# Echostar 2 a Total Loss



## spear61 (Sep 19, 2004)

Rumors are flying that E2 at 148 ( to be moved to 77) has gone silent prematurely.


----------



## rocatman (Nov 28, 2003)

I think you mean permanently although that has yet to be confirmed.


----------



## spear61 (Sep 19, 2004)

rocatman said:


> I think you mean permanently although that has yet to be confirmed.


No, I was hedging a bit since the FCC application said they would shut it down during transit to 77 but yes indeed, there are more serious rumors


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Rumors are for those who wish to panic or cause panic.

If you have FACTS post them ... otherwise, let others monger their rumors.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

Maybe the non mongers should quit being high and mighty and start panicking.

http://dish.client.shareholder.com/secfiling.cfm?filingid=950134-08-12791


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

http://dish.client.shareholder.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=950134-08-12791


> On July 14, 2008, our EchoStar 2 satellite experienced a substantial failure that appears to have rendered the satellite a total loss. EchoStar 2 had been operating from the 148 degree orbital location primarily as a back-up satellite, but had provided local network channel service to Alaska and six other small markets. All programming and other services previously broadcast from EchoStar 2 were restored to Echostar 1, the primary satellite at the 148 degree location, within several hours after the failure. EchoStar 2, which was launched in September 1996, had a book value of approximately $6.4 million as of June 30, 2008.


----------



## JohnH (Apr 22, 2002)

Please change the title to say EchoStar *2* so there is no possible confusion with the current launch of EchoStar 11.


----------



## derwin0 (Jan 31, 2005)

That'll put a crimp on the Eastern Arc. At least they got 12 out of the projected 10 years out of it. Not too bad.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

JohnH said:


> Please change the title to say EchoStar *2* so there is no possible confusion with the current launch of EchoStar 11.


Good idea. It gets so confusing.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Since this is a thread about a rumor and not a failure, continue discussion about the failure here: http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=133326


----------



## Ressurrector (Jan 1, 2008)

Well lets see here..................... The satelite was 6.4 million and prolly a mil or 2 to launch it and laber cost we will just go head and say ten million.

So if you had just a million subscribers (very small estimate) and they paid a rock bottom 30 bucks a month then thats 30 million a MONTH....... I would hope 20 million covers your overhead cost and etc leaving you enough to reup.

And did they not get any type of insurance with that launch company??? I certainly hope so!


----------



## Voyager6 (Apr 17, 2006)

Ressurrector said:


> Well lets see here..................... The satelite was 6.4 million and prolly a mil or 2 to launch it and laber cost we will just go head and say ten million.
> 
> So if you had just a million subscribers (very small estimate) and they paid a rock bottom 30 bucks a month then thats 30 million a MONTH....... I would hope 20 million covers your overhead cost and etc leaving you enough to reup.
> 
> And did they not get any type of insurance with that launch company??? I certainly hope so!


Huh??? E2 was 12 years old and had been at 148W since 2001. It's design life was 10 years. Some research shows that this class of sat has had some abnormal power failures. That's probably what just happened to E2. http://www.sat-nd.com/failures/index.html?http://www.sat-nd.com/failures/echo2.html


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

Ressurrector said:


> Well lets see here..................... The satelite was 6.4 million and prolly a mil or 2 to launch it and laber cost we will just go head and say ten million.
> 
> So if you had just a million subscribers (very small estimate) and they paid a rock bottom 30 bucks a month then thats 30 million a MONTH....... I would hope 20 million covers your overhead cost and etc leaving you enough to reup.
> 
> And did they not get any type of insurance with that launch company??? I certainly hope so!


I think someone's confusing E2 with E11.


----------



## russ9 (Jan 28, 2004)

For those of us who remember Echostar 2, a memorial service will be held Friday night at the original location.


----------



## Newshawk (Sep 3, 2004)

Ressurrector said:


> Well lets see here..................... The satelite was 6.4 million and prolly a mil or 2 to launch it and laber cost we will just go head and say ten million.
> 
> So if you had just a million subscribers (very small estimate) and they paid a rock bottom 30 bucks a month then thats 30 million a MONTH....... I would hope 20 million covers your overhead cost and etc leaving you enough to reup.
> 
> And did they not get any type of insurance with that launch company??? I certainly hope so!


<sarcasm>Yeah! The nerve of that satellite company, not to stand behind their work! They should replace it for free, including the delivery costs!</sarcasm>

Hey, people think that's the way Dish (and DirecTV) work...

BTW, E2, from what I understand, was the satellite equivalent of a 1986 Ford Escort with 250,000 mi. on the clock. It should have been in the back row of Smilin' Cal's lot by now.


----------



## Aransay (Jun 19, 2006)

dahm woudl afet su diretly ot mexico nw dishenwtroks serice


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

russ9 said:


> For those of us who remember Echostar 2, a memorial service will be held Friday night at the original location.


I suppose that's the one I watched when I signed up in '96.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Newshawk said:


> <sarcasm>Yeah! The nerve of that satellite company, not to stand behind their work! They should replace it for free, including the delivery costs!</sarcasm>
> 
> Hey, people think that's the way Dish (and DirecTV) work...
> 
> BTW, E2, from what I understand, was the satellite equivalent of a 1986 Ford Escort with 250,000 mi. on the clock. It should have been in the back row of Smilin' Cal's lot by now.


Everything gets old even satelites. It's expected.

