How to delete a self-spot I submitted

Hello all. I just tried to self-spot using APRS via APRS2SOTA as a test. It worked! Now, how do I delete the spot I added. I don’t want folks to try listening for me when I’m not even there?? That’s annoying for the chasers.
Rich, KN6TRY

1 Like

You can’t. The spot was placed by a user APRS2SOTA not you so you can’t remove it.

One of the downsides of APRS and SMS spotting.

1 Like

Thanks for the info.

If I am trying a new device or way of spotting, I put “TEST, please ignore”, in the comments section.


Also, a test spot with nonsense QRG, mode and Summit Reference helps. Like 50.0MHz, Other, W6/NC-0XX.


Stewart G0LGS created a FAQ site for users:

73 Martin, OE5REO

It is worth remembering that if you post test or nonsense spots via APRS, SMS etc and are therefore unable to remove it yourself following the test, you are reliant on a member of the MT noticing it and deleting it for you. This may happen quickly, slowly, or not at all.

The problem with test (etc) spots is they still feed into and populate cluster windows on chasers’ logging software, even if deleted from SOTAwtach. Not the end of the world - but a bit of a nuisance! Even if you can immediately delete the test spot yourself, it will still linger on the cluster feeds. Personally, I never submit a test spot.


Understood. However, this is an experimental hobby and I’d rather place a test spot the first time I try via Iridium or APRS than mess it up on a hill I’ve spent hours or days getting to where there is no cell signal. :slightly_smiling_face:

Yes, I do this for a test too. That way, no one is looking for me.


For SOTAwatch you can ignore test spots, click your username then select settings. Check the Ignore test spots and they wont appear on SOTAwatch.

They do get sent into the feed as Tom says but most people taking a feed know what’s a test and what isn’t and so don’t click on the test spot and have their antennas rotate and their rig retune :wink:


It’s not actually obvious when it’s a clickable callsign that appears in your bandmap window.


1 Like

Is that an official instruction from a member of the MT, or just your own personal angry capitals? :wink:

1 Like

The clue is in the inclusion of the emoticon. Mind you, you have used the same one to append your question, so I probably needn’t have bothered answering it! :smiley:

1 Like

+1 for this


But what about the chasers?

Seriously, with the connection between SOTAwatch and the cluster networks, we maybe need to avoid pushing non-spots out to the world just for the peace of mind of an individual activator.

Could a filter be added so that anything with “Test” in the comments field is not dispatched to the clusters?

It really is a non-problem.

I did think of putting some code into the SOTA cluster so it pushed the comment through a regex to find all combinations of test/testing etc. but came to the conclusion that the time spent writing/testing/deploying and then having to deal with corner case that would cause valid spots to be filtered (i.e. there’ll be a Mount Testing somewhere!) was not worth it.

Chasers with clue can distinguish odd looking spots.

The Iridium case is most valid. The vast majority of Iridium users do not have their contract running 365/24/7 but tend to activate it for a few weeks every now and then. The rest of the time it is dormant. The first thing you want to know is has my contract recommenced and what was the magic to make a spot work. Result is a test spot. I should know as I wrote both ends of my Iriidium spotter software (the mobile and fixed ends) and once I start up a month’s airtime I send a test spot. Probably Bouvet on 24GHz because nobody is seriously going to think there is someone there and they would try 24GHz for SOTA :wink:



I accept the “is this issue worth the time investment?” argument.

I’d like to consider myself in that category. But when the callsign appears in a bandmap window on Logger32, as fed from the cluster, it is impossible to determine if the spot is “odd-looking” (it will be in a band that my 991A covers and therefore a “normal” SOTA band*.

*admittedly topband and 70cm are not as “normal” as other bands, but not exactly unheard of. Test spots do appear on “normal” bands too.

There’s 31 of them :frowning_face:

DM/NS-011 Altestalkopf 693 6
LA/MR-086 Helvetestind 1373 4
W7W/SN-034 6702 Contest Pk 2043 8
W7W/RS-047 5507 Contest Peak 1679 6
W7W/PO-074 3156 Mt Contest 962 2
W7W/OK-314 Whitestone Mountain 869 2
W7W/OK-326 South Whitestone Mountain 749 2
W7W/LC-087 3970 Contest Pk 1210 4
W7W/FR-063 Whitestone Ridge 1457 4
W7W/CH-198 5770 Contest Mtn 1759 6
I/VA-303 Testa d’ Arpy 2022 6
I/VA-319 Testa di Comagna / Tête de Comagne 2105 8
I/PM-376 Testa di Garitta Nuova 2385 8
LA/AA-066 Flatestøylåsen 926 2
YO/WC-209 Testiaș 1239 6
KLS/SI-230 Whitestripe Mountain 877 2
I/CL-016 Monte Volpintesta 1729 6
I/MC-098 Monte Serrintesta 741 1
I/PM-063 Testa della Costabella del Piz 2760 10
I/PM-074 Testa Gias dei Laghi 2739 10
I/PM-157 Testa di Menta 2204 8
I/PM-170 Testa dei Rossi 2026 8
I/VA-020 Testa del Rutor / Tête du Rutor 3486 10
I/VA-039 Testa Grigia / Tête Grise 3314 10
I/VA-091 Testa di Liconi / Tête de Licony 2929 10
I/VA-127 Testa Colon / Tête du Colon 1917 6
PS8/SR-012 Morro do Testa 625 6
LA/NL-478 Meraftestinden 638 2
LA/NL-505 Helvetestinden 602 2
LA/TN-372 Helvetestinden 674 2
PY6/CN-307 Morro Testa Branca 641 4

Tom, why are you making such a big deal of this? Almost every day this forum has posts from activators who have posted incorrect summit references, reeling off lists of chasers and asking them to correct their logs. That is a much bigger issue and consumes much more time emailing folk and the subsequent database corrections.

What we are talking about here is a deliberate, once in a while action, where the activator clearly states via the comment that it isn’t a real spot. It is usually as a result of them experimenting with a new mode and or device. Have you ever called or keyed, “CQ test M1EYP”? Same thing.

1 Like

It is in the quest to continuously improve and develop SOTA for the benefit of all participants. All of us on the MT can’t help being like that, it’s a genuine passion.

This. I joked that maybe docking the points would help clarify the mind when people make these mistakes. That went down like a **** in a punch bowl to use a fruity expression. It’s understandable that you can make mistakes like this, even someone as perfect as me has got the ref wrong. (But only once!).

I haven’t tracked to see if there are repeat ref error activators. Maybe I should?

1 Like