# DIRECTV Satellite Discussion D-15 @103W



## Gary Toma

Here we go.......

Here is the Directv FCC filing for the D15 satellite

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/SATLOA2014060400055&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number


----------



## Gary Toma

and before you ask -

Yes, spear61 is already hard at work creating the GoogleEarth Beam Footprints for D15. He hopes to have them ready in the next few days !


----------



## Stuart Sweet

Thanks so much Mr. Toma!


----------



## slice1900

Interesting, so it is going to 103 after all, giving them 4 satellites at that location.

The application mentions the RDBS capability, but requests only launch but not operational authority for it. So we'll have to wait longer to find out when and what it will be used for.

It looks like this satellite will be capable of filling any role with Directv as far as CONUS capability. It can transmit the full 32 Ku transponders, the full 24 Ka hi transponders, the full 24 RDBS transponders, and the first 14 Ka lo transponders, which are the only ones used for CONUS Ka lo from both 99 and 103.

I wonder how many transponders it can operate at once? There are already other satellites handling the entire Ka spectrum from 103, but the application is for operational authority for Ka, not for RDBS. If it broadcasts Ka, then it would be taking over some of D10 or D12's transponders. I wonder how many Ka transponders it can power while still being able to power all 24 RDBS transponders? Hopefully more than zero


----------



## georule

So they're overproviding bandwidth at 103?

1). Backup capacity?

2). Could they do VoD (well, Video on Demand in a Little While) from there on some other frequencies?


----------



## damondlt

Isn't it to replace the defective D10?

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## peds48

georule said:


> 2). Could they do VoD (well, Video on Demand in a Little While) from there on some other frequencies?


VOD is not feasible via satellite


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> Interesting, so it is going to 103 after all, giving them 4 satellites at that location.
> 
> The application mentions the RDBS capability, but requests only launch but not operational authority for it. So we'll have to wait longer to find out when and what it will be used for.
> 
> It looks like this satellite will be capable of filling any role with Directv as far as CONUS capability. It can transmit the full 32 Ku transponders, the full 24 Ka hi transponders, the full *24 RDBS transponders*, and the first 14 Ka lo transponders, which are the only ones used for CONUS Ka lo from both 99 and 103.
> 
> I wonder how many transponders it can operate at once? There are already other satellites handling the entire Ka spectrum from 103, but the application is for operational authority for Ka, not for RDBS. If it broadcasts Ka, then it would be taking over some of D10 or D12's transponders. I wonder how many Ka transponders it can power while still being able to power all *24 RDBS transponders*? Hopefully more than zero


Assuming it's 24 and not actually 18 transponders for RDBS. As I mentioned on the other thread there's some confusion there.

Interesting though, no LiL spotbeams for this bird, Guess they figure the existing Ka hi and lo ones from 99 and Ka lo ones from 103 (assuming SW1 will be relegated to backup/retired) are sufficient.

Also, only CONUS beam (and spot nationals for HI and PR) capability for all 32 transponders of the DBS 12/17 GHz payload.

What purpose would only CONUS capability for DBS have for the SD LiL spotbeam frequencies should it be called into duty at 101 or 119?


----------



## slice1900

damondlt said:


> Isn't it to replace the defective D10?
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S5


Whatever the issue was with D10, it was with spotbeams only, and it was "ameloriated" so there's no reason to replace D10, and certainly no reason to replace it for CONUS which is all that D15 is capable of.


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> Assuming it's 24 and not actually 18 transponders for RDBS. As I mentioned on the other thread there's some confusion there.
> 
> Interesting though, no LiL spotbeams for this bird, Guess they figure the existing Ka hi and lo ones from 99 and Ka lo ones from 103 (assuming SW1 will be relegated to backup/retired) are sufficient.
> 
> Also, only CONUS beam (and spot nationals for HI and PR) capability for all 32 transponders of the DBS 12/17 GHz payload.
> 
> What purpose would only CONUS capability for DBS have for the SD LiL spotbeam frequencies should it be called into duty at 101 or 119?


Yes, that's true, I forgot the information about both D14 and D15's number of RDBS transponders is conflicting. However, I suppose whether it has 18 or 24 transponders is academic as far as D15 being able to fulfill any need for CONUS, since 18 is the highest number of full 36 MHz wide transponders licensed for use in the US.

Seems a bit early to retire SW1 and SW2, they are only nine years old, after all. According to that Directv satellite fleet chart (below) they have several years of design life remaining, along with fuel life lasting beyond 2020. If they decide to relocate them, maybe they'll go to 101 and take over some of the Ka duty to increase the lifespan of D8 and D9S? Does anyone know if they can do Ka lo, or are they Ka hi only?

Not sure what your question means about the spotbeam frequencies for 101 and 119. Between the two, transponder/frequency is used for CONUS, so it has to support all frequencies to be capable of covering either location. Besides, just because Directv uses spots for certain frequencies from those locations now, doesn't mean they can't be converted to CONUS at some future date.

BTW, I guess this chart answers the question of when Directv originally planned to have D14 enter service - this was from the investor day after they announced D14 and D15 a few years ago, and it shows D14 in service a year ago! :righton:


----------



## damondlt

slice1900 said:


> Whatever the issue was with D10, it was with spotbeams only, and it was "ameloriated" so there's no reason to replace D10, and certainly no reason to replace it for CONUS which is all that D15 is capable of.


Not true, it burned through much more of its fuel to date than expected because if the issues.
There has been multiple post about this in the past.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## Diana C

Perhaps D15 is going to 103 temporarily (maybe to experiment with RDBS). DirecTV-4S is near EOL. D15 can handle the CONUS load on 4S, releasing enough power on 9S to power all of its spot beams.


----------



## HoTat2

Diana C said:


> Perhaps D15 is going to 103 temporarily (maybe to experiment with RDBS). DirecTV-4S is near EOL. D15 can handle the CONUS load on 4S, releasing enough power on 9S to power all of its spot beams.


Except that according the Gary's TPN maps, D4S' CONUS beam tps. haven't been used for some time now. Only it's spotbeam tps. show as possibly sharing the load with D9S.

But all CONUS beam even numbered tps. (LHCP) at 101 are listed as coming from D9S already for a long time.


----------



## HoTat2

Also of Note:

Minor correction to the application, but since they (DIRECTV) did it twice, I take it as a definite error and not merely a single typo.

The Ka-lo uplink band for D15 listed as "29.25-2*5*.29 GHz" mentioned twice in section 5.1 of the application is incorrect.

As the number marked in red should have been a "9" for "29.25-2*9*.29 GHz," which corresponds to its stated downlink counterpart for that band of 18.55-18.59 GHz.


----------



## Diana C

HoTat2 said:


> Except that according the Gary's TPN maps, D4S' CONUS beam tps. haven't been used for some time now. Only it's spotbeam tps. show as possibly sharing the load with D9S.
> 
> But all CONUS beam even numbered tps. (LHCP) at 101 are listed as coming from D9S already for a long time.


Okay...didn't know that. I used to know what satellite and transponder any given channel came from back in the day, but I haven't kept with which satellites are doing what.


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> ... Seems a bit early to retire SW1 and SW2, they are only nine years old, after all. According to that Directv satellite fleet chart (below) they have several years of design life remaining, along with fuel life lasting beyond 2020. *If they decide to relocate them, maybe they'll go to 101 and take over some of the Ka duty to increase the lifespan of D8 and D9S? Does anyone know if they can do Ka lo, or are they Ka hi only?*
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah ...
> 
> The Spaceways were given a limited Ka-lo band capability as an afterthought to their original design. As part of what was called a "Potter Horn retrofit," comprising two 165 MHz wide transponders on a nationwide beam for back-hauling purposes.
> 
> Chart summarizing the FCC filed specifications for it here;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously they can't and therefore haven't been used at their current orbital positions ever since the presence of the Ka-lo band birds D10, D11, and D12 (it's spotbeam payload that is).
> 
> Not sure what your question means about the spotbeam frequencies for 101 and 119. Between the two, transponder/frequency is used for CONUS, so it has to support all frequencies to be capable of covering either location. Besides, just because Directv uses spots for certain frequencies from those locations now, doesn't mean they can't be converted to CONUS at some future date.
Click to expand...

You're right;

I guess we could say D15 can be used to replace or supplement any *nationwide* transponder requirements for Ka hi/lo or Ku DBS bands


----------



## slice1900

damondlt said:


> Not true, it burned through much more of its fuel to date than expected because if the issues.
> There has been multiple post about this in the past.


I don't remember anything about burning through more fuel. The chart showing Directv's satellite fleet doesn't indicate anything about that, unless the fuel usage is a second problem beyond that spotbeam issue they "ameloriated".


----------



## slice1900

Diana C said:


> Perhaps D15 is going to 103 temporarily (maybe to experiment with RDBS). DirecTV-4S is near EOL. D15 can handle the CONUS load on 4S, releasing enough power on 9S to power all of its spot beams.


When a satellite is going to a location temporarily, I believe the application will state that. At least I remember seeing a filing for temporary authority for D11 or D12 to go to some oddball location after launch and conduct RDBS testing before moving to its final location.

They probably don't need to do any testing for RDBS from 103 (beyond whatever they'd do in preparation to start using it "for real") since D12 has 4 RDBS spotbeams. Not sure if they're still active or if they are/were ever used for anything beyond testing.

I keep hoping we'll get some further information that will let us know whether they'll be using CONUS RDBS from 99 and/or 103 for customer content. They'll have full CONUS capability from both locations after D14 and D15 are launched, but still no clue on what it will be used for.


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> I don't remember anything about burning through more fuel. The chart showing Directv's satellite fleet doesn't indicate anything about that, unless the fuel usage is a second problem beyond that spotbeam issue they "ameloriated".


Though I do wonder how accurate this chart would be for D10's estimated longevity if you factor in the failure of its primary propulsion system and is now permanently on its back-up one?

Or is it even possible to factor in something like this into such a time estimate for the future life of the satellite?

Though DIRECTV did mention a while ago it is functioning fine on the back-up.


----------



## Gary Toma

The Beam Footprint Maps for D15 are now posted; see

Forum: Directv Tips and Resources
Thread: Interactive Beam Footprint Library

D15 Footprints are in Post #128.

some comments from spear61:

_A total of just 7 Beam Footprints_

_3 Ku Beams not licensed for 103W (for use at 101, 110 or 119W )_
_1 BSS Beam previously licensed_
_3 Ka Beams_

_Each Beam (Ku, Ka or BSS) can support up to 100 HD Channels_


----------



## damondlt

slice1900 said:


> I don't remember anything about burning through more fuel. The chart showing Directv's satellite fleet doesn't indicate anything about that, unless the fuel usage is a second problem beyond that spotbeam issue they "ameloriated".


They had to move Directv 10 out of its orbital location and then move it back in position during the repairs.


----------



## slice1900

damondlt said:


> They had to move Directv 10 out of its orbital location and then move it back in position during the repairs.


Ah OK, I remember that. I have no idea how much fuel that used up compared to the normal orbital adjustments. Would it reduce the fuel life by three months or three years? Maybe someone like LameLefty might know?

Since all the other satellites seem to have fuel life well beyond their design life, I would assume the same would be true of D10, until this unplanned fuel usage occurred. So it depends how many months/years of normal operation fuel was consumed in that maneuver.


----------



## inkahauts

damondlt said:


> They had to move Directv 10 out of its orbital location and then move it back in position during the repairs.


That really, based on what has been reported via investor meeting etc,, wasn't the big issue. The big issue now is it's primary propulsion system has failed and it's using its backup.


----------



## damondlt

inkahauts said:


> That really, based on what has been reported via investor meeting etc,, wasn't the big issue. The big issue now is it's primary propulsion system has failed and it's using its backup.


yes I do remember that too. I know there are some issues that have effected the life span of D10. 
Also space way 1 and 2 are getting close to their projected life span. 2017 and 18 is only 3 and 4 years away. 
D15 Won't be launched anytime soon.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## HarleyD

I guess with D10 it's a question of how far you want to press your luck driving on the spare tire. 

With the number of birds that have never had to fail over to the backup I'm guessing it's not too likely to have the backup fail as well, but one of the rules I try to live by is Don't make any bets you can't afford to lose. How do you weigh the potential risk and exposure against the mechanics and expense of the resolution? An outright loss of D10's capabilities with the existing fleet's capabilities would appear to be catastrophic. I don't see them being able to absorb that with existing resources and I believe that it is something to be proactively acted upon and avoided but not necessarily a panic item either.

Now is the backup propulsion system a full-sized spare or just a "donut"?


----------



## inkahauts

HarleyD said:


> I guess with D10 it's a question of how far you want to press your luck driving on the spare tire.
> 
> With the number of birds that have never had to fail over to the backup I'm guessing it's not too likely to have the backup fail as well, but one of the rules I try to live by is Don't make any bets you can't afford to lose. How do you weigh the potential risk and exposure against the mechanics and expense of the resolution? An outright loss of D10's capabilities with the existing fleet's capabilities would appear to be catastrophic. I don't see them being able to absorb that with existing resources and I believe that it is something to be proactively acted upon and avoided but not necessarily a panic item either.
> 
> Now is the backup propulsion system a full-sized spare or just a "donut"?


I have a feeling they could absorb it. It would likely just cost them some of the life left in the other satelites. Just a hunch, but...


----------



## damondlt

I see people getting excited over D14 and 15, thinking major channel additions, when I think it's more of a maintenance requirement. 

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## Sixto

It will enable more HD.


----------



## damondlt

Sixto said:


> It will enable more HD.


I agree . Some will be added. But not a boat load. My guess 4K options.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## Gary Toma

BSS @ 103W New FCC Filing

Attached is the link to the new (6/12/2014) BSS filing for 103W. Fresh data has not been posted to the Beam Footprint Library thread because this updated BSS Beam information was provided with and included in the D15 Beam Footprint Maps just uploaded on June 5, 2014.

That link is: 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/SATMOD2014061200066&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number


----------



## slice1900

Well, it looks like it is finally confirmed that Directv will be using RDBS/BSS for commercial HD programming from 103! That's a bit surprising since there's never been anything confirming it this clearly for 99, even though D14 launches sooner. Wonder why that is...

So now the speculation can begin on exactly how they're going to do this. We know all legacy LNBs would have to be replaced to receive the RDBS bands. The more interesting question is whether some or all of the SWM LNBs have this RDBS reception capability already built in. That would sure make it a lot easier to roll this out. Otherwise one would expect RDBS to be used for niche content only, and specialty stuff like content for their corporate clients.


----------



## P Smith

17.3-17.7 GHz ...
do we have center freqs for it ?


----------



## HoTat2

P Smith said:


> 17.3-17.7 GHz ...
> do we have center freqs for it ?


Sure;
From the FCC docs.

RB1, 2, and 2A
Downlink center freqs., each tp. 36 MHz in BW.
---------------------

TP1 17.345 GHz RHCP
TP2 17.345 GHz LHCP
TP3 17.385 GHz RHCP
TP4 17.385 GHz LHCP
TP5 17.425 GHz RHCP
TP6 17.425 GHz LHCP
TP7 17.465 GHz RHCP
TP8 17.465 GHz LHCP
TP9 17.505 GHz RHCP
TP10 17.505 GHz LHCP
TP11 17.545 GHz RHCP
TP12 17.545 GHz LHCP
TP13 17.585 GHz RHCP
TP14 17.585 GHz LHCP
TP15 17.625 GHz RHCP
TP16 17.625 GHz LHCP
TP17 17.665 GHz RHCP
TP18 17.665 GHz LHCP

Uplink
------------

TP1 24.785 GHz RHCP

TP2 24.785 GHz LHCP
TP3 24.825 GHz RHCP
TP4 24.825 GHz LHCP
TP5 24.865 GHz RHCP
TP6 24.865 GHz LHCP
TP7 24.905 GHz RHCP
TP8 24.905 GHz LHCP
TP9 24.945 GHz RHCP
TP10 24.945 GHz LHCP
TP11 24.985 GHz RHCP
TP12 24.985 GHz LHCP
TP13 25.025 GHz RHCP
TP14 25.025 GHz LHCP
TP15 25.065 GHz RHCP
TP16 25.065 GHz LHCP
TP17 25.105 GHz RHCP
TP18 25.105 GHz LHCP


----------



## P Smith

so, if we can use Ka LNBF LOF 18.03 GHz, then IF would be 685...365 MHz (inverted spectrum) what would fit into low band of current freq stack (250...750 MHz)


----------



## Diana C

That's a bit close to the start of the DECA band (850 MHz) but I guess it would only on the LNB to SWiM circuits, where there normally isn't any DECA signal to worry about.


----------



## P Smith

Diana C said:


> That's a bit close to the start of the DECA band (850 MHz) but I guess it would only on the LNB to SWiM circuits, where there normally isn't any DECA signal to worry about.


tell that to mfg of legacy LNBFs and switches like WB68 what came long time ago ...
it's not new and well known range, the DECA came later and they already considered all consequences


----------



## slice1900

P Smith said:


> so, if we can use Ka LNBF LOF 18.03 GHz, then IF would be 685...365 MHz (inverted spectrum) what would fit into low band of current freq stack (250...750 MHz)


Except that's overlapping with the B band, so you can't output that signal on a 4 coax KaKu LNB. It would need another LO that places it higher than the existing signals (at 2350 - 2750 MHz or so) or it needs one or two additional outputs. I thought I recalled VOS mentioning hearing something about flex ports and Ka last year? That's basically what we'd be talking about here.

If Directv only does RDBS from 103 and not 99 (not sure why they would, but who knows?) they could place it where 110/119 currently are if it replicated the content on 119. That would still be a new LNB, but at least still only 4 coax and same frequency range.

FWIW, below is Directv's patent for a KaKu LNB, which shows bandpass filters on 102.8 and 99.2 that pass 18.3 - 18.8 Ghz and 19.7 - 20.2 GHz only. The cross reference section shows a lot of other KaKu patents related to this one, and everything matches what we know about the KaKu legacy LNB. That doesn't prove that the patent exactly describes that LNB, but I would think at some point in the past 7 or 8 years someone would have noticed if a KaKu LNB output 400 MHz of noise from 2350 - 2750 MHz!

The more interesting question is whether the SWM LNB supports RDBS, and there's no way to know for sure without opening one up and counting the DROs and/or see if there are connections from the LNAs to all three SWM chips, rather than just two of them. There is also a patent that shows the SWM LNB, but it is focused on the interconnections with the SWM chips, and even if it provides a complete representation of the SWM LNB, it doesn't mean there can't be newer revs that support RDBS.

https://www.google.com/patents/US20070082644


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> Except that's overlapping with the B band, so you can't output that signal on a 4 coax KaKu LNB. It would need another LO that places it higher than the existing signals (at 2350 - 2750 MHz or so) *or it needs one or two additional outputs. I thought I recalled VOS mentioning hearing something about flex ports and Ka last year? That's basically what we'd be talking about here.*


And if you went in the direction of re-tasking the flexports this way, it still leaves open the question of how can only one or two additional outputs from a new RDBS capable LNBF be sufficient, what with future RDBS service to be available from both the 99 and 103 slots?

In multi-receiver homes trying to access programming on the RDBS transponders from the 99 and 103 slots simultaneously wouldn't that need four additional outputs (therefore eight outputs overall) from the new LNBF to allow for R/LHCP RDBS signals from both slots?

Just doesn't seem practical going in the direction of more physical outputs for a legacy type voltage/tone Ka/Ku/RDBS LNBF to accommodate the RDBS band....


----------



## Diana C

The LNB design issues may end up being moot. My personal prediction is that if the AT&T acquisition of DirecTV is approved, RDBS will be used for satellite broadband for rural customers, and will be supported with a different dish entirely.


----------



## slice1900

Diana C said:


> The LNB design issues may end up being moot. My personal prediction is that if the AT&T acquisition of DirecTV is approved, RDBS will be used for satellite broadband for rural customers, and will be supported with a different dish entirely.


I'd be willing to bet against that. Why in the world would a company that has cellular towers almost everywhere use satellite for broadband, especially satellite from GSO which sucks due to the latency? Not to mention that D14 & D15 would be useless for it, they have CONUS beams. They'd need a satellite like the Spaceway with beamforming capability.

