Diseqc Switches / LNBs Mounted Together

cyberham

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 16, 2010
2,351
205
Halifax, Nova Scotia
I have acquired another good quality 43" x 40" Star Choice Ku dish yesterday for almost free. One person's garbage is another person's treasure. Its original LNB is in place but the plastic protector on the face of the LNB is missing. I can see the little Ku feedhorn. Does this matter or should I changeout the whole LNB to a spare I have? This means I now have 3 decent-sized FTA dishes. I have decided to use these for 87W, 103W and 125W and forget using a motor for now. This is new territory for me.

I happen to have two 4x1 diseqc switches. I have read the good faq by Anole on these which is useful. I'm still wondering if there is any way to use these two switches in series so I can have one dish near the house, then use a long cable run to another location where I will install the other two dishes? I don't think this is possible. The only reason would be to use only one long run of cable to the remote location. I don't have any 22 kHz switches or multiswitches. I might use a PLL universal LNB anyway so a 22 kHz switch wouldn't work. My other two LNBs are good quality non-PLL standard LNBs.

Another question: Is it possible to tape a second LNB beside the main one so, for example, I could receive both 87W / 91W? I've done this in past with a linear and circular LNB, but I've never tried with two linear LNBs. Same question for 103W / 99W? Would the different required elevations and skews not allow this to work for 1- and 1.2-meter dishes?
Dish.jpg Dish2.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: FTA4PA

Magic Static

FTA Geek
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Lifetime Supporter
Oct 12, 2010
6,921
4,060
Montana
You can't stack switches of the same DiSEqC protocol. You would need to use one switch with a run to each dish. Or buy a DiSEqC 1.1 switch to use with your 1x4 DiSEqC 1.0 . A switch is probably cheaper than a long run of coax.
 

cyberham

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 16, 2010
2,351
205
Halifax, Nova Scotia
As I expected. In Toronto, even on a weekend, I used to go to a couple of local stores selling satellite stuff and I could buy a low-cost switch and enjoy the candy store viewing too. Here in little Halifax, I don't think the satellite shop is in business anymore. We used to have one. Whereas, I can go to the local Home Depot near my home in Halifax and buy RG-6. I may even have enough RG-6 already to do what I need.
 

catamount

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 9, 2009
596
135
maritimes
Four degrees shouldn't be an issue . Here is the same dish back around 2006 with 83/91/97. The scaler made it difficult to get the two ku lnb's much closer.
CatamountIMG_0022.JPG
 

cyberham

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 16, 2010
2,351
205
Halifax, Nova Scotia
Good news! I could try for 87/91/95W and 97/99/103W. But I suspect this triple combination might not work with fussier 87W (LPB) and 103W (NBC).
 

Magic Static

FTA Geek
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Lifetime Supporter
Oct 12, 2010
6,921
4,060
Montana
You can't do tighter than 4° separation without special design feeds. 97/99 won't be possible on the same dish.
 

Magic Static

FTA Geek
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Lifetime Supporter
Oct 12, 2010
6,921
4,060
Montana
The GSP Bullet LNBF was made for tightly spaced multi-lnb configurations. Not sold anymore though. :(
 

cyberham

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 16, 2010
2,351
205
Halifax, Nova Scotia
Forget 97W then. It's not my cup of tea. With 87/91/95, 99/103, 125W using 3 dishes, that's the best of Ku these days. And it allows me to spread the dishes around to be able to peek through all my foliage. And no more motor too!

Neighbours may see me endlessly walking around my property using my smartphone app to "see" the satellites wondering why I'm always photographing the sky.
 

Magic Static

FTA Geek
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Lifetime Supporter
Oct 12, 2010
6,921
4,060
Montana
You might want to rearrange that configuration. 87 ~ 103 is only a 16° spread which can usually be done on one dish. 4° separation is too tight to work with most common LNBFs. You may end up with 87/95/103 on one and 91/99 on the other.
 

Magic Static

FTA Geek
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Lifetime Supporter
Oct 12, 2010
6,921
4,060
Montana
Many years ago I played with a bunch of Dish Network Superdish LNBs that were FSS linear. I put as many as 4 of them on a Superdish reflector. I had two pairs 4° apart but had to use custom feeds.

SDMOD 003.JPG
 
  • Like
Reactions: FTA4PA

cyberham

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 16, 2010
2,351
205
Halifax, Nova Scotia
You might want to rearrange that configuration. 87 ~ 103 is only a 16° spread which can usually be done on one dish.......
Being much further east at 63 degrees W longitude than most, my change in dish azimuth would be smaller to move my dish and receive satellites located successively further to the west than those who are located to my west. So to move my dish from 87W to 103W, for example, requires a smaller azimuth change than someone in Montana. This is starting to feel like school.

All things being equal, if Magic Static can do it in Montana, then I can do it Nova Scotia. Receive a 16 degree spread on 1 or 2 dishes, that is.
 

