Filling in the blanks

It’s interesting to see how essential SOTAwatch is for chasers to fill in the blanks. I did an activation yesterday that was not alerted and no-one spotted me (despite working several well known chasers). One came back to me on the air several minutes after our contact presumably having noticed that I was not spotted and thus he didn’t know the reference (I had sent it during the contact). Another chaser has just emailed me for the reference as he didn’t copy it completely during our contact (he didn’t ask for a repeat)…


Bonjour Richard,

Thank you for the QSO on 20m, it’s been a long time!

For your reference no problem since you were spotted by RBN about fifty times. On the other hand, if someone is looking for you, it will be difficult because your last upload log dates back to April 12, 2012.
Here we can talk about Blank :crazy_face:

73, Éric


This last weekend I overheard several instances of “remarkable” operating that left me thinking “surely they’re not going to accept that as a good contact”… (But I bet they did!)

I blame the Foundation Licence. And Brexit.

1 Like

But that wouldn’t have included the SOTA reference, and RBNHole wouldn’t have picked it up and appended the reference, as Richard says he hadn’t alerted.


Hi Tom

You are correct for RBNHole since there was no alert :+1:
In fact I have QSO Richard just after his second self spot


That’s interesting. Richard omitted from his story that he had spotted himself - that alters the context somewhat - and makes the reported incidents rather curious!

1 Like

Hi Tom,

Can you expand on these ‘remarkable’ instances a bit further? Fyi, I sometimes hear Chasers give a report even when the Activator hasn’t acknowledged them - presumably they then use the ‘spot’ to submit a chaser log to gain the points? Would I be correct in thinking there’s no cross check in the background on the SOTA website?

73, Lea

1 Like

Not regularly but we have the capability to do so and run it every few months or so as people raise complaints about chaser logging.

1 Like

I upload my activator logs even when I know I’ll get no points (having activated that summit earlier in the year). Presumably, that’s another reason for doing so.



Of course, logging activator (or chaser) contacts is not compulsory - unless you wish to count them towards awards - and never will be. However, the more participants that log into the SOTA Database the better, and makes the occasional issues like this easier to identify.


If this happening then that Log is Null and Void as a Chaser Log, because the correct exchange that is in the rules has not been adhered to. In this case the “so called Chaser” could only log a SWL Log!??

IMHO this is also not in the spirit of Amateur Radio or SOTA??


1 Like

Ghost QSOs happen for mainly 2 reasons.

  • less competent operator who is unable to determine that the the other station is not in QSO with them
  • deliberate attempt to cheat as they don’t think they will be found out

Now even very skilled operators can be misled into thinking they are having a QSO but it happens rarely unlike with some who can’t or don’t listen and assume that if they hear a report from the other station they called then it must aimed at them and not someone else who called at the same time.

We all start out without the skills to have QSOs, we learn them over time with practice and especially if we are “Elmered” along the way. It’s a fact of life some people never seem to improve.When I was 1st licenced I heard plenty of appallingly bad stations on the air including plenty of G3/G4 stations so this is not something that can be blamed entirely on new licencees or changes in the licence process.


When the activator and hunter logs are in the database there is nothing more to say!

It happens to me to log activation’s where I am not in the log because the signals were too weak and knowing that and when it is possible to check (sinequanone conditions the log of the activator must also be uploaded) I delete my QSOs from the database!
And all happy :crazy_face:

The person logging the QSOs in my logbook has unreadable handwriting sometimes, or logs the summit reference and doesn’t believe what he’s written down :smiley:

1 Like

I’ve heard this process described by other chasers too. However, I am somewhat perplexed by it!

If you’ve not had the on-air acknowledgement, and waiting for subsequent online confirmation, I don’t see how that can be a “good contact”.

I’ve similarly challenged members of my contest group, who mention getting a LOTW confirmation - and only then knowing that they’ve “successfully worked” a DXpedition. I say “How can you possibly say you’ve completed a good contact on air if you don’t know that until the LOTW comes through?”



Two different activations. I was referring to one yesterday that was not on G/SP004. I did not self spot yesterday.

1 Like

Hi Tom,

I thought you were nicer than that!

Perhaps an instruction from the MT “not to appear too fraternal with others”.

Re-read the topic of the thread

I’m probably as bad at English as YOU are at French.
Try, you will see the difficulty, why must others make the effort? It’s not one-sided or missed something :crazy_face:

What I wanted to write but who by the games of Google Translate had this effect!

Here is the correct version:

I happen to log activation’s where I’m not sure I’m in the log because the signals were too weak…

Here a sample of my long unique Log :crazy_face: nearly 8800 unique summits

I check and if it’s not good I delete ! This was not the case :wink:
W1_HA_080 AA6XA 21122021 1539Z other side

And if that’s not enough you can ask Andrew @VK3ARR to check my log,
If there are more than 12 errors I’ll pay you a beer, Andrew too), but not for contacts with @G3CWI Richard since 2012! No log anymore
Anyway I only miss G/SP-012 (this summit must be cursed)

73, Éric

1 Like