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

FCC Report and Order for BSS Band (17/24GHz)

Discussion in 'Legislative and Regulatory Issues' started by Tom Robertson, May 8, 2007.

  1. May 8, 2007 #1 of 21
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    Recently the FCC released its Report and Order for the 17/24GHz band.
    Notes
    US down frequencies: 17.3-17.7 GHz (US reserved 17.7-17.8GHz for earth based services)
    ITU down frequencies: 17.3-17.8GHz

    4° degree separation
    First come, first served licensing (But there will be a modified review of the entirety of the applications already in place. Applicants have 45 days to adjust their applications based on the 4° and other rulings.)

    Safeguards
    • $3M bonds
    • Milestones: (likely the same: design review, contract, launch, operate)
    • Applications must be complete or lose slot
    • No slot selling
    • Maximum of 5 of pending or unbuilt satellite applications
    15 year licenses for non-broadcast
    8 year licenses for broadcast (common carrier)
    GSO only uses

    Licensees must provide adequate coverage for Alaska and Hawaii, though such can be provided via “system-wide” solutions rather than from each orbital slot.

    For the first time the FCC adopted a rule specifying the receiving antenna size of 45cm, though gives operators the option for smaller dishes with the understanding of the interference from: adjacent satellites, sharing uplink and downlink at the same frequencies, and nearby frequency usage of earth based stations.

    Channels will not be standardized for this band but the entire frequency range must be re-used via polarization and/or via spatially independent beams [spotbeams].

    Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein suggests that the percentage requirement of allocating bandwidth for public interest programming be increased to the maximum allowed, seven percent.

    Echostar notes
    45cm (18”) dish planned
    Originally wanted 4.5° separation
    Has 10 requests before the FCC: 119, 114.5, and 110; and 61.9, 67, 77.2 86.3, 124, 128.6, and 147.6

    DIRECTV Notes
    60cm (24")dish planned
    Has 5 requests before FCC: 96.5, 101, 105.5; and 99 and 103.

    Links
    R&O: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-76A1.pdf
    Adelstein statement: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-76A3.pdf
     
  2. May 8, 2007 #2 of 21
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    Basically this R&O is how the FCC opens up a whole new band for satellite operators to use for new or expanded services. Satellite operators will now be able to use the uplink band of the DBS satellites for downlink usage as well: 17.3-17.8GHz. Note, satellite operators can't use the 17.7-17.8GHz in a space to earth configuration over the US; that has been reserved for existing earth usage. They can continue to use it for earth to space.

    Because of this dual usage of the band (uplink for some applications and downlink for other applications) this R&O has provisions and discussion that I gather are not normally found in previous R&Os for satellite bandwidth: a receiving dish requirement/recommendation, more precise requirements for received energy on the ground and in space, shielding for earth transmitters, etc. to prevent interference.

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  3. May 8, 2007 #3 of 21
    Coffey77

    Coffey77 Cutting Edge: ECHELON '07

    2,533
    0
    Nov 12, 2006
    Would it have anything to do with High Speed Internet or just another way for their receivers to communicate and transfer data?

    :up: on the reasearch once again Tom! Great work!
     
  4. May 8, 2007 #4 of 21
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    The FCC docs and the DIRECTV applications seem to imply more advanded video services. I don't see high speed internet from at least those two sources. Now, some of the other applicants might be requesting bandwidth for Internet.

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  5. May 8, 2007 #5 of 21
    harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,192
    183
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    I'm not sure that the future of high speed Internet rest with geosynchronous satellites. I'm of a mind that that will be done using Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites with substantially reduced latency.

    High speed is cool, but the latency is a real buzz killer and makes some uses (gaming, VPN) difficult or impractical.
     
  6. May 8, 2007 #6 of 21
    Supervolcano

    Supervolcano Hall Of Fame

    2,085
    0
    Jan 23, 2007
    So when are the new dishes, lnbs, and multiswitches going to be made available?
    !rolling
     
  7. May 8, 2007 #7 of 21
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    As I prepared the Ka thread a few months ago and sent it DIRECTV for review, I knew this band was coming so I asked if we would need new ODU and switches. Understandably, I got a very polite "No comment".

    A lot will likely depend on which assignments DIRECTV gets and how the band will ultimately be used. As for timing, no earlier than 4 years would be my guess.

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  8. May 9, 2007 #8 of 21
    HIPAR

    HIPAR Icon

    749
    0
    May 15, 2005
    Is there any chance a new DBS company may emerge on this band? D* and E* seem to be gobbling up everything.

    Of course a new company would need to be imaginative and not just duplicate the other two that, except for football, already duplicate each other.

    I like the requirement for 18 in dishes. That's what made DBS attractive for me. Those big dishes that look all over the sky are somewhat unwieldy. That puts the burden for the down-link transmission power budget on the satellite engineering department. They need to provide more effective radiated power to overcome path losses associated with receiving 17-18 Ghz using a smaller antenna while providing a fade margin.