Cellular is ideal for rural broadband since there are few users per cell, and it requires a lot less fiber - none, if they use microwave for tower linkage in very remote areas. Despite that though, AT&T already said those 15 million rural customers would be provided "local loop" (i.e. wired) broadband, that was one of the commitments they made if the Directv purchase is allowed to go through.

Directv has long had a plan for RDBS or they wouldn't have applied for that spectrum and built satellites capable of using it. AT&T would damage the value of their investment by taking that from Directv to use for their own purposes. And it would be a waste, because once someone offers rural customers fixed wireless, they'll abandon their satellite provider. Satellite internet from GSO is much slower and has far higher latency.


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> And if you went in the direction of re-tasking the flexports this way, it still leaves open the question of how can only one or two additional outputs from a new RDBS capable LNBF be sufficient, what with future RDBS service to be available from both the 99 and 103 slots?
> 
> In multi-receiver homes trying to access programming on the RDBS transponders from the 99 and 103 slots simultaneously wouldn't that need four additional outputs (therefore eight outputs overall) from the new LNBF to allow for R/LHCP RDBS signals from both slots?
> 
> Just doesn't seem practical going in the direction of more physical outputs for a legacy type voltage/tone Ka/Ku/RDBS LNBF to accommodate the RDBS band....


Why would they need 4 additional outputs for a total of 4 400 MHz wide bands from 99 and 103? They stack the other outputs, why not these? I'm not sure of your reasoning here. All four could be stacked a single coax using the standard 250-2150 MHz range with 100 MHz spacing instead of the 200 MHz currently used; alternatively they could fit into two coax inside the normal "Ka" ranges of 250-750 MHz and 1650-2150 MHz, leaving the Ku range on flex1 for the 95* dish (via a combiner) if that was still in use.

The RF5201 chips used in SWM modules are capable of utilizing the full 250-2150 MHz range from all 6 inputs, so either way would be compatible with all existing SWM modules. Going higher in frequency and stacking RDBS above the current three bands on the existing four outputs would avoid additional outputs, but even if the RF5201's VCOs have a wide enough range to go higher than 2150 MHz, there might be other equipment that didn't support that range and needed replacement, such as amplifiers or splitters. Not saying going higher in frequency on the existing four coaxes is impossible, both methods have their obstacles.

Since that updated RB-2 writeup states they'll be using RDBS from 103 for customer HD content, they have to have some sort of legacy LNB going forward that can receive it. There will always be larger installs that go above the limit of SWM channels, no matter how high future SWM technology may raise that limit. Whether Directv supports receivers directly attached to this new legacy LNB is another matter, they may support only SWMs attached to it, not legacy multiswitches or receivers. I think that's likely, given that they dropped legacy support on the H25 and Genie.


----------



## HoTat2

I see;

Yes, if a new legacy LNBF has two appropriate DROs for frequency stacking on each flexport cable run re-tasked to supply the RDBS signals from 99 on one and 103 on the other, this could work.

As you say, likely you would want to stack the R/LHCP 400 MHz wide transponder sets with one in each of the Ka hi and lo frequency ranges, thus leaving open the 950-1450 MHz range for any 95W dish which would then have to be diplexed into one of the flexports I suppose.


----------



## slice1900

There are several permutations between RDBS from 99/103 or 103 only, using one or two flex port cables, and using the space currently occupied by 110/119 for 103's RDBS (if that content was replicated)

I wonder if anyone here knows how Directv recommends MDUs be installed? In the past Sonora's diagrams showed six coax, 4 for SL5, 1 for 72.5 and 1 for 95. When the 72.5 dish was dropped the diagrams showed five coax. Do they still train installers to run six coax, even though only five will be used? The latest amplifier, the TAMP6, still has two flex ports even though it would seem there's zero likelihood of adding another standalone dish that would require the second flex port. More likely IMHO is replicating the content from 95 and dropping the 95W dish in future installs.

Did they keep that second flex port because they knew they'd be using it for RDBS, or did they keep it just because all their other equipment has two flex ports and they didn't want to drop something that could be used for other purposes? Despite being marked 250-2150 MHz, Sonora's amps actually amplify starting at 54 MHz so they can be used for cable/OTA. Early SA-6ALs actually had a passive sub-band return built in to the second flex port, but Directv made them remove it in later revs because they "wanted all six ports to be identical".


----------



## Gary Toma

More information: This should keep a few folks up tonight: 349 pages of documentation; a vast amount of information here:

From spear 61:
_The narrative for the FCC Space Station License transfers from Directv to AT&T is found:_

_http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=1050160_

_Among other things, they describe the frequencies, bandwidth and coverage (map) of the dedicated LTE broadband service they propose for rural areas._

_You will find the license links at ----------- Space Stations - Pending - AT&T_


----------



## inkahauts

slice1900 said:


> There are several permutations between RDBS from 99/103 or 103 only, using one or two flex port cables, and using the space currently occupied by 110/119 for 103's RDBS (if that content was replicated)
> 
> I wonder if anyone here knows how Directv recommends MDUs be installed? In the past Sonora's diagrams showed six coax, 4 for SL5, 1 for 72.5 and 1 for 95. When the 72.5 dish was dropped the diagrams showed five coax. Do they still train installers to run six coax, even though only five will be used? The latest amplifier, the TAMP6, still has two flex ports even though it would seem there's zero likelihood of adding another standalone dish that would require the second flex port. More likely IMHO is replicating the content from 95 and dropping the 95W dish in future installs.
> 
> Did they keep that second flex port because they knew they'd be using it for RDBS, or did they keep it just because all their other equipment has two flex ports and they didn't want to drop something that could be used for other purposes? Despite being marked 250-2150 MHz, Sonora's amps actually amplify starting at 54 MHz so they can be used for cable/OTA. Early SA-6ALs actually had a passive sub-band return built in to the second flex port, but Directv made them remove it in later revs because they "wanted all six ports to be identical".


95 may not be needed if you have bss. Just a thought.


----------



## inkahauts

slice1900 said:


> There are several permutations between RDBS from 99/103 or 103 only, using one or two flex port cables, and using the space currently occupied by 110/119 for 103's RDBS (if that content was replicated)
> 
> I wonder if anyone here knows how Directv recommends MDUs be installed? In the past Sonora's diagrams showed six coax, 4 for SL5, 1 for 72.5 and 1 for 95. When the 72.5 dish was dropped the diagrams showed five coax. Do they still train installers to run six coax, even though only five will be used? The latest amplifier, the TAMP6, still has two flex ports even though it would seem there's zero likelihood of adding another standalone dish that would require the second flex port. More likely IMHO is replicating the content from 95 and dropping the 95W dish in future installs.
> 
> Did they keep that second flex port because they knew they'd be using it for RDBS, or did they keep it just because all their other equipment has two flex ports and they didn't want to drop something that could be used for other purposes? Despite being marked 250-2150 MHz, Sonora's amps actually amplify starting at 54 MHz so they can be used for cable/OTA. Early SA-6ALs actually had a passive sub-band return built in to the second flex port, but Directv made them remove it in later revs because they "wanted all six ports to be identical".


95 may not be needed if you have bss. Just a thought.


----------



## slice1900

Yes, hence my mention that my opinion is they'll replicate 95's content and dropping the extra dish from future installs


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> Yes, hence my mention that my opinion is they'll replicate 95's content and dropping the extra dish from future installs


And considering the implications that since the new IS-30/31 satellites for DLA have no provision for supporting the WD service to North America from 95W also suggest that WD service from a separate 95W dish days are numbered.


----------



## HoTat2

Gary Toma said:


> More information: This should keep a few folks up tonight: 349 pages of documentation; a vast amount of information here:
> 
> From spear 61:
> _The narrative for the FCC Space Station License transfers from Directv to AT&T is found:_
> 
> _http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=1050160_
> 
> _Among other things, they describe the frequencies, bandwidth and coverage (map) of the dedicated LTE broadband service they propose for rural areas._
> 
> _You will find the license links at ----------- Space Stations - Pending - AT&T_


Thanks for the link spear61 and Gary;

Though reading this "REDACTED - FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION" heavily edited document feels like an electronic equivalent of those familiar government declassified papers with many parts inked out what with all the blank spaces for deletions marked with--

"[BEGIN DIRECTV HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION]"

"[END DIRECTV HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION]"

Or;

"[BEGIN AT&T HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION]"

"[END AT&T HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION]"


----------



## James Long

HoTat2 said:


> Though reading this "REDACTED - FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION" heavily edited document feels like an electronic equivalent of those familiar government declassified papers with many parts inked out ...


I prefer electronically redacted documents where someone uses black highlight to cover up the text and then they save as a PDF, not realizing that the words are still in the published document. Effectively: "This text is redacted."

I learned a lot from court filings made a few years ago with "black highlight" redaction.


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> And considering the implications that since the new IS-30/31 satellites for DLA have no provision for supporting the WD service to North America from 95W also suggest that WD service from a separate 95W dish days are numbered.


Do we know the remaining lifespan of the current 95W satellite? Maybe IS30/IS31 are additions and not replacements, at least in the short/medium term. If nothing else they could keep only Directv's tpns active, to allow years before the current WD customers need to change anything.

While I think it makes a lot of sense to replicate 95 (and 119) using D14 and D15's additional capacity so future installs don't require a separate dish, upgrading all those old installs is probably something they'd want to tackle in parallel with whatever timeline they plan for phasing out MPEG2/SD.

If there's a planned retirement date for 95W that isn't determined by age/fuel, we might find it aligns quite well with Directv's secret internal timeline for MPEG2 retirement


----------



## P Smith

isn't DTV just renting bandwidth on G3C at 95W ? then why they would worry about lifespan of it instead of real owner ?


----------



## slice1900

P Smith said:


> isn't DTV just renting bandwidth on G3C at 95W ? then why they would worry about lifespan of it instead of real owner ?


They are leasing, so they don't necessarily care about the lifetime of that particular satellite. However, if IS30/IS31 can't replace the service it is providing to Directv, one must assume that Directv has a plan to replace the WD dish content before G3C is decommissioned.

Thus the date when we think it might be decommissioned would be interesting to know as it would put a "to be completed by" date on whatever plan Directv has.


----------



## fluffybear

slice1900 said:


> Do we know the remaining lifespan of the current 95W satellite?


Roughly 3 years. Galaxy 3C was launched in June of 2002 with a life expectancy of 15 years.


----------



## JosephB

Diana C said:


> The LNB design issues may end up being moot. My personal prediction is that if the AT&T acquisition of DirecTV is approved, RDBS will be used for satellite broadband for rural customers, and will be supported with a different dish entirely.


Without derailing too much....I don't think so, AT&T is buying DirecTV to get TV off of its terrestrial network as much as possible (won't be 100%), and they have been touting "Fixed Wireless Local Loop" technology which is essentially a permanently installed LTE antenna/radio pointing to a dedicated non-cellular tower/frequency (they're saying 10mhz per market) to provide "at least 10mbps at DSL-level usage caps" according to FCC filings in both the DirecTV acquisition application and the current proceedings with the FCC to trial shutting down the PSTN. They also plan to roll this out nationwide in areas that don't have wireline broadband options, both inside and outside their traditional 22-state wireline service area.

Satellite broadband just doesn't really fit into anything that they've done up to this point or that they've announced they want to do.


----------



## Skyboss

slice1900 said:


> Yes, that's true, I forgot the information about both D14 and D15's number of RDBS transponders is conflicting. However, I suppose whether it has 18 or 24 transponders is academic as far as D15 being able to fulfill any need for CONUS, since 18 is the highest number of full 36 MHz wide transponders licensed for use in the US.
> 
> Seems a bit early to retire SW1 and SW2, they are only nine years old, after all. According to that Directv satellite fleet chart (below) they have several years of design life remaining, along with fuel life lasting beyond 2020. If they decide to relocate them, maybe they'll go to 101 and take over some of the Ka duty to increase the lifespan of D8 and D9S? Does anyone know if they can do Ka lo, or are they Ka hi only?
> 
> Not sure what your question means about the spotbeam frequencies for 101 and 119. Between the two, transponder/frequency is used for CONUS, so it has to support all frequencies to be capable of covering either location. Besides, just because Directv uses spots for certain frequencies from those locations now, doesn't mean they can't be converted to CONUS at some future date.
> 
> BTW, I guess this chart answers the question of when Directv originally planned to have D14 enter service - this was from the investor day after they announced D14 and D15 a few years ago, and it shows D14 in service a year ago! :righton:


It's crazy how long so many of these have been up there. I remember waiting and waiting for more than a couple of HD channels in the early 2000's. Now we're less than 10 years from so many of them that brought us all those great new channels going out of service. Man time flies!


----------



## slice1900

I wonder if they'll provide an update of this chart in next month's investor day, since it is a little out of date (talking about the satellite at 72.5* "consumer migration will be completed by the end of 2011")


----------



## slice1900

Since D14's launch will be out of the way tomorrow, has anyone seen anything further about scheduling for D15's launch? Maybe one of those other sites that puts forth expected future launch schedules?


----------



## HarleyD

slice1900 said:


> Since D14's launch will be out of the way tomorrow, has anyone seen anything further about scheduling for D15's launch? Maybe one of those other sites that puts forth expected future launch schedules?


Username Salo posts and updates 'unofficial' Arianespace launch schedules on the NASA Spaceflight forums with input and corections from other persons with knowledge of the goings on.

The latest such schedule, last updated yesterday, shows the following for DirecTV 15.

*first half - DirecTV 15 - Ariane 5 ECA - Kourou ELA-3*

By comparison, here is the information for DirecTV 14 from the same posting.

*December 4 5 (TBD) - DirecTV 14, GSAT-16 - Ariane 5 ECA (VA221) - Kourou ELA-3 - 20:39-21:49*

Note that for DirecTV 15 there is not yet a companion load or launch vehicle (VA-2XX) designation yet so it's really not much more than a bookmark at this point. It's more or less on the 'to do list'.


----------



## slice1900

Found something very interesting while searching on the FCC site. Remember there were some ongoing issues with the RDBS band at 103 where a Canadian company called Ciel claimed priority for that spectrum? I think everyone thought that was in the past, but it looks like that may not be the case.

It seems that Hughes Canada has a contract with Ciel to use that capacity which was launched on Ciel-6 (which is licensed for RDBS from 103 in Canada but not the US) and licensed it to Dish! Dish recently filed an application with the FCC put up 50,000 dishes on cell tower sites in the US and use RDBS from 103 to deliver video and data services. The uplinks would be from Canada, but the downlinks would be to the US. They are claiming Directv used Canadian authority for some of its satellites in the past, and also trying to use Directv's request for a milestone extension as a way to shoehorn themselves into the process.

Obviously using this spectrum in the US would be completely incompatible with Directv's use of RDBS from 103 via D15. Not sure why out of all the possible ways Dish could provide this video/data service it is choosing the one way that would screw Directv, except for the obvious reason that it would screw Directv.

Since the FCC has already approved Directv's license for RDBS from 103 in the US this seems doomed to fail, but depending on how hard Dish pushes it - especially if they got the courts involved - it could potentially delay Directv's ability to utilize this spectrum for some time. They could still launch D15 on schedule, but would be unable to utilize its RDBS transponders. Delays of more than a couple years could impact their 4K rollout (i.e. if there were enough 4K channels that they would no longer fit on the RDBS transponders at 99 that D14 will provide)

Not sure if this is a simple attempt to screw with the competition, Dish has some particular reason why out of all the various spectrum they could license from Hughes they want to use this, or if they hope to use it as a way of forcing Directv into giving them something they want. The thing that comes to mind are Directv's transponders on 110 and 119. Maybe Dish wants Directv to agree to hand them over once they've migrated off MPEG2, in exchange for removing the roadblock they're trying to erect for their RDBS rollout? Of course, doing this might just guarantee that Directv goes out to their way to hold onto them even if they don't need them...tit for tat!

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/SESLFS2014092400752&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number


----------



## Jacob Braun

slice1900 said:


> Found something very interesting while searching on the FCC site. Remember there were some ongoing issues with the RDBS band at 103 where a Canadian company called Ciel claimed priority for that spectrum? I think everyone thought that was in the past, but it looks like that may not be the case.
> 
> It seems that Hughes Canada has a contract with Ciel to use that capacity which was launched on Ciel-6 (which is licensed for RDBS from 103 in Canada but not the US) and licensed it to Dish! Dish recently filed an application with the FCC put up 50,000 dishes on cell tower sites in the US and use RDBS from 103 to deliver video and data services. The uplinks would be from Canada, but the downlinks would be to the US. They are claiming Directv used Canadian authority for some of its satellites in the past, and also trying to use Directv's request for a milestone extension as a way to shoehorn themselves into the process.
> 
> Obviously using this spectrum in the US would be completely incompatible with Directv's use of RDBS from 103 via D15. Not sure why out of all the possible ways Dish could provide this video/data service it is choosing the one way that would screw Directv, except for the obvious reason that it would screw Directv.
> 
> Since the FCC has already approved Directv's license for RDBS from 103 in the US this seems doomed to fail, but depending on how hard Dish pushes it - especially if they got the courts involved - it could potentially delay Directv's ability to utilize this spectrum for some time. They could still launch D15 on schedule, but would be unable to utilize its RDBS transponders. Delays of more than a couple years could impact their 4K rollout (i.e. if there were enough 4K channels that they would no longer fit on the RDBS transponders at 99 that D14 will provide)
> 
> Not sure if this is a simple attempt to screw with the competition, Dish has some particular reason why out of all the various spectrum they could license from Hughes they want to use this, or if they hope to use it as a way of forcing Directv into giving them something they want. The thing that comes to mind are Directv's transponders on 110 and 119. Maybe Dish wants Directv to agree to hand them over once they've migrated off MPEG2, in exchange for removing the roadblock they're trying to erect for their RDBS rollout? Of course, doing this might just guarantee that Directv goes out to their way to hold onto them even if they don't need them...tit for tat!
> 
> 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/SESLFS2014092400752&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number


Yep, that totally sounds like something Dish would do just to mess with DIRECTV.

Charlie Ergen is simply awful (See: Sprint/Clear).

Edit: I'm not saying that the ONLY reason Dish made this decision was to mess with DIRECTV, but I would be surprised if that didn't have a somewhat significant factor in Dish's choices.


----------



## James Long

slice1900 said:


> Dish recently filed an application with the FCC put up 50,000 dishes on cell tower sites in the US and use RDBS from 103 to deliver video and data services. The uplinks would be from Canada, but the downlinks would be to the US.


If the FCC considers that to be a problem then they can easily refuse to license the receive dishes.


----------



## carl6

James Long said:


> If the FCC considers that to be a problem then they can easily refuse to license the receive dishes.


Do receive dishes need licensing? I thought the FCC only licensed transmitters.


----------



## slice1900

James Long said:


> If the FCC considers that to be a problem then they can easily refuse to license the receive dishes.


I'm pretty sure as carl6 says, receive dishes don't require licensing. Dish filed under SES-LFS - Satellite Earth Station License to communication with a Foreign Satellite. As I understand it, that permission is required for uplink/control, not downlink. Not sure what the rules are if Dish does the uplink/TT&C from earth stations in another country as they're requesting, but I think the whole thing is a way of getting their foot in the door to be able to try and gum up the works for Directv in the US, Canadian and possibly EU courts.

The satellite is currently licensed for RDBS from 103 in Canada, not the US. They and Directv are supposed to "coordinate" so they don't interfere with each other. Not sure what ever came of that. I'm not sure on what logic Dish is claiming it should be allowed to have the satellite broadcast into the US when it isn't licensed to do so, given only Directv holds a license for RDBS from 103 in the US. Like I said, I think they're just trying to screw Directv. Given how slowly courts move, they may be successful in doing so.

If you google for SES-3 and the Ciel-6i payload this satellite has quite an interesting history. It looks like it parked at 99 for a short time, then it went halfway across the world for a secret mission supposedly for the DoD using previously undisclosed encryption capabilities and Ka payload - I assume that 'Ka payload' was a reference to the RDBS payload. After a brief stop along the way home for a commercial customer who needed that Ka band for some testing (they speculate it was Echostar) it went to 103 where it is supposed to replace the AMC-1 satellite's C and Ku band capabilities.


