1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

DIRECTV Satellite Discussion D-14 @99W

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by Sixto, Jun 17, 2010.

  1. Feb 13, 2013 #641 of 3078
    Diana C

    Diana C Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    2,117
    293
    Mar 30, 2007
    New Jersey
    Uplink and C&C aside, I would still think that the presence of the Intelsat satellite gives the FCC some jurisdiction due to their responsibilities to avoid harmful interference.
     
  2. Apr 11, 2013 #642 of 3078
    Sixto

    Sixto Well-Known Member

    12,224
    94
    Nov 18, 2005
  3. Apr 11, 2013 #643 of 3078
    HarleyD

    HarleyD Hall Of Fame

    1,357
    62
    Aug 31, 2006
    Well, this document had to be filed "no later than 9 months prior to launch" and it is dated April 5 so the soonest it could launch is early January, 2014...at the very earliest.

    That doesn't even account for getting scheduled at the launch facility, etc.

    So best case to see it lit up what with parking, IOT, etc is roughly a year from now.

    I'm not obsessing, am I?
     
  4. Apr 11, 2013 #644 of 3078
    Sixto

    Sixto Well-Known Member

    12,224
    94
    Nov 18, 2005
    That's about right from what we know now.
     
  5. Apr 12, 2013 #645 of 3078
    LameLefty

    LameLefty I used to be a rocket scientist

    12,182
    105
    Sep 28, 2006
    Middle...
    D14 is still listed on the Arianespace launch manifest for "early 2014." It's fourth on the list right now, ahead on ATV-4 to the ISS, which has a definite launch date penciled in for April 12, 2014. The others will be slotted in pending payload availability, launch processing flow, range and tracking asset availability, etc.
     
  6. Jun 4, 2013 #646 of 3078
    bobnielsen

    bobnielsen Éminence grise

    8,473
    92
    Jun 29, 2006
    Bainbridge...
    This thread has been somewhat quiet, but with D14/RB-1 being operational in about a year (+/-), iIt's probably a good time to wake it up and start discussing the implementation.

    Have we determined what (if any) receiving equipment changes will be required for RB-1? It could require a new LNB assembly with two downconverters sharing the 103 feedhorn or two feedhorns for the same location. Would new SWMs be required? Would there be interference issues with the image frequency?

    Edit: That should be 99 rather than 103.
     
  7. Jun 5, 2013 #647 of 3078
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,139
    171
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    First since D14/RB-1 is headed for 99w, it'll be the 99 feed horn ... :)

    And as Dish Network successfully demonstrates by using frequencies up to 3 GHz over RG-6 coax to feed their Hopper, My guess is that a new LNB will be designed to place the RDBS band of 17.3-17.7 GHz somewhere 200 MHz or more above 2150 MHz on the two 99/101 lines for RB-1. And the same for the 103/110/119 and 103/119 lines on a SL-5 for RB-2 when launched (two 101/103 lines for a SL-3).

    I also suspect that since the Ka band feed horns already span a broadband all the way from 20,2 to 18.3 GHz, it will be little matter for its dimensions to accommodate the 17.3-17.7 GHz band which is just a tiny bit lower than the 18.8-18.3 GHz Ka lo-band. Therefore no need for additional feed horns for the RDBS band.

    Just my personal speculations here...
     
  8. Jun 5, 2013 #648 of 3078
    cypherx

    cypherx Hall Of Fame

    3,447
    64
    Aug 27, 2010
    PA - Berks...
    I have an SL-3 and one single wire coming down from the dish into the garage which feeds a green label 8-way (one port is CCK feed through to power inserter).

    Bottom line, will I need new equipment? Where and what? At what cost to me? How long would it take DirecTV to update the millions of people that would need this particular component update? Why not move MPEG2 SD boxes to MPEG4 at that time as well. Then when finished, they could move everything on 101 to MPEG4 and have even more bandwidth to play with.

    HR24-200
    H24-200
     
  9. Jun 5, 2013 #649 of 3078
    longrider

    longrider Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    3,954
    169
    Apr 21, 2007
    Elizabeth, CO
    While no one here on the forum truly knows I would feel fairly confident saying that with a SWM-LNB such as you have the only thing that would have to be replaced would be the LNB. People with external SWM will need a new LNB, a new SWM 8 or 16 module and maybe another cable run if they cant stack it on one of the existing runs. Legacy users will have to convert to SWM as I dont see them developing new receivers that can handle the new signals in legacy format.
     
