CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Discuss CT60/CT63, CTPCI, SuperVidel and EtherNAT hardware here.

Moderators: Mug UK, [ProToS], moondog/.tSCc., lp, Moderator Team

Post Reply
User avatar
1st1
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 981
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 11:48 am

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by 1st1 »

Cyprian wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 11:24 am
1st1 wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 11:19 am That... would be mega cool! But 68080 has no MMU.
68080 has an MMU, but different than Motorola one, and it seems it is a better
Yes, true, but who will modify all the old software which uses MMU for this one? (I know, it*s not much, but things like romram/gemram/... are essntial - at least if you use winx - I do...)
Power without the Price. It's not a bug. It's a feature. _/|\_ATARI

1040STFM in PC-Tower (PAK68/2, OvrScn, 4 MB, 1GB SCSI, CD-ROM...) * 3x Falcon 030 * 3x TT030 * many 260 /520/1040ST(F)(M)(+) * 520/1040STE * many Mega ST * 2x Mega STE * Stacy * STBook * 2x SLM605 * 3x SLM804 * SMM804 * SH 204/205 * Megafile 30/44/60 * SF314 * SF354 * 5x Pofo * PC3 * ...
Rustynutt
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1542
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 7:38 am
Location: Oregon

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by Rustynutt »

1st1 wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 4:58 pm
Cyprian wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 11:24 am
1st1 wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 11:19 am That... would be mega cool! But 68080 has no MMU.
68080 has an MMU, but different than Motorola one, and it seems it is a better
Yes, true, but who will modify all the old software which uses MMU for this one? (I know, it*s not much, but things like romram/gemram/... are essntial - at least if you use winx - I do...)
But CT60 doesn't need rom to ram..?
Accomplished differently, but neither does AB040.

So I look for my original CT60 shipping box from Rudolph. Think 2003?

For those wanting a CT60, best to bite the bullet and buy NOS full 68060 from reliable vendor.

Or, change platforms and buy Viper stand alone :)

This is the same discussion started when Willy announced his CT60e, without 060 included.

I'm 65, will never live to see 68080 inside Falcon :)
User avatar
1st1
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 981
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 11:48 am

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by 1st1 »

Rustynutt wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 5:04 pm But CT60 doesn't need rom to ram..?
Try using WinX without that...

https://www.atari-forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=23545
Power without the Price. It's not a bug. It's a feature. _/|\_ATARI

1040STFM in PC-Tower (PAK68/2, OvrScn, 4 MB, 1GB SCSI, CD-ROM...) * 3x Falcon 030 * 3x TT030 * many 260 /520/1040ST(F)(M)(+) * 520/1040STE * many Mega ST * 2x Mega STE * Stacy * STBook * 2x SLM605 * 3x SLM804 * SMM804 * SH 204/205 * Megafile 30/44/60 * SF314 * SF354 * 5x Pofo * PC3 * ...
User avatar
dhedberg
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1336
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 8:36 am
Contact:

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by dhedberg »

Hm, isn't CT60 TOS always relocated to TT-RAM at boot?
Daniel, New Beat - http://newbeat.atari.org.
Like demos? Have a look at our new Falcon030 demo It's that time of the year again, or click here to feel the JOY.
Rustynutt
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1542
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 7:38 am
Location: Oregon

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by Rustynutt »

dhedberg wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 6:38 pm Hm, isn't CT60 TOS always relocated to TT-RAM at boot?
Yes, it does.
The link to the WinX discussion is not on a CT, as far as I could tell.
User avatar
Cyprian
10 GOTO 10
10 GOTO 10
Posts: 2416
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2002 11:23 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by Cyprian »

1st1 wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 4:58 pm
Cyprian wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 11:24 am
1st1 wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 11:19 am That... would be mega cool! But 68080 has no MMU.
68080 has an MMU, but different than Motorola one, and it seems it is a better
Yes, true, but who will modify all the old software which uses MMU for this one? (I know, it*s not much, but things like romram/gemram/... are essntial - at least if you use winx - I do...)
If I remember correctly every MC processor (020/030/040/060) has its own backward incompatible MMU. Therefore one more incompatible shouldn't be an issue. Especially there are some skilled Atarians with the Vampire.
But I see one issue - I'm not able to find any documentation about 68080 MMU structure/instructions, and I'm not sure whether it was published yet.
Mega ST 1 / 7800 / Portfolio / Lynx II / Jaguar / TT030 / Mega STe / 800 XL / 1040 STe / Falcon030 / 65 XE / 520 STm / SM124 / SC1435
DDD HDD / AT Speed C16 / TF536 / SDrive / PAK68/3 / Lynx Multi Card / LDW Super 2000 / XCA12 / SkunkBoard / CosmosEx / SatanDisk / UltraSatan / USB Floppy Drive Emulator / Eiffel / SIO2PC / Crazy Dots / PAM Net
Hatari / Steem SSE / Aranym / Saint
http://260ste.atari.org
PeterS
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 503
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:53 pm
Location: England, GB