----------



## slice1900

What's really funny is that Echostar was granted about a half dozen RDBS licenses, mostly from locations where Dish already has satellites - at least 61, 75, 79, 107, 110, 119. It looks like they were at least doing design for some of them, not sure where they stand now however. If they've lost those due to inaction, the FCC probably won't look kindly on this request. If they have been making milestones and will soon launch these, it is hard for them to argue they need use of this slot over Directv when they are already hogging so many.


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot

slice1900 said:


> I'm pretty sure as carl6 says, receive dishes don't require licensing. Dish filed under SES-LFS - Satellite Earth Station License to communication with a Foreign Satellite. As I understand it, that permission is required for uplink/control, not downlink. Not sure what the rules are if Dish does the uplink/TT&C from earth stations in another country as they're requesting, but I think the whole thing is a way of getting their foot in the door to be able to try and gum up the works for Directv in the US, Canadian and possibly EU courts.
> 
> The satellite is currently licensed for RDBS from 103 in Canada, not the US. They and Directv are supposed to "coordinate" so they don't interfere with each other. Not sure what ever came of that. I'm not sure on what logic Dish is claiming it should be allowed to have the satellite broadcast into the US when it isn't licensed to do so, given only Directv holds a license for RDBS from 103 in the US. Like I said, I think they're just trying to screw Directv. Given how slowly courts move, they may be successful in doing so.
> 
> If you google for SES-3 and the Ciel-6i payload this satellite has quite an interesting history. It looks like it parked at 99 for a short time, then it went halfway across the world for a secret mission supposedly for the DoD using previously undisclosed encryption capabilities and Ka payload - I assume that 'Ka payload' was a reference to the RDBS payload. After a brief stop along the way home for a commercial customer who needed that Ka band for some testing (they speculate it was Echostar) it went to 103 where it is supposed to replace the AMC-1 satellite's C and Ku band capabilities.


I'm not going to go searching at 2:30am, but isn't Ciel-2 @ 129W licensed to Canada and Dish is using it to deliver programming to the USA (obviously)?

Is Ciel-6 licensed for CONUS or only Canadian Coverage?

Also, as this would involve an issue between 2 different Countries, would this not have to be taken to the World Court, making an FCC grant worthless until settled? Clearly a US Court does not have authority to tell Canada not to use that Spectrum (and vice versa).


----------



## James Long

carl6 said:


> Do receive dishes need licensing?


Yes. There is a list of satellites one can receive without a specific license. If the satellite is not on that list one must get a license from the FCC to receive that signal. "All U.S.-Licensed Space Stations in the geostationary orbit" covers the US satellites.

DISH requested and received blanket receive licenses for their subscribers in order to use the Canadian 129 and 72.7 DBS slots and Mexican 77 DBS slot. DirecTV would have needed a blanket license when they used the Canadian 72.5 DBS slot.

ALSAT Permitted Space Station List
http://transition.fcc.gov/ib/sd/se/permitted.html

The narrative to the application slice1900 linked above requests:
DISH Operating L.L.C. (together with its affiliates, "DISH"), pursuant to Section 25.137 of the Commission's Rules (47 C.F.R. § 25.137), submits this application to operate up to 50,000 earth stations in the United States for the purpose of receiving service from Ciel-6i, a Canadian-licensed 17/24 GHz Broadcasting-Satellite Service ("BSS") payload on the in-orbit SES-3 satellite at the 103 W.L. orbital location.
These are not transmit antennas DISH is seeking permission to operate - these are receive antennas.
DISH seeks authority to deploy 17 GHz receive-only antennas at cellular towers in the United States. DISH plans to use the Ciel-6i capacity to begin developing this network component and identify any technical or other deployment issues.


----------



## James Long

SomeRandomIdiot said:


> Also, as this would involve an issue between 2 different Countries, would this not have to be taken to the World Court, making an FCC grant worthless until settled? Clearly a US Court does not have authority to tell Canada not to use that Spectrum (and vice versa).


The spectrum dispute would be up to the International Telecommunications Union.
The FCC could still not grant the 50,000 receive antennas - regardless of the footprint of the satellite.


----------



## slice1900

SomeRandomIdiot said:


> I'm not going to go searching at 2:30am, but isn't Ciel-2 @ 129W licensed to Canada and Dish is using it to deliver programming to the USA (obviously)?
> 
> Is Ciel-6 licensed for CONUS or only Canadian Coverage?
> 
> Also, as this would involve an issue between 2 different Countries, would this not have to be taken to the World Court, making an FCC grant worthless until settled? Clearly a US Court does not have authority to tell Canada not to use that Spectrum (and vice versa).


When Directv fought this before, and it was supposedly put to bed, the reason they said they didn't need to coordinate and the FCC agreed with them is because other countries allowed applications for RDBS slots before they were allowed in the US, and several companies did blanket requests for large numbers of slots. This was bad for US companies and Directv argued it would not serve the public interest to grant them access to this spectrum in the US when all US companies were locked out due to the FCC not having their rulemaking for RDBS completed until after other countries were already accepting requests.

If it comes down to it, this would be fought in whatever body resolves ITU disputes, but it seems to me Dish would have a lot more to lose if they won than Directv. There are undoubtedly international holders of all the half dozen or so slots Echostar is licensed for, if priority is given to those earlier filings in other countries, Dish will lose all their RDBS slots. Maybe they've already prepared for that eventuality by making backdoor deals with the holders like they did for this slot. Though actually I think Dish's applications will have all expired by now since they will have needed to have a satellite in orbit using the frequency already. In my search earlier I couldn't come up with any LOAs for Dish satellites to use RDBS or extensions for satellites using it that were ready for launch and simply delayed like D14.

Directv argued at the time and the FCC agreed that these slots were mostly snapped up by companies that had little or no ability to launch satellites to make use of them, certainly not all of them. They were just squatting. I guess because the SES-3 satellite happened to be launched with the Ciel-6i RDBS package because of whatever classified mission it did for a short time, they were able to actually use it. It was just Directv's bad luck it happened to land at 103, and Dish is trying to seize an opening to screw a competitor.

Had they actually any real plans to use RDBS in this way, and make use of all that wireless spectrum they hold they've done absolutely nothing with, they would have already launched satellites using their licensed RDBS locations in the US. Instead they let all their licenses expire and suddenly claim they're interested in conducting "tests" with 50,000 receive dishes.


----------



## inkahauts

I don't mind ruthless in business but the more Charlie has dish do the more I see he is simply unethical.


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot

James Long said:


> The FCC could still not grant the 50,000 receive antennas - regardless of the footprint of the satellite.


Receive sites do NOT need to be licensed. This is no different than when the courts ruled that anyone with a BUD could receive and legally view the un-encrypted signals ~30 years ago.

One CAN apply for a license for the receive location so if any future terrestrial interference is encountered, that site is protected and the future source of the interference must solve the issue. Without a license, it is you get what you get, future interference or not.

For that reason, most commercial ventures license their site - though again, that is not required.


----------



## James Long

SomeRandomIdiot said:


> For that reason, most commercial ventures license their site - though again, that is not required.


Even if one accepts your interpretation it is a good business practice. The FCC refusing to license the 50,000 receive dishes would be a way of telling DISH that the FCC would not be protecting their reception.

Whether or not any signal emanates from Ciel-6i that interferes with DirecTV's yet to be launched satellite is a problem the ITU will have to sort out. Canada asked for use of the slot first and has a satellite capable of providing the service in place. That counts for something.


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot

James Long said:


> Even if one accepts your interpretation it is a good business practice. The FCC refusing to license the 50,000 receive dishes would be a way of telling DISH that the FCC would not be protecting their reception.
> 
> Whether or not any signal emanates from Ciel-6i that interferes with DirecTV's yet to be launched satellite is a problem the ITU will have to sort out. Canada asked for use of the slot first and has a satellite capable of providing the service in place. That counts for something.


Receive locations are not licensed to receive from any specific orbital position, thus Dish would have no issue getting the Receive sites licensed.

First claim has no bearing. If international treaties did not give Canada full North American Coverage (like 129W), then Canada has no right to put a signal over the US.

That is the only unknown that is not answered that has any bearing here. As the FCC gave DirecTV licenses for 103, then one can assume (right or wrong) that under International Treaties that Canada only has the right for a Canadian footprint at that location.

Assuming DirecTV is licensed for USA and Ciel-6 for Canada, the issue is the interference around the border as one cannot not stop a signal entirely at the border. This could potentially cause interference for cities like Detroit, Buffalo, Syracuse etc. that might end up in "no man's land".

However, Dish would have no standing to try and receive that location in the USA UNLESS 103 is granted to Canada by International Treaties, which again would beg the question why the FCC would grant a license to DirecTV in the first place - as that should have been very evident.


----------



## James Long

Talk to the ITU ... they have a different opinion than you on how slots are assigned.


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot

inkahauts said:


> I don't mind ruthless in business but the more Charlie has dish do the more I see he is simply unethical.


He plays by the rules as he sees them and has made himself a lot of money doing so.

He is not afraid to tie things up in the court system for years and made some lawyers very rich in the process as well.


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot

James Long said:


> Talk to the ITU ... they have a different opinion than you on how slots are assigned.


I believe it is you that needs to talk to the ITU.

If it was first come, first serve, the USA would have taken all the Orbital Positions for North America (and probably South America as well) while Russia would have take all for Europe/Asia and probably Africa as well, especially as no other Country could launch a satellite in the early days.


----------



## inkahauts

SomeRandomIdiot said:


> He plays by the rules as he sees them and has made himself a lot of money doing so.
> 
> He is not afraid to tie things up in the court system for years and made some lawyers very rich in the process as well.


No he's unethical. His actions on how he does things is indefensible.

He looks for loop holes with the sole intention of screwing others. Sprint??? And now DIRECTV.

And he doesn't win all that often. TiVo???? The only one who loses in all his retrans fights is his customers....

Unethical. No way around it.


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot

inkahauts said:


> No he's unethical. His actions on how he does things is indefensible.
> 
> He looks for loop holes with the sole intention of screwing others. Sprint??? And now DIRECTV.
> 
> And he doesn't win all that often. TiVo???? The only one who loses in all his retrans fights is his customers....
> 
> Unethical. No way around it.


With all the money he has, again, he just ties stuff up in court forever, knowing he can outlast the others.

That he put Voom out of business by breaking his contract and paid as little as he did, he considers it a win.

Same with Tivo. He got to operate all those years without paying fees and again, got away with paying less than he should.

So he sees logic in his actions.

I prefer to go to sleep at night at peace with myself. Others do as well. Unfortunately, he probably does as well.


----------



## inkahauts

He can't outlast and he does not have more money than DIRECTV can throw at this especially if att gets them. 

And someday all this will catch up to him.


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot

inkahauts said:


> He can't outlast and he does not have more money than DIRECTV can throw at this especially if att gets them.
> 
> And someday all this will catch up to him.


What he expects - and has played out over the past 15 years - he counts on DirecTV to change ownership every feww years before something settles and the new ownership might not be as interested in perusing it as the old ownership was.


----------



## inkahauts

Att would never back down. They are buying DIRECTV because of its bandwidth. It'd be a mistake on his part to think otherwise.


----------



## P Smith

And we're finally returning back to the topic: D-15. Right?!


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot

inkahauts said:


> Att would never back down. They are buying DIRECTV because of its bandwidth. It'd be a mistake on his part to think otherwise.


And AT&T could be bought out in several years.


----------



## slice1900

inkahauts said:


> Att would never back down. They are buying DIRECTV because of its bandwidth. It'd be a mistake on his part to think otherwise.


What do you mean "buying Directv because of its bandwidth"? If AT&T wanted satellite bandwidth, they could easily have made the filings with the FCC and build/launch satellites. Or rent bandwidth from one of the many commercial providers. AT&T is buying Directv for what it is, one of the largest cable/satellite providers.


----------



## James Long

slice1900 said:


> What do you mean "buying Directv because of its bandwidth"? If AT&T wanted satellite bandwidth, they could easily have made the filings with the FCC and build/launch satellites. Or rent bandwidth from one of the many commercial providers. AT&T is buying Directv for what it is, one of the largest cable/satellite providers.


NFL Sunday Ticket. 
One of the few dealbreakers mentioned in the merger contract.

Other than that, they are happy to purchase a large profit making company. If AT&T runs DirecTV into the ground then they may consider spinning it off. But that is a few years off. The merger has not been approved let alone completed.


----------



## inkahauts

Massive bandwidth that can be pipped into people's homes and they don't have to start from scratch. That's huge. It would att far more than what they have now. 

They look at the future and say we want to offer Internet phone and tv to everyone. Wireless will get the first two but they need DIRECTV for the third.


----------



## P Smith

can we move to proper thread when discussing ATT/merge/DTV in general ? and keep the thread to D-15 satellite ?


----------



## Oli74

D-15 is scheduled to launch in 1st or 2nd quarter of 2015 right? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2

Oli74 said:


> D-15 is scheduled to launch in 1st or 2nd quarter of 2015 right?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Recent post in the D14 thread has D15 pegged for (late in I suspect) the first quarter of '15.
http://dbstalk.com/index.php?/topic/170004-DIRECTV-Satellite-Discussion-D-14#entry3316664

Though stay tuned to sources like nasaspaceflight.com's launch schedule thread (Salo's posts in particular) for Arianespace and Arianespace's official web and twitter feeds of course.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Oli74

Who is helping with the launch of D15? Arainespace or another company? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bakers12

Oli74 said:


> Who is helping with the launch of D15? Arainespace or another company?


According to Satbeams, Arianespace will launch D15.


----------



## Oli74

bakers12 said:


> According to Satbeams, Arianespace will launch D15.


June 30 estimate date but it can be before that

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith

Oli74 said:


> June 30 estimate date but it can be before that
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


we are seen only slipping dates recently so far...
Why you're thinking it will launch early then an end of June? 
Ariane doesn't looks keep its schedule, perhaps sat manufacturers delaying delivery.


----------



## Oli74

P Smith said:


> we are seen only slipping dates recently so far...
> Why you're thinking it will launch early then an end of June?
> Ariane doesn't looks keep its schedule, perhaps sat manufacturers delaying delivery.


Well I kinda figure it can be before that date

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

Someone at Satelliteguys said Nasaspaceflightnow is reporting D15 will fly with SkyMexico-1 and launch in April.


----------



## harsh

nasaspaceflight's Jester offered up the second week of April yesterday and Salo added it to the schedule.

Jester seems to be pretty well placed.

The rocket is designated VA223.


----------



## P Smith

ah-oh.... will keep fingers crossed for April's schedule


----------



## HarleyD

Having a companion payload scheduled is probably a big plus in getting a firm spot in the launch queue. You have to have a dance partner for the Ariane 5 launch vehicle...well, Arianespace's business model requires it. Unless you want to pay twice as much you have to go along with "double occupancy".

A vehicle designation gives real credibility to the projected date as well. These things aren't just sitting on the shelf at Costco.

With only one other Ariane 5 (March 12 - Thor 7, Sicral-2/Syracuse-3C - Ariane 5 ECA (VA222) - Kourou ELA-3) being penciled in _at this point _an April launch seems eminently do-able.


----------



## slice1900

Why the three month gap between VA221 and VA222? Does Kourou have some sort of yearly maintenance that dictates that? If that was normal they'd only get in four launches a year....


----------



## bakers12

The VA missions only refers to Ariane 5 launches. They also have two more lightweight classes of rockets. Soyuz Flight VS10 launched on December 18 and Vega Flight VV04 is scheduled for February 11.

See this link for details.


----------



## HarleyD

slice1900 said:


> Why the three month gap between VA221 and VA222? Does Kourou have some sort of yearly maintenance that dictates that? If that was normal they'd only get in four launches a year....


They don't really do a whole lot better than that anyway. :rolling:

I'll lay money on the holidays having an impact. I know at my company it's hard to assemble a quorum beyond Thanksgiving and critical work is deferred until the new year.

Plust the 'VA' designation is specifc to the Ariane 5 launch vehcles. They launch other types of vehicles from Kourou besides that so it may not be that they're sitting on their hands for three months.


----------



## HarleyD

Looking at Salo's latest projections, only 6 Ariane 5 rockets launched in 2014 (VA216 - VA221) and there was a four month gap from March to July between Ariane 5 launches. (VA216 and .VA219)

Throw in a few Soyuz launches and a Vega and they only had 11 launches in all of 2014

*2014:
№ - Date - Satellite(s) - Rocket - Launch Site - Time (UTC)*
01 - February 6 - ABS 2, Athena-Fidus - Ariane 5 ECA (VA217) - Kourou ELA-3 - 21:30:07
02 - March 22 - Astra 5B, Amazonas 4A - Ariane 5 ECA (VA216) - Kourou ELA-3 - 22:04:07
03 - April 3 - Sentinel-1A - Soyuz-STA/Fregat-M (VS07) - Kourou ELS - 21:02:26
04 - April 30 - KazEOSat 1/Kazakhstan DZZ-HR/HRES - Vega (VV03) - Kourou ZLV - 01:35:15
05 - July 10 - O3b (4 sats) - Soyuz-STB/Fregat-MT (VS08) - Kourou ELS - 18:55:56
06 - July 29 - ATV-5 Georges Lemaître - Ariane 5 ES (VA219) - Kourou ELA-3 - 23:47:45
_07 - August 22 - Galileo-FOC FM01 (Doresa), Galileo-FOC FM02 (Milena) - Soyuz-STB/Fregat-MT (VS09) - Kourou ELS - 12:27:11 (incorrect orbit)_
08 - September 11 - Measat 3b/Jabiru 2, Optus 10 - Ariane 5 ECA (VA218) - Kourou ELA-3 - 22:05:07
09 - October 16 - Intelsat 30/DLA 1 (TBD), Arsat 1 - Ariane 5 ECA (VA220) - Kourou ELA-3 - 21:43:52
10 - December 6 - DirecTV 14, GSAT-16 - Ariane 5 ECA (VA221) - Kourou ELA-3 - 20:40:07
11 - December 18 - O3b (4 sats) - Soyuz-STB/Fregat-MT (VS10) - Kourou ELS - 18:37


----------



## Diana C

Which, IIRC, beats their previous high of 10 launches per year. Their goal for 2014 was 12.


----------



## HarleyD

I suppose it's not entirely fair to try to paint them in a pejoraive light.

A lot of things have to go right for a launch to go off, and only one thing has to go wrong to scratch it.

But it's more entertaining to poke a little fun at them.

It's kind of hard for me to distill how many launches they are planning for 2015 based on what Salo has posted. A lot of the staellites projected to go up on an Ariane 5 in 2015 are listed singly which we know isn't how it works. They'll be paired up based on payload mass, when the completed satellite is available to be delivered, etc. So a list of 20 some odd launch events is going to winnow down to a much smaller list of actual launches. They've only got two Ariane 5 vehicle assignments, two Vegas and a Soyuz to date. Then there's a list of satellites with no vehicle designation to go up singly or in some combination encompassing a dozen on Ariane 5 platforms, a pair of Vegas and a Soyuz.


----------



## bakers12

Salo has pushed his estimate of the D15 launch back. The estimate is now for May.

April 6-12 first half NET May - DirecTV 15, SKY MEXICO-1 (SKYM-1, DIRECTV INNOVA) - Ariane 5 ECA (VA223) - Kourou ELA-3

Follow him at this link.


----------



## lwilli201

Question. Does Directv have an up-link center dedicated to Mexico/South America? With D-15 and Sky Mexico-1 going up together, they will presumably be testing two satellites at the same time.


----------



## HarleyD

It's strictly a ride share for the launch into orbit. From there they go their separate ways. Ariane 5 launch vehicle is intended to carry two paying passengers. The only thing they need to have in common is that they're going into space.

DirecTV 14 went up with a satellite that is going to serve India.


----------



## slice1900

bakers12 said:


> Salo has pushed his estimate of the D15 launch back. The estimate is now for May.
> 
> April 6-12 first half NET May - DirecTV 15, SKY MEXICO-1 (SKYM-1, DIRECTV INNOVA) - Ariane 5 ECA (VA223) - Kourou ELA-3
> 
> Follow him at this link.


