The manhattan 3.4 thread got so long I lost where we are.
If I install 3.4 can I run a DiSEqC 1.2 motor AND a 1.0 or 1.1 switch ?
If I install 3.4 can I run a DiSEqC 1.2 motor AND a 1.0 or 1.1 switch ?
Manhattan ver 3.4 where are we?
- Thread starter Pixl
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 5
- Views 1K
-
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
Ok.
Just seems to me there was still some motor/switch issue remaining or something to do with 22k
Just seems to me there was still some motor/switch issue remaining or something to do with 22k
I think there is an unresolved issue with some 22khz switch configurations, but I haven't had any problems in my setup, Jim . 
Do you know if it will control a universal lnb that calls for 22k for the high band, along with diseqc 1.0, 1.1, and motor 1.2 ?
I tested that configuration and I believe it works. I only used about 3 sats though on Diseqc 1.2, since I prefer USALS for Ku motors. [edit] See post 31 of this thread, http://www.satelliteguys.us/free-air-fta-discussion/269067-manhattan-update-3-4-thread-4.html . You will see the problems that still seem to exist with the 22khz implementation. I believe it boils down to not being able to make settings "sticky", for each satellite. I might be wrong.
[edit] See post 31 of this thread, http://www.satelliteguys.us/free-air-fta-discussion/269067-manhattan-update-3-4-thread-4.html . You will see the problems that still seem to exist with the 22khz implementation. I believe it boils down to not being able to make settings "sticky", for each satellite. I might be wrong.
Last edited:
- Status
