check out this guy's stuff

pmb1010 · #1 (**permalink**) 09-25-2007, 07:03 AM

rainman · #2 (**permalink**) 09-25-2007, 07:27 AM

nice looking farm I am working on it.LOL

William Eng · #3 (**permalink**) 09-25-2007, 08:15 AM

I guessing that this must be wealthy retired person if he has the time to put up all those dishes and watch everything off the satellites. Then again, why can't he afford a motor?

yuzhanin · #4 (**permalink**) 09-25-2007, 09:14 AM

I came across the same site over the weekend and showed it to my wife (especially the switchboard). She doesn't think I am crazy anymore.

But... It is very informative, especially the switches graphs. It can be very useful to someone setting up a toroidal dish.

lumpkin666 · #5 (**permalink**) 09-25-2007, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by William Eng

I guessing that this must be wealthy retired person if he has the time to put up all those dishes and watch everything off the satellites. Then again, why can't he afford a motor?

Motors suck when you're watching from multiple TV's in the house at the same time. I've been mentally calculating the cost (space and dollars) between having motorized dishes for every receiver in the home, or having dedicated dishes (or a couple T90's and a few multi-lnb BUDs) feeding all of the receivers, and I keep coming back to how nice it is to be able to add another receiver to the setup with dedicated dishes (and how nice the "no waiting for the motor to move" feels with dedicated dishes).

Sadoun · #6 (**permalink**) 09-25-2007, 12:00 PM

Nice setup specially he only started the hobby 2 years ago. Wow

yuzhanin · #7 (**permalink**) 09-25-2007, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sadoun

Nice setup specially he only started the hobby 2 years ago. Wow

I think he mentions on one of his pages that he is now a scanning station for SatcoDX. So, he probably has one of the most effective setups in North America.

Sadoun · #8 (**permalink**) 09-25-2007, 03:09 PM

That is great, because SatcoDX has live updates to their website as compared to dated updates on Lyngsat.

yuzhanin · #9 (**permalink**) 09-25-2007, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sadoun

That is great, because SatcoDX has live updates to their website as compared to dated updates on Lyngsat.

I might be wrong (I am very new to this hobby), but I seem to read a lot of complaints about Lyngsat's accuracy lately. I think I have also read somewhere that SatcoDX is more accurate for European satellites and not as accurate for our skies. Perhaps, they want to improve the situation.

Jim-S · #10 (**permalink**) 09-25-2007, 05:55 PM

Do you think he sleeps at night.............................

Sadoun · #11 (**permalink**) 09-25-2007, 07:02 PM

SatcoDX is more accurate because it is updated in Real-time (according to Alex at SatcoDX).

rainman · #12 (**permalink**) 09-26-2007, 04:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim-S

Do you think he sleeps at night.............................

yep it said in the article it was on auto scan.

datacom · #13 (**permalink**) 09-26-2007, 07:37 AM

Getting the SatcoDx software may not be a walk in the park. The site for the download has been down for at least a couple of days.

lumpkin666 · #14 (**permalink**) 09-26-2007, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sadoun

Nice setup specially he only started the hobby 2 years ago. Wow

I'm going to have to show this to my wife. She thinks I'm nuts just because I started the hobby this past spring and now have 4 Ku-Band dishes, 3 C-Band dishes, 6 receivers, 2 satellite pci cards, at least 1000ft of RG6 + misc switches/diseqc/splitters/etc drug through conduit in the yard/basement (not to mention the handful of dishes and receivers I've drug home and setup for friends/church members). I have absolutely NOTHING on this labgate guy!

wejones · #15 (**permalink**) 09-26-2007, 09:51 AM

Re SatCodX vs Lyngsat.... just my opinion, but...

I used to use SatCodX years ago, and back then, it was the only thing around of it's kind, and I liked it. But in my opinion, at least the last time I visited the site, it is hopelessly out of date, and/or just plane inaccurate. Personally, I wouldn't waste my time with SatCodx. I haven't checked out SatCodx for a few months, but the last time I did, it didn't even come close to Lyngsat for accuracy. I know that Lyngsat sometimes takes a few days to get information updated, but that is good, because the guy who runs it checks things out. I've only submitted one item to Lyngsat, and I made a typo in the submission, and he came back and asked if I really meant what I typed. Last time I went to SatCodx, there were things listed that were probably 6 to 8 months out of date. It may be updated real time, but that doesn't do any good if the information isn't correct. The only problem with Lyngsat, is that it is dependent on hobbiests to submit info, and many of the more knowledgeable hobbiests don't submit info because they use other databases, and many of the people who do submit info don't always have the hardware necessary to submit accurate info. That being said though, lyngsat, is quite accurate for 95% of the transponders I've looked at.

The one good thing about SatCodx is that it is set up to work as a database, and some receivers are set up to accept data from their format. If you have a new receiver, which might have obsolete data in it's memory, then it MIGHT be advantageous to start out with SatCodx info, but I sure wouldn't waste my time with it..... unless it has changed greatly since the last time I visited the site.

#####
Before posting this, I decided to do a quick check. I went to one sat that I know Lyngsat doesn't have a clue. SatCodx is even worse. This sat has at least 15 or so strong transponders visible to North America on Ku, of which Lyngsat shows about 9, and about 4 of those 8 are mis-identified. SatCodx shows 5, 2 of which were bogus. Both are missing a FTA channel on one of the well known muxes. On the C-band side, Lyngsat correctly showed two very valuable muxes that have been FTA for a few months. SatCodx did not show either one.
I went to another satellite where there is a mux that has been there for years, that is usually encrypted, but occasionally goes FTA. Lyngsat had the correct info for the ~7 channels in the mux. SatCodx just said "feeds", and had one set of A/V PIDs, which weren't correct for any of the channels in the mux.

I didn't bother checking out anything else. As far as I'm concerned, Satcodx is hopelessly inaccurate.

Sadoun · #16 (**permalink**) 09-26-2007, 10:26 AM

Bill

When I talked to SatcoDX, thoy mentioned that their North America data is not complete because of lack of input. However, they assured me that their European and other regions data is accurate and process more mature.

yuzhanin · #17 (**permalink**) 09-26-2007, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wejones

Before posting this, I decided to do a quick check. I went to one sat that I know Lyngsat doesn't have a clue. SatCodx is even worse. This sat has at least 15 or so strong transponders visible to North America on Ku, of which Lyngsat shows about 9, and about 4 of those 8 are mis-identified. SatCodx shows 5, 2 of which were bogus. Both are missing a FTA channel on one of the well known muxes. On the C-band side, Lyngsat correctly showed two very valuable muxes that have been FTA for a few months. SatCodx did not show either one.

Which satellite is it?