Is it just me, or do you also think that Logbook of the World (LOTW) is more trouble than it’s worth?
Three years ago, I went through the bother of downloading the software, getting the certificates, etc. I used it for a while, uploading all of the QSOs that I’d logged since I got back on the air, and it was interesting to see the QSLs tote up.
Then, I switched to a Mac in my shack. I managed to get LOTW working, but sloughed off on uploading my contacts. It was a bit of a hassle to do it, and the law of diminishing returns kind of took over. By that I mean I wasn’t seeing the rush of new countries that I did when I first started uploading. This was only natural.
Then, my Mac crashed. I had backed up my computer log, but I’d forgotten to back up the LOTW certificates and the .p12 file (whatever the h*ll that is). It got to be such a pain that I just forgot about LOTW altogether.
About a week ago, though, I get an e-mail from the ARRL noting that my certificate was about to expire. After getting a second warning today, I thought I’d give it a whack. I downloaded the latest version the TQSL software, but I’d forgotten that I’d lost my certificates. I logged into the LOTW website, and right on the homepage, it says, “Looking for your certificate? Click Your Account in the menu above.” I did that and downloaded a certificate, but the TQSLCert program didn’t recognize it, so I couldn’t renew it.
So, it was back to step 1. I ran TQSLCert and told it to generate a new certificate request. It created a .tq5 file that I uploaded to the LOTW website. Unfortunately, upon doing so, I got the error message, “Sorry, but you can’t have two certificates whose dates overlap.” This makes sense, but it’s oh so frustrating. So, now I have to wait for someone at the ARRL to sort things out, so that I can start using LOTW again.
Apparently, I’m not alone. According to the LOTW website, the system has only 30,039 users, and many of those are DX stations, I’m sure. Of those 30k, I wonder how many are like me, and rarely use the thing?
I gotta believe that there’s an easier way to do this. All this security is well and good, but we are talking about amateur radio QSLs here, not corporate trade secrets or national defense. I’m a computer person, and if I’m having trouble with it, just think of all the problems that hams with less computer experience than me are having with it. Or, is it just me?
—————————————
UPDATE 11/30/09
Well, I’ve finally got it all straightened out. Shortly after I wrote this, someone at the ARRL actually did sort things out and sent me a new certificate, and I finally got around to installing it last night.
At first, I was having trouble saving the .p12 file and digitally signing an ADIF file. I even fired off an e-mail to the ARRL asking why my password didn’t work. As it turns out, this was my fault. Apparently, when I requested the new certificate, the caps lock was on, meaning that the alpha characters in the password were all caps. Once I figured that out, everything went smoothly.
I now have 8,928 LOTW QSOs and 1,160 QSLs. This includes 81 different DXCC entities. I haven’t run through my QSL collection yet, but I’d bet that I now have enough countries to get a DXCC certificate.
John K3TN says
Oh, it’s probably just you! It only took me about 5 minutes to get going on LoTW, about the same amount of time it took me to get going on eQSL for an authentic eQSL listing. Actually, being on LoTW made it lot easier to get that authenticated listing on eQSL
I upload to both LoTW and eQSL regularly and find it much easier to use LoTW, at least with the N3FJP logging software I use. I gave money to eQSL to help support it, but the LoTW site is also much faster. My return rates are a bit higher on LoTW – about 30% vs. 25%.
I work in the Internet security area, and I think the ARRL using certificates is definitely overkill, but making it harder for someone to scam the system is a good idea. Certainly are areas where they could make it a bit easier to use but boy is submitting for awards so much more fun with LoTW than in the old paper card days.
73 John K3TN
Mario says
Dan,
I agree with you. I’m a computer consultant at a major university and a Ham. I’ve been using LOTW for about two years and it’s no fun at all. Also I’m lucky if i can confirm as many as one in ten of my DX contacts.
Mario
KC2QJJ
Dan KB6NU says
I screen comments before they are posted here, so neither John nor Mario saw each other’s comments when they were posted. I found it interesting that I received two such divergent comments.
