Hello
I would like to manage the Triple Play WAS with Logic.
There 's someone who already is doing with the tools provided by Logic now?
However, requires a different report for the specific award that is to be programmed?
It would be interesting this possibility in Logic.
Even more interesting to use the SPOT LOG to highlight the necessary calls to achieve the Award.
I do not know if the idea could be valid, but I try.
Thanks for your attention.

73's de IKØCHU Mauro
***

G'Day Mauro,

I have a report for the WAS- Triple Play. As previously stated on the forum, I do not formally apply for any of these "awards". I run reports based on them for my own pleasure and interest.

Attached is a report I wrote for my progress. I use my three principal modes - CW, SSB and RTTY. Clearly, the DATA mode for the award is more than just RTTY. I also do not consider District of Columbia. You may like to add a filter expression for location. The report does not include "states" not worked on any mode.

All LOGic reports work the same way. A list of relevant QSOs is filtered from the log, and each is processed for printing one QSO at a time. The processing allows one to COUNT the QSOs, to accumulate totals, and if necessary, suppress printing of any one QSO.

For some reports Dennis has a special "award function" that locates all the QSOs, before following the report process.

My report works as follows ...

The report filters from all my QSOs those that meet the award - all after 01/01/2009, confirmed on LOTW, on any BAND like this: QSO_DATE>{^2009-01-01} AND LOTW_RCVD='F' AND (MODE='CW' OR MODE="SSB" OR MODE="RTTY") AND NOT EMPTY(STATE)

I then define a custom index in the report - STATE, MODE, and QSO date. This will present to the report process a list of the filtered QSOs sorted first by State, then within the state by mode, by QSO date and time.

In the report I define report groups for the State, and for the Mode.

As each QSO is processed, I count the QSOs, and suppress printing any beyond the first QSO for any Mode within a State.

For me, the result is one double sided sheet of paper. It is easy to see what states have a triple, and which states I have yet to work the full complement. As stated above - unworked states do not appear.

The reports are attached. You can safely put the files into the LOGic Report folder and run the report in the normal way.

If you have any questions - please ask.

G'Day Mauro,

You will need to explain a little more what you want from the Spot Log.

The problems include ...

Spots do not contain a State.
Looking up a call on QRZ for every Spot would not be practical.
Scanning your log for every spot to see if you need it would not be practical.

If I understand your need, use the report to find the states and modes you need, then add a spot ALERT, for the approximate state by using the K call - W7 etc for the western states, W4 etc for the central states, W1 etc for the eastern states. Unfortunately the US calls don't exactly match the states as they do in VK.

I have updated my report to include a list of states, NOT worked, or NOT confirmed.

G'Day,

You are correct Mauro. I see the State for US calls in the Spot log.

That will make the alert even easier.

I wonder how that is done?

Hi Peter,
STATE reported in spotlog derived from the data that each US Ham recorded in the LOTW specifications.
I often update LOTW user list with Logic tool. Now count about 73.000 but i dont understand why LOTW refer about 93000.
If you notice, the STATE is displayed in spotlog for each HAM who in LOTW has flag "Y" in.
But who is not a member LOTW does not count for the WASTP.
There are some U.S. HAMS that despite having LOTW as "Y" did not report it because they have not fully inserted the data.

I believe it is so.

73's Mauro
***

Hello Peter ,
yes I 've tried the V3 of your report.
I state that for Japan, I created a specific logform , where I enabled the JCC field already present in Logic, and then I created two new fields called JGC and JAPREF .
For this reason it was necessary to make a change to its operation because I do not use WAJA but I created a userfield called JAPREF ordered by name to WAJA that has a different sort with the number of the prefecture.
To create the userfield called JGC I used the updated data to 01.12.2013 , on the website of the JARL .
Your report works fine and is very useful .
I have to ask you a few things that I did not understand .
The report acts by default on QSOs where there is a QSL received .
I normally insert all the relevant data that are indicated for each QSL in my logform .
In the case of Japan I insert the JA AREA , JCC , JGC , JAPREF , and soon I will add also KU .
I only have 10 QSL where they reported all this data together.
In the report, these QSOs do not show in print the value of JGC even if it is printed in red , that there is no correspondence with JAPREF .
I wonder why is highlighted an error when the data were reported by the amateur that I contacted .
Maybe we have the databases of the JCC, JGC with different data?
I'm not a programmer but I tried to figure out how to make dbf to bind the award I need.
I have no pretensions to make things perfect but I'm trying to get a Logic to help me as much as possible in the management of the radio station and QSL.
And I will never cease to thank you for the help you are providing me with your advices and tools.
I attach two screenshots where you can see the JA1FVS QSOs that do not bear the JGC "12010" which instead is in the logform.

