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

FCC Filings Reveal Dish's Satellite Shuffle Plans

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by rocatman, Mar 6, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,744
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    I doubt if E* would invest any more than it has to in Ceil's new satellite. If they have the kind of money to spend to build a super spot-beam satellite it would be for 119 or 110 - the core locations where they have more room to play.
     
  2. rocatman

    rocatman Icon

    815
    0
    Nov 27, 2003
    The fact that subscribers can use a D1000 dish for 110/119/129 that is not that much larger or expensive than a D500 makes the non-CONUS 129 W slot ideal for a super spotbeam satellite. Dish's two fully CONUS slots i.e., 110 and 119 are too valuable for national programming to use too much of the licensed frequencies for spotbeams. I realize that some folks are having problems consistently receiving signal from 129 W with the D1000 but remember E-5 was not designed for 129 W otherwise only folks in the northeast U.S. would not be able to receive programming from 129 W.
     
  3. derwin0

    derwin0 Icon

    538
    0
    Jan 31, 2005
    If anything, Ceil will put up a satellite that covers all of CONUS and Canada. Canada does not have the plethra of locals like the U.S. has, so spotbeams arn't as nessesary. The new satellite though would have the coverage of the Northeast that E-5 currently lacks though. That would enable a Dish 1000 is areas that currently can't use it.
    Remember, Dish's use of 16 transponders at 129 is a lease, that can be terminated at some point (especially at the whim of the CRTC). Therefore they are not going to pay for a massive spotbeam satellite that is useless anywhere else. And Ceil might at some point want those 16 transponders back, therefore it's in their interest to have the satellite as non-spotbeam.
     
  4. JohnH

    JohnH Hall Of Fame

    7,802
    0
    Apr 22, 2002
    Oh Yeah? The new satellite will cut down the trees and move the hills and houses blocking the signal in the Northeast, NOT.
     
  5. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,744
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Shush. Don't talk about the non-civilian payload. :lol:
    (Imagine Quebecers trying to take over the NE US.)

    Everything is temporary - some things are more temporary than others. The further along E* gets with 8PSK and MPEG4 (and even Turbo QPSK on the receivers that can do that) the less physical space they will need at 110° and 119° for ConUS feeds. (Plus they will be able to put more on each spotbeam transponder.)

    I wouldn't rule out US spots at 129° - but I would not expect the satellite to be as busy as E10. Primarily because the link budget for Ceil's satellite must include ConUS (or ConCan?) coverage on the rest of the 32 transponders. R1 is 13 ConUS or 130 spot transponders. E10 is up to 132 spot transponders. Expect Ceil's 129° satellite to be closer in design to E7 and E8 than E10 ... they need the "ConCan" coverage.
     
  6. derwin0

    derwin0 Icon

    538
    0
    Jan 31, 2005
    The reason the Northeast can't see 129 is do to footprint, not angle. A new satellite would have to improve on that, due to Quebec.
    My angle to see 129 is greater than people on the west coast to see 61.5, yet Voom was able to sell there.
     
  7. rocatman

    rocatman Icon

    815
    0
    Nov 27, 2003
    I would not consider the agreement between Dish, Ciel and the Canadian government as a lease. It is more like a contract that really can not be readily terminated.

    In regards to the new Ciel satellite, I had previously reported that it has been described as going to be one of the most powerful satellites every launched. In regards to the Ciel satellite being CONCanada, that is impossible even more so than any satellite at 129 W being CONUS. Do you think that many folks in Toronto will be able to see a satellite at the 129 W slot? Don't think so. I would expect the usable area of the 129 W slot in Canada is probably Windsor on west although the farther north you go, the farther west the usable area will be. This eliminates a high percentage of the Canadian population greatly limiting the usefulness of the 129 W slot in Canada. That is why it has not been used until recently that was by Dish.

    In addition, don't rule out the possibility of both the E-11 satellite and the new Ciel satellite being located at 129 W. The steerability of the E-11 spotbeams makes it easier for Dish to gain approval from the FCC for its use at 129 W.
     
  8. derwin0

    derwin0 Icon

    538
    0
    Jan 31, 2005
    I see it in York, and am further East than Toronto.
    People in Vancouver see 82, and that angle is close to the angle for Toronto to see 129.
    Dish even has Erie as a 129 locals area, and their angle is the same as Toronto's.
     
  9. rocatman

    rocatman Icon

    815
    0
    Nov 27, 2003
    I have to disagree. You personally may be able to see 129 W but many folks in the northeast U.S. can not because of trees, hills, other houses etc. and it only gets worse the farther east and north you go. The same situation occurred for folks on the west coast of the U.S. seeing 61.5 W. Some could see it but many could not. It just is not smart to do something like what you propose from a marketing standpoint. Throw in the marketing of using a single dish i.e., the D1000 and the look angle becomes a major factor. I just can not see Dish trying to market satellite television in the New England area using the 129 W slot.
     
  10. derwin0

    derwin0 Icon

    538
    0
    Jan 31, 2005
    People were adamant that Atlanta locals were going on 61.5 because the angle was too low, and yet there they are on 129.
     
  11. JohnH

    JohnH Hall Of Fame

    7,802
    0
    Apr 22, 2002
    The claim about it being a footprint issue is not entirely accurate either. I get a good signal here in Reading, PA. Only because I can see it. 129 was used for extra Philadelphia locals at one time. There was and is no footprint issue for the satellite used at that time. The issue was Elevation and still is.
     
  12. rocatman

    rocatman Icon

    815
    0
    Nov 27, 2003
    The 129 W "look" angle should be acceptable for anything south of about Washington, D.C. Now the footprint of the E-5 satellite is another story.
     
  13. peano

    peano Icon

    747
    0
    Feb 1, 2004

    To confirm, I can see it quite easily in Toronto. Its at about 20 degrees elevation.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page