Thread: BSC621 BSC-621-2 C / KU Band LNBF

Broke this away from my thread on Primestar 84E BSC-621-2.

In my opinion and from experimentation I'm shelving the BSC 621-2 because this LNBF has too many trade offs in performance. A seperate quality C-Band LNBF and KU Band LNBF will work much better.

On a dish smaller then 6' in diameter;

My findings are that at best C-Band performance is almost useless and KU Band is even worse and this is with two distance focal depths. A compromise between the two settings is even worse.

Maybe on a Prime Focus BUD this LNBF would be OK, but probably not as good as seperate LNBF's

Just my opinions folks. a grain of salt.

Since you seemed more inclined to the separate LNBs for each band, here is a little more polished solution.
While this is an overpriced commercial offering, it wouldn't be difficult to drill a big hole in the scalar and stick a Ku-band LNB through.

Of course, the reference links you provided in your other thread, which went back to 2005 with this 84e dish idea, didn't really work out all that well either.

The guys using 1.2 meter dishes (4 foot) seem a happier lot.
Bloomdog, PopcornNmore, and QWERT1515 all have 1.2 m dishes on C-band.
You might search for postings by them and notice that the C-band LNB is offset on most or all.

Originally Posted by Anole

Since you seemed more inclined to the separate LNBs for each band, here is a little more polished solution.
While this is an overpriced commercial offering, it wouldn't be difficult to drill a big hole in the scalar and stick a Ku-band LNB through.

Of course, the reference links you provided in your other thread, which went back to 2005 with this 84e dish idea, didn't really work out all that well either.

The guys using 1.2 meter dishes (4 foot) seem a happier lot.
Bloomdog, PopcornNmore, and QWERT1515 all have 1.2 m dishes on C-band.
You might search for postings by them and notice that the C-band LNB is offset on most or all.

The whole point is to use the smallest dish possible and get the most channels possible.

Otherwise I just switch over to my 10' BUD.

Alot of people can't have larger then 1 meter dishes and this experiment is for that need.

1.2 meters is definetly not appropriate.

If DREAMFOX gets the performance he has stated then that is more then enough for alot of folks, that otherwise could not have C-Band.

Your scalar photo is perfect for the next project, but I will center the P* elliptical scalar ring between two overlapping C-Band scalar rings I will use the second Panarama for circular. QPH-031 with C120 interface to the P* elliptical circular scalar ring.

Don't you ever sleep?

I would have thought that the BSC621-2 would work better for simultaneous C/Ku on a small dish, since I've read many times that a Ku LNBF on a large BUD has to be positioned much more precisely than one on a DBS dish, for instance. Maybe my mistake was assuming that this thing would work as advertised under any circumstance.

I was planning to get C and Ku from one particular orbital slot on a fixed dish. I guess I'll have to go with separate C and Ku LNBFs and motorize the thing. Now I just need to find a reasonably priced (<$60) C-band LNBF that has a high performance/price ratio. Does anyone know if the 13K Panorama or BSC-421 outperforms the BSC-621?

I have a 421 and a 621 and they work about the same on C-Band

I have the 621 on my 6 footer that I ghetto move but its for C-Band only. I dont bother with KU because I lose hair trying to work with it

Originally Posted by Machman

Does anyone know if the 13K Panorama or BSC-421 outperforms the BSC-621?

There doesn't seem to be anything in print that suggests any of them are significantly better than others.

Couple more you might consider:
- Eagle Aspen
bandstacked C-band

LNB at Sadoun. With or without scalar. Good if you want to feed several receivers.
- SatelliteAV and his
CK-1


. Described in several Linuxman threads.

Originally Posted by Anole

There doesn't seem to be anything in print that suggests any of them are significantly better than others.

Couple more you might consider:
- Eagle Aspen
bandstacked C-band

LNB at Sadoun. With or without scalar. Good if you want to feed several receivers.
- SatelliteAV and his
CK-1


. Described in several Linuxman threads.

Anole,

Last Tuesday I ordered the B1 Stack from Sadoun and will test it. So much for USPS 3 day shipping.

Today, I ordered the Panorama LNBF that DREAMFOX1 uses and will compare it to others.

I was so glad to see Linuxman start his project with the true 1 meter P* dish, we then can compare results between P* 1m/E and 1m/offset. My gut feeling is that his results should compare to DREAMFOX1.

The B1 stack is rated at 65 db gain and 17 degrees vs the Panorama at 55 db and 13 degrees. Should be iteresting.

To be fair to the BSC-621 and the CK-1 I will say that they were most likely designed for a large C-Band dish, Because of the large number of wavelengths between the dish surface and the feedhorn coupling, phase error and impedance matching is much better. The Wavguide and other design elements of the C-Band throat are likely designed to couple energy better to the KU Scalar Ring deep in the throat of the dual LNBF on a large dish. As compromise is always part of an engineers design, I would say that these dual LNBF's will work best on a 10' diameter C-Band dish.

Attempting to get the BSC-621-2 to work on a close coupled dish smaller then 6' in diameter is not going to give satifactory results. But that is not the fault of the LNBF.

So in my opinion; this type of LNBF should be considered for a large C-Band dish when some KU Band channels are desired.

Originally Posted by satcom1

... I would say that these dual LNBF's will work best on a 10' diameter C-Band dish....

I feel sorry for you guys trying them on smaller dishes then, because on my 10' dish they seemed pretty worthless