Tim - AJ4JD says
I have to agree that LoTW can be a pain, however once you are setup with it and if you have a log book program that supports uploading to LoTW it’s pretty easy after that. Out of the 2000+ contacts I’ve made, I’m almost to the 800 mark in confirmations and yes the DX confirms are rare. I also use eQSL and I have to say it is definitely easier than LoTW although slightly less returns on it that LoTW. For a okay comparison between the two I wrote a post on it on my blog: http://aj4jd.blogspot.com/2009/06/lotw-vs-eqsl.html
Ed says
Dan, I look forward to your posts and, normally, I see eye to eye with you. Not that always agreeing with someone I read is a necessity, but it generally makes me feel better :) It won’t surprise me if you receive a lot of varying comments on this one!
I have to say, though, I’m in the other camp on this. I appreciate the fact that LOTW is not just a few clicks here or there to get running – or a matter of merely entering your VISA/MC numbers. Is it the easiest thing to set up? No, maybe not. But it isn’t all that difficult either. If someone can’t figure it out – provided they’ve actually read the instructions – then we’re all probably better off that they just stay away from it. I’ve moved my certificate from computer to computer – it isn’t that big of a deal. But, yes, you have to know what it is and where to find it when you go to transfer it.
You say that you think that there have to be easier ways…there are. One is called eQSL. But I personally don’t give them the same legitimacy as I do LOTW because I’ve seen contacts appear in my Inbox that I didn’t make. So, I’ve stopped using it.
The other alternative is easy to. Writing an address on an envelope and attaching a stamp. And then waiting…and waiting…and waiting.
I don’t think LOTW is perfect, but it does exactly what it claims it will for me. And I’ve saved a bundle on postage.
73 Ed N4EMG
John K1ym says
Dan its you. I have a mac also and have had no trouble getting certificates, updates and signing logs. I think it works great. I get about 40% return on my uploads. I think reading about the process seems more confusing than it really is.
73 john k1ym
Tim says
I think to a large extent whether or not LotW is “worth it” depends on the software you use. For general logging I use ACLog from N3FJP. LotW is very well integrated with that program. You upload new contacts you’ve made and download confirmations that have been received with a couple of mouse clicks. It takes less time to do that than it does to enter a single log entry.
I use a variety of computers for personal and professional use. Perhaps in your case the question is not “Is LotW Worth It?” but the question should be “Why hasn’t anyone developed a decent Macintosh logging program that is well integrated with LotW?”.
73,
Tim N9PUZ
Mike WM4B says
It’s a pain alright, but given that we’re ‘supposed’ to be a technically savvy bunch, I think we can handle it!
John KC8ZTJ says
Dan: You have hit on my major objection to LOTW. The security routine is overly fussy and well not needed. It was much easier to set up eqsl and continues to be easier to upload contacts. The need for such security is a bit puzzling and a bit over the top.
K3NG says
I think the security/authentication is overkill. It’s been possible for decades to game the paper QSL system and with Photoshop it’s even easier today to cheat if one wanted to. I understand why ARRL did the security the way they did, but it seems rather pointless. Furthermore, ARRL recreated the wheel developing LOTW as eQSL existed long before.
With limited time available for amateur radio these days, I would rather spend the time operating or building something than screwing around trying to remember how for the umpteenth time to upload QSOs to LOTW and eQSL.
I guess it’s a great system if you’re a paper chaser, but logically the LOTW authentication system in regards to awards doesn’t make much sense unless ARRL makes paper QSLs invalid.
On a side note, I wonder what our HF mail network and VHF/UHF digital voice standards would look like if ARRL put as much thought and design into those as they did LOTW’s authentication system.
Rick WA6ES says
The funny thing is my last PC died, I use MACs, with all my logging info on it, no I did not have a recent backup. I contacted the ARRL/Norm and he offered to send me a copy of what I had in LOTW, small log only 3k+. Did the whole Cert renewal and got the same errors you received. So off to Norm again. He then sent me a step by step instruction on how to do it. With the instructions it went easy. I actually find it easy to use and now I keep a backup and also send it to myself at my Yahoo account.
Not to make this any longer but when Norm sent me my Log I noticed I had many dup entries for the same call and times but seconds apart. Now to clean up my Log. Just my bit of info !
Rick
WA6ES
Eric WY7USA says
I just find it silly to have more encryption and security than most people have for their online banking.
To what end? Just so someone doesn’t fraudulently receive an award? I think the ARRL is taking the QSL validation waaay too seriously.
And yes, that does make it more complicated than it need be.