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by PeterS »

It would have been great if an Apollo fpga was available to replace the 68060 in Falcons and other machines but understandably they have focused on the Amiga market.
ThorstenOtto
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1842
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:54 pm

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by ThorstenOtto »

Cyprian wrote: Wed Dec 01, 2021 8:24 pm If I remember correctly every MC processor (020/030/040/060) has its own backward incompatible MMU.
68020 could only use an external MMU (68851), which is compatible to the one of 030 (however i don't think it was ever used for Atari). The MMU's of 040 and 060 are almost identical. So in fact you only have to deal with two different implementations.
But I see one issue - I'm not able to find any documentation about 68080 MMU structure/instructions, and I'm not sure whether it was published yet.
68080 is closed source. You don't even get much information about the "normal" instruction set. So that alone will make it impossible to support it.
User avatar
Cyprian
10 GOTO 10
10 GOTO 10
Posts: 2416
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2002 11:23 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by Cyprian »

PeterS wrote: Wed Dec 01, 2021 9:27 pm It would have been great if an Apollo fpga was available to replace the 68060 in Falcons and other machines but understandably they have focused on the Amiga market.
Gunnar mentioned that 68080 code can be licensed. The question is who could a proper, Falcon compatible FPGA hardware for it.
ThorstenOtto wrote: Wed Dec 01, 2021 10:17 pm 68020 could only use an external MMU (68851), which is compatible to the one of 030 (however i don't think it was ever used for Atari). The MMU's of 040 and 060 are almost identical. So in fact you only have to deal with two different implementations.
thanks for clarification.
ThorstenOtto wrote: Wed Dec 01, 2021 10:17 pm 68080 is closed source. You don't even get much information about the "normal" instruction set. So that alone will make it impossible to support it.
Regarding 68080 instruction set, it is well documented there:
http://www.apollo-core.com/index.htm?pa ... 1&z=nID3gE
plus deep dive about AMMX:
http://www.apollo-core.com/AMMX.doc.txt

but there is no details about MMU
Mega ST 1 / 7800 / Portfolio / Lynx II / Jaguar / TT030 / Mega STe / 800 XL / 1040 STe / Falcon030 / 65 XE / 520 STm / SM124 / SC1435
DDD HDD / AT Speed C16 / TF536 / SDrive / PAK68/3 / Lynx Multi Card / LDW Super 2000 / XCA12 / SkunkBoard / CosmosEx / SatanDisk / UltraSatan / USB Floppy Drive Emulator / Eiffel / SIO2PC / Crazy Dots / PAM Net
Hatari / Steem SSE / Aranym / Saint
http://260ste.atari.org
User avatar
sporniket
Obsessive compulsive Atari behavior
Obsessive compulsive Atari behavior
Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:39 pm

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by sporniket »

ThorstenOtto wrote: Wed Dec 01, 2021 10:17 pm 68020 could only use an external MMU (68851), which is compatible to the one of 030 (however i don't think it was ever used for Atari).
To complement this, and just because I searched about the subject recently, here is what I found (cannot find the original site, but I think, reading it again, it was taken from a discussion thread from linux kernel developpers).
Since I cannot find the url I took that from, here is the full text :
UnknownSourceButYouMayFindItAgainLatter wrote: 68030 on chip PMMU vs Motorola 68851 PMMU chip
There has been some discussion of the compatibility of the Motorola 68851 (PMMU) and the 68030 on chip PMMU.
Neither the PMMU nor the 68030 MMU consitutes a proper superset of the other. The PMMU has instructions and registers not found in the 68030 MMU, while the latter has registers not on the PMMU.
However, in a typical Unix implementation little work would be needed to port PMMU specific code to the 68030.
The 68030 has registers not on the PMMU. The important differences between the PMMU and the 68030 MMU in a Unix environment, as I see it, are:
  • The PMMU has a 64 entries cache with 8 process id tags. The 68030 MMU has a 22 entries cache with no process id tags.
  • The 68030 has two transparent translation registers (TTRs) that pass the address through untranslated. Effectively, they are cache hits not requiring cache entries.
CACHE SIZE

