TNAP-4 Images for OSMIO4K - 20201221 - Discussion

[el bandido]

Happy New Year! Thanks El Bandido for this update! Looks nice and installed without any problem. Now I'm trying to enable T2MI (for the channels on 40.5W) like I had done on TNAP 3.2, I installed the "t2mi module" plugin and rebooted, but it's not working (does not detect the T2mi services) and when I go to Information-About it still shows that the kernel is 5.90 (no T2MI). Am I missing something or it is not possible to enable T2MI on that version?

You should find this error has been fixed. Unfortunately, you will have to reload the image to get this feature to work. I made a mistake in building the .ipk files for the T2MI/Non-T2MI plugins. This mistake set the plugin where it did not install, and where you cannot delete it! So reloading the image is needed to fix it.
You may reload TNAP-4 using the Flash image menu. Insert a good usb drive into the recievr and select the correct slot that says "with backup". Make sure TNAP-4 is running in the reciver when you do this, else the backup will be from the image you are currently using. My apologies for the mistake.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

[brct203]

That worked perfectly! Thank you very much!

[eelstrebor]

Here's what I got on a scan of 101W this morning. As you can see, it's missing some transponders under 3800.

[el bandido]

You want to discuss your scan of 101w by showing scans of 105w????
Anyway, there is a bit of information in your photos that points to your problems.
(1) Your web interface is polling every 3 seconds, which can and will cause issues if you try to use the receiver while the web interface is polling. Make sure the web interface is closed when not in use, and make sure the web interface is closed when scanning.
(2) Frequencies at or near the bottom threshold may be missed in Blindscan. Default Low and High frequencies are set for maximum returns during Blindscan. They do not have to be set or changed by the user.

Attached are a few scan reports for 101w. The lowest return of transponders during a scan was with web interface open. and polling every 3 seconds. The Blindscan returned 18 transponders.
The next lowest was 19 transponders, with the start frequency set to 3700 MHz. This setting caused the transponders close to 3700 to be missed, and could be considered a "bug" that has been known about for some time. Similar "bugs" can be found when changing the combination of scan frequencies or the symbol rates.

Finally, for the 105w satellite, I see nothing wrong. Your blindscan returned 32 transponders for 105w, which is the exact same number I get. Most likely, you did this scan without changing the default scan frequencies.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] <---------> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

[eelstrebor]

You want to discuss your scan of 101w by showing scans of 105w????

I'm having this issue on both 101W and 105W. I just chose to illustrate the problem with 101W.

Anyway, there is a bit of information in your photos that points to your problems.
(1) Your web interface is polling every 3 seconds, which can and will cause issues if you try to use the receiver while the web interface is polling. Make sure the web interface is closed when not in use, and make sure the web interface is closed when scanning.

Never was a problem with TNAP 3.2.

(2) Frequencies at or near the bottom threshold may be missed in Blindscan. Default Low and High frequencies are set for maximum returns during Blindscan. They do not have to be set or changed by the user.

I tried the scan with both the default (3200 MHz) and with 3700 MHZ for the low limit. I didn't have any issues using 3700-4200 on TNAP 3.2.

[el bandido]

Your Blindscan found 32 transponders on 105w, which is exactly the same number I get. What is the problem with 105w???

In post #3 of this thread, you say you do not get any transponders below 3800 on 101w. Can you do a few Blindscans of 101w and/or any other satellite you are having trouble with? After the Blindscans are finished, collect the scan reports, zip them up and post them? The scan reports are designed to analyze problems. Why not use them?

As a different solution, and without doing any other tests, reload Tnap 3.2 and use it? This seems logical as it works correctly for you.

[eelstrebor]

Your Blindscan found 32 transponders on 105w, which is exactly the same number I get. What is the problem with 105w???

In post #3 of this thread, you say you do not get any transponders below 3800 on 101w. Can you do a few Blindscans of 101w and/or any other satellite you are having trouble with? After the Blindscans are finished, collect the scan reports, zip them up and post them? The scan reports are designed to analyze problems. Why not use them?

As a different solution, and without doing any other tests, reload Tnap 3.2 and use it? This seems logical as it works correctly for you.

It got the transponders but wouldn't scan in the services on transponders below 3800 MHz. A manual scan of each transponder picked up the services.

[el bandido]

If I was not confused before, I am now.
First, we have this in post#3:

I don't know if I found a bug but when I blind scanned 101W all vertical transponders except for the ones below 3800 were found. Horizontal transponders and services scanned in just fine.

Reading the above quote, I would assume that we are missing the vertical transponders below 3800 MHz in a Blindscan.
Then this in post#13:

Here's what I got on a scan of 101W this morning. As you can see, it's missing some transponders under 3800.

3 Pictures are included with post#13. None of them show any transponders missing. None of them show a scan of 101w.

Now we have this:

It got the transponders but wouldn't scan in the services on transponders below 3800 MHz. A manual scan of each transponder picked up the services.

There are no scan logs or anything to go along with this except for 3 pictures in post #13 that more or less show nothing wrong. And no one else reports having this problem. Scan reports may/may not show a pattern, but none have been provided. The only thing we have are three pictures which show nothing wrong...


The TNAP-4 Blindscan/ServiceScan has been shown to work. It is aggravating to have incomplete scans, but I see no way to fix this or even study your scan issue without some useful information. It is highly unlikely there could be image issues that cause only two satellites to have scan issues.

Besides manual scanning. there is really nothing else to do except maybe revert to TNAP-3.2 since that image works correctly for you.

[el bandido]

I tried the scan with both the default (3200 MHz) and with 3700 MHZ for the low limit. I didn't have any issues using 3700-4200 on TNAP 3.2.

TNAP-3.2 and TNAP-4 have the Exact Same issue when the Blindscan is started at 3700.
The first transponder found is at 3733 on 101w when the start frequency is set to 3700 with TNAP-3.2 or TNAP-4.
The first transponder found is at 3704 on 101w when the start frequency is set to 3200 or 3400 with TNAP-3.2 or TNAP-4.
TNAP-3.2 scan reports for 101w are attached if you care to look.

The scan start and stop frequencies probably need to be removed from TNAP Blindscan plugin for the Mio/Mio+ receivers. Changing these values might make a precious few seconds difference in scan times, but changing the scan start/stop values accomplishes little if anything else. It is probably better to set the start/stop frequencies for maximum return for a particular band, then delete the start/stop entries from the plugin menu.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] <--------> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

From the above screencaps, we can see the following:
(1) The tp Blindscan time for the 3400 start frequency is 1 minute, seven seconds.
(2) The tp Blindscan time for the 3700 start frequency is 58 seconds.
(3) There are 9 seconds of time difference between the 3400 and 3700 start frequency settings
(4) Three transponders are lost when using the 3700 start frequency.
(5) The 9 second time difference is a mute point when considering 3 transponders were not scanned in the 3700 start frequency setting.

[stephan94]

The scan start and stop frequencies probably need to be removed from TNAP Blindscan plugin for the Mio/Mio+ receivers.

Hello
I'm not in favor of removing the blindscan limits on the MIO (+)
I find it very useful both in KU band and KA band.
I don't find it embarrassing that the limits are approximate, you just need to know
Good evening and happy new year 2021 and stay healthy

stephan94