Looks like they're pretty booked out through 2017. I guess it is a good thing it takes a while to build satellites, because if you were able to build one in six months it would sit around for a few years before it could be launched!

I'm really surprised to see listings out into the 2030s. Do these come from long term contracts people sign with Arianespace, or are companies actually willing to put down deposits now to insure they have a launch slot available 20 years from now?


----------



## slice1900

HarleyD said:


> It's strictly a ride share for the launch into orbit. From there they go their separate ways. Ariane 5 launch vehicle is intended to carry two paying passengers. The only thing they need to have in common is that they're going into space.
> 
> DirecTV 14 went up with a satellite that is going to serve India.


I think he was referring to the fact that Directv will own/operate both satellites being launched, so they'd have two satellites being tested at once. I have no idea how involved Directv is in doing the testing, versus being done by the satellite manufacturer...and even if the testing is run from a Directv uplink site I see no reason why they couldn't deal with two satellites at once.

They might need more people around, but I don't imagine the testing requires hands on 24x7. More like kick off a predefined test sequence, wait for the data to be collected and analyzed, then further testing in that area if the analysis indicates something that needs to be looked at more closely. Seems like they should be able to handle doing two at once.


----------



## doctor j

lwilli201 said:


> Question. Does Directv have an up-link center dedicated to Mexico/South America? With D-15 and Sky Mexico-1 going up together, they will presumably be testing two satellites at the same time.


There is a separate California Uplink Center in Los Angeles , a few miles away from the LABC in Marina del Ray.
I think they do a lot of the Latin America uplinks.

Doctor j


----------



## slice1900

doctor j said:


> There is a separate California Uplink Center in Los Angeles , a few miles away from the LABC in Marina del Ray.
> I think they do a lot of the Latin America uplinks.
> 
> Doctor j


There are actually three in LA that are licensed to uplink to US satellites. There's 'LABC', 'LADUF' in Long Beach, and 'CANOGA PARK'. I would assume some/all of those are also licensed to uplink for DTVLA satellites.


----------



## HoTat2

doctor j said:


> There is a separate California Uplink Center in Los Angeles , a few miles away from the LABC in Marina del Ray.
> I think they do a lot of the Latin America uplinks.
> 
> Doctor j


Yep...

The "CBC" or "California Broadcast Center" in Long Beach, CA., supply programming for WD service and international feeds outside those provided by those in or neighboring countries themselves, for DIRECTV LA excluding SKY Brazil which satellite is located too far east for LOS.

But that doesn't mean the CBC's facilities will be used for IOT of SKYMex-1.


----------



## harsh

Salo updated the Arianespace launch schedule today to reflect a possible Q2 launch (which could be conceivably sooner than a NET May launch). That said, if the previous launch (VA222) is on or about Tax Day, another April launch seems unlikely.

If Arianespace moves VA223 ahead of VA222, this may be what the maybe is about. That Sky Mexico-1 was originally second half 2015 makes a transition like this doubtful but certainly not impossible. DIRECTV INNOVA/SKYM 1 is an Orbital Sciences Corporation GeoStar-2 bus.


----------



## bakers12

I don't see where Salo indicates that VA223 will be launched before VA222. Here's the Ariane 5 launches he's predicting.

March 12 April 16 - Thor 7, Sicral-2/Syracuse-3C - Ariane 5 ECA (VA222) - Kourou ELA-3
April 6-12 first half NET May - DirecTV 15, SKY MEXICO-1 (SKYM-1, DIRECTV INNOVA) - Ariane 5 ECA (VA223) - Kourou ELA-3 (or 2nd quarter)
NET spring May June - Galileo-FOC FM11 (Alizée), Galileo-FOC FM12 (Lisa), Galileo-FOC FM13 (Kimberley), Galileo-FOC FM14 (Tijmen) - Ariane 5 ES - Kourou ELA-3


----------



## slice1900

Whether there's any chance VA223 might be swapped with VA222 would depend on the reason for VA222 being pushed back a month. If it is Arianespace's delay then everything is pushed back equally. However, if the delay is due to one of the satellites on VA222 not being ready in time, I suppose a swap would be possible if D15 and SkyM-1 could be ready before the delayed VA222 satellite.


----------



## bakers12

Has there been any indication that these two launches are being swapped in their scheduling? I don't know why we're pursuing this.


----------



## HarleyD

It's not without precedent.

In fact it happened twice in 2014. VA217 preceded VA216 and VA219 went before VA218. I don't have the specifics of why or when that scheduling flipped. It's probably out there, I'm just not going to dig it up right now...

*01 - February 6 - ABS 2, Athena-Fidus - Ariane 5 ECA (VA217) - Kourou ELA-3 - 21:30:07*
*02 - March 22 - Astra 5B, Amazonas 4A - Ariane 5 ECA (VA216) - Kourou ELA-3 - 22:04:07*
03 - April 3 - Sentinel-1A - Soyuz-STA/Fregat-M (VS07) - Kourou ELS - 21:02:26
04 - April 30 - KazEOSat 1/Kazakhstan DZZ-HR/HRES - Vega (VV03) - Kourou ZLV - 01:35:15
05 - July 10 - O3b (4 sats) - Soyuz-STB/Fregat-MT (VS08) - Kourou ELS - 18:55:56
*06 - July 29 - ATV-5 Georges Lemaître - Ariane 5 ES (VA219) - Kourou ELA-3 - 23:47:45*
_07 - August 22 - Galileo-FOC FM01 (Doresa), Galileo-FOC FM02 (Milena) - Soyuz-STB/Fregat-MT (VS09) - Kourou ELS - 12:27:11 (incorrect orbit)_
*08 - September 11 - Measat 3b/Jabiru 2, Optus 10 - Ariane 5 ECA (VA218) - Kourou ELA-3 - 22:05:07*


----------



## HarleyD

bakers12 said:


> Has there been any indication that these two launches are being swapped in their scheduling? I don't know why we're pursuing this.


No direct indication, but it could be read into the tea leaves, such as they are.

On December 19, a credible source (screen name 'Jester') said that VA223 was tracking the second week of April. At that time VA222 was penciled in for March 12.

Then on December 23 Jester indicated that VA222 had moved and was now tracking April 16...not quite the second week of April but only two days past that window. VA223 then ****ed to No Earlier Than May 2015.

No specific reason was given for pushing out the date for VA222 however there are news reports from back around Nov 24 indicating that the VA222 launch vehicle was beggining its' buildup in the Launch Integration Building facility. So it is reasonable to speculate that the VA222 launch date being pushed back is likely as not associated with delivery of one of the payloads and not the launch vehicle. Although it's not impossible that the cause of the delay lies with the Ariane 5 or Arianespace.

Then on December 30 Salo added the caveat "or 2nd quarter" to the estimated launch info for VA223. That would encompass April, May and June.

Now I won't pretend to know at what point in the assembly the launch vehicle becomes committed to a certain payload or payloads and cannot be used for another payload, but VA222 and VA223 are both going up on Ariane-5ECA launch vehicles. A novice observer such as myself could speculate that the Ariane-5ECA currently in buildup may be re-designated VA223 if DirecTV 15 and SKYM-1 are both going to be ready to go significantly sooner than Thor-7 and Sicral-2...again, provided that the launch vehicle is not yet built up to a point where it could only carry very specific payloads.

And really, speculation is all we have. Might as well live it up a little. :righton:


----------



## HoTat2

HoTat2 said:


> Yep...
> 
> The "CBC" or "California Broadcast Center" in Long Beach, CA., supply programming for WD service and international feeds outside those provided by those in or neighboring countries themselves, for DIRECTV LA excluding SKY Brazil which satellite is located too far east for LOS.
> 
> But that doesn't mean the CBC's facilities will be used for IOT of SKYMex-1.


Though I do wonder what SKYMex-1 means for the subscrbers to the SKY Mexico service ...

That the subs. will eventually no longer use leased Ku band transponders on intelsat birds at 58W (currently IS-21), and there will be a large scale dish re-point program to 79W to transition them over to SKYMex-1?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Lord Vader

All this talk about the uplink control center in California got me to thinking--what would happen if the "Big One" were to hit southern CA. and knocked out or destroyed DirecTV's HQ there? Is there a redundant backup center that could take over the transmission of their hundreds of channel broadcasts?


----------



## inkahauts

Lord Vader said:


> All this talk about the uplink control center in California got me to thinking--what would happen if the "Big One" were to hit southern CA. and knocked out or destroyed DirecTV's HQ there? Is there a redundant backup center that could take over the transmission of their hundreds of channel broadcasts?


They have multiple backups to everything.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

inkahauts said:


> They have multiple backups to everything.


Inky is spot on...backups...and backups to backups.


----------



## James Long

Where and for how long?

If I recall correctly they have a center in Colorado not too far from DISH Network's main uplink center. But with modern satellite design the uplink is designed to be from a particular area of the country per uplink beam - not a ConUS receive beam.


----------



## slice1900

James Long said:


> But with modern satellite design the uplink is designed to be from a particular area of the country per uplink beam - not a ConUS receive beam.


That's only true for spot beams. Those have to be uplinked from a certain location because of the transponder re-use. They have pairs of uplink centers so they have some redundancy there as well.

For CONUS there is no transponder re-use, and any CONUS content can be uplinked from either LA or Colorado. If they lost everything in California they'd be fine from a broadcast perspective, they would uplink everything from Castle Rock.


----------



## HoTat2

In the case of the CBC, I would assume other uplink centers in Mexico and Latin American countries like Colombia, Argentina, and Brazil that regularly supply much programing along with the CBC for DIRECTV LA would take up the slack, though WD service here in the CONUS would probably be interrupted.

As for the LABC, Castle Rock is designed to take over as a backup in case the LABC is diabled. Which makes sense given that CR was originally the main broadcast center before Los Angeles.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Oli74

Happy New Year to all 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HarleyD

Going back to the number of Arianespace launches targeted for 2015, it is spoken to in the following article...

http://www.arianespace.com/news-press-release/2015/1-6-2015-press-conference.asp

Quote from the article...

*Priorities in 2015*​*Objective: at least 11 launches *
*Arianespace aims to match the record of 11 launches in 2014 -- *and even surpass this record if all satellites are ready on time -- with six to seven Ariane 5 launches, two by Soyuz and three by Vega.

*The first mission of the year is slated for February 11, 2015*: Vega will be used to inject Europe's reentry demonstrator, IXV, into a suborbital trajectory.


----------



## Radio Enginerd

Skyboss said:


> It's crazy how long so many of these have been up there. I remember waiting and waiting for more than a couple of HD channels in the early 2000's. Now we're less than 10 years from so many of them that brought us all those great new channels going out of service. Man time flies!


I was thinking the same thing. We waited for what seemed like forever for D10. I remember when they lit up the first batch of MPEG4 HD channels. It was so cool!


----------



## bakers12

Salo updated his estimates today. No change for D15, but the one after it has been moved up.

April 16 - Thor 7, Sicral-2/Syracuse-3C - Ariane 5 ECA (VA222) - Kourou ELA-3
NET May - DirecTV 15, SKY MEXICO-1 (SKYM-1, DIRECTV INNOVA) - Ariane 5 ECA (VA223) - Kourou ELA-3 (or 2nd quarter)
June 15 July - MSG-4/Meteosat-11 - Ariane 5 ECA - Kourou ELA-3


----------



## harsh

Jester over at nasaspaceflight.com says that DIRECTV 15 and SKYM-1 (VA223) are currently on the schedule for May 20, 2015 (was NET MAY).


----------



## slice1900

So it has a date, and there is only one other VA launch ahead of it, so it shouldn't have much slippage risk. If it follows a similar launch to IOT slot at 76* and drift to 103* it would be in service by end of July.

Though given that RDBS is the only new service it will add, if it is delayed it won't really matter since D14 will be fully in service months earlier.


----------



## P Smith

slice1900 said:


> So it has a date, and there is only one other VA launch ahead of it, so it shouldn't have much slippage risk. If it follows a similar launch to IOT slot at 76* and drift to 103* it would be in service by end of July.
> 
> Though given that RDBS is the only new service it will add, if it is delayed it won't really matter since D14 *will be fully in service months earlier*.


I would see that fact before stating it .


----------



## slice1900

Looks like D15 is taking on a bit more importance now that D10 appears to have bitten the dust. D15 includes 14 Ka lo transponders that will replace the transponders D10 provided until yesterday.

Does anyone know how many transponders D15 can power simultaneously? I remember seeing something that it had 24 Ka hi and 14 Ka lo, and it could power up to 24 Ka transponders simultaneously. What about the 18 RDBS? Any idea whether it could power all 18 of those along with the 14 Ka lo? Maybe there's some data in the filings that could be used to determine this?


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> Looks like D15 is taking on a bit more importance now that D10 appears to have bitten the dust. D15 includes 14 Ka lo transponders that will replace the transponders D10 provided until yesterday.
> 
> Does anyone know how many transponders D15 can power simultaneously? I remember seeing something that it had 24 Ka hi and 14 Ka lo, and it could power up to 24 Ka transponders simultaneously. What about the 18 RDBS? Any idea whether it could power all 18 of those along with the 14 Ka lo? Maybe there's some data in the filings that could be used to determine this?


From the D15 Narrative up to 24 Ka band CONUS (spots for HI and AK) xpndrs can be powered simultaneously of the combined total of 38 (24 Ka-hi, 14 Ka-lo).

No indication from the documents the RDBS payload (S2712) cannot be powered simultaneously as well.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## bobnielsen

I doubt that the RDBS payload has an independent power source.


----------



## inkahauts

I'll bet it can run rdbs with other stuff at the same time. D14 can. The only limit we have ever seen on it is in regards to the combinations of the ka and ku stuff. Do we even know if that's all about power instead of maybe how much it can receive at one time on the uplink?


----------



## Diana C

There are several inter-related factors that determine what a given satellite can support. One, obviously, is power. There are fixed demands like dynamic attitude control, telemetry and control, heaters, internal signal processors and the like, with the remaining power budgeted across the transponders. Usually, the biggest limit on power consumption is the draw rate from the batteries, since they have to power everything when the satellite is in earth's shadow.

Also in the mix is the ability of the receivers to handle the demodulation and switching/routing of the data and the number and type of antennas. In a fully functional satellite, there is usually more than enough CPU and circuit bandwidth, which is why electrical power is usually the key factor.

However, except in special circumstances, a satellite is almost never asked to provide more than roughly 85% of its rated power, since as the satellite ages, it produces less power. The solar panels (actually the entire satellite) get covered with a fine film of dust that reduces their output. The panels also can suffer damage from micro-meteorites. Of course, the batteries also lose the ability to hold a full charge over time as well. So a satellite is usually loaded with no more of a load than what it is expected to handle when near its EOL (except sometimes on a temporary basis).

I don't know how much of D14's 20kW power budget is consumed by the fixed demand, but I'd guess there is more than enough available for both Ka and RDBS transponders. The limitation of high and low Ka band transponders that can be powered is probably more a result of how they are wired to the power busses than to a power capacity limit. I would be really surprised if D14 can't at least power its entire RDBS payload and the full Ka lo payload.

D15 would be no different. It should be able to power all the RDBS payload and at least a large portion of its Ka payload. If I were designing the satellite, I'd allocate the same power budget to RDBS and Ku, since it is HIGHLY unlikely that it will ever be in a slot where it would be possible to use both.


----------



## lwilli201

Diana C just has a way of explaining things that I can even understand. Thanks Diana.


----------



## HoTat2

Diana C said:


> ...
> I don't know how much of D14's 20kW power budget is consumed by the fixed demand, but I'd guess there is more than enough available for both Ka and RDBS transponders. The limitation of high and low Ka band transponders that can be powered is probably more a result of how they are wired to the power busses than to a power capacity limit. I would be really surprised if D14 can't at least power its entire RDBS payload and the full Ka lo payload. ...


Just one point of correction;

D14 only has Ka-hi band payloads, not any Ka-lo ones.

Very good and informative post otherwise though ....

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Diana C

Confused the payloads of 14 & 15.

Not unusual for me...I have a mind like a steel sieve.


----------



## Ed Campbell

damondlt said:


> I agree . Some will be added. But not a boat load. My guess 4K options.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S5


+1

Talk to sales floor @ Best Buy, Walmart - 4K is rolling out the door, mostly because of uprezzing. The hardware base for content is growing faster than it did early days of HD. D* will be in shape for serious quantity/range of 4K vs stodgy cable systems or DISH.

Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


----------



## Oli74

When the D-15 going up? I hear in May or June 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2

Oli74 said:


> When the D-15 going up? I hear in May or June
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's about the current estimate...

Natually subject to change of course. ...

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## bakers12

Salo at Nasa Spaceflight says the launch is expected on May 20.


----------



## HarleyD

And while anything is possible, with D15 already having a launch vehicle designation in place (VA-223) and only one other Ariane 5 launch ahead of it with five weeks in-between the two (Thor7/Sicral 2 on VA-222 set for April 15) that May 20 date is not apt to slip by a lot. 

But as I said, anything is possible and Arianespace launch dates are not etched in stone. It's more like they're penciled in Silly Putty..


----------



## HoTat2

Application for a 9.2m earth station antenna (E150022) at Castle Rock for TT&C of D15 and two filings requesting permission to relocate D10 and 12 .035° westward to make room for D15 eventually at 102.750°W

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/SESLIC2015031600157&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

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/SATMOD2015032000012&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

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/SATMOD2015032000013&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

Strange, if not a mistake, that the relocation requests state that DIRECTV has only two operational satellites at the nominal 103W position.

What about SW1?

Also note in the requests DIRECTV confirms the launch date on or about May 20th and expects D15 to reach it's operational slot about mid-July.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## bobnielsen

Maybe SW1 is already in a position where it doesn't need to be moved.


----------



## HoTat2

bobnielsen said:


> Maybe SW1 is already in a position where it doesn't need to be moved.


Quite possibly so...

But the way the requests are worded at that point is a though SW1 doesn't even exist. As though they're saying DIRECTV has only two satellites at the 103W nom. position.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## inkahauts

Maybe it's going to move before then via a separate filing.


----------



## harsh

HoTat2 said:


> Strange, if not a mistake, that the relocation requests state that DIRECTV has only two operational satellites at the nominal 103W position.
> 
> What about SW1?


An interesting and seemingly inexplicable omission. According to the transponder maps, Spaceway 1 supports around 30 markets plus PR.

Maybe they had counted DIRECTV 10 out?


----------



## HoTat2

harsh said:


> An interesting and seemingly inexplicable omission. According to the transponder maps, Spaceway 1 supports around 30 markets plus PR.
> 
> Maybe they had counted DIRECTV 10 out?


But they specifically identify the two existing satellites as D10 and 12, as though those are the only two in existence at nom. 103W.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

bobnielsen said:


> Maybe SW1 is already in a position where it doesn't need to be moved.


As far as I can tell, it is currently at 102.925, so doesn't need to be moved. I agree its odd they didn't mention it in the filings to move the other two, but I guess the only need to mention the ones that need to be moved.


----------



## alnielsen

SW1 was launched on April 26, 2005 and it has a 12 year life expectancy. Maybe they are getting ready to decommission it. Is it owned by DirecTV or Boeing?


----------



## slice1900

alnielsen said:


> SW1 was launched on April 26, 2005 and it has a 12 year life expectancy. Maybe they are getting ready to decommission it. Is it owned by DirecTV or Boeing?


Both are owned by Directv, Boeing just built them. Most satellites outlive their design life, some by a significant margin. The limitation is generally fuel; both Spaceways have fuel life beyond 2020. As I posted in another thread, Directv recently filed for a license extension for D8 through 2025. It was launched the same year as the Spaceways, and like them had a design life of 12 years. In the filing Directv estimated it had sufficient fuel on board to last through 2034! The licenses for both Spaceways will come up for renewal this year, so we'll see extensions filed for them soon which may provide more information as to their future.

