One Receiver Controlling Two Dish Movers: Help Request
- Thread starter gpflepsen
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 31
- Views 4K
- Status
Info on the SW-21: http://www.satelliteguys.us/threads/89670-Is-a-Dish-SW21-just-a-Diseqc-switch
I don't see how it would work for this application.
I don't see how it would work for this application.
Nothing wrong with using the connection that you outlined in your original post. As long as you use a high quality 22khz switch, it should handle the HH motor current and reliably pass the DiSEqC commands.
There are several other ways to connect the two dishes, but all would face the same motor control challenges as we have discussed.
There are several other ways to connect the two dishes, but all would face the same motor control challenges as we have discussed.
Your system probably would not benefit from using a SW21 switch.
SW21 switches are simply a robust DiSEqC switch which uses control commands that are unique to Dish Network. Some FTA receivers support this type of switch, but they were typically implemented for supporting the eye patch crowd. Not saying that it was a theft of service feature, but that was the history.
Dish Network installations typically no longer use this type of switch and usually use DP switches, which is another unique switch protocol to support DP LNBFs. Some hobbyist prefer the SW switches as they are robust, are/were readily available and often free.
Charlie,
I question this, too. I have several DG-280 and DG-380 HH motors and they all work well with USALS. I use Coolsat 5K / AZBox / Pansat recievers here, some others at times, too. All of them control this DG motor via USALS. We're going to have to look into this sometime down the road when you have time to discuss it. I am quite curious why it is not operational for you.
RADAR
some DN switches are better than others
I never recommended nor encouraged the use of DN's SW21 switches, because a lot of receivers didn't support their protocol. .
Often in the release notes of eye patch firmware, would be a big list of (existing DN) switches supported.
Those had regular updates.
However, there were never any fixes to things useful to us.
So changing from a hacker-friendly receiver to a real FTA box could render your switch matrix inoperable.
But something Brian mentioned above reminded me of a really useful DN switch.
The DP-34 is a big robust diseq switch, often left behind or discarded at DN sites.
Most people wouldn't consider it as they would see it as overkill, and you'd barely use a fraction of its capability.
It's a diseqc switch with 3 inputs, 4 outputs, serious power-handling capability, wide bandwidth for bandstacked use, robust & burnout resistant, and free if you look for them.
Used as a 2-in, 1-out switch seems wasteful, but it should work.
If your receiver won't power everything, feed the DP-34 on output 1 through a power inserter.
Every time I think of a new use for one of these beasts, it gives me chills.
I never recommended nor encouraged the use of DN's SW21 switches, because a lot of receivers didn't support their protocol. .
Often in the release notes of eye patch firmware, would be a big list of (existing DN) switches supported.
Those had regular updates.
However, there were never any fixes to things useful to us.
So changing from a hacker-friendly receiver to a real FTA box could render your switch matrix inoperable.
But something Brian mentioned above reminded me of a really useful DN switch.
The DP-34 is a big robust diseq switch, often left behind or discarded at DN sites.
Most people wouldn't consider it as they would see it as overkill, and you'd barely use a fraction of its capability.
It's a diseqc switch with 3 inputs, 4 outputs, serious power-handling capability, wide bandwidth for bandstacked use, robust & burnout resistant, and free if you look for them.
Used as a 2-in, 1-out switch seems wasteful, but it should work.
If your receiver won't power everything, feed the DP-34 on output 1 through a power inserter.
Every time I think of a new use for one of these beasts, it gives me chills.
when i went to usals it gave me an error message. hmmmm. i am doing a complete new setup with the 1.2. i did scan 97w so i can scan 12115 for the latest update to install. then i will do usals. thanks, charlie
Make sure your receiver has your correct location so USALS can compute the right locations.
yup. took about 12 minutes to program all k band satellites. then did a preprogramed scan and got all the k's scanned. that was using usals. for two months i was trying to get diseqc 1.2 on every one. the nice thing there was i could do the same position number on k and c band satellites. now i am putting in the c band satellites with diseqc 1.2. then i will save it as an up to date udf file. charlie
- Status