  10. Jun 5, 2013 #650 of 3078
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,627
    145
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    Lets do little math..
    LOF 18050
    Range 17.4-17.7
    getting
    IF 650...350 MHz (need Inversion )

    Conclusion : if current LNBF has wider range, down to 17 GHz, then changing SL3 FW should be enough.
     
  11. Jun 5, 2013 #651 of 3078
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,139
    171
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    While I can't know for sure until I see the FCC filed LOA tech. data when submitted for Intelsat 31;

    I also wonder if the future World Direct service (currently at 95w) is destined for the RDBS band at 99 and 103.

    I noticed looking at the tech. info. filing for the coming Intelsat 30 satellite, there are no 11.7-12.2 GHz Ku band CONUS beam transponders available to serve the current 95w WD service. The entire Ku band payload is for south of the border Latin America/Caribbean service.

    So assuming Intelsat 31 is the same in this respect as well, what happens to the World Direct service when the ageing Galaxy 3C bird reaches the end of its operational lifetime?

    Could the need of a secondary WD dish aimed at 95w for International programming days be numbered?
     
  12. Jun 5, 2013 #652 of 3078
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,139
    171
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    P. Smith;

    I remember VOS once suggesting that either a separate L.O. could be added in a new LNB for the RDBS band.

    Or perhaps an LNB with a L.O. of 20.45 GHz for both the Ka and RDBS bands. This would mean the current Ka high and low bands would need to switch positions and invert their spectrums, but it would place the (also inverted) RDBS band between 2750-3150 MHz just within the coax bandwidth.

    Of course this would mean new LNBs and any needed SWiM module swap outs along with firmware updates to the receivers for the new frequency positions and inversions this would result in.
     
  13. Jun 5, 2013 #653 of 3078
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,627
    145
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    I'm wondering if current SL3 is capable to tune/cover the 17 GHz range ...
    If I would know there is a signal, I could try.
    Nay, it must be filtered out or it would interfere with current signals...
     
  14. Jun 5, 2013 #654 of 3078
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,139
    171
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    Agreed;

    The LNB cannot let 17.3-17.7GHz RDBS signals reach the Ka band mixer or they will generate image frequencies of 350-750 MHz by mixing on the low side of the 18.05 GHz L.O. which will interfere with the 250-750 MHz Ka-lo band.
     
  15. Jun 5, 2013 #655 of 3078
    cypherx

    cypherx Hall Of Fame

    3,447
    64
    Aug 27, 2010
    PA - Berks...
    Well sounds like DirecTV service personnel are going to be pretty swamped with LNB replacements.

    I mean if D14 adds a bunch of new HD channels and other things... I know I'm going to have to pay for a service call to get it working.
     
  16. Jun 5, 2013 #656 of 3078
    Sixto

    Sixto Well-Known Member

    12,224
    94
    Nov 18, 2005
    Similar to D12 (which shares with D10), D14 will have lots of regular Ka bandwidth and share with D11, besides the new reverse bandwidth, thus expecting the mainstream new adds to be available to everyone with no change, just as D12 does.
     
  17. Jun 5, 2013 #657 of 3078
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,627
    145
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    There is still a chance, Ka-Lo is not that taking all "slots", it has many gaps now, so with smart placing a many RDBS tpns could co-exist with Ka-Lo.
     
  18. Jun 5, 2013 #658 of 3078
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    21,981
    1,017
    Nov 13, 2006
    Pretty sure it's been said no upgrading of any current equipment is needed. Don't know if that's cause it won't be used For mainstream or what.
     
  19. Jun 5, 2013 #659 of 3078
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,139
    171
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    For the Ka band reception, true, no need of new equipment.

    To receive the RDBS band, needs for new equipment and FW updates is a certainty I'm sure.
     
  20. Jun 5, 2013 #660 of 3078
    TheRatPatrol

    TheRatPatrol Hall Of Fame

    7,225
    180
    Oct 1, 2003
    Phoenix, AZ
    Would this include having to get new receivers as well?
     

Share This Page