Transponder & Band Plans

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Tips and Resources' started by tomspeer46, Jun 19, 2015.

  1. tomspeer46

    tomspeer46 Legend

    692
    84
    Nov 17, 2011
    Eastern NC...
    Thanks, Hotat2

    It does not surprise me that the FCC filings were inaccurate, I certainly have found that to be true in the case of D7S, where I did the same type of analysis that you did. The problems you found in the D11 data did not jump out at me as much as D7S, so I apparently did not go through the same process. Everything in the transponder charts, except where I made specific notes, was copied into Excel directly from the databases filed with the FCC applications, if at all possible, and cut and pasted from the PDF files in other cases. Everything with blue background comes directly from the FCC filings. Anything that I have manually corrected has a yellow background.

    I have friends and family visiting this weekend (since yesterday). I will review what you have found, but probably not until Monday evening. .
     
  2. tomspeer46

    tomspeer46 Legend

    692
    84
    Nov 17, 2011
    Eastern NC...
    I took a look at this problem. I sorted the D11 transponder table by uplink beam and uplink channel, and looked for inconsistencies. I came up with the exact same conclusion you did, without referring to your statement of the problem, until I had reached my own conclusion. So we concur. Now, the question is: which set of uplink channels is wrong? It could be either the set for A2BD or the set for A2B3. I don't see any evidence or pattern from other transponders on D11 , or D12, that would point me in one direction or another as to which set is wrong.
     
  3. tomspeer46

    tomspeer46 Legend

    692
    84
    Nov 17, 2011
    Eastern NC...
    I posted a new Satellite Transponder Tables Workbook in Post #2. It changes the shading of the Beam Location column to indicate manual entry for all beams. The designation of 48 State, 49 State, 50 State, etc. that I made earlier this year, is entirely my own contrivance, not data from the FCC. The names in the various FCC filings were inconsistent between satellites. The filed beam names are still there. I also changed the uplink channels for the transponders associated with D11 beams A2B3 and A2BD to a manual entry indicating our uncertainty, given the errors in the FCC filing.
     
    dp35654 likes this.
  4. Oct 4, 2016 #104 of 120
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,773
    231
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    Oh, and one other minor point Tom;

    If you want to change it for the sake of accuracy, on your Domestic Satellite Transponder map under the D5 and G3C tab you list "all uplinks and downlinks as 24 MHz wide according to the FCC documents."

    But actually for G3C the horiz. pol. up/downlink transponders used for the WD service are listed as 27 MHz wide in the docs. Or half the size of the 54 MHz ones on vertical pol., some of which were formally used for HD service to Puerto Rico.

    See my old post here from back in May of 2014 and the graphic I clipped out and labeled the transponder numbers from G3C's Tech info.

    http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/184044-interactive-beam-footprint-library/?p=3256801
     
  5. Oct 4, 2016 #105 of 120
    tomspeer46

    tomspeer46 Legend

    692
    84
    Nov 17, 2011
    Eastern NC...
    OK, I will remove that comment from that particular spreadsheet. which covers both G3C and D5, because it is technically inaccurate in that it makes a statement about G3C that is not supported by the FCC docs. The channels currently in use on G3C have a symbol rate of 20 Megasymbols per second, and unless the rolloff is significantly different than the rest of the DTV satellites, it probably occupies the same bandwidth, so it is a minor issue.

    The comment has been removed in my macro enabled workbook, which generates the one that gets posted. The change will appear the next time we need to update.
     
  6. Oct 5, 2016 #106 of 120
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,017
    1,258
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    DVB-S (so I'm guessing DSS as well) supports roll off of 20%, 25% and 35%. A 27 Mbps transponder with a 20 MHz signal width equates to a 35% roll off.

    Though I don't think anything prevents them from uplinking a signal intended for a 24 MHz transponder to a 27 MHz transponder - similar to how they have for years fed a signal intended for a 36 MHz transponder to the 62.5 MHz transponders on the Spaceways.
     
