Please Help! Hard Drive Lost Partitions After Removal!

cope242 · Apr 5, 2005

I removed the drive to take on a road trip. The drive was put in an
anti-static bag and never used. Upon my return I discovered the drive
could only be seen by BIOS and not by Win2000 or Fdisk. The drive is
spinning and its a Western Digital 7200RPM 40GB with FAT32. It was
formatted with WIN98 and used as a backup drive. I ran Svend's
Findpart on it and got...

Findpart, version 4.63 - for Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP.
Copyright Svend Olaf Mikkelsen, 1999-2005.

OS: Windows 5.0.2195

Disk: 2 Cylinders: 4865 Heads: 255 Sectors: 63 MB: 38162

None found.
There were sectors, which could not be read.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, SVEND. PLEASE SMILE DOWN ON ME!!!

Thanks,

Mike

wemaole · Apr 5, 2005

I suggest you use Partition Table Doctor.It provides very useful
functions: Backup partition table, Restore partition table, Rebuild
partition table, undelete partition,Fixboot,etc.
see more:http://www.ptdd.com/recoverylostpartition.htm

Svend Olaf Mikkelsen · Apr 5, 2005

I removed the drive to take on a road trip. The drive was put in an
anti-static bag and never used. Upon my return I discovered the drive
could only be seen by BIOS and not by Win2000 or Fdisk. The drive is
spinning and its a Western Digital 7200RPM 40GB with FAT32. It was
formatted with WIN98 and used as a backup drive. I ran Svend's
Findpart on it and got...

Findpart, version 4.63 - for Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP.
Copyright Svend Olaf Mikkelsen, 1999-2005.

OS: Windows 5.0.2195

Disk: 2 Cylinders: 4865 Heads: 255 Sectors: 63 MB: 38162

None found.
There were sectors, which could not be read.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, SVEND. PLEASE SMILE DOWN ON ME!!!

Thanks,

Mike

findpart 2 table fp-a.txt

cope242 · Apr 5, 2005

Svend, here are the results...

Findpart, version 4.63 - for Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP.
Copyright Svend Olaf Mikkelsen, 1999-2005.

OS: Windows 5.0.2195

Disk: 2 Cylinders: 4865 Heads: 255 Sectors: 63 MB: 38162

Partitions according to partition tables on second harddisk:

Error reading CHS: 0 0 1

Svend Olaf Mikkelsen · Apr 5, 2005

Svend, here are the results...

Findpart, version 4.63 - for Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP.
Copyright Svend Olaf Mikkelsen, 1999-2005.

OS: Windows 5.0.2195

Disk: 2 Cylinders: 4865 Heads: 255 Sectors: 63 MB: 38162

Partitions according to partition tables on second harddisk:

Error reading CHS: 0 0 1

It can be a number of bad sectors, or a general disk read problem. In
the latter case, I cannot help.

If you want to examine if it is a general problem, you can use the
Findbad program from boot to a DOS floppy.

As example (assuming the disk has the disk number 2 in DOS too):

findbad 2 0 10 firstlast fp-b.txt

findbad 2 100 100 firstlast fp-c.txt

findbad 2 1000 1000 firstlast fp-d.txt

Or the Findpart for DOS Getsect program can be used:

findpart getsect 1 2000 0 1 1 fp-e.bin

For usage, type:

findpart getsect

One thing that could be done is to set up a system with the problem
disk, and a new larger disk, and be ready to copy the problem disk
sector by sector, if it becomes possible.

In some cases it is seen that as soon as a read attempt is made to a
bad sector, all following read fails. If the MBR is a bad sector, it
then will be needed to access the disk while it is set to "none" in
BIOS, since else DOS will attempt to read the partition table.

cope242 · Apr 5, 2005

Which program do you recommend for sector by sector disk copying? I'll
try your suggestions as soon as I get home.

Svend, thank you for taking the time to help.

Sincerely,

Michael C.

Zvi Netiv · Apr 6, 2005

cope242 said:
Which program do you recommend for sector by sector disk copying? I'll
try your suggestions as soon as I get home.

Svend, thank you for taking the time to help.

Try CloneDisk from www.resq.co.il/resq.php The unregistered package will let
you test if cloning is possible at all or the drive is already beyond cloning.

Don't spend too long on testing as life is exhausting rapidly from the drive,
once on the decline slope.

Regards, Zvi

Folkert Rienstra · Apr 6, 2005

cope242 said:
Svend, here are the results...

Findpart, version 4.63 - for Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP.
Copyright Svend Olaf Mikkelsen, 1999-2005.

OS: Windows 5.0.2195

Disk: 2 Cylinders: 4865 Heads: 255 Sectors: 63 MB: 38162

Partitions according to partition tables on second harddisk:

Error reading CHS: 0 0 1

Isn't it nice to know that at least one person knows how to get around the peculiarities of Svend's programs.

cope242 · Apr 11, 2005

Isn't it nice to know that at least one person knows how to get

around the peculiarities of Svend's programs.

What does that mean?

Rod Speed · Apr 11, 2005

What does that mean?

Just ****nert being snide, dont worry about it.

Folkert Rienstra · Apr 11, 2005

cope242 said:
around the peculiarities of Svend's programs.

What does that mean?

It means that that person knows an alternative command when the desired
message that should clarify what's wrong fails to appear due to an
omission in the program code. That person of course is the author himself.

cope242 · Apr 12, 2005

I tried that software and was unable to fix the problem. Do you have
any other suggestions?

