DBSTalk Forum banner

DIRECTV Satellite Discussion D-14 @99W

428K views 3K replies 157 participants last post by  P Smith 
#1 ·
Next up, DirecTV-14, 2014.

Space Systems / Loral (SS/L) Selected to Provide High-Power Satellite to DirecTV:
http://www.ssloral.com/html/pressreleases/pr20100611.html
RB-1 (S2711 at 99°) FCC Filings:
Application: http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/ib/forms/reports/swr031b.hts?q_set=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number/%3D/SATAMD2008011400013&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

Original (1/2008): http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=-141474

Grant (7/2009): http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=727403

Bond (8/2009): http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=737367

Build (7/2010): http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=837188

Modification (7/2011): http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=907941

Schedule-S (7/2011): http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=908556

RB-2 (S2712 at 103°) FCC Filings:
Original (1/2008): http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=-141476

Letter (7/2011): http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=908362

Letter (7/2011): http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=910484

Modification (7/2011): http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=907995

Schedule-S (7/2011): http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=908568

Sixto said:
The FCC approvals from 7/28/2009 ... the Notes are from early September last time I checked:

FCC Application | Company | Callsign | Slot | Notes
SAT-LOA-20050210-00031|Intelsat|S2662|91°|Surrendered
SAT-LOA-20060412-00042|Pegasus|S2698|91°|Surrendered
|
SAT-LOA-20060908-00099| DirecTV| S2711|99°|Paid (RB-1)
SAT-LOA-20050210-00029|Intelsat|S2660|99°|Surrendered
|
SAT-LOA-20060908-00100| DirecTV |S2712|103°|Paid (RB-2)
|
SAT-LOA-19970605-00049|DirecTV| S2242|107°|Surrendered
SAT-LOA-20020328-00052|EchoStar|S2442|107°|Paid
SAT-LOA-20060412-00043|Pegasus|S2699|107°|Surrendered
|
SAT-LOA-20020328-00051|EchoStar|S2441|111°|Paid
SAT-LOA-19970605-00050| DirecTV | S2243|111°|Paid (RB-4)
 
See less See more
#1,253 ·
[*]D11[*]D12
 
#1,255 ·
And don't forget that one of those birds (D11) was launched by Sea Launch form an equatorial position so it arrived in GSO more readily than the Baikonur lauches. Otherwise it would have taken more than the 4 months it took with the delays, etc.

This one won't have that advantage in launch placement either.
 
#1,256 ·
HarleyD said:
This one won't have that advantage in launch placement either.
Well, French Guiana isn't very far off the equator (5.3º N or so); there won't be the Byzantine series of drawn-out orbital operations to reach GSO like there are for a Proton launch from Baikonur.
 
#1,257 ·
slice1900 said:
They seem to be narrowing it down, since it was previously NET Q2 and is now NET May.
NET doesn't get narrower by shifting from Q2 to May as it is open on the upper end. The effective change is that April now off the table.

Another way of looking at it is the projection went from NET April to NET May.
 
#1,259 ·
slice1900 said:
You need that special 36x24 dish, and it is my understanding its output plugs into the flex port of a SWM8 (or older multiswitch if it is added to an existing legacy install)

Since it also receives 101, I suppose it could be used standalone for a SD only customer (if they didn't need 119) so it wouldn't have really cost Directv much extra in the past when the HD penetration was smaller.
I did measure it today (brand new, from a box) it's 35x20. The tech did try to use WB68 (no SWM ! Both DSS and FSS LNBFs are legacy type, straight from the package), no go. D12 (SD) and H23 (HD) both doesn't have signals from 95W tpns. It could works but will not pass IV/QC if you will choose "round 3LNB+95" (no 110/119W).
What is works for both IRDs, it's my old 22 kHz switch from old Hughes DTV international dishes (almost 20 years old !) and by a selection "round + 95W". He will check (if DTV will find ) 3x4 switch tomorrow.

DUH !
 
#1,260 ·
Diana C said:
Well, stretching the concept...

B=L.A. Broadcast Center
C=Castle Rock
R=Regional uplink centers (VA and MN)

If I'm right, there would be more Rs than Cs and more Cs than Bs.

It probably has nothing to do with it, but it's fun to speculate. ;-)
In a side conversation with spear61, (our Beam Footprint Master), his response on this R,C,B, question was, "....I suspect they are related to identifying the antenna used for transmission. These satellites have several transmission antennas , each antenna with different shaped beams for various transponders."
 
