Search the Community
Showing results for tags '5.25 Floppy'.
Found 1 result
Hello AtariAge community, I am hoping some of you could provide some insight into a problem I am having with my Atari 1050 floppy disk drive. For years the drive has worked seamlessly with my Atari 800 XL... but when I pulled it out and started it up just recently, I only got one successful boot out of it, and it hasn't worked since. I know this is rather open-ended, so I will provide some information on what I have tried so far. I cleaned the reader heads, so no problem there. I heard that the read arm is supposed to travel the full length of the read track upon initialization of the device. Whether this is correct or not, my device does not do this. It travels maybe a fourth of the way and then back. I tried the following program which I grabbed off of another forum: 5 GOSUB 1000 10 POKE 769,1 20 POKE 770,33 30 POKE 772,0:POKE 773,64 40 Z=USR(1536,58451) 50 ? "FORMAT STATUS ";Z 60 FOR R=1 TO 30 : POKE 778,R : POKE 779,0 70 POKE 772,0:POKE 773,64 80 POKE 770,82 90 Z=USR(1536,58451) 100 ? "READ SECTOR ";R;" STATUS ";Z 190 NEXT R 999 END 1000 A=1536:TRAP 1030 1010 DATA 104,104,133,213,104,133,212,32,17,6,132,212,169,0,133,213,96,108,212,0,-1 1020 READ D:POKE A,D:A=A+1:GOTO 1020 1030 RETURN This program formats the disk, then gives a status number in return. It then checks individual sectors from 1 to 30, and gives the read status. During the formatting process, the arm moved the full length of the floppy disk and appeared to be doing exactly what it should, however during the read phase, the disk drive reader arm did not move at all until the 21st sector or so, where it began to twitch with each sector read. Still every transaction with the drive returned a status of 144, which is a "Device Done Error" according to this website: http://page6.org/archive/issue_22/page_10.htm. "This error occurs when you have issued a valid command to the peripheral but the device is unable to carry it out" the page says. I have received a request from a friend to replace all electrolytic capacitors, because even if they do not burst, they are prone to drying up over time. Does anyone want to support or deny that statement? If so, is it possible that the caps dragged other more important (and harder to diagnose) components with them? Sorry for the load of information, but any help on where to start with this is greatly appreciated. Thanks, BitFracture