I'm not sure what all the design life of a satellite takes into account but I know their power rating is based on power at the end of their design life, assuming normal deterioration of solar panels and batteries. If a satellite is not operating at its full capacity it won't need its peak power capability. The Spaceways are only using 4 and 6 of their 16 62.5 MHz Ka hi transponders, respectively, and their 165 MHz Ka lo transponders are inactive, so they're operating well below their design power.

The only Directv satellite likely to be forced into retirement in the relatively near future is D4S, it exhausts its fuel budget in 2019. It is effectively an in-orbit spare already, if it is doing anything it is only providing a few spot beams from 101 that D9S could likely cover.


----------



## harsh

Posted in the wrong thread last night:

Launch VA223 has been given a launch window of 21:35 to 22:37 (zulu) on May 20th.


----------



## RAD

From http://www.satnews.com/story.php?number=1917589804&menu=1

[quoteDIRECTV 15, the most powerful U.S. broadcast satellite, has left Airbus Defence and Space's cleanrooms in Toulouse (France). It will now be shipped to Kourou for launch by Ariane 5 in May 2015.[/quote]


----------



## MysteryMan

RAD said:


> From http://www.satnews.com/story.php?number=1917589804&menu=1


Looking good. Thanks for posting .


----------



## slice1900

Interesting info in that article. D15 is claimed to have a "record breaking number of radio frequency power amplifiers (150+)". Breaking the record for Directv? For Eurostar? Why so many, when it has 30 Ku, 38 Ka (24 active at once) and 18 RDBS tranponders? Does each transponder (active or not) require two? That would add up to 172, and seems to be the only way they could get to that number since D15 has no spot beams. I would have thought spot beam satellites would hold the 'record'.

Can anyone who understands this better cure my ignorance on this subject?


----------



## P Smith

A lot for spare ? Perhaps they has unpublished statistics to make such big fail-over ?


----------



## harsh

RAD said:


> From http://www.satnews.com/story.php?number=1917589804&menu=1


Apparently Arianespace's published policy regarding early arrivals (no earlier than 30 days in advance of launch) isn't being observed of late.

Maybe they have contracted a barge.


----------



## lwilli201

Since they did not state how the satellite was to be shipped, they are probably using the Russian An-124 Ruslan (Condor). I guess Airbus does not build anything big enough to carry it (to my knowledge).

Correction: The An-124 is built in the Ukraine, not Russia.


----------



## P Smith

It was only one Ukrainian An-124, probably mothballed now due to their revolution's chaos, so only barges available


----------



## Oli74

http://spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=45462

DIRECTV 15, the most powerful US broadcast satellite, has left Airbus Defence and Space's cleanrooms in Toulouse (France). It will now be shipped to Kourou for launch by Ariane 5 in May 2015.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Oli74

The Spaceport is continuing its sustained mission pace in support of Arianespace's 2015 launch schedule, with the initial payload having now arrived in French Guiana for another of its heavy-lift Ariane 5 missions.

http://www.arianespace.com/news-mission-update/2015/1275.asp

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## RAD

P Smith said:


> It was only one Ukrainian An-124, probably mothballed now due to their revolution's chaos, so only barges available





Oli74 said:


> The Spaceport is continuing its sustained mission pace in support of Arianespace's 2015 launch schedule, with the initial payload having now arrived in French Guiana for another of its heavy-lift Ariane 5 missions.
> 
> http://www.arianespace.com/news-mission-update/2015/1275.asp
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Guess they still have them flying.


----------



## lwilli201

RAD said:


> Guess they still have them flying.


There will always be a need for a few of these monsters. These planes are built in the Ukraine. Even NATO leased 7 of these a few years back. I could not find a reference to see it NATO is still using them. Antonov, the company that builds these planes, is alive and well, contrary to some reports.

http://www.antonov.com/

http://www.antonov.com/news/374


----------



## Diana C

slice1900 said:


> Interesting info in that article. D15 is claimed to have a "record breaking number of radio frequency power amplifiers (150+)". Breaking the record for Directv? For Eurostar? Why so many, when it has 30 Ku, 38 Ka (24 active at once) and 18 RDBS tranponders? Does each transponder (active or not) require two? That would add up to 172, and seems to be the only way they could get to that number since D15 has no spot beams. I would have thought spot beam satellites would hold the 'record'.
> 
> Can anyone who understands this better cure my ignorance on this subject?


I haven't been keeping up with the latest in transponder design, but I know back in the early days of Ku they used to double gang amplifiers to increase EIRP. Perhaps they do the same in Ka.


----------



## slice1900

I guess another reason why there might be multiple RF amps per transponder is due to separate beams for HI and PR. Not really sure how that works, but if each beam had a separate amplifier, that could start to add up pretty quickly.

But Diana's explanation is probably correct - if they used to do it that way in the past, they probably still do. An LNB has a low noise amp, then a mixer, then a 'regular' amp (since the NF of a second stage amp makes less difference) so it makes sense that a satellite would work in a similar manner.


----------



## harsh

Oli74 said:


> The Spaceport is continuing its sustained mission pace in support of Arianespace's 2015 launch schedule, with the initial payload having now arrived in French Guiana for another of its heavy-lift Ariane 5 missions.


It seems odd that this schedule lofts its first Ariane 5 on Tax Day this year.


----------



## Laxguy

Odd? Or ironic? 

Or early in the year? In other words, what is the odd factor?


----------



## lwilli201

harsh said:


> It seems odd that this schedule lofts its first Ariane 5 on Tax Day this year.


I would imagine that April 15 is just another day in the rest of the world.


----------



## harsh

Laxguy said:


> Or early in the year? In other words, what is the odd factor?


The oddity lies in that a service that normally has eight Ariane 5 launches a year doesn't launch its first until the second quarter.


----------



## Laxguy

Thanks. I'd never have fingered that out myself. (digit reference intended). But it's only a fortnight or so into the second.


----------



## HarleyD

harsh said:


> The oddity lies in that a service that normally has eight Ariane 5 launches a year doesn't launch its first until the second quarter.


Like the six they launched in 2014 (VA216 - VA221)? That's about what I expect this year as well.

They have three Ariane 5 launches slated through Q2 this year, well the third one isn't until July 2 so that's technically Q3.

But they didn't launch their third Ariane 5 in 2014 until July 6.

Using past as prologue this looks about typical. The projected slate at the start of the year will only vaguely resemble what actually goes up by the end of the year.


----------



## lwilli201

Are there any weather conditions that keep them from launching early in the year? Upper level winds or something like that. Was D-14 slipped a bit due to upper level winds?


----------



## Diana C

Wind is only a problem if it is very strong (gale force or better) at the launch pad. Once it gets a few thousand feet in the air, its upward momentum makes any sort of wind a very minor factor. Arianespace has never lived up to its start of year goal. But they haVe gotten better...for the first few years I think only made 5 or 6 launches, now they do an average of 9 or 10.

At the time DirectTV booked the launch vehicles Ariane was the only one that could provide any assurance that they would be doing any launches at all. ILS had grounded the Proton, Sea Launch had filed for bankruptcy, and the Chinese didn't have a heavy lifter. Arianespace is usually the launch service of last resort.


----------



## slice1900

lwilli201 said:


> Are there any weather conditions that keep them from launching early in the year? Upper level winds or something like that. Was D-14 slipped a bit due to upper level winds?


They launch other stuff aside from heavy lift, so just because they have a few months gap between D14 and the April launch that's next in the schedule doesn't mean they haven't been busy there.


----------



## harsh

Laxguy said:


> But it's only a fortnight or so into the second.


The DIRECTV 15 launch comes two and a half fortnights later.


----------



## peds48

harsh said:


> The DIRECTV 15 launch comes two and a half fortnights later.


But at least DIRECTV® is launching new sats and is not resting on their laurels like the "other" sat guys....


----------



## harsh

peds48 said:


> But at least DIRECTV® is launching new sats and is not resting on their laurels like the "other" sat guys....


The other guys have committed to making much better use of their existing bandwidth rather than launching additional bandwidth.


----------



## James Long

peds48 said:


> But at least DIRECTV® is launching new sats and is not resting on their laurels like the "other" sat guys....


EchoStar XVIII launches 4Q 2015. DISH's current fleet covers all of their licensed and leased transponders.


----------



## lwilli201

Diana C said:


> Wind is only a problem if it is very strong (gale force or better) at the launch pad. Once it gets a few thousand feet in the air, its upward momentum makes any sort of wind a very minor factor.


Directv 14 was delayed 2 days due to strong upper atmosphere winds.

http://spacenews.com...r-directv-isro/


----------



## RAD

harsh said:


> The other guys have committed to making much better use of their existing bandwidth rather than launching additional bandwidth.


Excuse me, you say that Dish is making better use of their licensed bandwidth by having duplicated service with their eastern and western arc setup?

Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


----------



## peds48

RAD said:


> Excuse me, you say that Dish is making better use of their licensed bandwidth by having duplicated service with their eastern and western arc setup?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


You beat me to it....


----------



## Laxguy

harsh said:


> The DIRECTV 15 launch comes two and a half fortnights later.


YOU said Tax Day, which is April 15th. That's just a day more than a fortnight into the second quarter.

Know your Brit-isms!


----------



## inkahauts

And in other more revenant news and thoughts since this tread is wavering lately....

I wonder if this launch will be able to be watched on a sat channel or if we'll have to stream it from the website again. I'm guessing the latter.


----------



## HoTat2

inkahauts said:


> And in other more revenant news and thoughts since this tread is wavering lately....
> 
> I wonder if this launch will be able to be watched on a sat channel or if we'll have to stream it from the website again. I'm guessing the latter.


Most likely the later here as well;

While I can understand perhaps why DIRECTV did not show us IS30/DLA-1's launch since it really doesnt pertain to us, but DLA. If for whatever reasons they didn't let us see D14's launch though, why should we expect them to switch and let us see D15's?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## HarleyD

harsh said:


> The DIRECTV 15 launch comes two and a half fortnights later.


Completely typical for Ariane.

Let's look at last year's Ariane 5 launches, as documented by Salo...

*Launched:*

*2014:*
*№ - Date - Satellite(s) - Rocket - Launch Site - Time (UTC)*
01 - February 6 - ABS 2, Athena-Fidus - Ariane 5 ECA (VA217) - Kourou ELA-3 - 21:30:07
02 - March 22 - Astra 5B, Amazonas 4A - Ariane 5 ECA (VA216) - Kourou ELA-3 - 22:04:07
06 - July 29 - ATV-5 Georges Lemaître - Ariane 5 ES (VA219) - Kourou ELA-3 - 23:47:45
08 - September 11 - Measat 3b/Jabiru 2, Optus 10 - Ariane 5 ECA (VA218) - Kourou ELA-3 - 22:05:07
09 - October 16 - Intelsat 30/DLA 1 (TBD), Arsat 1 - Ariane 5 ECA (VA220) - Kourou ELA-3 - 21:43:52
10 - December 6 - DirecTV 14, GSAT-16 - Ariane 5 ECA (VA221) - Kourou ELA-3 - 20:40:07

So that's&#8230; 
44 days between VA217 and VA216
129 days between VA216 and VA219
44 days between VA219 and VA218
35 days between VA218 and VA220
51 days between VA220 and VA221

Now to be fair, three other launch vehicles that were not Ariane 5 went up during that 129 day gap between VA216 and VA219 so as was stated previously they stay busy over there in French Guiana. Apart from that, it's roughly five to seven weeks between Ariane 5 launches.
I don't mean to imply or predict that this kind of regularity is the norm, and my days to fortnight conversion skills are not well-exercised, but I'm pretty sure that 2.5 fortnights between Ariane 5 launches is just a bit better than what they were able to put up last year so to view or obliquely imply that it is concerning is just FUDslinging, plain and simple.


----------



## joed32

I was excited to see 14 launch but it's not giving me a lot of new HD channels. Why get excited over 15?


----------



## peds48

joed32 said:


> I was excited to see 14 launch but it's not giving me a lot of new HD channels. Why get excited over 15?


just the fact that we are putting another satellite in to space should be reason for excitement.

Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## studechip

peds48 said:


> just the fact that we are putting another satellite in to space should be reason for excitement.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk


Even if it never gets used? Hyperbole I know, but still my point remains.


----------



## HoTat2

studechip said:


> Even if it never gets used? Hyperbole I know, but still my point remains.


Outside of doubling RDBS capacity and most likely taking over the duties of D10's CONUS+ xpndrs, we won't notice much from D15.

PR subs. will with spotbeam redirects of CONUS+ national channels of the Ka and RDBS band to them. But not too much for us.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

To whatever extent that Directv may be concerned about D10 due to the issues it has had during its life, we should get 'excited' about a successful launch for D15 because it means Directv will no longer have any concern over the stability of Ka lo at 103. They have the capacity to go "all HD"[*] right now. If they don't actually do so until this fall, you might be more excited about a successful launch of D15 in hindsight 

[*] By "all HD" I mean all CONUS channels they currently carry in SD only are added in HD if available and either Directv is allowed by their contract to carry them in HD or those that pay Directv for carriage pay whatever upcharge Directv may ask for HD carriage.


----------



## inkahauts

joed32 said:


> I was excited to see 14 launch but it's not giving me a lot of new HD channels. Why get excited over 15?


First off d14 is still in its early stages of being fired up so we don't know yet what will truly be coming from that sat. Give it some more time and we will start seeing more from it.

Add to that it has been suggested that d15 is where we will see more new additions from because of all the issues with d10.... It has nothing to do with its actual location but overall capacity for the entire system that is what they may be waiting for. And if they aren't counting on d10 to last much longer... D15 is the big one for more Hi Definition it seems.


----------



## peds48

studechip said:


> Even if it never gets used? Hyperbole I know, but still my point remains.


Right even if it does not get used. It just amazes me how far we have gotten in technology! To think that the first satellite only broadcasted a few shorts "beeps"


----------



## harsh

RAD said:


> Excuse me, you say that Dish is making better use of their licensed bandwidth by having duplicated service with their eastern and western arc setup?


Consider that the Eastern Arc is 100% MPEG4 with few (if any) SD duplicates.

The Western Arc is transitioning to 8PSK. DIRECTV is still QPSK for SD and some of their HD.

DISH's modulation scheme gets about the same net bandwidth out of a 24MHz TPN that DIRECTV needs 36MHz to cover.


----------



## harsh

slice1900 said:


> To whatever extent that Directv may be concerned about D10 due to the issues it has had during its life, we should get 'excited' about a successful launch for D15 because it means Directv will no longer have any concern over the stability of Ka lo at 103.


While DIRECTV 15 covers the CONUS, there's a "mature" spot beam bird in that slot.


----------



## RAD

harsh said:


> Consider that the Eastern Arc is 100% MPEG4 with few (if any) SD duplicates.
> 
> The Western Arc is transitioning to 8PSK. DIRECTV is still QPSK for SD and some of their HD.
> 
> DISH's modulation scheme gets about the same net bandwidth out of a 24MHz TPN that DIRECTV needs 36MHz to cover.


Doesn't matter, Dish is still duplicating all their national programming across the two slots, that is not efficient use of scarce Ku band frequencies, doesn't matter which modulation scheme is being used.


----------



## HoTat2

harsh said:


> Consider that the Eastern Arc is 100% MPEG4 with few (if any) SD duplicates.
> 
> The Western Arc is transitioning to 8PSK. DIRECTV is still QPSK for SD and some of their HD.
> 
> DISH's modulation scheme gets about the same net bandwidth out of a 24MHz TPN that DIRECTV needs 36MHz to cover.


C'mon now harsh, let's be fair here; 

While going to MPEG-2/8-PSK only on the WA will gain Dish savings in bandwidth, still similar to DIRECTV's problem, until you can get rid of the bottleneck of MPEG-2 on the WA, it will continue to mostly nulify the advantages of all MPEG-4 on the EA.

Also, you well know that it's not just DISH's higher level modulation scheme that gives them the same net advantage as DIRECTV at a lesser xpndr bandwidth.

They're also cheating off somewhat by down-converting the 1080i HD feeds to 1440 x 1080 to reduce bandwidth.

Yes, you can well argue that it's imperceptible. Nevertheless it is still worth pointing out ...

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## studechip

HoTat2 said:


> C'mon now harsh, let's be fair here;
> 
> While going to MPEG-2/8-PSK only on the WA will gain Dish savings in bandwidth, still similar to DIRECTV's problem, until you can get rid of the bottleneck of MPEG-2 on the WA, it will continue to mostly nulify the advantages of all MPEG-4 on the EA.
> 
> Also, you well know that it's not just DISH's higher level modulation scheme that gives them the same net advantage as DIRECTV at a lesser xpndr bandwidth.
> 
> They're also cheating off somewhat by down-converting the 1080i HD feeds to 1440 x 1080 to reduce bandwidth.
> 
> *Yes, you can well argue that it's imperceptible. Nevertheless it is still worth pointing out ...*
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


If it was imperceptible, most people wouldn't say, regardless how slightly, that Directv's hd is better than Dish's.


----------



## slice1900

harsh said:


> DISH's modulation scheme gets about the same net bandwidth out of a 24MHz TPN that DIRECTV needs 36MHz to cover.


Which costs signal margin; they are paying for that by raising the minimum CNR by several db. Dish's 8PSK turbo transponders will suffer rain fade sooner than Directv's Ku transponders. That doesn't matter too much today since Directv is using Ku for SD, but when they drop MPEG2 SD and repurpose Ku for HD the argument that Dish's HD is more resistant to rain fade will turn around on them as they'll be more affected by rain than Directv.

Directv is also in a much better position for 4K if it really takes off, while Dish would need to add satellites in two arcs.


----------



## harsh

RAD said:


> Doesn't matter, Dish is still duplicating all their national programming across the two slots, that is not efficient use of scarce Ku band frequencies, doesn't matter which modulation scheme is being used.


For all of DIRECTV's Ka and RDBS licenses, they don't deliver correspondingly more programming and if I'm not wrong, they still haven't hit all the LIL markets yet.

DISH's approach has made a big dent in the transition to advanced modulation and compression schemes for a significant portion of their customers. So much is made of what DIRECTV could do if they could convert 101W to MPEG4. Let's see it!


----------



## harsh

slice1900 said:


> Directv is also in a much better position for 4K if it really takes off, while Dish would need to add satellites in two arcs.


UHD is a very big if -- perhaps even moreso than 3D. I suspect that by the time UHD "takes off", DBS will be fading fast as a technology that those who demand True UHD content will be using.

DIRECTV has spent a lot of money and energy on chasing after technology to support big splashy marketing claims of delivering new types of content and I think it's time they start working on replacing their older technology to bring the subscribers who pay the same up to a comparable level of quality.


----------



## RAD

harsh said:


> UHD is a very big if -- perhaps even moreso than 3D. I suspect that by the time UHD "takes off", DBS will be fading fast as a technology that those who demand True UHD content will be using.
> 
> DIRECTV has spent a lot of money and energy on chasing after technology to support big splashy marketing claims of delivering new types of content and I think it's time they start working on replacing their older technology to bring the subscribers who pay the same up to a comparable level of quality.


How much money has DIRECTV spent ( your definition of a lot ) chasing bug splashy marketing claims? 3D did not cost them a lot of money since the majority of their STB's supported 3D with just a software update and they had the bandwidth available to provide content that was provided to them. So far for UHD again please show where they've spent "a lot" of money to support it? Yes D14 and D15 will provide bandwidth to support UHD programming but plans for those SATS were in the pipeline a few years ago for normal expansion/backup. Current Genie STB's are providing UHD support via RVU, so again no big capitol outlay there.

Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


----------



## RAD

harsh said:


> For all of DIRECTV's Ka and RDBS licenses, they don't deliver correspondingly more programming and if I'm not wrong, they still haven't hit all the LIL markets yet.DISH's approach has made a big dent in the transition to advanced modulation and compression schemes for a significant portion of their customers. So much is made of what DIRECTV could do if they could convert 101W to MPEG4. Let's see it!


According to JL's thread at http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/185998-directv-dish-network-hd-channel-lineup-comparison/, DIRECTV carries 57 more full time HD channels then Dish. IIRC D14's spot exam capabilities are supposed to allow DIRECTV to cover all the DMA's. Again, IIRC D14 is their first sat they've launched that's supposed to really be able to take advantage of the RDBS licenses that they own.

