I/G4OBK/P Activation I/TO-314 01/07/15 null and void

Each Association is allowed one update a year. We have over a hundred Associations, that means that potentially we would have to perform two updates a week in addition to the work on new Associations - of which there are approximately fifty in various stages from initial proposal to near completion. Frankly, if every Association took advantage of the opportunity for an annual update the task would become very difficult.

In the case of Italy, there are the current summits to be checked and corrected, and about 1500 new summits to be checked and added. The satellite data is a good start but it doesn’t give us the names, and sometimes the satellite is apparently registering the tops of the trees rather than the surface which can give positional errors as well as height errors which will impinge on the prominence. Thus every summit must be checked against the map or a trustworthy summit list. This alone amounts to hundreds of hours of work. Then there is the ARM which will need new summit lists added and probably some re-writing.

The amount of work that goes into expanding and maintaining SOTA is difficult to appreciate, but enthusiasm can achieve little miracles!


Hi Brian,

Thanks for the very clear explanation, it is an eye-opener. I never realized that there were over 100 associations! I guess some mature associations like France require less updates compared to new ones. If you delegate the work to various people but eventually have to check everything yourself then it is a huge amount of work for very few people. At some stage I think you will have to delegate to people whom you’ve trained and admit that some errors may happen. Nobody’s perfect. Until you delegate to more people and accept that errors are part of it then it will be hard to change.

I am just wondering what is best. 1 update a year and in the meantime you leave a lot of errors as they are or the ability to update more often via delegation to trusted people and admit that a few errors may happen? This is an open-ended question. I would think the second option would look more appealing, especially for new associations that require a lot of updates. That is just one man’s opinion though.


The most errors tend to turn up in the first year after an Association goes “live”, and these will be fixed in the first update (although if a really important correction turns up it might get fixed outside of the schedule!) Subsequent updates tend to be minor corrections such as changes of names, typos or occasionally are due to re-surveys (even a new road cutting through a col may create new summits by increasing prominence!)

The number of people involved in summit work on the MT side of the task has been increased and the provision of satellite data to new AMs makes their work easier - and a new “buddy” system assists them in setting up an Association, but since its inception SOTA has depended on the work of AMs and the helpers that they can recruit to become RMs. The quality of the individual Association is due to the commitment and ability of the AM, the MT gives support but it is the guys on the ground that SOTA depends on.


Good evening friends,

it is important to update the list of Italian peaks. Our country is rich with important peaks (Alps and Apennines), with the renovation of all the peaks would be a further incentive for this activity at both national and international for hunters.
For example in my region (Piedmont - I / PM) there are ony 160 peaks in the list of international sota, but nationally (sotaitalia.org) we have cataloged several hundred.
The work of error correction must be done by OM locals who know the area well and send to the manager IW1ARE the corrections that are then sent to the MT International sota uk.
This is an encouragement to enter all the other peaks in the international program sota.
Come on guys and thanks for everything!

IZ1TWC - Andrea

Thanks for your comments Mike and Guru. (I read MIke’s post before it was removed). I will continue the discussion on this orignal thread when I made it known that this activation was voided.

I actually made 70 QSOs from that failed activation of what I thought was Le Cornate I/TO-314. The summit remains unactivated, yet a good number of chasers are claiming having contact with it.

This failed activation took place on 1st July 2015. No activator log was submitted once I realised the error.

I have now decided to go through my log and compare it with the SOTA Database logs of the stations worked that day and publish the callsigns on this thread. I will do this this evening. If you read this you and you logged the contact you have a little time to remove the QSO details before I check through the database. This is the beauty of the SOTA database - it is transparent which is admirable.

After publicising the callsigns claiming Le Cornate on this thread I will then wait one week and if the contacts are not removed I will e-mail the chasers remaining individually via the e-mail address that are listed in QRZ.COM with an explanation of the problem - asking the operator to remove the contact from the database.

I agree with the comment from Guru that a few points more or less would make little difference.

However this is a principle of integrity - both of the integrity of the data contained in the database and the integrity of the individual. I also agree that it would be unfair to place this burden on the MT volunteer(s) who control the SOTA database (principally Andy MM0FMF) with this work.

