Tech Forum

Hi

Reaching out to anyone who has recently had their satellite receiver upgraded to the new Cisco 9865.

The signal is very unstable in a 5 minute test view it dropped out 5 times which makes it all but unusable. Has anyone else had the same issue. I'm from the UK so anyone from here had a similar experience.

Thanks

I've installed 2 receivers in our building without a problem.
However if you're installation includes 2 receivers with the supplied splitter, the splitter isn't fit for purpose, especially if the signal is marginal.

If you PM me, I will send you a link for a suitable replacement.

How is the signal strength? I suspect it's probably weak for some reason.

In the UK the dish size tends to be about 1.1m. Which at best is a little on the small side. in the majority of cases the cable run is in excess of 30-40 metres. Therefore there is quite a signal drop.
We have been supplied with passive splitters (for dual receiver installation), that attenuate the already low signal strength, by more than 10dB. Our AV contractor supplies active splitters, that increase the gain by 12dB.

What was used before?

We had one of the 550 models forget the actual name grey in colour.

It's a single reciever install using the current dish.

I didn't go digging around on the controls through fear of breaking it and could find no user manual or info on the tech pages. I will email the tech missionaries at the area office for help on getting some info.

Would I expect to get the same signal strength on the new reliever as old one?

To be honest the signal strength has always been patchy over year ago I decided to go on the roof and check the line of sight as I was sure tree where getting in way it looks close to me then. That said it does not account for the sudden drop in quality.

It is worth re crimping the cable end I had a feeling today that as I wobbled it it made a difference hard to tell though.

If needed with use broadband I think we actually get a better picture over the Web anyway.

Will update this post with my findings and results. Thank skills for the replies.

russellhltn wrote:What was used before?

Not sure what you mean was used before?
If you mean the Wegener satellite receivers, they had the option for up to four languages, whereas the Cisco is only equipped for two languages. This is the reason we have had to double up on the receivers. The splitter means that the LNB doesn't have to be replaced with all the associated extra cabling and costs involved. The consequence we have discovered is the splitter, in the supplied kit, is the wrong type!

Biggles wrote:This is the reason we have had to double up on the receivers.

Ah. Every split is at least 3dB drop (passive splitter). That's enough to hurt a marginal situation.

Biggles wrote:The consequence we have discovered is the splitter, in the supplied kit, is the wrong type!

Active gives more gain then passive, but when you say "wrong type", was it not rated for the frequencies involved?

No the frequency range was correct, just the difference between active and passive can be enough to loose signal, especially in poor weather conditions. Which is very common in the UK!

Biggles wrote:No the frequency range was correct,

So, not wrong. Just inadequate for your installation.

I seem to remember someone had a "high RF" message on his receiver. The active one would be the wrong one for him.

I'm not sure how this will work out for me. I've already got a active amplifier out at the feed horn and two receivers. We'd have to go to 3 for our existing use and probably should go 4/5 since we've added a new language ward that has two languages.