As for Dish and they transition to newer schemes they really had no other option since they HAD to do something with western arc in order to gain some additional room for new programming. They've already gone to HD Lite and part time HD RSN's, if they wanted to stay competitive they needed to spend the dollars else cable, telco's and DIRECTV would continue to beat them on the number of HD channels.


----------



## inkahauts

harsh said:


> UHD is a very big if -- perhaps even moreso than 3D. I suspect that by the time UHD "takes off", DBS will be fading fast as a technology that those who demand True UHD content will be using.
> 
> DIRECTV has spent a lot of money and energy on chasing after technology to support big splashy marketing claims of delivering new types of content and I think it's time they start working on replacing their older technology to bring the subscribers who pay the same up to a comparable level of quality.


In addition to what others have said UHD just might be a big reason satellite in general can survive better than cable and such because no internet provider right now wants to supply all true UHD content to all their customers. They don't have the space. DIRECTV does.....

And eventually UHD will be what everything is produced in, so yeah it's not going away. UHD is the opposite of 3d in terms of what its path will be.

What I'm curios to see is if DIRECTV fires up d15 and kills off d10 quickly after its launch and makes d10 an in orbit spare. I'm guessing based on its ability to redirect to PR like d14 that is what will happen.


----------



## studechip

Harsh keeps trying to compare 3D to UHD, but they are two entirely different things. Apples and oranges.


----------



## peds48

harsh said:


> UHD is a very big if -- perhaps even moreso than 3D.


The only 'if" I see here is "if" Dish is able to support any of it just like DIRECTV® can.


----------



## lwilli201

inkahauts said:


> What I'm curios to see is if DIRECTV fires up d15 and kills off d10 quickly after its launch and makes d10 an in orbit spare. I'm guessing based on its ability to redirect to PR like d14 that is what will happen.


As long as D-10 works, do not see any reason to move programming onto D-15. As long as it works, keep the load off of D-15. I do not think that battery life is a major concern on these sats as long as they are managed well. Keeping that load off of D-15 just may extend its life, but only time and fuel levels will determine that. IMHO. I have found that trying to second guess what Directv is going to do rarely works.


----------



## Ed Campbell

Comparing UHD to 3D is absurd, a last gasp for folks who don't look at what is happening at retail. Folks are buying 4K sets for less than their previous HD set. That's a biggie. They buy them because upscaled SD, 720p, 1080i looks appreciably better than existing sets can provide. That solves half the chicken/egg quandary that occupies small minds.


Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


----------



## HoTat2

lwilli201 said:


> As long as D-10 works, do not see any reason to move programming onto D-15. As long as it works, keep the load off of D-15. I do not think that battery life is a major concern on these sats as long as they are managed well. Keeping that load off of D-15 just may extend its life, but only time and fuel levels will determine that. IMHO. I have found that trying to second guess what Directv is going to do rarely works.


Except as inkahauts notes;

D10 (or D12 for that matter) cannot supply Puerto Rico with national programming though spotbeam redirects. So not using D15 would deprive PR subs. of access to much new programming from the Ka-hi and lo CONUS+ xpndrs at 103W.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## James Long

peds48 said:


> The only 'if" I see here is "if" Dish is able to support any of it just like DIRECTV® can.


DISH is making more of an effort with 4K than they did with 3D and 1080p. The 4K Joey due out later this year will deliver 4K to compatible sets (it would help if the industry would get its act together on compatibility ... but that is a topic for another thread). A client for select models of one brand of TV is a start ... being able to deliver 4K/UHD regardless of which brand of TV the customer chooses is important for the future.

Fortunately for both providers 3D was a software upgrade. DISH still supports 3D (and 1080p) through intrenet VOD and pre-loaded satellite VOD. DirecTV has 3D and 1080p channels and 3D, 1080p and 4K/UHD VOD. DirecTV's experiment with linear 3D channels was worth the effort ... the channels that were added were withdrawn by their programmers, not by DirecTV. As noted in the appropriate thread I believe DirecTV will be the first to experiment with linear 4K/UHD channels when available from programmers.

It is easy to label 3D as a "failure" now that less channels are available than there were in the past. I don't recall so much disdain being shown for 3D when DirecTV was introducing channels. I do recall people claiming that 3D TV sales were good because people were buying the sets to get a better HD picture ... not caring if the set could also do 3D or accepting it as a feature that they were happy to have for occasional use. Similar to current purchases of 4K/UHD TVs that provide a better HD picture than non-4K/UHD sets. It seems that UHD has become the new way to get a better HD set. It is a shame that many of the sets sold today may not see a UHD signal other than through Netflix or another IPTV source.

But all of this belongs in other threads ... general technology questions in the tech forum and what DirecTV is planning for 4K/UHD in that thread (which also has a lot about general technology in the thread). D-14 and D-15 provide room for DirecTV to move forward with any new programming they seek to carry, That is what is important for this thread.


----------



## inkahauts

I have been racking my brain trying to figure out what d10 could do if d15 takes its place fully now, or if maybe they could share the load.. But I am not sure that doing that would increase either sat's lifespan. Who knows, maybe they will sell it and one of the spaceways for a pretty penny and keep one as a backup or something. SO many things they can do.


----------



## slice1900

lwilli201 said:


> As long as D-10 works, do not see any reason to move programming onto D-15. As long as it works, keep the load off of D-15. I do not think that battery life is a major concern on these sats as long as they are managed well. Keeping that load off of D-15 just may extend its life, but only time and fuel levels will determine that. IMHO. I have found that trying to second guess what Directv is going to do rarely works.


The number of active transponders on a satellite does not affect its lifetime. It ages the same and uses the same amount of fuel if it is orbiting there idle or supplying the maximum number of transponders it is capable of. The only way to save fuel would be to move it to some other location where it doesn't have to station keep so precisely.


----------



## slice1900

inkahauts said:


> I have been racking my brain trying to figure out what d10 could do if d15 takes its place fully now, or if maybe they could share the load.. But I am not sure that doing that would increase either sat's lifespan. Who knows, maybe they will sell it and one of the spaceways for a pretty penny and keep one as a backup or something. SO many things they can do.


I wonder if DTVLA holds any Ka licenses, or plans to apply for them? They send D10 over and get up and running pretty quickly if they did..

I think it is quite possible they may continue to use SW2. I wish there was an easy way to overlay all of D14's beams for transponders 1-4 and 3-6 onto a map and see where the gaps are (anyone handy with Google Earth and maybe can do that using the footprint maps?) Those are the places that SW2 could still have a role, along with beams for Anchorage and Puerto Rico locals. Whatever happens they can't get rid of both Spaceways, there are DMAs that the spots for D11, D12 and D14 don't cover that must be covered by one of the Spaceways.


----------



## harsh

peds48 said:


> The only 'if" I see here is "if" Dish is able to support any of it just like DIRECTV® can.


Is DIRECTV's current level of "support" (hardware and software) effectively meeting their UHD customer's needs?


----------



## harsh

slice1900 said:


> The only way to save fuel would be to move it to some other location where it doesn't have to station keep so precisely.


That ship appears to have sailed on this side of the planet.


----------



## harsh

inkahauts said:


> In addition to what others have said UHD just might be a big reason satellite in general can survive better than cable and such because no internet provider right now wants to supply all true UHD content to all their customers. They don't have the space. DIRECTV does.....


If any video delivery service charged as much as DIRECTV is charging, they could effectively limit the bandwidth consumed and still make enormous profits.


> And eventually UHD will be what everything is produced in, so yeah it's not going away. UHD is the opposite of 3d in terms of what its path will be.


I'm pretty sure I heard someone suggest that most professional sports programming and all championship level sports would sooner than later be produced in 3D.


----------



## Tom Robertson

James Long, well said.

Harsh is right, 3D and UHD can be compared--Like FUHD, both are new technologies with D in their name... 

Yet, lessons from 3D's paused adoption should be learned. As should lessons from HD's adoption:

First in my mind is that DIRECTV did not 'chase" any of these technologies. They led. Or were part of the leadership if one prefers. DIRECTV worked closely with and is working closely with the TV manufacturers, providers, content creators, etc. to make success. Of the 3 technologies, 3D is paused until the TV manufactures can create native 3D viewing. The content proved it wasn't enough to overcome the glasses distraction.

Today TV makers can make UHD as inexpensively as HD was two years ago. At that point, it is a no-brainer--better picture, same price points. Always sells. 

So the industry as a whole stair steps to the new technology, TV makers doing their part, so content creators get interested, so DIRECTV does their part, so more TV makers make more TVs, ..... Soon we'll have channels that are UHD, HD, and SD (HD likely a downconvert, SD will be eventually but not likely this year.)

Tying back to this thread topic, D15 is part of the long-term vision DIRECTV had. They knew more bandwidth would be needed. For 3D? For HD? For UHD? Didn't matter, they knew more would be necessary and roughly at this point in time. (Had D10 been more successful, things would have been more comfortable along the way, but stuff happens.) 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## peds48

harsh said:


> Is DIRECTV's current level of "support" (hardware and software) effectively meeting their UHD customer's needs?


currently, no but neither is dish. However DIRECTV has the hardest part covered, which is the satellites up in space. And that is where dish is lacking

Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## David Ortiz

The content, or lack of content, for glassesless 3D will likely be its undoing. With glasses, the left and right view can be directed to the correct eye. It's impossible to do without glasses. So all of the 3D content out there would have to be converted again.

At CES the glassesless 3D sets look better and better from year to year, but that's about the only good thing I can say about it. It may only ever be a cool demo. 3D with glasses, however, works and works well.



Tom Robertson said:


> 3D is paused until the TV manufactures can create native 3D viewing. The content proved it wasn't enough to overcome the glasses distraction.


----------



## WestDC

The glasses have always been a draw back (no Matter) how they update them- So when ever I want to watch something I go outside with my regular glasses on and still see everything in Natural 3D :rotfl:


----------



## Tom Robertson

David Ortiz said:


> The content, or lack of content, for glassesless 3D will likely be its undoing. With glasses, the left and right view can be directed to the correct eye. It's impossible to do without glasses. So all of the 3D content out there would have to be converted again.
> 
> At CES the glassesless 3D sets look better and better from year to year, but that's about the only good thing I can say about it. It may only ever be a cool demo. 3D with glasses, however, works and works well.


The success or failure of 3D will be on the entire package. Glasses are a huge distraction. So if content doesn't make up for that distraction, it won't (and hasn't flown.) Glassesless 3D, at the right price points, has less of a content hurdle to overcome. If a glassesless 3UHD technology came out at today's HD TV price points, no brainer there. It will sell. Then content will come along.

Until glassesless 3D is easy and ubiquitous, 3D will stay in the margins. There have always been attempts at 3d since the 1890s, with more serious efforts since the 1950s. At some point, the right package will be found.

And DIRECTV will have the bandwidth ready. And likely will be there to assist with the adoption too. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## HoTat2

I wonder if this "glassesless" is really an official term yet in the dictionaries?

Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue if it is ...

I prefer "autostereoscopic" myself, though it is a bit longer ... B)

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## lwilli201

They keep producing 3D versions of movies, so they must be doing well in theaters even with glasses. Maybe it just comes over better on a large screen that can not be duplicated on a small screen.

3D movies are nothing new. I saw this movie when I was around 14. I was blown away by the 3d effect.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0045784/


----------



## Tom Robertson

lwilli201 said:


> They keep producing 3D versions of movies, so they must be doing well in theaters even with glasses. Maybe it just comes over better on a large screen that can not be duplicated on a small screen.
> 
> 3D movies are nothing new. I saw this movie when I was around 14. I was blown away by the 3d effect.
> 
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0045784/


You make me consider. I wonder if the profits for 3D are there because the sunk costs are already in place for most theatres and the 3D production costs are now relatively minimal--even from 2D sources. So they don't need very much in the way of customers to profit from 3D versions at an extra $5 per head.

On the other hand, linear 3D channels have continuing costs of the bandwidth, production facilities, etc. Since there isn't additional revenue as there is in the theatres, the costs aren't justified.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## lwilli201

Tom Robertson said:


> You make me consider. I wonder if the profits for 3D are there because the sunk costs are already in place for most theatres and the 3D production costs are now relatively minimal--even from 2D sources. So they don't need very much in the way of customers to profit from 3D versions at an extra $5 per head.
> 
> On the other hand, linear 3D channels have continuing costs of the bandwidth, production facilities, etc. Since there isn't additional revenue as there is in the theatres, the costs aren't justified.
> 
> Peace,
> Tom


I assume that theaters have to use a two projector set up to show 3D, but with the advent of digital media instead of the costly 35 MM film the distribution costs have been greatly reduced.


----------



## studechip

harsh said:


> Is DIRECTV's current level of "support" (hardware and software) effectively meeting their UHD customer's needs?


Stupid question, (FUD), of course it isn't. It's hardly been deployed. Where was their level of support in the early stages of HD?


----------



## inkahauts

lwilli201 said:


> I assume that theaters have to use a two projector set up to show 3D, but with the advent of digital media instead of the costly 35 MM film the distribution costs have been greatly reduced.


From what I have read and seen they use the same projectors, but have to change the lenses on them. And unfortunately they do not have to change the lenses back to show a 2d movie so they will often just leave the 3d lenses on and not change them when they are not showing a 3d movie. That actually degrades the brightness and quality a little bit of the 2d movie. I am not sure how much it affects an imax projection system though.


----------



## inkahauts

harsh said:


> Is DIRECTV's current level of "support" (hardware and software) effectively meeting their UHD customer's needs?


Yes. There is very little content today, and yet they have a way to make it available to their customers today.

Their is no other level of support that can be made yet... Linear channels will get here when someone is ready to launch one, and I'll bet DIRECTV already has that contract in hand.


----------



## inkahauts

Tom Robertson said:


> You make me consider. I wonder if the profits for 3D are there because the sunk costs are already in place for most theatres and the 3D production costs are now relatively minimal--even from 2D sources. So they don't need very much in the way of customers to profit from 3D versions at an extra $5 per head.
> 
> On the other hand, linear 3D channels have continuing costs of the bandwidth, production facilities, etc. Since there isn't additional revenue as there is in the theatres, the costs aren't justified.
> 
> Peace,
> Tom


that is likely part of it...

UHD is not in the same situation, because the entire system will already be set up for UHD. It will simply be a matter of the new generation of equipment, not a whole secondary line of equipment to make it work as 3d is. There will be 4k entry level TVs and entry level TV prices too. I never saw an entry level 3d at a entry level TV price.


----------



## KyL416

inkahauts said:


> Their is no other level of support that can be made yet... Linear channels will get here when someone is ready to launch one, and I'll bet DIRECTV already has that contract in hand.


Plus it's hard to meet the needs when the industry still hasn't settled on a standard yet. Right now it's looking like it's going to be HDMI 2.0 with HDCP 2.2, so many early adopters are screwed when it comes to 4K unless they have a connection speed fast enough and data caps high enough to support delivery via built in apps like Netflix unless their manufacturer actually follows through on providing an upgradable module.

Dish's equipment is also going to have that requirement, although many articles online left that key detail out of their headlines claiming Dish's new Joey will support "ALL" 4K TVs.


----------



## Tom Robertson

inkahauts said:


> Yes. There is very little content today, and yet they have a way to make it available to their customers today.
> 
> Their is no other level of support that can be made yet... Linear channels will get here when someone is ready to launch one, and I'll bet DIRECTV already has that contract in hand.


Now that you mention it, I bet DIRECTV does have a few clauses already in existing contracts. Great point.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson

lwilli201 said:


> I assume that theaters have to use a two projector set up to show 3D, but with the advent of digital media instead of the costly 35 MM film the distribution costs have been greatly reduced.


No, it believe it is still a single projector system, but it is not cheap. A recently built theatre nearby chose not to spend the $100K per screen on 3D projectors. So they have no way to handle the current 3D movies.

But once the money is sunk into the theatre costs, along with a huge supply of glasses, $5 per head is mostly profit to share back with the distributor.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Diana C

harsh said:


> For all of DIRECTV's Ka and RDBS licenses, they don't deliver correspondingly more programming and if I'm not wrong, they still haven't hit all the LIL markets yet.
> 
> DISH's approach has made a big dent in the transition to advanced modulation and compression schemes for a significant portion of their customers. So much is made of what DIRECTV could do if they could convert 101W to MPEG4. Let's see it!


You are right, DirecTV makes a habit of launching new satellites to support new services rather than making do with what they have. You are also right that they cost more than Dish does.

I would just point out that Dish had the same opportunities to bid on satellite slots as DirecTV. Had they emulated DirecTV a little more than they did, they could have avoided the need for the "dual arc" kludge they have today. Duplicating all your CONUS content on two complete sets of satellites wastes satellite resources, increases operating costs and can be confusing to customers. All they needed to do was bid on some licenses of their own. Instead they "made do" and then had to scramble for space on leased satellite slots to get the required capacity.

Running at 8PSK and MPEG-4 does buy you a small amount of bandwidth but since you also need to increase FEC when you increase data density you don't get the full benefit of the "advanced modulation and compression schemes." This is really something you do only if you have to. Dish had to, DirecTV didn't.

Yet, despite using such "advanced" technology, and under-cutting DirecTV's price, Dish Network has never gotten close to catching up with DirecTV's subscriber numbers. The fact that DirecTV had a 2 year head start is no longer a factor. 18 years is more than enough time to catch up if the product being offered is preferable to customers.

So many things can be argued to be "better," from price to channel selection to business practices to satellite encoding system to set top boxes to how many owners the company has had (all points you have raised in the past as criticisms of DirecTV). But the only objective way to measure success is to look at how the product or service does in the marketplace and by that measure, DirecTV is winning.

As I look at the moves Charlie & Co have been making in the past couple years, I can't help but think that Mr. Ergen is planning to repeat what he did when he started Dish Network. If you recall, Ergen and Defranco ran a C-Band business from 1980 until 1992 (when they were granted their first DBS license) at which point they abandoned the C-Band market and remade themselves into a DBS provider. I expect Ergen is getting ready to abandon the DBS business for the terrestrial wireless business. All they need is to find someone upon whom they can unload Dish Network.

So, what are we to conclude? It seems that ALL business have things we like and other things we dislike. DirecTV and Dish are two companies in the same industry that have taken different paths to get where they are today. Is one a "better" company than the other as a result? Don't be ridiculous. I don't even know what being a "better" company means. Corporations are not people (despite the efforts lately to make them one legally) and so do not have personalities or characters. They all exist for only one reason: to enrich their owners.

So, can we PLEASE stop the disparaging comments from the peanut gallery about modulation schemes, number and location of satellites, number of channels, business practices, etc. Both Dish Network and DirecTV live in glass houses, so great care needs to be taken before tossing rocks at each other, and the result is likely to be nothing but a lot of noise and broken glass.


----------



## Tom Robertson

Well said, Diana!

In my comparisons of the companies, I generally think of Dish and DIRECTV as having slightly different market slices with large overlap. They approach things differently and from within their viewpoint, do so fairly well. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## harsh

David Ortiz said:


> So all of the 3D content out there would have to be converted again.


The content wouldn't have to change -- the delivery device would make any necessary conversions between formats as they do now.


----------



## David Ortiz

Glassesless 3D would require more than the two views that current 3D content uses. I'll be sure to ask to see some converted content next time I'm in front of a set.



harsh said:


> The content wouldn't have to change -- the delivery device would make any necessary conversions between formats as they do now.


----------



## Diana C

David Ortiz said:


> Glassesless 3D would require more than the two views that current 3D content uses. I'll be sure to ask to see some converted content next time I'm in front of a set.


Unless it is Ultra-D based...they are said to even produce reasonable 3D effects from a 2D source. Of course, they require a 4K display, which they effectively reduce to 1080p to support 3D.


----------



## I WANT MORE

What does all of this 3D talk have to do with D-15?


----------



## joed32

Just passing the time until there is something to talk about with D-15.


----------



## studechip

I WANT MORE said:


> What does all of this 3D talk have to do with D-15?


Nothing, but some people, well, ONE person, seems to think it does.


----------



## James Long

studechip said:


> Nothing, but some people, well, ONE person, seems to think it does.