I hope I have explained well with my poor English.
73's de IKØCHU Mauro
***

... yes, I am working on showing in the ARRL WAS Triple Play report what modes are needed for which states.

Dennis has said ... "watch this space" to your original post. I guess he is working to include WAS TP in his normal Awards process that is using a special internal LOGic program function. I do not have access to his function, and just use the normal report process we all can use.

We will see who gets a result first. Dennis, or me.

I am still puzzled by how the State for the spot is determined in LOGic.

I looked at the process to download the LOTW list - it is just a list of calls - no material on the calls US State. Then I thought maybe Dennis must look at previous QSOs, and or the internal Callbook. But ... when I checked the Spot Log there are spots with States, that do not have previous QSOs.

I hope Dennis can add some information to help the understanding.

Fantastic. Thanks for running the JA Check Data Report. It is great to see my work being used by others. Well done on changing the report - few make the effort.

On the screen dump, I notice two things ... that JAREF shows the text of the Prefecture (CHIBA) as compared to the code (12). The QSO shows a JCC and a JCG for a QSO. I understand that a JA will report EITHER a JCC or JCG, not both. All my data comes from the QSL cards, and I have never seem a QSL with both JCC and JCG reported.

If there is a value in JCG (or JCC), the report looks at the first two letters of the JCG (or JCC), and checks to see they match the number in the WAJA/JAREF field. If they don't match, a red warning line should appear.

So the report will see "12" in JCC and JCG, but "Ch" in the JAPPREF, and report an error for both. An error will also appear because you have both JCC and JCG for the QSO.

To use your JAPREF list, the error msg fields need to check against the code(12) in the JAPREF List in the list table ... that is against list.descr not tag_val("WAJA:",userfields).

Attach a ZIP of your report files to your next post and I will have a look for you.

Hello Peter,
thanks for your work.
I have tested the different versions and this is what I noticed.
Where a State has confirmed in lotw CW and RTTY modes, the missing phone is shown in red color perfectly.
Where a State has confirmed in LOTW the CW and other digital modes such as RTTY or PSK31 and JT65, the missing phone is not reported.
Concluding, the missing phone is not highlighted if digital mode confirmed in lotw is RTTY in addition to other digital modes.
If you feel it is not enough explanation I can send you some screenshots of the v3 and v4.

I specify that the check has been done on different reports and also occurred with the necessary filters in Logic9.


Sorry for the delay but I've been busy for two weekends to compete in fox hunting in 2 meters in ROMA and 80 meters in VITERBO hi ...
Thanks and 73's de IKØCHU Mauro
***

Hello Peter,
in order to avoid misunderstandings, for one thing, I am sending you the MODE database to verify its correctness.
After we continue the analysis of the results.

For fox hunting I really enjoyed with my friends and I was the winner in Rome and eighth in Viterbo (My QTH Hi)
Thanks de IKØCHU Mauro
***

Hello Peter,
thank you for testing my database of operating MODES.
Starting from the conclusions that you have written or taking the MODES database operating correctly, I pulled out two reports of my archive.
I used the V3, which I think is very accurate in the results, and V4 which has the description of the missing MODES.
I used exactly the same selection criteria for equality of verification.
On the report V4 I have highlighted "MISSING" all the STATES where there is no refer of missing modes while others are perfectly highlighted (green check) with respect to the report version V3.
I hope I can be of help for a deeper analysis of your code.
Thanks

73's de IKØCHU Mauro
***