Dan KB6NU says
I think I agree most with K3NG who says, “I guess it’s a great system if you’re a paper chaser.” I do like getting QSLs, and I do want to get a DXCC certificate one of these days, but I’m certainly not obsessed with doing so. If I were, I’d be all over this. Since I’m not, I only goof around with LOTW every three to six months. What this means is that I forget nearly everything I learned the last time and have to re-learn it to get it working right again.
So, to get back to the original question, “Is LOTW More Trouble Than It’s Worth?” I guess the answer is no, and I will be beating on it until I get it working again. The ARRL has already sent me my new certificate. I hope that all I have to do is install it and everything will be up and running again.
VE3OIJ, Darin says
Interesting article. I wrote something similar in early November as well:
http://www.squidzone.ca/ve3oij/2009/11/why-ill-probably-never-use-logbook-of-the-world.html
Enjoy!
73 de VE3OIJ
Jeff says
It’s not that hard to use!
I am amazed that so many people have so much trouble using it. I followed the directions, and got it working the first time.
I have better than 36% confirmation rate on my logged QSOs, too.
As far as easy to use, the Ham Radio Deluxe Utilities from WD5EAE makes updating from logbook to LoTW a single mouse click — or it can do it automatically! Sadly, there is no HRD for Mac, or Linux, but I find it easier to go with the flow and use Windows XP for my shack computer.
Jeff
Tim Duncan says
If you move, or change computers everything breaks.
Jerry Colton says
Hi Dan…. I just Googled “LOTW Confusing” and got your site first! Like you wrote, I am saying to myself, “Is it me or is this thing confusing?” I am not a computer person. I can do all the basic stuff but the different file types and all that I would think would confuse any layman.
I’d really like to get this LOTW on my computer and see the results I get from my old call as I was most active with that….. and that may create more confusion as I’d like to have LOTW for my current call I just got…… Just thinking about this give me a headache but I’m downloading the instructions and going to give it a try. I hope its worth all the effort. I’m also wondering if I need an additional logging program like Ham Radio Deluxe to make this all work…..
Scratching my head…
73 and thanks for your informative site.
N1TKO – Jerry
(Former WB1CAX)
Dan KB6NU says
Hi, Jerry–
You don’t say when you were using WB1ACX, but I’d be surprised if you get very many QSLs for that callsign. I might be wrong, though.
Having a program that interfaces directly with LOTW makes using it a *lot* easier. I don’t know which program you’re using now, but if it’s relatively modern, my guess is that it will support LOTW.
73, Dan
Douglas Crittendon says
Hi Dan!
Thanks for a most enjoyable CW QSO great meeting you! I’m on a fixed income (part time/retired)
so the value of the LOTW ( I also duplicate the effort by being a member of eqsl.cc ) between the two I think most of the folks that want my confirmation will get it . . . But I also send out cards by mail especially to DX (with managers) or at requrest.
My experience with LOTW has been good . . I crashed a couple of hard drives and lost (as you did)
the necessary info . . . however, likely because it happened enough the ARRL people have made it super easy to ‘recover’ and get back on the beam again and they respond to email querys like instantly . . . I have to give them a big hand. I’ve uploaded over 4500 QSOs to LOTW and eQSL.cc each in just the last 14 months . . . I could never have afforded to send all those card via mail or even via the bureau ( I also use the bureau 100% as it helps to ‘support’ the ARRL hi hi )
Thank yo uso much for this great Blog and keep up the good work man! 73 Prayers and DX Doug Crittendon, NJ1T
Dan KB6NU says
UPDATE 1/09/10: Well, I just got around to re-installing LOTW on my Mac iBook G4 after the hard disk crashed about a month or so ago. This time, the re-install was a lot easier because I’d saved the .p12 file. I downloaded the latest batch of QSLs and noticed that I’d gotten one from OX3XR (Greenland). So, I’m inching ever slowly towards DXCC.
Jerry Colton says
Hi Tom
I changed my call about a year ago and you are probably right about QSL’s in LOTW… I may have some. I recently got a message from the W! QSL Buro telling me my funds ran out. I had forgotten all about them. Well I sent in some cash and on Christmas eve I received about 25 cards from contacts I made in 1999. What a terrific Christmas gift! hi hi
I just may give LOTW another shot!
73 and thanks for the nice Blog
Jerry – N1TKO
Greg says
I have been wanting to use LOTW as I seem to have less time to tend to my paper QSL replies. (Although I’ve read that DX QSL requests may still require paper, as many aren’t using LOTW)
I am not an award chaser, but do want to provide confirmation fro those that do.