Zvi Netiv · Apr 12, 2005

cope242 said:
I tried that software and was unable to fix the problem. Do you have
any other suggestions?

No software can help if there is no access to the drive. The drive being
recognized in the BIOS doesn't mean it is readable, and bad sectors on track 0
don't mean it is not recoverable.

The simplest method to test if the drive is recoverable is to run FDISK of DOS
boot (or FreeDOS) and see if the drive reports in FDISK. If not, then the
device is dead.

Regards, Zvi

Folkert Rienstra · Apr 12, 2005

Zvi Netiv said:
No software can help if there is no access to the drive.

Findpart saw it, so the bios saw it, so there was access.

The drive being recognized in the BIOS doesn't mean it is readable,

Yes it does mean it is readable. At a minimum for the configuration sector.
Recognizing it at POST under a different name may be a different thing
altogether though. There will be no geometry data, for one.

and bad sectors on track 0 don't mean it is not recoverable.

He didn't say why it "was unable to fix the problem".

The simplest method to test if the drive is recoverable is to run FDISK

It is also the best way to cause more trouble.

off DOS boot (or FreeDOS) and see if the drive reports in FDISK.

It may or may not because of the bad sector MBR.
The result then is inconclusive, dependent on what you consider "reports".

If not, then the device is dead.

Nonsense. Findpart saw it just fine.
Obviously the bios could read the configuration sector.

Zvi Netiv · Apr 13, 2005

Folkert Rienstra said:
Findpart saw it, so the bios saw it, so there was access.

Your nit picking remind me of an anecdote about scientist being able to talk to
a corpse hours after death, by means of electrodes they connected to the dead's
brain. The only problem was that the stiff didn't answer when talked to ...

Yes it does mean it is readable. At a minimum for the configuration sector.
Recognizing it at POST under a different name may be a different thing
altogether though. There will be no geometry data, for one.

You understood perfectly what I meant and your sophistry doesn't help users.

He didn't say why it "was unable to fix the problem".

He did provide sufficient info in an earlier post.

It is also the best way to cause more trouble.

Where from do you take that nonsense?

It may or may not because of the bad sector MBR.

You are getting smarter ...

The result then is inconclusive, dependent on what you consider "reports".

You obviously never tried FDISK on a drive in that state. Reports in my post is
the inverse of "does not report" and there is no ambiguity to what that is, if
you had hands-on experience, which you visibly lack.

Nonsense. Findpart saw it just fine.
Obviously the bios could read the configuration sector.

Useless. May I suggest that you keep studying specifications rather than
confusing readers with pointless posts.

Regards, Zvi

Folkert Rienstra · Apr 13, 2005

Thanks Netiv.
As usual you childishly pick on the person rather than on the information
when you have been driven into a corner.

Zvi Netiv said:
Your nit picking remind me of an anecdote about scientist being able to talk to
a corpse hours after death, by means of electrodes they connected to the dead's
brain. The only problem was that the stiff didn't answer when talked to ...

How very fitting, when one pictures you as the corpse ......

You understood perfectly what I meant and your sophistry doesn't help users.

You also understood perfectly what *I* meant and that is why you are now
desperately posturing how you are being deliberately misunderstood when
you know that you have been driven into a corner and see no way out of it.

Right there: "bad sectors on track 0 don't mean it is not recoverable".
In other words a few bad sectors doesn't make a drive dead.
If the configuration sector can be read then the drive has read capability.
Hence the findpart report shows read capability, hence drive not dead.
No point in running Fdisk and risk more (Fdisk F6 sector) grief.

He did provide sufficient info in an earlier post.

Yes, as to whether the drive is dead or not.
Nothing in relation to why Partition Doctor "was unable to fix the problem".

Where from do you take that nonsense?

More posturing from you Netiv, you know very well about the Fdisk F6 sectors.
You know very well about Svend's warnings to *not* to run *Fdisk* in case of
MBR (partiton tables) problems.

This is where you ran yourself into another corner again, Netiv, and you know it.

You are getting smarter ...

Yup. Contrary to you, Netiv.

You obviously never tried FDISK on a drive in that state.

What state exactly, that is still to be determined.

Reports in my post is the inverse of "does not report"

and there is no ambiguity to what that is,

Oh yes, obviously there is.
We already determined that the drive can read and is recognized by BIOS.
So it does 'report'.
Fdisk will see it but because of the bad MBR it will be ambiguous as to what
to make of Fdisk's 'report'.

if you had hands-on experience,

The type that you are displaying here? No thanks.

which you

visibly lack.

Tall order that, on the internet, Netiv.
Keep posturing, you may actually convince someone, one day.

Useless.

Posture!
It depends on other tests at POST whether the bios will
give it a device number and whether the OS will then see it.

If Findpart sees it, Partition Doctor sees it then Fdisk will see it.
It's obviously not dead in the sense that you are trying to determine
it's status.

May I suggest that you keep studying specifications rather than
confusing readers with pointless posts.

Please Help! Hard Drive Lost Partitions After Removal!

cope242

wemaole

Svend Olaf Mikkelsen

cope242

Svend Olaf Mikkelsen

cope242

Zvi Netiv

Folkert Rienstra

cope242

Rod Speed

Folkert Rienstra

cope242

Zvi Netiv

Folkert Rienstra

Zvi Netiv

Folkert Rienstra

Zvi Netiv

Joep