#1,261 ·
Salo updated the schedule today.

DIRECTV 14 is now slated for NET August along with four other launches.

DIRECTV 15 has been modified to EOY 2014 "(or 2015)".

Looks like Arianespace isn't going to meet their 12 launch goal.
 
#1,262 ·
harsh said:
Salo updated the schedule today.

DIRECTV 14 is now slated for NET August along with four other launches.

DIRECTV 15 has been modified to EOY 2014 "(or 2015)".

Looks like Arianespace isn't going to meet their 12 launch goal.
Now all the way into August?

I'm beginning to wonder if Ariannespace was really the best choice by DIRECTV here as it seems they are simply overbooked.

I mean, I realize DIRECTV likes to spread their contracts for services around this way, but I'm not sure AS was the best decision at this point.

Perhaps they've just go too much on their plate right now for an industry where you certainly can't rush things, least you end up with some type of disastrous launch failure.
 
#1,264 ·
And now six launches scheduled as possible for August? That seems really unlikely to work out that way. More shuffling to come, it seems.
 
#1,265 ·
HoTat2 said:
I mean, I realize DIRECTV likes to spread their contracts for services around this way, but I'm not sure AS was the best decision at this point.
Arianespace, ILS and SeaLaunch have all launched satellites for Directv in the past; however, of the three, ILS (Proton) and SeaLaunch have both suffered catastrophic/loss-of-mission failures in the last few years, and SeaLaunch itself went through bankruptcy. I'm not sure it's even still a going concern. The choice of anyone BUT Arianespace would have been seriously questioned by the Board of Directors.

There are two - possibly three - other competitors for commercial payloads: ULA (utilizing a Delta IV or Atlas V), SpaceX (using Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy) and maybe China's Long March series of rockets. I don't believe the current Long March versions are capable enough, and I don't know whether ITAR technology transfer regulations would impact their selection anyway. Of the others, ULA is widely-considered too expensive for most commercial payloads (which is why there have been only a couple of commercial Atlas V launches) and SpaceX doesn't yet have a booster powerful enough; the current-generation of heavy Directv payloads are too big for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy hasn't even been seen outside of PowerPoints and web-renderings.

So really, Arianespace was almost the ONLY choice Directv could've made. But seriously, it's not like there's any urgent "gotta have 'em NOW!" reasons to get D14 and 15 up and running as soon as possible.
 
#1,268 ·
LameLefty said:
Arianespace, ILS and SeaLaunch have all launched satellites for Directv in the past; however, of the three, ILS (Proton) and SeaLaunch have both suffered catastrophic/loss-of-mission failures in the last few years, and SeaLaunch itself went through bankruptcy. I'm not sure it's even still a going concern. The choice of anyone BUT Arianespace would have been seriously questioned by the Board of Directors.

<snip>

So really, Arianespace was almost the ONLY choice Directv could've made. But seriously, it's not like there's any urgent "gotta have 'em NOW!" reasons to get D14 and 15 up and running as soon as possible.
And of course everyone else launching communications satellites are doing the same analysis. Until ILS gets a few successful Proton launches under their belt, and/or the attempts to get SeaLaunch up and running again succeed, Arianespace is pretty much the only game in town.

If you look at the history of Arianespace I don't think they have ever gotten more than 9 launches off in a year, and usually it is more like 6. Turning the pad around in less than a month is tough to do. Bottom line, the queue is only going to get longer.
 
#1,269 ·
LameLefty said:
So really, Arianespace was almost the ONLY choice Directv could've made. But seriously, it's not like there's any urgent "gotta have 'em NOW!" reasons to get D14 and 15 up and running as soon as possible.
I was thinking about this last night. It isn't as though there are dozens of channels all queued and ready to light up when these birds deploy.

Success is head and shoulders more important than making a date that was projected four years ago. Whether it is SSL, DirecTV or Arianespace that is pulling back on the stick, I'm confident that the reasons are legitimate and don't represent an inadequacy in the satellites, their payloads or the launch apparatus.

In spite of some veiled inferences by some (or one) of the posters on this thread that this reflects poorly, I am not troubled by this beyond my mild disappointment at having to wait a few more months. That is only because I like to follow these things from launch, to GSO arrival, through IOT and finally going live. It's fun. Not critical. A distraction from the mundane. I've been looking forward to it (and D15) since it was announced, and will continue to do so through August...and beyond if circumstances dictate it.
 