Magic Static

FTA Geek
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Lifetime Supporter
Oct 12, 2010
6,921
4,060
Montana
All things being equal, if Magic Static can do it in Montana, then I can do it Nova Scotia. Receive a 16 degree spread on 1 or 2 dishes, that is.
Dish network works with a 19° spread on their dishes. 110 ~ 119 ~ 129 albeit a more powerful signal.
 

catamount

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 9, 2009
596
135
maritimes
One thing I should mention is your lnb looks like the same as in my pic on the right. It should be a dual output standard linear made by cal-amp. This lnb is a lot smaller in diameter than the standard 40mm fta lnb's. This would help you out if it deems to be still working.
Catamount
 

primestar31

SatelliteGuys Master
Mar 15, 2005
8,387
4,660
Beta Omicron Delta III
Neighbours may see me endlessly walking around my property using my smartphone app to "see" the satellites wondering why I'm always photographing the sky.
Just tell them you are trying to re-find the bodies you were forced to bury some years ago, as you can't quite remember where they are anymore. LOL!
 

a33

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 4, 2015
382
260
netherlands europe
I happen to have two 4x1 diseqc switches. I have read the good faq by Anole on these which is useful. I'm still wondering if there is any way to use these two switches in series so I can have one dish near the house, then use a long cable run to another location where I will install the other two dishes? I don't think this is possible.
Well, stacking could be done, but you'd need an extra splitter, and your receiver would need to send the diseqc 1.0 command twice; and not al receivers do that. So if you want to, I would check that first.

Test for the diseqc repeat of your receiver:
Testing setup: Receiver - First switch - Port B of first switch connected to 2nd switch - LNB connected to port B of 2nd switch.
When switching from a port A channel to a port B channel in your receiver: if you have immediate reception on port-B LNB: the diseqc repeat is standard. :)
If it takes some seconds: there is just a 'no lock'-induced repeat of the command. :(
If it doesn't happen automatically after some seconds, but if you'd have to switch to another port-B channel to get reception: there is no diseqc repeat whatsover. :(:(:(

Setup of this serial use of diseqc would be like this:
Receiver - First switch - Ports A and B to a splitter (DC-through) - cable to distant 2nd switch - ports A and B of 2nd switch connected to LNBs.
...Port C of first switch: connected to 3rd LNB.

This serial use of diseqc 1.0 is (was) often used here in Europe, when people have a monoblock LNB and want to combine it with an extra LNB, and don't want to (or cannot) use diseqc 1.1 switches.
Instead of a 4/1 diseqc 1.0 switch, a 2/1 diseqc 1.0 OPTION switch makes it easier, as you don't need a splitter then.


All in all, using a diseqc 1.1 switch would indeed be the 'easiest' serial soltution, I would say. But I don't know if your receiver supports diseqc 1.1?


Another possibility would be parallel use of the diseqc 1.0 switches.
See this thread, e.g. (and the drawings in the last post) (sorry, in dutch!): Parallel schakelen van diseqc switches
You'd need DC-blocked terminating resistors on all parallel non-used ports, though, I found out.
So I myself don't use it. (I just use diseqc motor/ diseqc switches parallel.)


Did I explain things clearly?

greetz,
A33
 

cyberham

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 16, 2010
2,351
205
Halifax, Nova Scotia
A33: I appreciate your detailed response. I think I got lost when you said "ports A and B to a splitter". That's where my diagram has a hole. How can port A and port B go to a single splitter? I am using the GeosatPro microHD mainly. It supports diseqc 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 (USALS).

I understand the parallel switches configuration.
 

a33

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 4, 2015
382
260
netherlands europe
A splitter has two ports on one side, and one port on the other side.
In this case the two ports are connected to ports A and B of the diseqc switch, and the one port is connected to the long cable, to the 'receiver' port of the second switch.

What happens is this:
If the receiver selects diseqc 1.0 port A, port A of the first switch is chosen, and via splitter and cable arrives at 2nd switch and chooses port A of that switch.
If the receiver selects diseqc 1.0 port B, port B of the first switch is chosen, and via splitter and cable arrives at 2nd switch and chooses port B of that switch.

Switching to port A, a switch always does that automatically: it is its default port when it receives a voltage. No diseqc repeat needed.

Switching to port B requires a command repeat in this setup:
First the first switch receives the portB command, and switches to port B.
Now via the splitter and the cable the voltage arrives at switch nr. 2; but that defaults to port A.
After a second port-B command, switch 1 stays in port-B mode, but now switch 2 switches to port B.
QED.

Clearer now? :)

Greetz,
A33

Edit. BTW, drawing of splitter set-up is here (Trust is the author/inventor, in 2004!): oplossing komb. monoblock/diseqC switch
In the monoblock there is a 2/1 diseqc 1.0 (POSITION) switch; so there is the second diseqc 1.0 switch.

BTW2, You can also modify the diseqc switch internally, so you won't need the splitter.
Easy way: connect port A and B with an extra (little) cable bridge.
'Cleaner' way: let the IC-outputs for ports A and B go via diodes to the port-A switching transistors (usually Darlington pair).
 
Last edited:

cyberham

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 16, 2010
2,351
205
Halifax, Nova Scotia
This is educational. All I need is one splitter to add to the switches I already have and I can save a long run of cable. I can get a satellite splitter at my local Home Depot for low cost. I will use this technique provided my receiver passes the diseqc repeat test outlined.
 
Top