I can't even make out the numbers
In my experience the former maps were accurate and you could at least see the letters and numbers
am I the only one that hates the new Lyngsat Beam Maps?
- Thread starter John Popper
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 36
- Views 7K
-
WELCOME TO THE NEW SERVER!
If you are seeing this you are on our new server WELCOME HOME!
While the new server is online Scott is still working on the backend including the cachine. But the site is usable while the work is being completes!
Thank you for your patience and again WELCOME HOME!
CLICK THE X IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THE BOX TO DISMISS THIS MESSAGE
- Status
I can't even make out the numbers
In my experience the former maps were accurate and you could at least see the letters and numbers
Actually, I'm noticing he no longer hosts the maps himself. A sampling of a few birds sent me to the owners website, one SES, one Intelsat. I'd guess he is trying to save bandwidth costs, to the users detriment, of course.
What bird were you looking at there?
What bird were you looking at there?
These beam maps are the ones published by the satellite owners.
Ex: Intelsat Global Telecommunications Satellite Network
Ex: Intelsat Global Telecommunications Satellite Network
That's 89 Ku Band, I barely get beam here in Central Mex. I'm not that lucky on 87, 91 where all those sweet sports feeds are , 99, 103 and 125
, 99, 103 and 125
John,
Try Satbeams.com instead, I think you will appreciate it once you become accustomed to the format and navigation. Their maps are "interactive" and you can zoom in/zoom out and paneast/west/north and south. You can even dial them in down to the city level and beyond. Very nice!
It is all that I use now.
RADAR
Try Satbeams.com instead, I think you will appreciate it once you become accustomed to the format and navigation. Their maps are "interactive" and you can zoom in/zoom out and paneast/west/north and south. You can even dial them in down to the city level and beyond. Very nice!
It is all that I use now.
RADAR
Scott,
Thanks for the heads up on this. But, I will have to tell you honestly that my first impression wasn't as good as Satbeams.
I see many DN and DirecTV and other pay sat listings, but there aren't as many FTA sats as I would have hoped for. Unless I am missing them???
I will have to spend more time with this, when I have more time. But, I have really become quite partial to Satbeams and I hope you will forgive my bias.
RADAR
Thanks for the heads up on this. But, I will have to tell you honestly that my first impression wasn't as good as Satbeams.
I see many DN and DirecTV and other pay sat listings, but there aren't as many FTA sats as I would have hoped for. Unless I am missing them???
I will have to spend more time with this, when I have more time. But, I have really become quite partial to Satbeams and I hope you will forgive my bias.
RADAR
This could be a good thing in my view.
Years ago, all of Lyngsats maps were the maps that came from the sat owners, but I'm guessing that he had copywrit problems putting maps up that he didn't own, plus some sat owners don't publish their maps, so Lyngsat switched to putting up their own version of the maps, and I've always wondered where they came from, and was dubious about their accuracy, since they didn't come from the sat owners.
But if Lyngsat is going back to putting in links to the owners data, at least we can be assured that the maps are genuine rather than being his best guess at what the footprints are.
Also notice that some sats don't show maps at all on Lyngsat. These days it just isn't as easy as it used to be to find footprint maps. You used to be able to find them for all sats, but it's not easy to find them anymore.
Anyway, I'd rather have the sat owners map, even if low quality, and I'd rather have no map at all than a map of unknown source that may or may not be genuine.
The thing I miss most about the current Lyngsat display vs the old Lyngsat is that for the past couple years, he no longer has the IF freq appear when you do a mouse-over of the transponder freq. Not that hard to calculate, and not important for DVB channels, but it was always handy for DCII channels.
It probably came from the sat owners as they publish more data (If I remember correctly, the gain and a latitude / longitude coordinate) to the FCC database that is publicly available but very hard to find.
EDIT - About a year ago I tried to parse the FCC data and here are a few examples of what I was able to get.
Attachments
Last edited:
Wow....this is a cool site. It tells you everything you need to know for dish setup. I located my house, and pinpointed the exact location of my dish. Very cool. Thanks for the tip, Radar!
I figured that this must be available via the FCC, at least for US sats, but I usually give up before I find anything at the FCC. Years ago, I had some success looking up sats at FCC, but I can't make heads or tails out of their web pages now. Only thing I can find is broadcast stations, and sometimes ham data.
Not better if you're a Linux user.
I can't even make out the numbers
In my experience the former maps were accurate and you could at least see the letters and numbers
I think you got it right with your first statement. And if you think these are bad try searching for footprints in the UK.