Limiting the cache to 22 entries and forcing clearing and reload on every context switch seems likely to result in performance degradation. As mentioned, there are no process ids attached to the cache entries. However, with but 22 entries this may not be the wrong approach.
My beliefs on the effects of the cache reduction on performance are intuitive. Does anyone have actual measurements on cache size with/without process id tags? in a Unix environment? in other environments?

TRANSPARENT TRANSLATION

If kernel text and data are mapped transparently then use of the transparent translation registers always results in cache hits for the kernel whether or not the kernel exhibits good locality of reference. Further, no cache entries are required for addresses mapped by the TTRs.
We will the TTRs to map RAM and our other board addresses. Ram starts at 0 up to 64 MB, but the other board space begins at 0x2000,0000. So we will use one TTR for kernel ram, and one for the hardware addresses.
However, the TTRs are programmed with a base address and mask, like the 68451 descriptors, as opposed to a more sensible base address and limit, so the memory map must be appropriate. The minimum area mapped by a TTR is 16MB.
With the PMMU a "shared globally" bit can be set in a long (8 byte) descriptor. The effect is that the cache entry is valid for all process id's. However, each such page still requires a cache entry, so non-locality of the kernel could be an issue if too many cache entries are used.
(I seem to remember some past discussion on kernel non-locality, but don't remember if the effects on overall cache hit rate within a Unix environment were reported.)
User avatar
mrbombermillzy
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 9:24 am

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by mrbombermillzy »

Regarding the Vampire: I believe the 080 (although it is a good, well designed progression of the 680x0 line) is not the main 'win' here.

IMHO the big thing with the Vampire is superfast full 68000/20/30 compatability. Thats what the vast majority of code is out there (for the Atari and Amiga anyway).

As an Amiga coder, with a level speed playing field across all the 68xxx CPUs, personally I would think twice about starting a project using pure 060 code at this time. You are just limiting yourself unneccessarily, as its not fully downward compatible, nor 'king of the hill' anymore.

The days of the superfast 680 00/20/30 RPi/FPGAs are here (Vampire/Buffee/PiStorm/etc), which would probably dictate the use of straight 68000 code for max code compatability, or 020/30 for full 32-bit data/address path.

The only fly in the ointment with this thinking logic, is that most of these acellerators are for the Amiga.

The Atari barely gets a look in. This changes the outlook somewhat, but we have some fine products coming up (Buffee SHOULD work for 68000 systems, you have the CT here and we have BW working on a 030 booster for the Falcon).
User avatar
Dbug
Atari maniac
Atari maniac
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2003 8:42 pm
Location: Oslo (Norway)
Contact:

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by Dbug »

mrbombermillzy wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 9:50 am Regarding the Vampire: I believe the 080 (although it is a good, well designed progression of the 680x0 line) is not the main 'win' here.

IMHO the big thing with the Vampire is superfast full 68000/20/30 compatability. Thats what the vast majority of code is out there (for the Atari and Amiga anyway).
I was only mentioning the 68080 because it seemed to be a well supported and tested design that actually made it to production, looking like a proper alternative for an accelerator.

And yes I agree that a 100mhz 68000 would be much more compatible than a 100mhz 68060, if only because code would not have to be patched to handle the different stack frames, cache/prefetch issues, etc...
User avatar
mrbombermillzy
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 9:24 am

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by mrbombermillzy »

Dbug wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 10:14 am
I was only mentioning the 68080 because it seemed to be a well supported and tested design that actually made it to production, looking like a proper alternative for an accelerator.
I fully agree with you. The 080 is a very good progression of the 680x0 line. (The fact that most 080 instructions take 1 cyc is a good start!)

I also believe the AMMX instructions to be very good.

