Other SOTA sites: SOTAwatch | SOTA Home | Database | Summits | Video | Photos | Shop | Mapping | FAQs | Facebook | Contact SOTA

DM/RP-431 Invalid tool tip?

Like many more I jumped in just now to work DL1GKC/P on 7029 KHZ spotted as DM/RP-431 - as pointed out by Eric F5JKK this is no longer a valid summit, however when one puts ones mouse on the reference on SOTAWatch the tool tip still works - showing Orensberg, 581m, 4 points. Should the tool tip still work? I think not (Andy)…

Its still a Flora Fauna counter I think as the operator sent 44s.

73 Phil

1 Like

maybe GMA but in this case is DA/RP-431 :slight_smile:
73 Éric

1 Like

Looking at GMA cluster they say that it is in fact DA/RP449. No idea what it is in fact really.
I have seen now DM/RP-431 and 433 and DA/RP-449.
Results in editing SOTA Log different times, especially when using direct log from the cluster.

You mean you never heard him send the reference and just logged what was on SOTAwatch?

Hi Andy he was sending this ref DM/RP-431 abt each contact …


He has an account on here but has not accessed the account for 9years. This means he could well be unaware the summit is no longer valid and is just getting back into SOTA. Looking further his SSO account is just over 1 month old. That tends to support the coming back to SOTA idea. He has been logged in to the database since October 9th so has had the ability to check his summit is valid.

Sounds like a simple oversight for a new activator.

Should it be “spotable”? I think we’ve had this discussion before and can’t remember what we decided. You can’t log it however even if it did get a few pulses racing a little :wink:

Hi Eric,
Thank you for posting your warning spot.
I checked sotamaps = no more this summit, then I checked sotawatch logging tool = impossible to log QSO.
The question is: why was possible to spot this summit by anybody ?
73, Jarek

As I said above…

Of course I heard him saying the reference, but when what he says is wrong, outdated or invalid, that does not really help, I guess.
What I read is, that he is long out of sota, thus he should have checked in advance what he is planning to do? Preparing well is half the success, isn’ it?

Exactly Patrick, an expression Tom M1EYP doesn’t like that get’s stated at these times is “Fail to prepare then prepare to fail”. (I’m not sure how well that translates for non-native English speakers.) There’s lots written in the rules especially about checking access is permitted as it can change and that you are competent to climb hills etc. i.e. fit enough, prepared for the WX etc. The rules don’t specifically tell people they should check the summit is still valid. I’m not sure whether that is so obvious to someone who is new to SOTA or not as it is to people who have been active for long enough to have seen the regular monthly updates/changes topics that we post. Maybe such a comment is needed?

Most likely because he was spotted by RBNHole, which has to bypass summit checking to handle the situations where people use wildcard summit names (XX-XXX or ??-???) in their alerts for when they’re activating a bunch of summits, but aren’t sure which and won’t have coverage to update.

The point I was making was should a tooltip appear when the mouse is wiped across it on the SOTAWatch spot, for a summit that does not qualify now, that was all. Let’s not get distracted about whether one should alert before activating, which is a very common trait of some activators and always will be.

73 Phil

Please reread my statement - I wasn’t saying anything about whether you should or shouldn’t alert. My point about alerting is secondary to the fact the spot came in via RBNHole (which of course uses alerts to determine what to spot). Because of the alerts situation I mentioned, RBNHole has to be able to spot summits that aren’t valid.

That’s fine, I see that, but why have an active live tool tip for a none SOTA summit that is valid in GMA etc. That was my point.

73 Phil

I can’t seem to post a spot for that summit via SW3, so the only way it could have come in is via something using the non-checking summit endpoint, which is basically RBNHole. There may be something else using that endpoint, but I can’t see it if they are.


These two spots look like if they were posted on SW3…

This is what I get:

Perhaps there’s something deeper going on, but I can’t see it right now.

It’s no big deal getting the odd “non-summit” coming in to the system from RBN hole or wherever as a spot. So long as we know we can’t claim stuff like this which seems to be the case as the database affords excellent screening against non-summits beign claimed as far as I can tell.

Anyway, off topic - lets looks forward to the penultimate round of the Flavours Challenge next week on 80m and 160m and the soon to be ended silly season on the reflector that the winter bonus usually brings to an end, although with more of us at home writing stuff on here as a diversion from boredom where there is nowt to work, it may well continue for some time!

I’m hoping for more settled weather in Southern Scotland so I can do another day trip to that region, but I am anxiously waiting to see what the Scottish First Ministers announcement about their 5 tier Covid protection system contains, which is coming in on Nov 2nd. Maybe I will get there to a safe zone before that announcement, but I like settled weather when I am driving such a distance in the day and walking as well.

73 Phil

RP-433 is a valid summit. Only he wasn’t on 433, he was on 431 (apparently)