#1,270 ·
Diana C said:
And of course everyone else launching communications satellites are doing the same analysis. Until ILS gets a few successful Proton launches under their belt, and/or the attempts to get SeaLaunch up and running again succeed, Arianespace is pretty much the only game in town.
Exactly.

Maybe in the next year or two, Proton will have reeled off a comfortingly-long string of successes again; maybe SeaLaunch will reorganize in some form and get the Zenit 3SL back into the the heavy GSO game; maybe SpaceX will have at least shown off Falcon Heavy hardware and have a launch date penciled in for their demo flight. Once any of those happen, there will be some relief on the world launch markets. But none of that has happened yet.
 
#1,271 ·
inkahauts said:
And we have seen these timelines get pushed in all sorts of directions before so you never know.
Can you cite an instance where the launch date was pushed up considerably? I can't think of an example where this has happened with DIRECTV.

I seem to recall where DIRECTV traded their initial launch date for a the subsequent launch date not too far back but I have a sneaking suspicion that they weren't ready anyway.
 
#1,272 ·
georule said:
And now six launches scheduled as possible for August? That seems really unlikely to work out that way. More shuffling to come, it seems.
There needs to be at least four weeks between launches. DO NOT ignore the "NET" portion of the forecast.

It does seem odd that they're not showing a clear ordering of the launches.
 
#1,273 ·
harsh said:
There needs to be at least four weeks between launches. DO NOT ignore the "NET" portion of the forecast.

It does seem odd that they're not showing a clear ordering of the launches.
Just because there has always BEEN four weeks between launches does not indicate that it's a natural law that requires it. Gemini 6A and 7 launched 8 days apart from the same pad once upon a time. It's all about money and manpower. If Arianespace has a real need to surge their launch rate to something less than a month, I am certain it could be done for at least a few month period. They're historically well-established, know their people and their procedures and how to do all that's necessary. Heck, SpaceX is brand-new to launching GSO payloads and they managed a month between the launches of SES-8 and Thaicom-6. Roughly 4 weeks between launch campaigns might be optimal in terms of a long-term sustained rate, but to meet short-term demand a quicker turn-around is entirely reasonable for several launches.

They're not showing a clear launch order for a number of reasons, probably, uncertainty about readiness of several of the payloads being chief among them. One of the highest-profile Ariane 5 payloads this year is ATV-5 to the ISS. That payload, in turn, is subject to a lot of different factors relating to ISS operations. There is a master "Visiting Vehicle" schedule that has to be coordinated among all the spacecraft launched to the station: Soyuz, Progress, Dragon, Cygnus, HTV and ATV all have nominal, expected windows of time during which they will be active. A delay or issue with any of them will ripple down and affect them all. Further, the ATV itself requires a lot of on-site processing before launch and takes up a lot of time/effort/money to get ready, probably substantially more than a relatively simple, self-contained payload like a comsat.

The takeaway from this, as anyone who actually understands space engineering and operations, is simple: schedules are subject to change. They usually slip to the right but with enough money changing hands, moving to the left is possible. It's usually not worth it though.
 
#1,274 ·
harsh said:
Can you cite an instance where the launch date was pushed up considerably? I can't think of an example where this has happened with DIRECTV.

I seem to recall where DIRECTV traded their initial launch date for a the subsequent launch date not too far back but I have a sneaking suspicion that they weren't ready anyway.
Based on what, exactly? Do tell.
 
#1,275 ·
harsh said:
Can you cite an instance where the launch date was pushed up considerably? I can't think of an example where this has happened with DIRECTV.

I seem to recall where DIRECTV traded their initial launch date for a the subsequent launch date not too far back but I have a sneaking suspicion that they weren't ready anyway.
I am Talking in general. And if they swapped places with someone else for who knows what reason then right there you have an example of someone moving up. Who's to say what happens if someone ahead of ten failed to meet a deadline and they get moved up because of that as well if they are ready. And oh yeah d15 was move up for original expected launch. Granted that was ages ago and was very far out. But still the same idea.
 
#1,276 ·
Sea Launch is still alive and kicking. . . but haven't had a successful launch since late 2012 (they did lose a bird in 2013!), and are scheduled to return to launches this April with EUTELSAT 3B.

But given the time frames D* would have been engaged in scheduling, not really a viable alternative for D14. If Ariane continues to logjam, and SL gets successfully back into space in April, perhaps they'd become a viable "Plan B" for D14 or D15.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top