Ciel 2 Tracking

E5 seems to have moved a little east, 128.8 at last check, probably to give Ciel-2 a wide birth. Only so much space close to 129, and E5 and C2 aren't the only ones there.

So, essentially, E5 is somewhat out of alignment now, causing dropouts... So, I wonder how long all the HD from 129 will be fairly useless while they get Ceil 2 ready?
 
That's a known issue that has existed for a couple of years now. I'm talking about today's anomolies with E5 and reception (or more to point, problems with) from HD channels coming from E5 that didn't start happening until today.

I tried to go into the point dish screen on my 622 about 15 minutes ago to see what the signal strength on 129 tps was looking like...my receiver locked up and I had to reboot it...weird.
 
I also have the same signal strengths readings on my 722, I have taken readings the last two mornings. The big difference is that I get zero signal strength on transponders 20,24,25,26, and 29, these are just skipped as I scroll down the list of transponders.
Dan

I had singal on all 32 transponders last night, some did not come in right the way, I had to wait for maybe 2 to 3 seconds, but I do not recall the above five had any wait, I had to wait on 2, 3 and 4 if I remember correctly.


Correction, I just checked again, you were correct, some of the higher #s are skipped, I cannot be certain if I simply missed those last night.
 
That's a known issue that has existed for a couple of years now. I'm talking about today's anomolies with E5 and reception (or more to point, problems with) from HD channels coming from E5 that didn't start happening until today.

It seems highly likely that moving a satellite 0.25 degrees, that already has marginal signal strength, is going to make that signal more often fall below the reception threshold.

Yet another reason why I would bet that all the CONUS national channels on E*5 are moved to Ciel-2 by late Friday/early Saturday.
 
It seems highly likely that moving a satellite 0.25 degrees, that already has marginal signal strength, is going to make that signal more often fall below the reception threshold.

Yet another reason why I would bet that all the CONUS national channels on E*5 are moved to Ciel-2 by late Friday/early Saturday.

That would be something I'd like to see happen (Ciel 2 go live by the weekend). :)
 
<...snip...>my receiver locked up and I had to reboot it...weird.
Fairly common with my 722 in the bad beach location (at my GF's in the 'couv, it's fine) I'd have to say, probably 25% of the time when I try signal strength with "aim disk" it locks..

*might* be a function of low signal.. don't know but my neighbor at the beach has same problem. Sometimes, box will lock when it simply loses sat and you wait for re-acquire.. bink... locked..

All-in-all, I'm on record here, my experience with DN has been... less than stellar...

:rolleyes:

Wayne Sagar
 
I thought someone had mentioned that they had nudged E5 a bit off its usual station to make room for Ciel 2 and to provide the requisite distance between space objects.
I've seen a couple people mention this, but for some reason this seems like a massive buffer for error, especially with the TLE placing E5 at 128.86°

Someone please check my math:

2*22186miles (altitude of satellite *2 to get diameter) + 7926.41 miles (diameter of earth) = total diameter of orbit

52298.41 * Pi = 164300.30065042697860034709334254 mile circumference of the orbit

164300.30065042697860034709334254 / 36000 (to get the number of miles per 0.01°)

~4.56 miles per 0.01°


These satellites are about the size of a bus -- is spacecraft positioning really so imprecise that they need over 60 miles of separation between them?
 
It seems highly likely that moving a satellite 0.25 degrees, that already has marginal signal strength, is going to make that signal more often fall below the reception threshold.

Yet another reason why I would bet that all the CONUS national channels on E*5 are moved to Ciel-2 by late Friday/early Saturday.

I just checked 129 and I have no signal differences here on a Dish300.
 
I just checked 129 and I have no signal differences here on a Dish300.

The more marginal the signal of E*5 - due to footprint - the more that little changes cause loss of signal.

When I had a smaller dish (here in the PNW area), I would get far wider swings of signal than when I upgraded to a 30-inch dish.

BTW, I found this in the EchoStar 11 thread:

nelson61 said:
E11 at 115. E8 has moved a little east to make room and those on the fringe of the fringe may be seeing some signal loss without re-pointing.

This would be a similar effect.
 
Last edited:
I checked the comparable thread to this one for EchoStar 11.

E*11 arrived at 110 some time on a Friday. Late Monday night, they moved three transponders. Late Tuesday night, they moved all the rest of the transponders.

It is a good guess that they did not work on Sunday and possibly not on Saturday either. So, they might have moved some transponders only one business day later and all of them only two business days later. At most, it was 3 calendar days and 4 calendar days.

And, EchoStar 8 was not failing.

So, again it seems reasonable to expect E*5 CONUS national channels to move by late Friday night.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 2)