D-15 will provide space for whatever "D" needs the space.


----------



## P Smith

James Long said:


> D-15 will provide space for whatever "D" needs the space.


. Only if it will be delivered to its position and all its part will functioning properly !


----------



## doctor j

Minor Modification for D-15

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/SATAMD2015040700018&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

Also just to update RB-2A

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/SATMOD2015032700015&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

And a New Earth Station KU not related to D-15 but put here with other info

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/SESLIC2015040800198&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

Doctor j


----------



## HoTat2

doctor j said:


> Minor Modification for D-15
> 
> 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/SATAMD2015040700018&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number
> 
> Also just to update RB-2A
> 
> 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/SATMOD2015032700015&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number
> 
> And a New Earth Station KU not related to D-15 but put here with other info
> 
> 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/SESLIC2015040800198&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number
> 
> Doctor j


Yep;

In the first DIRECTV asks for an exception to a rule complying with orbital debris migration, There's a pressurized helium tank in the central core of D15's satellite bus that will be largely used up and then permanently sealed off after the "Launch and Early Orbit Phase" (LEOP) of D15's flight. So any residual pressurization leftover in the tank cannot be fully discharged to totally meet with the FCC's rule for a disposal orbit when D15 reaches its EOL.

Interesting, but a big yawner to almost everyone I realize. 

Next regarding RB-2A, a request to slightly relocate along with D12 since it's a part of the same satellite of course. Don't know what RB-2A is supposed to do once D15's full RDBS band payload is in service, assuming all the legal wrangling over RDBS service at 103W is finally sorted out to allow the payload to go into service that is.

In fact I was never really sure what RB-2A was ever used for to begin with. Maybe some type of advanced RDBS testing?

And lastly application for a new standard 12/14 GHz Ku band satellite earth station at DIRECTV's "East Coast Uplink Facility" (ECUF).

A 9.2m dish mfr. by General Dynamics also designated "EKU03." Outside of the mention of providing backup TT&C services for this station, I wonder what these standard Ku band earth stations are really needed for?

DIRECTV installed another standard Ku band station late last year at their SWUF near Tucson, AZ. called "SWKU5." A 13.2m version also mfr. by General Dynamics.


----------



## Tom Robertson

HoTat2 said:


> ...
> In fact I was never really sure what RB-2A was ever used for to begin with. Maybe some type of advanced RDBS testing?
> ...


I was in _Cheers_ the other day. Cliff Clavin told me, "its a little known fact that DIRECTV leased the Verizon, 'can you hear me now?' guy to test reverse band dbs. Yeah, they put a small dish on his head and had him walk along the Canada/US border verifying where the signals bled into Canada from the US. With all the testing he's done is hearing is so good he used a smaller than normal dish, which gave him even greater daily range of movement. Normally he travels 20 miles..."

Thankfully my order arrived about then. Norm said, "hi". (After asking for another beer, of course.)

Peace,
Tom


----------



## HoTat2

Tom Robertson said:


> I was in _Cheers_ the other day. Cliff Clavin told me, "its a little known fact that DIRECTV leased the Verizon, 'can you hear me now?' guy to test reverse band dbs. Yeah, they put a small dish on his head and had him walk along the Canada/US border verifying where the signals bled into Canada from the US. With all the testing he's done is hearing is so good he used a smaller than normal dish, which gave him even greater daily range of movement. Normally he travels 20 miles..."
> 
> Thankfully my order arrived about then. Norm said, "hi". (After asking for another beer, of course.)
> 
> Peace,
> Tom


ROFLOL;

And I would have said, "Yeah right Cliffy...

Checking the Canadian border for bleedover from a spotbeam payload where 2 of the 4 beams are nowhere near the border with Canada."

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## harsh

HoTat2 said:


> In fact I was never really sure what RB-2A was ever used for to begin with. Maybe some type of advanced RDBS testing?


Early speculation argued that RB-2A was necessary to implement RDBS by a date certain to keep the RDBS license for the slot.


----------



## slice1900

harsh said:


> Early speculation argued that RB-2A was necessary to implement RDBS by a date certain to keep the RDBS license for the slot.


If that was true, Directv wouldn't have applied for an extension on their RDBS licenses at 99 & 103 last year due to the launch schedule falling behind.


----------



## Tom Robertson

harsh said:


> Early speculation argued that RB-2A was necessary to implement RDBS by a date certain to keep the RDBS license for the slot.


If I recall, the RB-2A license requests indicated they would not fulfill all the requirements of the RDBS licenses and yet, as you also indicate, were part of the experiments necessary to build the first generation of satellites that did fulfill all the license requirements.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## harsh

slice1900 said:


> If that was true, Directv wouldn't have applied for an extension on their RDBS licenses at 99 & 103 last year due to the launch schedule falling behind.


Was the extension on the RDBS license itself or the LOAs for the physical RDBS payloads?


----------



## harsh

Salo indicates today that VA222 (Thor 7, Sicral-2/Syracuse-3C) has been delayed until April 25th with a TBD (to be determined). It was supposed to launch tomorrow. There is no indication of resultant shuffling in Salo's Kourou Space Center schedule.

DIRECTV 15 et al are VA223.


----------



## slice1900

The August 1st filing for an RB-2 "launch and begin operations" extension through April 27 was going to have to be re-extended anyway. Maybe that's why the early delivery to the launch site, so Directv can show the FCC they've got everything ready on their side and the need for a second extension is not their fault.

In the extension they said the launch would happen in Feb/Mar timeframe, now it is scheduled for May 20th and be slip into June if the VA222 delay cascades the rest.


----------



## harsh

slice1900 said:


> In the extension they said the launch would happen in Feb/Mar timeframe, now it is scheduled for May 20th and be slip into June if the VA222 delay cascades the rest.


The cause of the delay has been discovered and it doesn't sound all that threatening:

http://spacenews.com/ariane-5-launch-delayed-for-cable-swap/

Thor 7 has been a stinker.


----------



## HoTat2

harsh said:


> .... Thor 7 has been a stinker.


Though I don't see anything in this article about Thor 7 being the cause of this particular delay.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

Yeah, a cryogenic cable connected from the pad to the rocket has nothing to do with the satellites inside. Whether it delays VA223's launch depends on how quickly they can turn around the pad between launches, but any delay should be pretty short. Probably still can make May unless the weather decides to be uncooperative.

Regardless, we should be seeing a filing for a second extension fairly soon.


----------



## harsh

HoTat2 said:


> Though I don't see anything in this article about Thor 7 being the cause of this particular delay.


I was speaking to the fact that Thor 7 appeared on Salo's schedule in July 2011 was originally slated to launch in Q4 2013 and its still not aloft.

http://www.arianespace.com/news-press-release/2011/7-5-2011-thor7.asp


----------



## doctor j

Directv 15 Update:
STA for Testing at 66.8W not before 6/3/2015. IOT x2 weeks Drift to 103 about 7/12/2015

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/SATSTA2015041500023&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

Doctor j


----------



## bakers12

Salo on NasaSpaceFlight.com yesterday updated the launch date and time for Thor 7, Sicral-2/Syracuse-3C (VA222) to April 24 19:38-21:32 UTC.

No change in the prediction for DirecTV 15, SKY MEXICO-1 (VA223), which is still at May 20 21:35-22:37 UTC.


----------



## HoTat2

DIRECTV requests 30 day STAs for TT&C of D15's Ka band payload during its IOT at 66.8W and migration to operational slot at 103W nom. (102.75W specifically) using earth stations at New Hampton, NH., E140117. And Castle Rock, CO., E150022

Duplicate entries here for some reason. Perhaps separate entries for the Ka-hi and lo portions?

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/SESSTAINTR201500726&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

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/SESSTAINTR201500727&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

DIRECTV request 30 day STA for TT&C from it's Castle Rock, CO., earth station E930304 for IOT at 66.8W of D15's Ku band DBS payload.

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/SESSTAINTR201500729&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

DIRECTV requests 30 day STA for TT&C from it's Castle Rock, CO. earth station E070027 for IOT at 66.8W of D15's RDBS band payload RB-2.

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/SESSTAINTR201500731&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number


----------



## doctor j

*Lancement VA222 Arianespace
THOR 7 et SICRAL 2 : REPORT DU LANCEMENT*​Au cours des opérations de chronologie du vol VA222, prévu le 24 avril, une anomalie est apparue sur un équipement de conditionnement du lanceur. Dans ces circonstances, Arianespace a décidé de ramener le lanceur au Bâtiment d'Assemblage Final (BAF) pour une remise en configuration.

Le lanceur et les satellites THOR 7 et SICRAL 2 sont en attente et en conditions de sécurité.

La nouvelle date de lancement sera communiquée dans la journée. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​*ARIANESPACE FLIGHT VA222
THOR 7 and SICRAL 2: LAUNCH DELAYED*​During the final count-down operations for flight VA222 slated for today, an anomaly occurred on a conditioning equipment of the launcher. As a result, Arianespace has decided to bring back the launcher to the Final Assembly Building (BAF).

The launch vehicle and its THOR 7 and SICRAL 2 satellite payloads have been placed in stand-by mode and maintained in safe conditions.

The new launch date will be announced later today.

MORE DELAYS (

Doctor j


----------



## inkahauts

Yikes.


----------



## harsh

While this represents an indeterminate delay for VA222, it could mean either a delay or an advance in the VA223 launch date depending on how intrusive the repairs turn out to be. As I said not too long ago, Thor 7 seems to be somewhat cursed.


----------



## HoTat2

harsh said:


> While this represents an indeterminate delay for VA222, it could mean either a delay or an advance in the VA223 launch date depending on how intrusive the repairs turn out to be. As I said not too long ago, Thor 7 seems to be somewhat cursed.


Now this I agree with...

We're only assuming this means VA223 and all the following in the Ariane 5 launch queue must be delayed. When it's quite possible D15/SKYM-1 will simply leapfrog THOR 7/SICRAL 2 depending on what the latter's problem(s) turn out to be.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Tom Robertson

The Attack Basset is correct, this further delay of Thor 7 and Sicral 2, this might open up the earliest possibility for D15. All depends on if VA222 is sufficiently delayed and if they can work on both the VA222 delay while launching VA223 with DIRECTV 15.

Peace,
Tom

Edit: also agree with HoTat2, who posted as I was typing.


----------



## cforrest

@Arianespace: Flight #VA222: #Ariane5 launch with #THOR7 and #SICRAL2 is now scheduled for Sunday, April 26 at 4:37 p.m. in Kourou http://t.co/rerWjei9lO


----------



## Diana C

Which won't help D15, and will probably mean a launch date in late May or early June.


----------



## lwilli201

HoTat2 said:


> Now this I agree with...
> 
> We're only assuming this means VA223 and all the following in the Ariane 5 launch queue must be delayed. When it's quite possible D15/SKYM-1 will simply leapfrog THOR 7/SICRAL 2 depending on what the latter's problem(s) turn out to be.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


I do not think there will be any leapfrogging if the problem is with the launcher. That Ariana 5 will have to be ready to go before anything is launched.


----------



## harsh

lwilli201 said:


> I do not think there will be any leapfrogging if the problem is with the launcher. That Ariana 5 will have to be ready to go before anything is launched.


The problem isn't with the launch pad or gantry, it is with the launch vehicle itself. The VAnnn designation represents the launch vehicle and each is customized for its payload(s).


----------



## inkahauts

And Id assume they are using a different gantry or launch pad for the next launch so I imagine this shouldn't have to much affect. Or at least hope.


----------



## Tom Robertson

The first phases of building the total launch vehicle for D15 might not be delayed by the current problems. If they involve different teams, different equipment, the two projects can continue in parallel. Or so we can hope. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## James Long

Tom Robertson said:


> The first phases of building the total launch vehicle for D15 might not be delayed by the current problems. If they involve different teams, different equipment, the two projects can continue in parallel. Or so we can hope.


If the launch vehicles are similar they may add some delay making sure the same fault is not in both vehicles. But nothing worth worrying about, of course. There are actual rocket scientists on the job.


----------



## Laxguy

And they are backed up by brain surgeons!


----------



## bakers12

Salo's latest update shows D15's launch slipping by two days:

May 20 22 - DirecTV 15, SKY MEXICO-1 (SKYM-1, DIRECTV INNOVA) - Ariane 5 ECA (VA223) - Kourou ELA-3 - 21:16-22:40


----------



## freerein100

What ever problem they had was apparently minor with the successful launch of VA222

Sent from my HTC M8


----------



## cforrest

@Arianespace: Seeing double! DIRECTV's DirecTV-15 & SKY Mexico-1 are readied for #Arianespace Flight #VA223 http://t.co/aVlzrYs63w http://t.co/reKvL8KS7A


----------



## Oli74

http://www.arianespace.com/news-mission-update/2015/1288.asp 
Updated news from Ariane about D-15

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2

Mission Update:

Arianespace receives the Ariane 5 for its upcoming flight with two DIRECTV broadcast satellites









The Ariane 5 for Arianespace Flight VA223 is shown during today's Spaceport transfer from the Launcher Integration Building (visible in the center background) to the Final Assembly Building in French Guiana.

May 5, 2015 - Ariane Flight VA223

The Spaceport is busy with activity for Ariane 5's next mission from French Guiana, with the heavy-lift launcher now delivered to Arianespace and its two satellite passengers continuing their checkout process.

During activity in the Spaceport's central zone today, Ariane 5 was moved from the Launcher Integration Building - where it underwent the basic build-up process by industrial prime contractor Airbus Defence and Space - to the Final Assembly Building. This step marks the transfer of responsibility to Arianespace for the payload integration, final validations and launch.

At the same time, the two passengers are being readied for their liftoff. Both satellites on this upcoming mission, designated Flight VA223 in Arianespace's launcher family numbering system, are for the same customer: DIRECTV, which is one of the world's leading providers of digital television entertainment services with more than 37 million customers in the U.S. and Latin America.

DirecTV-15 will ride in Ariane 5's upper passenger position and is among the most powerful broadcast satellites ever built for the United States. Produced by Airbus Defence and Space using the Eurostar E3000 platform, it will provide services in the Ku-, Ka- and R-bands.

SKY Mexico-1 is an Orbital ATK, Inc.-built satellite based the GEOStar-2™ platform and carries Ku- and R-band transponders. It will be situated in the lower slot of Ariane 5's payload arrangement, contained in the SYLDA dispenser system.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Oli74

HoTat2 said:


> Mission Update:
> 
> Arianespace receives the Ariane 5 for its upcoming flight with two DIRECTV broadcast satellites
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Ariane 5 for Arianespace Flight VA223 is shown during today's Spaceport transfer from the Launcher Integration Building (visible in the center background) to the Final Assembly Building in French Guiana.
> 
> May 5, 2015 - Ariane Flight VA223
> 
> The Spaceport is busy with activity for Ariane 5's next mission from French Guiana, with the heavy-lift launcher now delivered to Arianespace and its two satellite passengers continuing their checkout process.
> 
> During activity in the Spaceport's central zone today, Ariane 5 was moved from the Launcher Integration Building - where it underwent the basic build-up process by industrial prime contractor Airbus Defence and Space - to the Final Assembly Building. This step marks the transfer of responsibility to Arianespace for the payload integration, final validations and launch.
> 
> At the same time, the two passengers are being readied for their liftoff. Both satellites on this upcoming mission, designated Flight VA223 in Arianespace's launcher family numbering system, are for the same customer: DIRECTV, which is one of the world's leading providers of digital television entertainment services with more than 37 million customers in the U.S. and Latin America.
> 
> DirecTV-15 will ride in Ariane 5's upper passenger position and is among the most powerful broadcast satellites ever built for the United States. Produced by Airbus Defence and Space using the Eurostar E3000 platform, it will provide services in the Ku-, Ka- and R-bands.
> 
> SKY Mexico-1 is an Orbital ATK, Inc.-built satellite based the GEOStar-2 platform and carries Ku- and R-band transponders. It will be situated in the lower slot of Ariane 5's payload arrangement, contained in the SYLDA dispenser system.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


Any update on a date for the launch?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2

Oli74 said:


> Any update on a date for the launch?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Arianespace list it as May 27th;
http://www.arianespace.com/news/mission-status.asp

No specific time of day given yet that I know of....

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## cforrest

*Arianespace* ‏@*Arianespace*  12m12 minutes ago
Mission logos highlight the two customers for #*Ariane5* Flight #*VA223*, DIRECTV and SKY:

http://www.arianespace.com/news-feature-story/2015/5-8-2015-VA223-logos.asp


----------



## slice1900

Dish's blanket earth station license for 25,000 3.5m and 25,000 4.5m dishes in the US to receive RDBS from Ciel-6 at 103 was accepted for filing on April 22nd. That doesn't mean the FCC will approve Ciel's use of 103 in the US, but it moves things a step closer to resolution - or perhaps more likely, moves things closer to a seemingly inevitable court date.

Since Dish appears to be pulling the puppet strings in the background, they may want something in exchange for dropping the 103 license in the US (and in Canada, without which the license is useless in the US since people in places like Detroit and Buffalo would not be able to receive RDBS from D15) such as Directv giving up the three transponders it holds on 110 - or maybe they even hold out for everything on 119 as well...though Directv couldn't release those for a few years until they discontinue MPEG2 programming.

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/SESLFS2014092400752&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> ... Since Dish appears to be pulling the puppet strings in the background, they may want something in exchange for dropping the 103 license in the US (and in Canada, without which the license is useless in the US since people in places like Detroit and Buffalo would not be able to receive RDBS from D15) *such as Directv giving up the three transponders it holds on 110 - or maybe they even hold out for everything on 119 as well...though Directv couldn't release those for a few years until they discontinue MPEG2 programming.*
> 
> 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/SESLFS2014092400752&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number


The thing I question though is DIRECTV's system of using the Ku band at 101, 110, and 119 to transmit SI, guide info. firmware updates, authorization info. etc. while reserving the Ka band for A/V data only just an arbitrary one they can modify to allow the Ka band to carry such info. if they wish?

Because if it is a necessity then surrendering the remaining three xpndrs at 110 to Dish would be a problem nowadays as there are no other Ku satellites that can hit Puerto Rico except for the re-pointed D5 at 110 or D15's Ku DBS payload.

And I severely doubt DIRECTV would use a valuable resource like D15 for such a limited purpose, 
nor can you move D5 to 101 or 119 without removing CONUS xpndrs from those slots as it's nationwide wide beam will obviously interfere with the other birds there even with the beam peak aimed at PR.


----------



## James Long

HoTat2 said:


> The thing I question though is DIRECTV's system of using the Ku band at 101, 110, and 119 to transmit SI, guide info. firmware updates, authorization info. etc. while reserving the Ka band for A/V data only just an arbitrary one they can modify to allow the Ka band to carry such info. if they wish?


Data is data ... there should be no reason why the guide and other tech data cannot be hosted on Ka transponders. Just like there is no prohibition (other than available space) to putting MPEG4 on the Ku transponders. As long as the system can tell the switch where the data is the data should be able to be tuned.


----------



## P Smith

well, if you'll be more familiar with DTV FW ... it's a conglomerate of pre-millenium era of DBes, FW algos , SI tables, etc
I'm afraid if they will touch it, it will fall out as a house of cards


----------



## James Long

P Smith said:


> well, if you'll be more familiar with DTV FW ... it's a conglomerate of pre-millenium era of DBes, FW algos , SI tables, etc
> I'm afraid if they will touch it, it will fall out as a house of cards


In my opinion SWiM switches would be the biggest challenge. But it becomes an interesting deep technical discussion that is moot as long as there is a Ku satellite available to use. I do not expect DirecTV to be abandoning Ku.


----------



## inkahauts

HoTat2 said:


> The thing I question though is DIRECTV's system of using the Ku band at 101, 110, and 119 to transmit SI, guide info. firmware updates, authorization info. etc. while reserving the Ka band for A/V data only just an arbitrary one they can modify to allow the Ka band to carry such info. if they wish?
> 
> Because if it is a necessity then surrendering the remaining three xpndrs at 110 to Dish would be a problem nowadays as there are no other Ku satellites that can hit Puerto Rico except for the re-pointed D5 at 110 or D15's Ku DBS payload.
> 
> And I severely doubt DIRECTV would use a valuable resource like D15 for such a limited purpose,
> nor can you move D5 to 101 or 119 without removing CONUS xpndrs from those slots as it's nationwide wide beam will obviously interfere with the other birds there even with the beam peak aimed at PR.