My main hurdle to using LOTW was reading that all my previous contacts had to be logged MANUALLY- one at a time! No “batch” uploading allowed. The thought of typing in my paper logs again is too much ( I had just entered my paper log QSO’s into the “DX Keeper” logging program).
But has this “manual entry only” requirement has changed? It’s been many years since my last LOTW consideration. Am I correctly reading that the “TQSL” program will allow me to now batch upload my old contacts ( already logged in DXKepper logging program) ? If so, I may just reconsider using LOTW.
I understand many logging programs will upload to LOTW “real-time”, but if older QSO’s can now be batch uploaded, (done via Cabrillo or ADIF formats?) , I am now much more interested and will bite the bullet.
Glad stumbling upon your post – and the comments from the happy users- has renewed my interest
Greg
Dan KB6NU says
If you have already entered your QSOs into DX Keeper, then you can export them to an ADIF file and digitally sign that file with the TQSL program. This creates a file with a .tqx extension, which you can then upload to LOTW. I’m not familiar with DX Keeper, but it might have a feature that allows you to do this entirely within the program. The N3FJP ACLog program that I use does that.
Joe WA3FWA says
Have been using paper logs for 50 years but wanted to get the LoTW. After painfully going through the 100 plus screens on the ARRL instructions info, I got TQSL and TQSL Cert icons appear on my desktop. I then tried to enter QSO’s manually from my paper logs into the free version of HRD, to accomadate LoTW requests. (I am not collecting any more award certs.) That didn’t work. ARRL guy told me the LoTW will not work in the free version of HRD. But a ham that is using this free version says it dose work. I thought that my TQSLCert was invalid. Not persueing LoTW any further, I got a LoTW renew notice from ARRL: guess I had the TQSLCert all along! I think that you can upload only from an ADIF logging program I didn’t try to renew.
Of the hams I know, very few are using using LoTW because they are just as confused as I am. I can’t find another ham who can help me sort this out. But I was able to figure out and use manually and upload QSO’s in eQSL. And reject or edit QSO’s.
Why must the LoTW program be so complicated and confusing? Perhaps I don’t have enough PC knowledge having gone through DOS 2.0, Win 3.1 and up to Win 7.
wb0snf says
Isn’t this supposed to be fun. Something this difficult isn’t fun. Maybe I made an error somewhere but everything seems to be in order. Still doesn’t work. I am not lazy or stupid and have built complete station, receiver, transmitter, beam antenna etc. and acquired extra with code license. The fact that I was first licensed in ’63 might have a bearing on this but I think I still have all my faculties. In the meantime I am happy with eqsl and paper cards. Paper cards are a lot cooler anyway and the box that I keep them in never crashes. Good luck.
John Stengrevics says
LoTW is a terrible experience. I just spent 3 1/2 hours emailing ARRL tech support and they gave up. Just God-awful!
Richard Williams says
I won’t mince words, LOTW sucks. I have been trying for 6 months to get a certificate and come up with the same error msg which I won’t bother posting here. I have read and reread the troubleshooting area, but no joy. I can see no reason why LOTW should be so difficult and overly fussy – no need for it. Just my 2 cents… Last contact with ARRL LOTW help was months ago. Was told I would be contacted based on the order my question was received. Guess there’s a whole bunch of folks in the que.. What’s that tell ya.
Rich
SV9RMU - Jukka (also OH2AXE) says
Well, It is not only you!!! You may guess once, why most DX stations do not use LotW. I have tried to get it working twice without success. It is a total nightmare for a DX station to even get the system set up. Some people may want to spend weeks or months for this kind of thing, but I have better things to do. One big problem is that ARRL requires the “documents” on paper and the envelope must be stamped in your location. E-mail is not accepted, as I found out in the answer to my e-mail by the “LotW team”. From my location (Crete, Greece) an airmail letter to US takes at least 2 weeks, and often much longer – and the same back, of course. That is just time, but it is in short supply with me.
Otherwise, the whole LotW software (both server and user side) is like it was written by some absolute beginner with no regard to usability. Even in my early coding days (in 1970’s), if I had produced something like LotW, The Boss would have told me to do the whole thing again, so that people can actually use it. So, unless ARRL makes some radical changes to the LotW system, I won’t even consider trying it out again. I use eQSL, which is much more user friendly, although they have some minor problems, too. But at least if one suggests some changes to the eQSL people, a friendly answer is usually received withing a couple of hours. Not so with LotW.
