USCH database and this contact

[F4GVO]

Hi Colin, Hi folks

I always put county and states from my US digital contacts to the Remarks section of the QSOs.
For example, I have this one from AA5AT. Here is what I put on the Remarks field:

EM40 East Baton Rouge CTY LA LOTW

I have done this way for a couple of years without any problem but today, I have just noticed as it was my third contacts with AA5AT and despite there are all been 'confirmed' by LOTW (ie V in QSLin field), this particular contact doesn't appear on USCH database when looking at LA states.
The entry "East Baton Rouge" exist but for the database, this one has never been worked/confirmed (it is blank)..... I don't understand why.... Maybe it is because it is a "three words" county ? Anyway, I don't know it if it is a bug, surely I made something wrong but so far, I can find a reasonable answer...
Thank you in advance for any idea.

73 de Thierry, F4GVO

P.S. I've just noticed the same problem with WI state and "Fond du lac" county. I have this one confirmed several time but nothing on USCH database.

[G0CUZ]

Hi Thierry

Pretty sure it because the county consists of three words, if I remember correct there are so few of these 'three word counties' in the USCH database that it didn't appear worthwhile to complicate the auto-update function.

I will look into though, I didn't know anybody used USCH (apart from me and that was many years ago!)

Incidentally, it is possible to update the USCH database manually.

I have been considering for a long time to change the format of US County and how it is represented in the Remarks or User field to reflect how this information is recorded in ADIF, but with so low usage maybe it is not worthwhile for the amount of work required.

73 Colin
G0CUZ

[F4GVO]

Hi Colin,

Thank you for your answer.
I totally agree that it's not worth adding more codes for something easily updating manually.
In any case, it is good to know that's it is a knew behaviour in Winlog32.

I started using USCH with the digital modes "explosion" and when I learnt about that

Merci and 73,
Thierry, F4GVO

[DL4KG]

I am using the USCH database for many years and I experienced the same problem with the counties from Alaska. It would be a great benefit if WL32 could grab the county from the QSO data in LOTW.

73 de Gerald - DL4KG