EchoStar 5 Apparently on its way to 119w

[JohnH]

This according to calculations on the latest TLES.

ECHOSTAR 5
1 25913U 99050A 03064.74128016 -.00000051 00000-0 00000+0 0 5560
2 25913 0.0373 53.1174 0005198 1.2811 264.9630 1.00219280 12637

[Cyclone]

I wonder what that means? Do you think that E* 7 is going to get fired? Maybe it was responsible for that outtage a few monthes back.

Or do you think it will work in conjunction with E*7 like E*6 & E*8 do at 110?

[JohnH]

Probably is going there to provide ConUS backup like EchoStar 6 was doing.

[Mike123abc]

While I do not have inside information, just from the specs of the satellites, they were switched to allow HD transmissions from 110.

Echostar needs a backup to E7 in orbit at 119. If E7 were to be hit by catastrophy and go off the air they will have a backup satellite in orbit to take over. They moved E6 from 119 to 110 and are now moving EV to 119 to be the backup at 119.

E7 can handle ALL the traffic at 119, but E8 cannot handle all the traffic at 110 (119 is 21 transponders, 110 is 29). So, rather than have to turn off 8 transponders on 110 that were being handled by E5 they move E6 over to 110 then transfered all the E5 traffic to E6. Now that E5 is not needed it is being moved to 119 to be the backup for 119.

Now the reason they want E6 instead of E5 at 110 is that at double power E5 is 220 watts per transponder and E6 is 250. By having 30watts or 13.6% more power at 110 they will be able to cut back on error correction and not experience rain fade (note E7 and E8 are 240 watts).

E1/2/3 on the wing satellites cannot operate in double power mode, so the error correction is 2/3 FEC (2 bits data for 3 bits sent the 1 bit going to error correction) and net data rate is about 43MBit/sec.

With double power mode on E6 Dish could probably get 5/6 FEC and a net data rate of 53.75 MBit/sec. Or about 3 HDTV channels per transponders.

[tampa8]

Originally posted by Mike123abc
While I do not have inside information, just from the specs of the satellites, they were switched to allow HD transmissions from 110.

Echostar needs a backup to E7 in orbit at 119. If E7 were to be hit by catastrophy and go off the air they will have a backup satellite in orbit to take over. They moved E6 from 119 to 110 and are now moving EV to 119 to be the backup at 119.

E7 can handle ALL the traffic at 119, but E8 cannot handle all the traffic at 110 (119 is 21 transponders, 110 is 29). So, rather than have to turn off 8 transponders on 110 that were being handled by E5 they move E6 over to 110 then transfered all the E5 traffic to E6. Now that E5 is not needed it is being moved to 119 to be the backup for 119.

Now the reason they want E6 instead of E5 at 110 is that at double power E5 is 220 watts per transponder and E6 is 250. By having 30watts or 13.6% more power at 110 they will be able to cut back on error correction and not experience rain fade (note E7 and E8 are 240 watts).

E1/2/3 on the wing satellites cannot operate in double power mode, so the error correction is 2/3 FEC (2 bits data for 3 bits sent the 1 bit going to error correction) and net data rate is about 43MBit/sec.

With double power mode on E6 Dish could probably get 5/6 FEC and a net data rate of 53.75 MBit/sec. Or about 3 HDTV channels per transponders.

Just what I would have said!:D :D

[JimW396]

Any chance the move would have something to do with improving services, spot, etc to the Caribbean?

Jim

[JohnH]

This particular move will not affect service to the carribbean, but putting EchoStar 6 at 110 most likely improved ConUS service to the Caribbean. It does not seem as though there will be any improvement from the current status there, until new satellites which have not been ordered or rumored to be on the table are in place.

[johnsmith22]

E*VI improved Conus coverage to the Caribbean on all transponders that were provided by E*V except 24 and 25 which have dropped signal strength to unusable levels. Transponders 13 and 29 are still marginal. The improvement on those was not as marked as on the others which although are not as good as E*VIII transponders have shown cosiderable improvement.

[Hopper27]

What are the limits to the total bandwith provided?

Can they not simply put up more powerful sats with more bandwith/power/transponders/whatever?

It would seem that with technology continuing to advance, they should be able to offer more and more channels on each sat as time goes by.

Then again, I'm no expert, so I really don't know.

Jason