Tim Duncan says
Absolutely correct. I change computers a lot. I have virtual machines, I have 2 laptops, I have a computer at work, I have a main computer.
The fact that this certificate can’t just be downloaded and has to be tied to a particular computer is ridiculous.
Like he said, these aren’t trade secrets. Hillary has no security on her computer and we are supposed to deal in hyper security over QSO logs that could be made up anyway?
I am going through the pain of trying to use a new computer to get this cert stuff up and it’s rejecting my old cert.
Is this worth the trouble?
I’m starting to think….NO
John Sherwood says
It’s just a pain to use… it’s only radio contacts… I mean really? digita; certificates and waiting on some stupid card in the mail to be able to use it? It’s rediculous… I’m an ITY guy and I play with certificates at work ands don’t want to do it for play time
John KN6LL
Twofive says
Oh no, it’s not just you. I’ve been into computers since 1983, and LOTW is the absolute worst software I’ve ever used- yes, I’m having ALL of the same problems you are having. It’s just not worth it. I’m going back to paper logs only. When I’m done with a logbook I’ll store it in a safe deposit box at the bank. LOTW is absolutely not worth the hassle. And I can’t even imagine what someone who is less computer saavy than me is going through with it. It should be completely SAAS…. Login to lotw.com, enter your username, password, and require txt verification code like every other damn website in the world. ARRL is REALLY behind on their technology. In fact, everything about the ARRL is ass-backwards–! This is 2018, and they are living like it’s 1968….! They need to get some new blood in there and really get things modernized— and QUICKLY too. All these new hams, and ARRL is bleeding subscribers. I wonder why…….! DOH……!
Malcolm says
As I have returned to Ham radio after 10 years I decided to apply/join/sign up with LoTW, loaded the software and as I lived outside of the USA emailed in copies of my amateur radio license (issued by our government) and a copy of a utility bill showing my address.
Never heard a thing, sent emails from a variety addresses in case ARRL’s spam filtering was dumping them to LoTW help asking what was going on and the status of my application, no response nothing.
I sent them a final email asking if LoTW was only open to ARRL/USA members and if so that would be rather sad as whilst I had not great need for LoTW some of their American members may be expecting a QSL confirmation byway of LoTW from me that they won’t now get.
I have unistalled the LoTW software and will stick with QRZ.
Glenn says
Wow, I’m a new HAM but no slouch when it comes to computers. This LOTW site is a joke. Sure I jumped thru all the hoops and got it up and running. I have to give it a big thumbs down for cost. $12 or so for a freaking electronic cert to print out. Now I see why so many are unhappy with this money grab of a site they have over at LOTW. I’ll stick with eQSL. I don’t need a printed cert on my wall to feel good about having radio greatness. Look at me ma, Top of the World!!!
Tam says
No offense, but when you read about someone who a) don’t recognize the file name extension of the single most common X.509 certificate container in use today, and b) don’t seem to understand cryptography at all since he didn’t even bother to back up his own private key, it’s kinda incongruent to see the same person describe himself as a “computer person”.
The point of your overall post is still completely valid: it is quite a complicated system for people who have failed to keep their technological savviness up to date since the 1990s, and admittedly a lot of hams fall into that category. However, I would argue that new systems should be built with the future in mind, and if younger minds have problems coping with a simple public/private keypair application, it’s a sign of a failure of today’s education rather than of the LoTW.
KK1LL says
The LOTW website makes no sense to me, and I have 20+ years of browsing experience.
QRZ is also a crappy website, but at least it is somewhat intuitive.
I am unsure that the person that wrote the LOTW site fully knows how to use it.
Bill says
QRZ.COM Easy to use, smooth as glass.
Steve says
I’m a 20-year software engineer, and I can say for certain, I couldn’t design a worse system on PURPOSE. I’ve stopped uploading entirely because it’s a giant hassle moving computers as you said, and the site itself is garbage. I can’t sort by any column headers in any grids. I mean seriously, the ARRL should throw $5,000 at a reputable software company to develop a modern application.
It’s so bad I won’t even donate to the ARRL because I assume they are just paying ‘administrators’ fat salaries at this point. I have no idea why LOTW still exists, or why anyone uses it.
I got here by searching “LOTW SUCKS”!