email protected]. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all\ninterested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions\nexpressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official\nviews of AMSAT-NA.\nNot an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\nSubscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n\n",
    "attachments": []
}