If Gunnar is reasonable with licensing and someone on the Atari side can integrate the hardware (remove the Amiga specifics) then it would be a logical step forwards.
joska
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 5190
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Florø, Norway
Contact:

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by joska »

I have a PiStorm in my A500. It's nowhere near as fast as my CT60, but... There are not that many 060-users out there, and the number will not increase by much due to the high prices of the currently unobtainable CPU's. So there is not much incentive to develop software that really exploits the power of the 060. An ultracheap-but-not-that-fast accelerator like the PiStorm OTOH will make lots of RAM and a relatively fast CPU (when emulating a 030 my PiStorm performs as an ~80MHz real 030) available to all Falcon users. It also has the potential of SuperVidel-like graphics for free. Considering the low cost of such a solution I would imagine that most active Falcon users would get one, which again would inspire developers to exploit it's features.
Jo Even

VanillaMiNT - Falcon060 - Milan060 - Falcon040 - MIST - Mega STE - Mega ST - STM - STE - Amiga 600 - Sharp MZ700 - MSX - Amstrad CPC - C64
czietz
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 1773
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 6:47 pm

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by czietz »

BTW: Is there any documentation what exactly is missing in PiStorm? (Typically, "Amiga-centric" accelerators omit a lot of 68k features that are required for Ataris.) Sadly, their GitHub page has zero info on this and the CPLD source code is not public.

Also, like you say, there is a massive difference in performance between a PiStorm and a CT60; therefore, surely there will be a market for the newly built CT60s, too.
MegaSTEarian
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 503
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2020 5:23 pm

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by MegaSTEarian »

Exactly what @joska implies is what the new CT6x should implement IMHO. A fast compatible CPU for the Falcon (versions for other models my also be an option) like PiStorm or Buffee which would also integrate some sort of Videl/Shifter expansion that would allow for better graphics. The 68060 cost doubles or triples the end consumer cost for an accelerator which is quite likely a recipe for commercial disaster. This is why I asked if the CPU could be replaced by an FPGA implementation.
User avatar
mrbombermillzy
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 9:24 am

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by mrbombermillzy »

joska wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 11:07 am I have a PiStorm in my A500. It's nowhere near as fast as my CT60
Yes, of course. Also, I did not factor in the IPC improvements of faster 68020+ CPUs on a Vamp, which will make them faster clock for clock anyway.

PiStorm was included in my candidates list, but really, I think Buffee is the real one to look out for, possibly being much faster than the Vampire, but just a 'clean' 68k implementation (which hopefully includes the needed functioning for the Ataris), with none of the fancy trimmings of the Vampire cards.

Again, I will say, the Atari side of this is a different scenario, so CT card is still relevant here as an option.

All I would ask of anyone designing a booster card NOW, is can we please ditch the paltry 64/128Mb RAM support as the 030+ can theoretically access 4Gb. Why limit ourselves? We are not needing to 'emulate' 1990's RAM prices :)
PeterS
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 503
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:53 pm
Location: England, GB

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by PeterS »

Is there a way of creating a list of those seriously interested in a CT60 fpga "vampire" style booster for their Atari ?

Something like a Kickstarter that might persuade the Vampire guys that there is a real opportunity to produce a suitable device.
User avatar
Cyprian
10 GOTO 10
10 GOTO 10
Posts: 2416
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2002 11:23 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by Cyprian »

czietz wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 11:38 am BTW: Is there any documentation what exactly is missing in PiStorm? (Typically, "Amiga-centric" accelerators omit a lot of 68k features that are required for Ataris.) Sadly, their GitHub page has zero info on this and the CPLD source code is not public.
I see on the PiStorm Discord that it is based on Musashi and nas some unimplemented pin signals like: FC0-2, BR/BG/BGACK, VMA/VPA, E Clock
I see also that our AF colleagues - Tuxie and Alexh were active there.
There you an find the PiStorm thread: https://www.atari-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=40540
Mega ST 1 / 7800 / Portfolio / Lynx II / Jaguar / TT030 / Mega STe / 800 XL / 1040 STe / Falcon030 / 65 XE / 520 STm / SM124 / SC1435
DDD HDD / AT Speed C16 / TF536 / SDrive / PAK68/3 / Lynx Multi Card / LDW Super 2000 / XCA12 / SkunkBoard / CosmosEx / SatanDisk / UltraSatan / USB Floppy Drive Emulator / Eiffel / SIO2PC / Crazy Dots / PAM Net
Hatari / Steem SSE / Aranym / Saint
http://260ste.atari.org
joska
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 5190
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Florø, Norway
Contact:

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by joska »

Buffee almost sounds too good to be true, if they achieve anything near the promised performance I will be seriously impressed. They do promise a full 68000 bus implementation though, so it should in theory work out of the box in any ST. 030 MMU-support is promised, so it may even work on a Falcon.
Jo Even

VanillaMiNT - Falcon060 - Milan060 - Falcon040 - MIST - Mega STE - Mega ST - STM - STE - Amiga 600 - Sharp MZ700 - MSX - Amstrad CPC - C64
User avatar
mrbombermillzy
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 9:24 am

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by mrbombermillzy »

Plain DIP 68k initially, I guess, will be the target.