I tried satbeams and have to say I still like the old Lyngsat maps best. Even satbeams has the small print or no print at all on some of the maps.
I tried looking for satellite footprints two days ago and found they had changed the format, looks like all the maps are links from other sources. I wish there was archieves of the old maps, I would continue to use them.
I usually go between Satmaps (here), Lyngsat and tracksat.com footprints
I can't say they're any better but it doesn't hurt to compare.
I can't say they're any better but it doesn't hurt to compare.
Satbeams should present you with a large "bubble" or balloon like in the comic strips which is easy to read and presents the highly pertinent information such as estimated power in dBm, recommended mnimum dish size and other data.
You have to bring up the EIRP map, then "click" on a specific location or area on the map for this informational "balloon" to appear.
I did not appreciate this format at first, as they had a different scheme when I first started using Satbeams, but now I rather like it.
When I first investigated SatBeams, you would simply position the mouse cursor over a general area on the map. The contour line surrounding that area would be "highlighted" as would a certain color block off to the side of the map that corresponded to the dBm value for that area. Similar to a color bar graph or chart, but interactive. You would have to read the pertinent data for that color bar that was highlighted to determine the minimum dish size recommended for that specific area from the KEY on the chart.
The way he has set it up now, you must position the cursor over the site in question and "click" the mouse key for the bubble to appear. The bubble has a good sized font and is very clear to read, even with my eyesight.
Now that I have grown accustomed to the scheme of the site, I like it very much.
The channel listings are more difficult to analyze. Here the font isn't so presentable (size-wise) but they have much more accurate data and include much more detailed information about the channel. Or at least the capacity for such is there. Since the format is supported partially through USER input, some channels listed may not list everything because the USER did not provide the information, but eventually this data gets filled in with highly accurate and informative data. I find it better than most other sources. Better than any other source, in my overall opinion.
I am not trying to convince anyone that it is the only thing to use, but I am trying to persuade everyone to use it in conjunction with all other sources and to give every one of them credit where credit is due. Some sites are better at one objective than another, and if you use them all, you gain a better overall picture of everything.
RADAR
You have to bring up the EIRP map, then "click" on a specific location or area on the map for this informational "balloon" to appear.
I did not appreciate this format at first, as they had a different scheme when I first started using Satbeams, but now I rather like it.
When I first investigated SatBeams, you would simply position the mouse cursor over a general area on the map. The contour line surrounding that area would be "highlighted" as would a certain color block off to the side of the map that corresponded to the dBm value for that area. Similar to a color bar graph or chart, but interactive. You would have to read the pertinent data for that color bar that was highlighted to determine the minimum dish size recommended for that specific area from the KEY on the chart.
The way he has set it up now, you must position the cursor over the site in question and "click" the mouse key for the bubble to appear. The bubble has a good sized font and is very clear to read, even with my eyesight.
Now that I have grown accustomed to the scheme of the site, I like it very much.
The channel listings are more difficult to analyze. Here the font isn't so presentable (size-wise) but they have much more accurate data and include much more detailed information about the channel. Or at least the capacity for such is there. Since the format is supported partially through USER input, some channels listed may not list everything because the USER did not provide the information, but eventually this data gets filled in with highly accurate and informative data. I find it better than most other sources. Better than any other source, in my overall opinion.
I am not trying to convince anyone that it is the only thing to use, but I am trying to persuade everyone to use it in conjunction with all other sources and to give every one of them credit where credit is due. Some sites are better at one objective than another, and if you use them all, you gain a better overall picture of everything.
RADAR
AcWxRadar-
I found using satbeams maps the other day for Europe that a good many of them that open display print so small that it can not be read. Also for many of the C-band sats they only show that there is a broadcast pattern and list no dbm at all.
For quick reference and ease of use I prefer the way Lyngsat use to display the maps. I'd like to see a poll taken to see who likes or prefers which style maps and the source providing or had provided them.
I found using satbeams maps the other day for Europe that a good many of them that open display print so small that it can not be read. Also for many of the C-band sats they only show that there is a broadcast pattern and list no dbm at all.
For quick reference and ease of use I prefer the way Lyngsat use to display the maps. I'd like to see a poll taken to see who likes or prefers which style maps and the source providing or had provided them.
Walrus,
You will have to show me what you mean about the "small print" next time you visit. You may be looking at something different than I am. Either that or you are SO old that your eyes are much worse than mine... Oh, that's right, you are older than me! HA! Just rubbing it in!
Sideline conversation... Lyle is giving me a ride to Omaha to pick up car parts this afternoon. Give me a call later in the afternoon (or early evening) if you have the time.
RADAR
- Status
