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



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Recently the FCC released its Report and Order for the 17/24GHz band. 


> With this Report and Order (R&O), we [the FCC] adopt processing and service rules for the 17/24 GHz Broadcasting-Satellite Service (BSS). This service will introduce a new generation of broadband services to the public, providing a mix of local and domestic video, audio, data, video-on-demand, and multi-media services to U.S. consumers. In some cases, these services will complement existing Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) services. Specifically, we adopt a first-come, first-served licensing procedure for the 17/24 GHz BSS, as well as various safeguards, reporting requirements, and licensee obligations. We also adopt geographic service rules to require 17/24 GHz BSS licensees to provide service to Alaska and Hawaii as discussed herein. In addition, we establish rules and requirements for orbital spacing, minimum antenna diameter, and antenna performance standards. Also, we establish limits for uplink and downlink2 power levels to minimize the possibility of harmful interference. Finally, we stipulate criteria to facilitate sharing in the 24 GHz and 17 GHz bands. We also initiate a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) to address technical issues related to potential interference unique to the "reverse band" operating environment. By these actions, we facilitate the introduction of new and innovative services to consumers in the United States and promote increased competition among satellite and terrestrial services.


*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


----------



## Tom Robertson (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


----------



## Coffey77 (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!


----------



## Tom Robertson (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


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Coffey77 said:


> Would it have anything to do with High Speed Internet or just another way for their receivers to communicate and transfer data?


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.


----------



## Supervolcano (Jan 23, 2007)

So when are the new dishes, lnbs, and multiswitches going to be made available?
!rolling


----------



## Tom Robertson (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


----------



## HIPAR (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


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

HIPAR said:


> Is there any chance a new DBS company may emerge on this band? D* and E* seem to be gobbling up everything.


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.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

RAD said:


> 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.


The current E* setup for Austin is a single dish unless you want in on their international programming.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

harsh said:


> The current E* setup for Austin is a single dish unless you want in on their international programming.


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.


----------



## HIPAR (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


----------



## HIPAR (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


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

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).


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

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?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

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.


----------



## rocatman (Nov 28, 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


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

Lots of interesting BSS stuff in this FCC filing from last week (most of which we knew but re-confirmed) ...

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-283460A1.pdf


----------



## Tom Robertson (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


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

Some more interesting BSS-related FCC Filings from DirecTV:

4/30/2008: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520006812

6/16/2008: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520029783

Lots of technical stuff but shows how early in the process they are ...


----------



## tkrandall (Oct 3, 2003)

Old thread I realize, but could we get a summary/update of the Echostar and DirecTV reverse band slots awarded (and/or not surrendered) and the associated birds (EX-4, RB-2, etc)?


----------

