Data Recovery and Disk Utilities Forum @R-TT

Thanks Alt

I think you're right! The block size is definitely correct, so there must be something trickier going on.

Thanks for all your help.
Ben

Strange that it didn't find anything like a folder structure (even a wrong one). Looks like some parameters like block size are wring.
I think, it's time to reconsider going to a data recovery pro. There's a rule: if a problem is easy to solve, you won't pay much, if it's hard to do, you won't solve it yourself.

Hi Alt

I've created the virtual RAID and run scans with all five disks and the original 3. Neither the folder structure or any correctly named files are found, although there are various fragments with numeric names that show up.

I guess this hasn't worked or I've got something wrong with the configuration.

Are there any other obvious options or it it time to write this off, do you think?

Thanks
Ben

Thanks - that's great.

I'll get back to you when I've done the scans.

The parent sector numbers don't matter for the case, the numbers of rows is 5, as I understand.
Now it's time to create a virtual RAID 5 out of the images and start scanning it.

OK, thanks.

What about the parent sector numbers and where we go from there? Can you also let me know about the 'numbers of rows' field.

Thanks
Ben

Most likely it's 0.

Hi Alt

So...I've got the the point of completing the first consistency check (on the full 5-disk set). Everything green except for a small strip at the start of the blocks - here, hovering over a block gives the message that 356791 are OK, 8 failed. That's for sectors 0-720,895.

Before I continue, you said above that I should "Write down the parent sector numbers for that". Where would I find those?

I found that ReclaiMe didn't work, at least in the time I gave it - after running for a week, it hadn't recovered the parameters. I knew the disk order and block size anyway and the card manufacturer was eventually able to let me know the block order. That just left offset, which I assumed was '0', although looking on the forum here, I think I can work that out manually if needed. Is there any reason it wouldn't be zero? I was't sure about the 'number of rows' field though, so I've left that at the default 5.

Thanks
Ben

Thank you - that makes it clear to me...

I'll come back to you when I've got all that sorted out.

Many thanks
Ben

An addition: you have to create a virtual RAID from the images rather than the original drives. The drives should be kept in a safe place until all the effort is over.