dw (04/15/83)
DEC finally came out and installed the new FCOs in my ts11. While I have
not had a chance to really test them, so far things look pretty good.
There are a couple of major mods, including all new microcode and new
hardware to keep the tape tension constant. They also install new push
buttons (with new labels) and mods to make the tape reel easier to move
when loading/unloading tapes. The FCO numbers are:
EQ-01106
EQ-01156
The installation took about 3 hours to install, as they also perform
a PM on the drive.
Since it's a freebee, I would recommend that anyne who is stuck with
this tape drive have these FCOs installed. BE warned, tho, that it
took about two months for the local office to receive all of the parts
(demand, they said, was quite high).
Don Wegeng
Xerox Corporation
Rochester, NY
(716) 422-3347
{seismo, allegra}!rochester!rocksvax!rocks34!dwCSvax:Pucc-H:Physics:suitti (04/18/83)
#R:rocks34:-16000:pur-phy:9600001:000:363 pur-phy!suitti Apr 18 10:58:00 1983 We have had these (ts11) FCO's for about two months. The tape drive works an order of magnitude better. In terms of real advantages gained (not including convenience); 1. Less than perfect tapes may be used reliably. 2. Tapes written on other drives have a high (rather than near zero) change of readability. Stephen Uitti ...pur-ee!physics:suitti
jim (04/19/83)
Be warned that the TS11 tape drive, in my experience, is a piece of junk not worth the price of the plastic it's stamped out of. I strongly recommend against getting one, and recommend trading away one if you already are stuck. I will be glad to provide documentation to back up this rather strong claim.
dlm (04/20/83)
I would like to see the data claining the TS11 is junk. My TS11 has only failed once in 1-1/2 years ( it blew a fuse I couldn't find without DEC's help). It is slower and harder to load than my TU77 or TU78, but is cheap and good enough for the once a week tape backups done on it. Are there lemons out there? Don't say all TS11's are bad if yours is. P.S. I understand that the TS11 is really a repackaged Kennedy. Daryl Monge BTL-HO machaids!dlm
CSvax:Pucc-H:Physics:suitti (04/22/83)
#R:rocks34:-16000:pur-phy:9600002:000:598 pur-phy!suitti Apr 22 11:04:00 1983 I second the request for ts-11 data. My ts has worked pretty good. Be warned that the original tape driver for it sucks (will crash the system at the slightest provocation). There is a newer (~ 1 year old) version (written here at pur-phy) which has (at least since I've been here) never glitched. I can send the new driver. The drive has, however, improved dramatically with the new FCO's, installed here (wrt read/write reliability on less than excellent tapes - we use Epoch 480's, one of the better brands). Stephen Uitti ...pur-ee!physics:suitti (pur-phy!suitti, same site)
hall (04/24/83)
#R:rocks34:-16000:uiucdcs:11600003:000:2717
uiucdcs!hall Apr 23 16:57:00 1983
I have a few comments (negative) about the Kennedy TS-11 tape drive.
We (not U of I--another place I was at) had a old DEC TU-10 and
bought the TS-11 as our second unit. Usage of both drives was
mainly for once-a-day backups and file archival. Both machines
were under service contract with regular preventive maintenance.
(1) The failure modes of the two machines were different. The TU-10
has a vacuum-servo system for tape positioning; when it failed,
the machine would lose vacuum, and a few feet of tape might be
unwound before the unit stopped. The TS-11 has tensioner arms
used for positioning. When our tensioner arms failed, the motors
for each reel turned in opposite directions, breaking the tape.
Also, the capstan had a habit of catching (much like car 8-track
tape decks) and winding up many feet of tape around the capstan,
while crimping (destroying) the tape.
(2) The first TS-11 we got failed diagnostics. The FE was on
the phone to California for about 2 hours trying to figure it
out. Eventually, they gave up and got us another drive.
(3) Our drive was dual density 800/1600 BPI. If you tried to read a
tape at the wrong density, it would always crash the computer.
Discalimer: This might of been a software problem, and the system
was not UNIX.
(4) Oh yeh, I almost forgot a few more problems. When you rewound a
tape, the drive often did not sense the physical beginning of the tape,
and the reel would continue turning merrily until you shut the
power off to the drive. The light for the photosensor was the
problem (at least this problem was resolved).
(5) We also had to have the R/W head assembly replaced I believe.
(6) The tensioner arm adjustment was extremely picky. The arms would
bottom out (like car shocks) if rereads were necessary due to
tape errors. This surely stretches the tape.
(7) TS-11 did not handle the EOT correctly. Evidently, a different
error code must have been returned to the software. The standard
backup software from DEC worked on the TU-10 but returned a read
error when EOT was reached on the TS-11; it was still workable
since the backup software just gave up (at the right time) after
so many retries.
Conclusion: I'd avoid the TS-11 if possible. I wasn't going to post
this, but the few testiminials I've seen in favor of the unit made
it necessary. In general, I'd like to stick with vacuum-tape units.
Even if tensioner arms work correctly, the tension they exert on the
tape tends to STRETCH it. Vacuum units do not have this problem.
Enough already,
--John R. Hall, University of Illinois, (...pur-ee!uiucdcs!hall)bcase (04/24/83)
#R:rocks34:-16000:uiucdcs:11600004:000:1404
uiucdcs!bcase Apr 23 18:33:00 1983
I have also experienced the horrors of the stupid TS-11 tape drive. My
undergrad college upgraded from a PDP-11/45 to 11/70; the 45 had a TU-10
and the 70 came with the TS-11. The TS-11 ruined a couple of tapes by
winding most of the tape around the drive wheel. The stupid TS-11 door
is mostly opaque plastic; thus, we did not realize that the tape was being
ruined until it became obvious that the two tape spools were turning in
impossible directions! If the door were mostly clear, we might (but
maybe not) have been able to save the tapes. The TS-11 almost NEVER
loaded a tape correctly the first time. Quite often a tape would simply
dismount in the middle of a long operation for no apparent reason. It
often took several tries to get a tape to read without errors. The switch
assembly (used for putting the thing in on-line mode, etc.) would bow in
at the middle whenever a button was pushed; it gave one a frightful feeling
of cheapness and fragility and left me wondering just how many button-
pushings it would stand before breaking. Often the indicator lights would
flash impossible, contradictory status conditions; this left one in doubt
about the validity of anything the drive might `say.' Oh, yeah, the door
would pop open in the middle of (it seemed like only) long operations; this
would, of course, abort the operation. I could go on....
Brian Case
uiucdcs!bcasemark (04/25/83)
Wait a minute. Kennedy TS-11? Are you sure? I think most of us on this newsgroup are talking about the DEC TS-11 (a 1600 BPI only tension arm tape drive). Now I'm beginning to get the impression that Kennedy makes an 800/1600 BPI tension arm drive called the TS-11 as well. Can someone clarify? In any case, if there are two different drives, let's try to keep them straight - referring to "the TS-11" will just confuse everybody. Mark
mason (04/28/83)
There are 2 TS?? tape drives: TS03 is an old 8" 800bpi tape drive originally a Kennedy 9700; TS11 is a new 10" 1600bpi tape drive originally a ??? - Dave