  7. Jan 1, 2017 #107 of 120
    tomspeer46

    tomspeer46 Legend

    692
    84
    Nov 17, 2011
    Eastern NC...
    I have created links in Post #1 to where the technical data for the DirecTV satellites is now maintained. The new DBStalk forum does not allow me to post spreadsheet files.
     
  8. tomspeer46

    tomspeer46 Legend

    692
    84
    Nov 17, 2011
    Eastern NC...
    Sky Mexico Satellite Transponder Tables are posted.
     
  9. Nov 1, 2017 #109 of 120
    Mysticseer

    Mysticseer New Member

    15
    0
    Jul 30, 2017
    New York, USA
    Hey guys. I was wondering if you could answer a question. I noticed there are no channels on 99ca tp 22. I checked my signal strength for fun and noticed that one transponder is at 0. I thought at first I had a problem but when I read the channel map and saw nothing is on that one it made me wonder why. Just a curious person. Thanks. :)
     
  10. Nov 1, 2017 #110 of 120
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    25,600
    472
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    testing ?
     
  11. Nov 1, 2017 #111 of 120
    Mysticseer

    Mysticseer New Member

    15
    0
    Jul 30, 2017
    New York, USA
    I bet that’s it. I never thought of that. Thanks for the reply. I love this site.
     
  12. Nov 1, 2017 #112 of 120
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,017
    1,258
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    For a couple years after D14 launched, there were about a half dozen 99ca transponders at 0. It was that long way enough a few of us were becoming concerned that maybe there was a technical problem with the satellite. Then they all went active earlier this year. Nobody knows what they were/are doing when they're at 0, but "testing something" is our best guess :)

    Having a failure on your end that takes out a single / few transponders is possible but pretty unlikely so not really something you need to worry about.
     
  13. Nov 1, 2017 #113 of 120
    Mysticseer

    Mysticseer New Member

    15
    0
    Jul 30, 2017
    New York, USA
    Thanks so much for the reply. I won’t worry about it. Everything is working perfectly. Every other tp in 99ca is over 80.

    Have a great one. :)
     
  14. Nov 1, 2017 #114 of 120
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,773
    231
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
  15. Nov 1, 2017 #115 of 120
    Gary Toma

    Gary Toma UNIX

    2,351
    148
    Mar 22, 2006
    Just looked through the 11/1 TPN Map. I dont' find 99CA TPN 22 anywhere in the data.
    What am I missing ??

    I believe that TPN 22 has now simply been defined in the database. That doesn't mean it is live, doesn't mean that it is in-service.
     
  16. Nov 1, 2017 #116 of 120
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,773
    231
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    Don't know ...

    I was referring to what either Tom or Dr. j posted under datadigesters in the thread there. ..

    .


    Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk
     
  17. Nov 2, 2017 #117 of 120
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,017
    1,258
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Without any channels on it, a transponder can be "in service" but have 0 signal without any effect. Maybe there isn't anything broadcast on that transponder not even a carrier, or maybe it is active but is carrying something that our receivers can't decode.
     
  18. Nov 2, 2017 #118 of 120
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    25,600
    472
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    as minimum it has no modulation matching to SI tables hence the SS=0, eg no lock to it
    worst case - no physical RF signal there
     
  19. Nov 2, 2017 #119 of 120
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,017
    1,258
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Are you saying the SI tables and modulation must match - i.e. if the SI tables said it was QPSK 2/3 but the transponder actually was QPSK 3/4 then the signal strength screen would report 0?

    That would be one way to test things without us snoopy dbstalk people finding out. Just have an 'alternative' SI table that special firmware uses and transponders that show up as 0 for us could be used for testing (i.e. transponder bonding tests or whatever)
     
  20. Nov 2, 2017 #120 of 120
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    25,600
    472
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    probably it will be weak argument, but I've seen real locks only matching TPN parameters (freq,SR, pol, mod, type [-S or -S2], etc) so far;
    perhaps I'm posed too strong condition... but who knows ?
     

Share This Page

spam firewall