However, it would be great if they did several different ones (for 68030 would be ideal, if thats a later target arch).
User avatar
mfro
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1015
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 10:33 am
Location: SW Germany

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by mfro »

Cyprian wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 11:24 am68080 has an MMU, but different than Motorola one, and it seems it is a better...
One can believe that (or not) but that thread actually stands out in avoiding any direct and detailed answer on the internal workings and capabilities of the Apollo MPU/MMU.

An MMU that can't be user programmed and that presents virtual addresses to all bus masters (that's essentially what the thread says besides "better") is basically virtually nonexistant.
User avatar
Cyprian
10 GOTO 10
10 GOTO 10
Posts: 2416
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2002 11:23 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by Cyprian »

mfro wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 2:59 pm An MMU that can't be user programmed and that presents virtual addresses to all bus masters (that's essentially what the thread says besides "better") is basically virtually nonexistant.
true,
but according to those threads there is a programmable MMU:

http://www.apollo-core.com/knowledge.ph ... 8&z=BzOfxV
http://www.apollo-core.com/knowledge.ph ... 6&z=xMLFlj

Code: Select all

The concept of APOLLO MMU allows a LOT MORE than old 680x0 MMU.

The APOLLO MMU allows to manage several memory controllers.
This is a complete new - no 68k before did allow this.

Right now we keep this private as old software does not handle this.
Mega ST 1 / 7800 / Portfolio / Lynx II / Jaguar / TT030 / Mega STe / 800 XL / 1040 STe / Falcon030 / 65 XE / 520 STm / SM124 / SC1435
DDD HDD / AT Speed C16 / TF536 / SDrive / PAK68/3 / Lynx Multi Card / LDW Super 2000 / XCA12 / SkunkBoard / CosmosEx / SatanDisk / UltraSatan / USB Floppy Drive Emulator / Eiffel / SIO2PC / Crazy Dots / PAM Net
Hatari / Steem SSE / Aranym / Saint
http://260ste.atari.org
User avatar
mfro
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1015
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 10:33 am
Location: SW Germany

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by mfro »

You might have noticed that I was participating in that thread as well and found Gunnar's answers rather disappointing. Everytime I asked something specific, there was either a very general answer or no answer at all.

It's therefore just pure guesswork, but I must assume what's there is a set of registers that allows to map (some, i.e. a limited number of) memory areas and manipulate access rights to these (similar to what the ColdFire MCU has with its ACR registers and programmable chip selects. That's not the same as an MMU (the ColdFires have one as separate unit on the same chip).

A "true" MMU has variable (programmable) page sizes, a (preferrably unlimited) number of translation entries, access control, translation caches, page hit and (restartable) miss exceptions and more. There's good reason why an 68851 (the companion MMU to the 68020) contains about the same number of gates than the 68020 itself.

Anyway, even if that features would be indeed there, they are of no use when you don't know how to program them. Don't get me wrong, I don't want them anything bad, but promoting something highly technical as "better" without any technical details isn't what I consider good marketing.
User avatar
Cyprian
10 GOTO 10
10 GOTO 10
Posts: 2416
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2002 11:23 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: CT60/CT63 will be available soon again

Post by Cyprian »

I agree.
Well, almost 4 years passed since that discussion, maybe would be worth to remind him about the MMU.
Mega ST 1 / 7800 / Portfolio / Lynx II / Jaguar / TT030 / Mega STe / 800 XL / 1040 STe / Falcon030 / 65 XE / 520 STm / SM124 / SC1435
DDD HDD / AT Speed C16 / TF536 / SDrive / PAK68/3 / Lynx Multi Card / LDW Super 2000 / XCA12 / SkunkBoard / CosmosEx / SatanDisk / UltraSatan / USB Floppy Drive Emulator / Eiffel / SIO2PC / Crazy Dots / PAM Net
Hatari / Steem SSE / Aranym / Saint
http://260ste.atari.org
Post Reply

Return to “CT60 / CT63 Area”