73 Phil G4OBK

1 Like


thanks for the heads up


Hello Phil,

There is an easy way to see who upload I/TO-314 that 1st of july.
Just upload a “dummy log” for I/G4OBK/P from sota I/TO-314.
Then you just have to look at your log on database and click on the "button"
SHOW WHO WORKED ME and you will have all the call with qtr and band, mode.
73 Cu Gerald

Great info that Gerald - thank you for the tip. I already have an ADIF file, so I’ll use Alain’s ADI2SOTA and use SHOW WHO WORKED ME. What a great time saver.

73 Phil

Gerald said:

Hello Phil,

There is an easy way to see who upload I/TO-314 that 1st of july.
Just upload a “dummy log” for I/G4OBK/P from sota I/TO-314.
Then you just have to look at your log on database and click on the “button”
SHOW WHO WORKED ME and you will have all the call with qtr and band, mode.
73 Cu Gerald

Yes - very good Gerald I did as you suggested and here is a JPG of those chasers who are wrongly claiming points for I/TO-314 Le Cornate - which has not yet been activated:

I will now remove my dummy log from the database so the asterisks will dissapear. I will re-introduce it in about a weeks time and anyone who still has a contact recorded will recevie and e-mail from me via their address in QRZ.COM if they have one.

There are some well known SOTA callsigns there - maybe they do not read the reflector as Guru says or maybe English is not the first language, so they may genuinely not be aware that the contact is void.

73 Phil G4OBK

Hi Phil,
I have sent whatsapp message to let Jorge EA2LU and Quique EA1DFP know about this.
I hope they will soon read my message and will delete their entry.
Best 73,


Hi Phil, I was glad for the s2s from DM/TH-012 as we had a full reservoir of water blocking the sigs. I did however delete it after your original post. Rain forecast here for next 4 days :frowning:

Thank you Guru and Steve. Yes - thanks for the chaser QSO Steve when you were on TH-012 and I thought I was on Le Cornate. I haven’t bothered checking if the location of the summit has yet been corrected on the summit page for it. I shan’t be rushing back to Italy for SOTA!

73 Phil

Thanks for pointing that out. I had never seen that facility before. Is it new or have I just missed it?

It’s interesting, because I can now see who has logged my callsign correctly last time I was on GW/SW-041.

Over half the contacts have logged me as GW4ISJ whereas I made it quite clear I was in England :smile:

A little sample:


Whilst I appreciate that the border runs along the line of the ridge but GW/SW-041 is a Welsh Summit. Surely if you are activating GW/SW-041 then you should be using GW4ISJ. If you wished to use G4ISJ then the MT should have put Black Mountain into the Welsh Borders as G/WB-xxx.

Just an observation not a criticism


Where it was - as WB-001


The AZ spreads either side of the border. If you sit in the English side you are in England and you have an English call sign.

The is exactly the same as Peel Fell G/SB-004 which is in England but has a significant AZ in Scotland and Lauriston Fell GM/SS-161 which is in Scotland and some plenty of AZ in England.

There are plenty of summits around the world (hundreds) that have an AZ in more than one country. You can activate from any country but you use the correct prefix for your location.

My licence states I have to use the correct prefix for the country I’m working in!
The activation zone covers both G and GW and as long as you’re in the AZ it’s a valid activation.
I was in England :smirk:

It was originally G/WB-001 before it was stolen by the Welsh :wink:
(Which is why WB-002 is the top of the Welsh Border list and SW-041 is at the bottom of SW)

Hi Peter and Andy

I wasn’t questioning the validity of the activation just highlighting some of the quirky/weird anomalies that is SOTA - would we have it any other way?


There are very few ‘High’ summits in southern/central England - is it time to start a lobby to have Black Mountain returned to it original home?

Free Black Mountain from its Welsh oppressors!!! :wink:

(you can tell there is nothing on TV and the bands are quiet)


Andrea it seems there is no way to correct the “Italian” problem.
I think the manager is not even reading sotawatch.
Unfortunately we should be patient and wait, wait wait

73 de in3aqk

1 Like