We have Smiling Cal out here. Must be franchised because he advertises on KTLA. I live in Northern Calif & he has a lot in San Jose. He must be over 90. I remember seeing him on TV way back in the 50's.


----------



## kstuart (Apr 25, 2002)

RasputinAXP said:


> I think someone's confusing E2 with E11.


Now you know why no one at E* was willing to say anything about it.

If this had occurred a month ago, it would have been reported immediately, but they undoubtedly were desperate to avoid this confusion !


----------



## DBS Commando (Apr 7, 2006)

Since E2 is now gone, will they consider moving E8 to 129 to replace that bird or will they try to continue with the eastern arc plans?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

12 years out of 10 on a satellite is pretty good. I worry a little now about E1 (DISH's oldest satellite). I've been wishing for a replacement bird for 148° for a few years. I hope DISH doesn't put it off too long and lose those licenses.

DISH's plan to move E2 to the east are kinda shot ... but that also shows that they didn't need E2 at 148°. The "book value" on the satellite should have been zero, in my opinion, as it was past it's prime. I suppose if it would have made it to the east it would have had more future value.

Thanks for the official word! Man, that "Eastern Arc" has seen a lot of problems! Hopefully Ceil-2 will work fine when launched. We may end up with a system a lot more like today's system than the original "Eastern"/"Western" plans.


----------



## Newshawk (Sep 3, 2004)

Paul Secic said:


> We have Smiling Cal out here. Must be franchised because he advertises on KTLA. I live in Northern Calif & he has a lot in San Jose. He must be over 90. I remember seeing him on TV way back in the 50's.


Smilin' Cal's not franchised. It's just that he's that famous. I've seen his commercials on various blooper and outrageous moments TV shows. He's become an icon of the wacky car dealer with the outrageous commercials. He's even in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cal_Worthington


----------



## rhambling (Dec 19, 2007)

Aransay said:


> dahm woudl afet su diretly ot mexico nw dishenwtroks serice


huh?


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

rhambling said:


> huh?


Aransay is probably wondering if E*2's retirement will affect the Mexican Dish Network plans at 77w.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 28, 2005)

Newshawk said:


> Smilin' Cal's not franchised. It's just that he's that famous. I've seen his commercials on various blooper and outrageous moments TV shows. He's become an icon of the wacky car dealer with the outrageous commercials. He's even in Wikipedia:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cal_Worthington


Anyone who has lived in SoCal for any length of time over the past 40 years has "go see Cal" permanently burned into their brains.


----------



## TBoneit (Jul 27, 2006)

James Long said:


> 12 years out of 10 on a satellite is pretty good. I worry a little now about E1 (DISH's oldest satellite). I've been wishing for a replacement bird for 148° for a few years. I hope DISH doesn't put it off too long and lose those licenses.
> 
> DISH's plan to move E2 to the east are kinda shot ... but that also shows that they didn't need E2 at 148°. The "book value" on the satellite should have been zero, in my opinion, as it was past it's prime. I suppose if it would have made it to the east it would have had more future value.
> 
> Thanks for the official word! Man, that "Eastern Arc" has seen a lot of problems! Hopefully Ceil-2 will work fine when launched. We may end up with a system a lot more like today's system than the original "Eastern"/"Western" plans.


At the same time Book value is a variable...

many things last beyond their predicted life. That doesn't mean that they have no value and no cost to replace. If my 20 year old car blew up tomorrow its book value doesn't mean I could find another 20 year old one that runs and get it for free.

Plus I always thought that the life of the typical satellite was tied to the amount of fuel available for station keeping? No fuel ---> No staying on station ---> dead satellite even if the electronics still work?

Evidently E2 still had fuel and is doomed by the dead electronics. Does this mean that it is now a hazard to other satellites at its location?


----------



## Wisegoat (Aug 17, 2006)

Bob Coxner said:


> Anyone who has lived in SoCal for any length of time over the past 40 years has "go see Cal" permanently burned into their brains.


Here's Cal Worthington and his dog Spot (Insert jungle animal here)!


----------



## kstuart (Apr 25, 2002)

James Long said:


> 12 years out of 10 on a satellite is pretty good. I worry a little now about E1 (DISH's oldest satellite). I've been wishing for a replacement bird for 148° for a few years. I hope DISH doesn't put it off too long and lose those licenses.


They can always move " E*4 the License Holding Wonder " over to 148 if E*1 fails.

The handful of working transponders would also probably be enough to run the Alaska and rural locals that are still at 148...


----------



## fornextloop (Mar 15, 2007)

Great, I've now that song stuck in my head. And I haven't lived in cali for 30 years. Thanks Guys! 

Silly me for reading a doom a gloom thread repackaged as a used car commercial.


Go see Cal
Go see Cal
Go see Cal


----------



## david_jr (Dec 10, 2006)

I don't believe the Eastern Arc question has been answered. Anyone here know how this loss will affect EA?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

david_jr said:


> I don't believe the Eastern Arc question has been answered. Anyone here know how this loss will affect EA?


If that is the question the answer is no. Nobody here (or elsewhere) knows. You may find some speculation and possibly some rumor - but only a few days have passed since the loss so I doubt if DISH has made any final decisions on EA.

(And yes, that is speculation ... but that's all we have!  )


----------



## david_jr (Dec 10, 2006)

Well, I'll take it. Thanks.


----------

