Recent content by Brct203

they won't sell to US-based customers at this point (because of all the uncertainties about customs). You got yours just in time. I might call them and see if they can ship to an address in France but charge to my US credit card and see what they say

can you post screenshots of the menu-information-about pages?

in TNAP 5.1 and prior, you'll find the T2MI driver under Menu - Plugins - Downloads - Extra, select teh t2mi-module, that will install it and will reboot the system. you can check what driver the system is running by going to Menu - Information - About, second page by the way, just curious...

the 0x320 service is what I scan in if I use the non-T2MI driver (TNAP 5.1). If I use the T2MI Mod driver, I get TRECE and TRECE+, and they play fine. Note that the other T2MI transponders are a bit weaker

I can confirm that TNAP 5.1 it does work very well with the T2MI transponders on SES6 @ 40.5W. so did TNAP 3.2, 4.2 and even 6 worked with T2MI This said I don't think I ever came across any T2MI transponder on Ku band, even on fairly exotic satellites that I received while in Europe (but did...

My experience with TNAP 6 is that it's great with the non-T2MI driver but not so good with the T2MI drivers (missing lots of transponders on blind scans). Did you try TNAP 5.1? Its T2MI drivers work very well. So my suggestion would be to install TNAP 5.1 in another slot and see if the problem...

not simultaneously... since the Ku LNBF is mounted to the side, its aim will be different than for C-band. Usually the difference is about 6-8 degrees depending on the dish size and C-band scalar diameter. What is absolutely critical is that the Ku LNBF and teh C-Band LNB feed be in the same...

Well I can confirm what you said... Take a look at the attached reports. Note that the duration indicated is for the blind scan part only, and does not include the service scan part The results are a bit inconsistant but still some hints: on 117W, great results with TNAP6 using the regular...

I'm finding it exactly where Jim said it was, in TNAP 6 using the GlamourAuraFHD skin items # 6 and 7 in the list of settings

hahaha you know me well! Yes I shall run some tests... I think 117W is indeed an interesting test subject. 40.5W is also an interesting one, as it has some T2MI transponders, but it's overall a bit weak, so results do vary because some TPs are just around locking threshold

Adding to the excellent advice provided by Mr Tony, powered multiswitches will make the setup more reliable. Also if you can get quad LNBFs, then all you need are the diseqc switches. I just don't know a reliable source for quad C-Band LNBFs. But for the Ku LNBFs that should not be too...

I was not aware of the plugin that allows easy swap of the driver - that's a game changer as the only reason I was staying with 5.1 was the low bitrate driver. Thanks Cyberham for pointing it out!

this is what I scanned on 28.2 East from the north of France, close enough from the UK that I could very easily receive the UK beam on a 65cm dish. Of course many channels were encrypted and an interesting aspect is that some channels were FTA in SD but pay TV in HD If you can get dishes aimed...

Sometimes when doing some testing - like site survey, it's nice to have a list of satellites with the parameters for the location - elevation, skey and azimuth. There was a site - satstar.net that was excellent for that purpose - you would enter your location and dish size and whether it was C...

for anyone who is interested in trying it, Anik F1R's orbit just crossed the equatorial plane, so can be received like any "normal" satellite for probably the next 30 minutes. I am seeing the exact same problem where the blind scan in TNAP 5.1 is not finding it, but the Signal Finder locks that...