66 MHz PC for a Saber?

[fogster]

Is 66 MHz too fast to write out to a Saber? I didn't think it was, but my Saber doesn't work after writing a new codeplug to it, and reading it in again shows a checksum error. (I have a 33 MHz processor, but I think I broke it when I accidentally tried hot-swapping processors... )

If 66 MHz is too fast, is MoSlow or the like worth a try? And how much is this RAM-dependent? I can't slow the CPU down (I've looked in the BIOS), but I could pull out some RAM.

A second question... The first thing I did upon receiving these was to read the radios and save to disk, but when I try to get it from disk, it shows up in the list, but I end up with "An error has occurred...... 'No radio data found' Press F2 to continue." Am I doing something wrong?

[Tom in D.C.]

Should we assume you're running from a DOS 6.22 boot and not DOS
under Windows?

A 66 mHz processor should not be a problem running V6 or
V7 Saber RSS. I run a P60 with no problems, although it
can be a crapshoot. I recently had a balky Astro Saber on
RSS that didn't like 60 mhz but has no problems at 25 mHz.

[fogster]

Well, MS-DOS 7.10. No Windows on this machine, but it's not 6.22 either.

I'm already in the backwards world where the slower the computer, the better. Do I need to downgrade to an earlier version of DOS too?

Should I just keep trying to write and hope one of the times it'll stick? Do I risk not being able to read the radio back in RSS / write a new codeplug out to it?

[HLA]

some computers just work funny. I use a pentium 233 and boot it with a startup disk into dos and it works perfect every time on sabers.

[RKG]

I didn't know there was a 7.1 MS-DOS, though there is a 7.1 PC-DOS (by IBM).

I've used 486-66 machines on Sabers and Systems Sabers without any problem.

[fogster]

Okay, so something in the path is broken. I've got a pair of VHF Saber Is. They were untested, but I threw a battery on them when they arrived, both would open squelch on holding in Monitor, and beeped/illuminated the LED when I tapped PTT.

Setup is a 486, now at 50 MHz, RSS 07.01.00, with an aftermarket RIB/cable. However, I could read the radio just fine on both radios.

Writing to the first radio with a new frequency (well within the 148-174 bandsplit: I used 154.57 for testing), it simply didn't do anything when I turned it off, unplugged it, and turned it back on. No noise on Monitor, nothing on trying to key up.

So stupid me just decided that maybe it was just a bad radio, and just tried the second of the pair. I read it in just fine, added 154.57, and wrote it back to the radio. It didn't show any errors on the write, but it, too, is basically a brick now. I get the same checksum error when trying to read it back into RSS.

It doesn't sound like the problem is CPU speed, though, if you guys can write it that fast (and faster!). It's clearly working partially--I can read it, and my changes get written. The new frequencies are in there, and the one I wrote as an H33 shows up as an H33. Does anyone have a clue what's going wrong?

[fogster]

I didn't know there was a 7.1 MS-DOS, though there is a 7.1 PC-DOS (by IBM).

I honestly don't know where it came from, but it does come up with a (colorful) screen saying "Microsoft MS-DOS 7.10."

[phrawg]

I think that is one of the dos simulations that has been pulled
from a windos version of some kind. I would get a copy of
real 6.22 stand alone dos and noot with and use that. pHRAWG

[mr.syntrx]

No, it's real DOS (provided you don't run it from within Windows.) It's essentially MS-DOS 6.22 with a few changes so it'll play nicely with Windows 95/98 etc.

[fogster]

So it should work fine? In that case, what is wrong?

Edit: Got the reference oscillator back in... Just takes a lot of patience.

[AEC]

What frequency range was reported by the RSS in F2(Radio configuration)?

It would show model number, then CORE, COPE, DVP ver. as well as Zones, PLs, and available channels and zones.

The bottom of the screen will show the actual frequency range of the radio, and that is what you have to go by.

If the reference oscillator is plugged in backwards, the radio will be stone dead.

The squared corner points to the top of the radio, if it's facing the lower frame, reverse it.

Also, if you programmed the radio with the RSS values instead of the radio values, you may have 'reset' the tuning parameters to that of a lower band split model, which has differing numbered sets of internal modules, with differing alignment adjustments as well.

If the radio is aligned and moduled for 148-174 Mhz, and you programmed it as a 136-150.8 band split, then the alignment settings will be changed to an out of band condition and will more than likely cause the radio to no longer transmit or receive.

This is not always the case with these radios when you have an OOB condition, as many will still be able to operate in receive, just not transmit, I've had both 'failures' many times over but I have usually been able to get the radio to receive, even if it refuses to transmit in the desired band split.

You can read the radio till the cows come home, and shut off the programmer any time during the read as well without causing 'damage' to the radio, BUT, in programming, if you have a failure in data transfer, you CAN restart the programming sequence again without worrying about damage to the radio as the fresh CP data will overwrite the corrupted CP and replace it with the good one.

[fogster]

What frequency range was reported by the RSS in F2(Radio configuration)?

It would show model number, then CORE, COPE, DVP ver. as well as Zones, PLs, and available channels and zones.

Both radios read as 148 to 174, with a 5D CORE ( patch 08 ).

If the reference oscillator is plugged in backwards, the radio will be stone dead.

The squared corner points to the top of the radio, if it's facing the lower frame, reverse it.

The oscillator was just a side-problem I created. The radios worked; I killed them in RSS, and then I took them apart out of curiousity (one has an encryption module, the other doesn't), and managed to get the reference oscillator to fall out of one of them. They're back in fine now, and I did just open both up and check that they were in right.

Also, if you programmed the radio with the RSS values instead of the radio values, you may have 'reset' the tuning parameters to that of a lower band split model, which has differing numbered sets of internal modules, with differing alignment adjustments as well.

I kept radio values.

If the radio is aligned and moduled for 148-174 Mhz, and you programmed it as a 136-150.8 band split, then the alignment settings will be changed to an out of band condition and will more than likely cause the radio to no longer transmit or receive.

But neither will beep at me on TX, nor will they even open the squelch on pressing the monitor. (And I didn't enable 'silent monitor'.) I think the problem is bigger than it simply not transmitting/receiving.

The other thing I'm wondering is why I can't even pull up the codeplugs I saved initially. That concerns me, and makes me wonder if the reads are actually somewhat corrupt or something too...?

(Edited to fix text from being interpreted as a smiley...)

[Joseph11]

MS-DOS 7.10 is a hacked version of DOS taken from Windows 95 or 98 (I believe 98). It is not an official Microsoft product. You should switch to MS-DOS 6.22. Also try 5.00 if 6.22 doesn't work.

[wavetar]

What version of the Saber RSS are you using? Many people don't understand the importance of using the latest & greatest version when it comes to running higher speed machines. The latest RSS is pentium compatible, and I have programmed many, many Sabers with machines varying from Pentium 120MHz right up to Celeron 1.7GHz with never an issue. If you're using an older version from the late 80's or early 90's, then it won't work properly on anything newer than a 286/386 vintage machine.

Todd

[Tom in D.C.]

Todd,

He's running V7 RSS. After all that's been reported I
seriously suspect the DOS version in use.

Regards,

[fogster]

Okay, you guys officially rock. Dug up an older computer, albeit faster, but with real DOS. Works like a charm. I'd have sat there all day trying to slow the 486 down more, never suspecting that DOS 7.10 was the problem.

[phrawg]

HEY GREAT !! Glad we could collectively come up with the solution
and get you back on line. Another score for all of us bats. Phrawg