    --- CHAS
     
  9. May 9, 2007 #9 of 21
    RAD

    RAD Well-Known Member

    16,452
    129
    Aug 5, 2002
    Dripping...
    On page 117 of the PDF it lists Intelsat and Pegasus as two other companies requesting slots.

    IMHO, I'd rather have a single 24" dish that can receive all the slots the the multipe dishes E*'s required in the past. If E* can see everything that they'll need with on 18" dish that's great since I don't like having to have a dish fan at the house in order to receive the programming like the current E* setup needs.
     
  10. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,192
    183
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    The current E* setup for Austin is a single dish unless you want in on their international programming.
     
  11. RAD

    RAD Well-Known Member

    16,452
    129
    Aug 5, 2002
    Dripping...
    But that's not the same all over the US now is it. You're always seeing threads from folks asking about using multiple dishes because they can't get all the slots witha good signal level on a single dish or all their programming, like in Atlanta IIRC.
     
  12. HIPAR

    HIPAR Icon

    749
    0
    May 15, 2005
    How many satellites would be required to bring DBS to the US?

    Let's say we have a new player S*, designing from scratch using state-of-the-art hardware and software. S* will plan to deliver locals, national channels, premiums and pay-for-view all in real 1080i. Let's say subscribers will receive S* in the new band (17.3-17.7Ghz) per the FCC requirements with an 18 inch dish. S* will design with projected 15 years future requirements.

    How many locals will they need to accommodate? Are 2000 enough?
    How many national/pay for view channels? Are 250 enough?
    How many pay-for-view channels? Are 50 enough

    Then S* will probably need some extra capacity for backhauls, special purposes etc. Maybe there can even be Ka band (or laser?) cross links between the satellites in the S* constellation to move data around.

    Can this be accomplished with two satellites? One serving west of the Mississippi and another serving east. Could each satellite accommodate into the allocated 400 mHz band 1000 locals (assuming they are evenly distributed geographically) and the nationals/pay-for-views. Certainly S* would use spot beams for the locals.

    That would sure simplify home installations.

    I know this is an extremely complex problem with many trade-off variables. Any armchair engineers out there? Are there any PhD real engineers out there?

    --- CHAS
     
  13. HIPAR

    HIPAR Icon

    749
    0
    May 15, 2005
    Alice says I would have to 'Go amongst mad people' to find someone who could figure out how to do this thing. She doesn't think it can be done; 400 mHz of bandwidth is too stingy even if the spectrum is reused in spot beams.

    --- CHAS
     
  14. James Long

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

    45,746
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    400 MHz could provide for 26 US transponders (the other 100MHz used internationally - 6 transponders).
    Currently E* can run 6 HDs on a single DBS transponder (8PSK MPEG4).
    Historically E* ran 2 HDs on a single DBS transponder (QPSK MPEG2).
    Currently E* can run 12 SDs on a single DBS transponder (QPSK MPEG2).
    Potentially, E* could run 36 SDs on a single DBS transponder (8PSK MPEG4).

    E* currently has 184 national SD channels in their "AEP" package. There are also 29 RSNs, 34 PPV channels and a few "slate" and barker channels. Giving seven transponders to national SD would provide 252 SD channels ... 5 state channels would be a break even. That leaves 19 transponders for HDs and locals.

    If 10 transponders were dedicated to spotbeams (similar to E10) there would be 9 left for internationals and HD. 54 National HD channels with 32 uplinked today. E* would need more space or be able to put more than 6 HDs or 36 SDs on a transponder.

    The math isn't bad. The satellite would have to be a monster to feed the number of spots E10 does (or more) as well as ConUS beams. Perhaps a "Dish500" setup would help (two satellite slots sharing the load). Or the core SD and HD might be mirrored on multiple slots with locals different on each satellite (keeping with the 18"/45cm dish). People in different parts of the country would point to a different source for the same content (the way DBS was originally intended, with east and west allocations).
     
  15. RAD

    RAD Well-Known Member

    16,452
    129
    Aug 5, 2002
    Dripping...
    Is this the new service that Charlie announced at the summit last week that will be using this new band? If yes how do all the HD locals that Charlie mentioned fit into the equation?
     
  16. James Long

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

    45,746
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Mr Ergen's mention was "by the end of the year" ... these satellites are not likely to be approved by the end of the year, let alone launched and in service.
     
  17. rocatman

    rocatman Icon

    815
    0
    Nov 27, 2003
    It looks like all the "Reverse DBS" FCC applications went to Public Notice including those from Dish, DirecTV, Pegasus and Intelsat. These filings were classified as "permit-but-disclose" so there is really nothing new to look at but I am wondering if these applications have been modified to address the provisions of the May 4th ruling.

    Here is the FCC website address:

    http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/servlet/ib.page.FetchPN?report_key=573440
     
  18. Sixto

    Sixto Well-Known Member

    12,224
    94
    Nov 18, 2005
  19. Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    Thanks to Sixto's great find, looks like things might be warming up again. So I've reopened this thread.

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  20. Sixto

    Sixto Well-Known Member

    12,224
    94
    Nov 18, 2005

Share This Page