P2P Not confirming

Tagged: , , , ,

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 16 total)
  • Author
  • #4468

    Hi I have been having issues for quite some time now with P2P contacts that I have made,I have just gone thru my QSO lists on here and all logs are there from both parties but some are still showing as unconfirmed currently list is 107 of 148 confirmed.
    I had raised this before and thought it was being fixed with the new system being upgraded and continually sorted but no such luck. After the effort to get out portable it would be nice to be able to finally claim the awards that I am short of.
    Thanks Adrian VK5FANA

    • This topic was modified 7 years, 2 months ago by Andrew M0YMA.

    I have about 30 P2P and they don’t seem to be showing at all. I have only one that is showing but listed as ‘unconfirmed.’
    N5PHT, Gary


    Now sitting at 107 out of 150 actions are very slow here


    Well frankly I am more than disgusted at what is going on in this regard. I have tried to chat with a few different wwff officials about this very thing and I appear to be getting minimal support. By and large it appears that the problem lies with the activators not submitting a log and as far as I am concerned them people should be on a “non conforming” list so we know who they are and maybe we can pressure them to do the right thing. I have no interest in being portable in a park only to find I work others in a park and they do not bother to do the right thing. Enuf is enuf ……… I would seriously like to see how many out there agree that something must be done to aleviate this problem as best it can be.

    Andrew M0YMA

    With apologies – my work and family matters have been getting in the way of my hobby.

    Could you give me some examples that have not confirmed, where both parties logs are uploaded?

    With close to nine million QSOs in the database, I need a clue ๐Ÿ˜‰


    Examples were sent and still appears as if nothing has been sorted. Surely if times are a minute or 2 apart but both logs there it should be easily confirmed seems like the gap is getting larger between confirmed and unconfirmed

    Andrew M0YMA

    A P2P will confirm if the QSO is +/- 5 minutes…

    There is a problem where the two times are either side of midnight UTC… as the date then doesn’t match. I’ll try and fix that…

    Adrian: the file you sent me had 148 entries with a claimed P2P, of which 12 were not confirmed. A quick scan shows garbage-in/garbage-out to be the cause.

    Logsearch makes an educated guess if one log specifies HH::MM:SS and the other 00:HH:MM (or even 00:00:00) but logs with 00:00:HH take a bit of guessing… as an observation EVERY ONE of your logs has incorrect time information.

    But of course, this is still MY FAULT that your P2Ps are not confirming?!


    If that is the case then how did Paul get them to upload if every log had 00:00 for times and all my times were out should not all p2p not confirm?

    Andrew M0YMA

    The only thing time is used for is to confirm P2P – 00:00:xx is a valid time ๐Ÿ™


    Despite the intentions of our committee of volunteers there are some problems with P2P. Before we go charging let us sit for a bit and give them time to actually find what is causing the problems. I am like many others wh have P2P not conforming……….. I hate it probably more than most so I am just enjoying the challenge of getting in logs especially dx logs………. its tough work if I am at home and even tougher when I am activating. I just keep pushing the envelope as afr as I can and try to get as many as is possible.

    Peter VK3ZPF

    For P2P contacts do the call signs need to match exactly or are additions such as /P or /M ignored?

    Andrew M0YMA

    Let me explain:

    1. P2P confirmation is on the base-call… so /P /M etc are ignored
    2. P2P requires a match of date, band and mode, plus the two callsigns plus the two references
    3. A match is still made when one QSO specifies both references, and the other is from the matching reference

    It should be noted that:

    1. P2P confirmation is fine where there is only one qualifying QSO set on a given date/band/mode/reference/callsign combination
    2. P2P confirmation is fine where there are multiple QSO pairs, and the times are within 5 minutes of each other (or one time is zero, or not specified!)

    Problem areas:

    1. Neither log claims the P2P
    2. The times are more than 5 minutes apart
    3. Other log errors

    In LogSearch it says I have zero P2P contacts. However on 21.05.2017 I was in DLFF-0109 and had a P2P with DJ0BO in DLFF-0034. Because we were both also on mountian summits we use the upload facility in GMA to upload our logs. It could be that the GMA upload does not contain the information needed for a P2P confirmation??? Some more of my logs with P2P were:

    30.04.2017 DLFF-0109 with DLFF-0111 and DLFF-0121
    23.04.2017 Dร–FF-0111 with DLFF-0121

    If there is anyway to correct our logs so that they do contain the P2P information please let me know.

    73, larry dl8vko

    Andrew M0YMA

    If you go into Logsearch, select QSOs, and DOWNLOAD

    This gives you a list of all Hunter QSOs creditted to you… edit the file, and add YOUR reference in the HunterRef column and HIGHLIGHT the changed cells

    Then email me the file………


    HI Andrew, please,
    We of the HBFF, as soon as we got the Info, added the SIG and MY_SIG fields to our ADIF logs, and have uploaded them.
    So, I suppose that all is OK with our logs regarding P2P.
    Should I check it by the .csv download procedure?
    We were not able to see the P2P among our pending awards, nor to find any P2P score on our HB9WFF group callsign.
    Thanks for any Info on this matter, Andrew!
    73 es 44 de Augusto nHB9TZA and LKuciano HB9FBI

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 16 total)
  • The topic ‘P2P Not confirming’ is closed to new replies.
Translate ยป