I don't really understand your worry about 110 and 119 with regards to guide data etc. you don't need either of those slots for any of those services, hence so many installs with just the core 99 101 and 103.

Why wouldn't they use d15 for KU for PR if they where allowed to. I just don't know if they technically are allowed to or not and if the day can function a couple conus + transponders for that like it can for ka band for pr from where d15 is going to be.

D5 is old and its replacement was actually scrapped a long time ago. That slot appears to be headed toward retirement. I'd have to look but I would be a bit surprised if a space way could /would take over its channels pr or even maybe they will come from d14 dedicated spots for there.

Plus who knows if the next sat DIRECTV builds will be for 101 and have conus + transponders for pr Alaska and hi. I wouldn't be surprised at all if that happened.


----------



## inkahauts

James Long said:


> In my opinion SWiM switches would be the biggest challenge. But it becomes an interesting deep technical discussion that is moot as long as there is a Ku satellite available to use. I do not expect DirecTV to be abandoning Ku.


As I said nothing at all is needed beyond 101 to get everything to make your system work including firmware updates and guide data. And 101 is never going away (it's their core KU!). So I can't seen any issues if they gave up or leased off their licenses for 119 and especially 110.


----------



## HoTat2

inkahauts said:


> As I said nothing at all is needed beyond 101 to get everything to make your system work including firmware updates and guide data. And 101 is never going away (it's their core KU!). So I can't seen any issues if they gave up or leased off their licenses for 119 and especially 110.


But I'm saying 110 is to PR what 101 is to CONUS+ and Hawaii.

Besides some twenty some odd SD channels, much more importantly the SI, Guide, FW updates, etc. for PR come from 110 as no other current Ku band DIRECTV satellite's footprint at 101 or 119 covers them. They could use the upcoming D15's Ku DBS payload, but would have to locate it at 101 thereby losing it's Ka and RDBS payload capacity at it's primary assigned slot of 103.

So if you give away 110, how can PR reasonably access the Ku DBS band for the foreseeable future?


----------



## inkahauts

Awh I see your worry now. 

. (Although I don't know about your analogy because conus+ is what's on the new d14 say that has beams for pr that are basically mirrors of actual conus transponders. I don't think any KU sat has that right now)

I see no reason they cant send all that info via a transponder from d14 or even d15. I think the reason they have always done KU for conus is because everyone in the U.S. Can get KU for sure. Not everyone can get ka. Can't everyone in pr get both KU and ka?


----------



## HoTat2

inkahauts said:


> Awh I see your worry now.
> 
> . (Although I don't know about your analogy because conus+ is what's on the new d14 say that has beams for pr that are basically mirrors of actual conus transponders. I don't think any KU sat has that right now)
> 
> I see no reason they cant send all that info via a transponder from d14 or even d15. I think the reason they have always done KU for conus is because everyone in the U.S. Can get KU for sure. Not everyone can get ka. Can't everyone in pr get both KU and ka?


Well first regarding the meaning of "CONUS+" it's a little confusing, but when speaking of the present Ku band birds at 101, 110, and 119 CONUS+ means the continental US, Alaska, and Hawaii. No Puerto Rico.

For the newer Ka band birds at 99 and 103, CONUS+ means just the continental US and Alaska with Hawaii and now beginning with D14 and D15, Puerto Rico, supplied by spotbeams for mirrored CONUS+ xpndrs.

And no, there are no current Ku satellites that have a footprint covering PR except the reoriented D5 from 110.

This is why I asked initially if there was some technical reason why DIRECTV must supply system and guide data only from the Ku band. Because if mandatory then I don't see how DIRECTV can afford to let 110 go to Dish short of a new generation of Ku satellites at 101 with spotbeam capability to PR for mirrored CONUS+ xpndrs, for how else will PR access the Ku band?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

Why do you think this data must come from Ku? The receiver's firmware tells it where to look for initial configuration data when the receiver is started (the "downloading satellite info" progress bar on the SD GUI) It makes sense to have this on 101 in the US because every single install in the US includes 101, and always will for the foreseeable future.

I don't know what the install scenarios for PR are, do all installs include 110? Or do HD installs include 99/103 only? Once they drop MPEG2 SD in PR, all it would take is a firmware update to tell the PR receivers to look at 99 or 103. Anyway, if Directv made a deal to give Dish transponders on 110, they wouldn't have to make it effective immediately. They could make it effective in 2018, or whenever it is they plan to discontinue MPEG2 SD in PR. Or they could make it contingent on Dish continuing to provide spot beams to PR from 110 for a number of years.

I don't think SWMs are a problem, because SWMs are very dumb. Just like receivers tell the SWM the polarity/frequency they want instead of telling it what channel they want, they probably tell it where guide data is found. Maybe they're hardwired to put a specific polarity/frequency on SWM channel 1 and that can't be changed, but that seems like an unnecessary complication.


----------



## James Long

I have faith that should the situation arise DirecTV will work out any issues.


----------



## slice1900

James Long said:


> I have faith that should the situation arise DirecTV will work out any issues.


Agreed.

And now that I think about it, while the receiver's firmware may have an idea where to look for that data, if it isn't found is almost certainly programmed to get around this by either scanning all the transponders one by one until it finds what it is looking for, or every transponder has some little bit of data repeated every few seconds that tells the receivers where to look.


----------



## Tom Robertson

We probably should break the question of "does SI, APG, etc. data have to come via Ku?" into two parts: technical and logistical.

Technically, the data can be delivered from any data feed DIRECTV can muster: C-band, Ku, Ka, Internet, cell phone, wireless, or string/tincup.  It just has to support the data rates and reliability necessary for DIRECTVs purposes.

Logistically, at least most of the data has to come via Ku at 101° as it does today. There are many, many receivers that can only see that satellite and frequency combination. It is the common denominator for all DIRECTV systems in the US.

In theory, DIRECTV could direct HD receivers to look at other locations--but only if they are certain the receivers are in fact hooked up to receive the other location. Remember some systems are hooked up to single location dishes part-time and multi-satellite dishes at other times. (Think RVs.) 

Also remember there are no savings to moving the data or breaking it up. The complexity and lower reliability out weight the lack of benefits. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## inkahauts

Has PR ever had as KU single
LNB dishes installed? I thought they where always MPEG 4 equipment with a 5 lnb. If so I see no reason logistically anything for pr needs to come from any particular slot in the long run.


----------



## James Long

slice1900 said:


> Agreed.
> 
> And now that I think about it, while the receiver's firmware may have an idea where to look for that data, if it isn't found is almost certainly programmed to get around this by either scanning all the transponders one by one until it finds what it is looking for, or every transponder has some little bit of data repeated every few seconds that tells the receivers where to look.


P Smith or one of the people who investigate DirecTV feeds would be able to help. DISH has made it easy ... tables transmitted on every transponder tell the receiver where to go for any feed (EPG, Firmware). I can't imagine DirecTV not being able to handle the problem.


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> ...Why do you think this data must come from Ku? ...


But I don't necessarily think it ...

I really don't know for sure whether it must or not, that's why I posed it as a question for a topic of discussion. Is there some technical reason why system and guide data only come from Ku?

I understand for logistical reasons as Tom points out sys. and guide data coming from 101 and mirrored at 119, but why does service to PR imitate the same methodology of. transmitting sys. and guide data from Ku with Ka left to only A/V data instead of just sending both from Ka?

Could there be some technical limitations involved in this scheme? For instance might the receiver's network tuners be only able to receive the Ku band (i.e. tune to an IF between 950-1450 MHz)?

And/or could the SWiM LNBs or ext. modules' embedded firmware be designed to seek guide data only from Ku?

Or could this just be DIRECTV creating a reason for 110's continued existence since they can't simply spectrum squat at that location?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2

inkahauts said:


> Has PR ever had as KU single
> LNB dishes installed? I thought they where always MPEG 4 equipment with a 5 lnb. If so I see no reason logistically anything for pr needs to come from any particular slot in the long run.


According to our main colleague in PR, "Luis", All subs. there use the SL-5 with service provided from 99, 103, and 110. 101 and 119 are not used.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Gary Toma

HoTat,

Luis is a colleague. Not an informant. :grin:


----------



## HoTat2

Gary Toma said:


> HoTat,
> 
> Luis is a colleague. Not an informant. :grin:


Correct;

Poor choice of words ... 

Post edited ...

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## James Long

HoTat2 said:


> I really don't know for sure whether it must or not, that's why I posed it as a question for a topic of discussion. Is there some technical reason why system and guide data only come from Ku?


Is any one else questioning the technology? The data for PR currently is on 110 but I don't see anyone saying that it must be on 110.


----------



## HoTat2

James Long said:


> Is any one else questioning the technology? The data for PR currently is on 110 but I don't see anyone saying that it must be on 110.


But just because no one else thought to ask it or personally felt it worthy of one, does that have to mean its not a legitimate question?

In DIRECTV's system is Ku access a necessity for control data or not is all I attempted to ask

Then if so, I see no other alternatives for PR in DIRECTV's fleet than the reoriented D5 at 110.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

James Long said:


> Is any one else questioning the technology? The data for PR currently is on 110 but I don't see anyone saying that it must be on 110.


Yes, I see no reason why they couldn't put the data on 99 or 103 for PR if they wished to drop 110. Maybe they'd need a firmware update on the receivers first, maybe not.

The network tuner shouldn't be an issue, I can't imagine there are any savings to be had in limiting the range of the VCO to produce a tuner that's capable of only tuning 950-1450 MHz. In every other way it would have to be identical to the "regular" tuners. Pretty sure Directv just spec'ed one extra tuner in all their equipment. That's why the Genie ended up with 5; it used two three tuner chips but one had to be used for the network tuner. Dish used one three tuner chip in the Hopper, that's why it ended up with three since they don't need to use one for the network tuner (but able to record 6 channels at once for PTAT since all four locals are carried in the same transponder and a tuner demodulates the whole transponder and thus all data/channels it contains)


----------



## inkahauts

I do believe long ago they where not full tuners. But I think these days they are and I don't think they ever installed those old boxes in PR


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> Yes, I see no reason why they couldn't put the data on 99 or 103 for PR if they wished to drop 110. Maybe they'd need a firmware update on the receivers first, maybe not.
> 
> The network tuner shouldn't be an issue, I can't imagine there are any savings to be had in limiting the range of the VCO to produce a tuner that's capable of only tuning 950-1450 MHz. In every other way it would have to be identical to the "regular" tuners. Pretty sure Directv just spec'ed one extra tuner in all their equipment. That's why the Genie ended up with 5; it used two three tuner chips but one had to be used for the network tuner. Dish used one three tuner chip in the Hopper, that's why it ended up with three since they don't need to use one for the network tuner (but able to record 6 channels at once for PTAT since all four locals are carried in the same transponder and a tuner demodulates the whole transponder and thus all data/channels it contains)


Ok, seems logical;

I suppose then it's as I suggested lastly in a prior post. The system for PR using Ku at 110 for control data and a few SD channels instead of simply placing everything on Ka was probably done to show the FCC they're still using 110 for customers.

Like I said, I guess DIRECTVs license at 110 don't entitle them to just sit on that spectrum. They have to use it for customer service somehow.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## James Long

HoTat2 said:


> Like I said, I guess DIRECTVs license at 110 don't entitle them to just sit on that spectrum. They have to use it for customer service somehow.


The use requirement is minimal. While DISH or another potential competitor can always file a complaint if they feel DirecTV is not adequately using the transponders it doesn't take much to consider them used. Theoretically DirecTV could put a business TV channel or data service on each transponder for a few days a year and still meet FCC minimums.

The only way DirecTV's license would be at risk would be if they lost or removed the satellite providing Ku service. DirecTV would need to move another satellite in to place (anything that could transmit Ku) to show that they could use the slot. Otherwise keeping the slot is trivial.


----------



## slice1900

Dish did mention in its filings regarding the Directv/AT&T deal that the three tpns on 110 are not being used in CONUS, and whined a bit about how Directv having all tpns at 101 is somehow a significant advantage compared to Dish having only 29 of 32 at 110. I guess the underutilization isn't enough for a formal complaint, so they took the opportunity that presented itself to register their displeasure.

I don't know the details of how Dish's full power (non-FSS) CONUS tpn slots compare in the eastern and western arcs. If the western arc has fewer, getting 110 and especially if they got 119 could be of significant help for adding more HD and doing 4K. If the eastern arc has fewer, it isn't clear that adding more slots on 110/119 would help them much unless they were able to add more tpns in the eastern arc.


----------



## Tom Robertson

As far as PR goes, DIRECTV will most likely use the most common denominator as the transponder for data. Since I have no feel for the dishes and receivers delivered to PR, especially historically, I don't have a guess what it would be. Just that DIRECTV has a plan, a backup plan, and a contingency plan. 

I'm sure DIRECTV will do what makes the most sense from a cents standpoint. Might be to swap a few receivers, swap an aging satellite, who knows. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## James Long

slice1900 said:


> Dish did mention in its filings regarding the Directv/AT&T deal that the three tpns on 110 are not being used in CONUS, and whined a bit about how Directv having all tpns at 101 is somehow a significant advantage compared to Dish having only 29 of 32 at 110. I guess the underutilization isn't enough for a formal complaint, so they took the opportunity that presented itself to register their displeasure.


Thanks to the Canadians (129) DISH has 82 transponders on 110-119-129. Compared to DirecTV's 46 on 101-110-119. Even looking only at US licensed DBS DISH has 50 transponders to DirecTV's 46. So the complaint becomes "full US slot". The complaint has some validity as 129 does not cover the entire US. But DirecTV would have a better argument for claiming a disadvantage.



slice1900 said:


> I don't know the details of how Dish's full power (non-FSS) CONUS tpn slots compare in the eastern and western arcs. If the western arc has fewer, getting 110 and especially if they got 119 could be of significant help for adding more HD and doing 4K. If the eastern arc has fewer, it isn't clear that adding more slots on 110/119 would help them much unless they were able to add more tpns in the eastern arc.


ConUS vs spotbeam can vary. 31 Western Arc transponders are currently used for spots - the rest are used for ConUS SD and HD (with SD currently being MPEG2 QPSK). Eastern Arc is 62 licensed transponders on 61.5 and 72.7 (plus two used "temporarily" for testing). Eastern Arc is nearly all MPEG4 8PSK. Today the bottleneck is Western Arc (all that MPEG2 QPSK SD). But as DISH converts to 8PSK Eastern Arc will become the bottleneck. The extra slots at 110 and 119 would certainly help in the conversion ... but eventually open space on WA won't help.


----------



## slice1900

James Long said:


> ConUS vs spotbeam can vary. 31 Western Arc transponders are currently used for spots - the rest are used for ConUS SD and HD (with SD currently being MPEG2 QPSK). Eastern Arc is 62 licensed transponders on 61.5 and 72.7 (plus two used "temporarily" for testing). Eastern Arc is nearly all MPEG4 8PSK. Today the bottleneck is Western Arc (all that MPEG2 QPSK SD). But as DISH converts to 8PSK Eastern Arc will become the bottleneck. The extra slots at 110 and 119 would certainly help in the conversion ... but eventually open space on WA won't help.


Isn't May 31st the date for switching to 8PSK in their western arc? They still need to drop MPEG2 duplicates which I imagine is a longer term thing as it is for Directv, but if they were able to get 110 in CONUS now (and continue to provide spots to PR for Directv for however long it takes before they are no longer needed there) and 119 eventually it would allow them to drop 129 and save money. If it is necessary to help the AT&T deal go through and remove the obstacles for CONUS RDBS from 103, I think that deal makes sense for both.

The only reason for Directv to hold onto 110/119 after MPEG2 goes away is to keep them away from Dish, and the only reason Dish says they want to do the 50,000 3.5m/4.5m broadband dishes using RDBS at 103 instead of some other license they could lease is to throw a wrench in Directv's plans. I'm going to guess that Ergen owns a chunk of Ciel or whoever the ultimate ITU licensee of 103 RDBS in Canada is and can make that problem go away for good if he gets what he wants. Directv may let this play out a few years before agreeing though, since it'll be some time before there are enough 4K channels to fill up the 16 tpns from 99. Leaving the ones at 103 in limbo in the meantime won't hurt them.


----------



## HoTat2

Mission Update:

DirecTV-15 and SKY México-1 are integrated for their Arianespace heavy-lift mission with Ariane 5


























SKY México-1 is shown during its integration atop Ariane 5 in the Spaceport's Final Assembly Building (photo at left), which was followed by lowering of the upper composite - containing DirecTV-15 - to complete the launcher's build-up (photos at center and right).

May 13, 2015 - Ariane Flight VA223

Arianespace's upcoming mission to orbit two direct-to-home broadcast satellites from the Spaceport in French Guiana has made an important step closer to this month's liftoff with the integration of DirecTV-15 and SKY México-1 on their heavy-lift Ariane 5 launcher.

During action in the upper levels of the Spaceport's Final Assembly Building, SKY México-1 was installed atop Ariane 5's central core - over which was positioned the "upper composite" containing DirecTV-15, the SYLDA 5 dispenser system and the protective payload fairing.

Following final checkout, the Ariane 5 will be readied for rollout to the ELA-3 launch complex, enabling the May 27 liftoff.

As the mission's upper passenger, DirecTV-15 is to be released first during the flight sequence, followed by the SYLDA 5 dispenser's separation and deployment of SKY México-1.

DirecTV-15 was produced by Airbus Defence and Space using the Eurostar E3000 platform, and it will provide services in the Ku-, Ka- and R-bands for the more than 20 million customers of U.S.-based DIRECTV - one of the world's leading providers of digital television entertainment services.

SKY México-1 is an Orbital ATK, Inc.-built satellite based the GEOStar-2™ platform and carries Ku- and R-band transponders. This spacecraft will be operated for SKY, which is owned by Mexico's Grupo Televisa S.A.B. and DIRECTV.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Diana C

If DirecTV ever "gives up" their Ku licenses at 110 and 119, I'd be very, very surprised. As pointed out by Mr Long, it doesn't take much to keep them active, and unless they were in a position to eliminate SD all together, AND Dish was offering a sizable amount of money for them, I doubt they'll EVER give them up. About the only way I see anything happening is if it were somehow made a condition of the AT&T acquisition (not likely). They'd be far more likely to use 110 and 119 for UHD, PPV downloads, backhauls, business feeds, or some new service than to just give them up.


----------



## slice1900

If Directv is put into a position where Dish, via Ciel, is able to block Directv's use of their 18 RDBS transponders at 103, they may have no choice. Which is better, holding on to 14 Ku slots spread across the sky between two locations where Directv has nothing else, or being able to use 18 RDBS slots at 103 where they already have 48 Ka transponders, separated by only 4* from 98 (or potentially 146 if they decided to someday use Ka from 101 for customers) other transponder slots?


----------



## inkahauts

I just don't see that working IMHO. DIRECTV has a history of using stuff it gets and especially if they see dish behind this they will say dish had their chance to bid on the spectrum so they don't matter.


----------



## thelucky1

FCC today By this Order, we grant the application of DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC (DIRECTV) for an extension, through July 31, 2015, to meet its "launch and begin operations" milestone for its RB-2 space station. As discussed below, DIRECTV has provided sufficient information to demonstrate that it will launch and bring RB-2 into operation no later than this date. Given the apparent imminent launch of RB-2, currently scheduled for May 27, 2015.

Link: http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0514/DA-15-586A1.docx

Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk


----------



## harsh

thelucky1 said:


> FCC today By this Order, we grant the application of DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC (DIRECTV) for an extension, through July 31, 2015, to meet its "launch and begin operations" milestone for its RB-2 space station.


The converse of what James was talking about is that if they didn't get the license implemented by the deadline, they could also risk their license.

I guess this isn't the first time they've had to get an extension.


----------



## lwilli201

slice1900 said:


> If Directv is put into a position where Dish, via Ciel, is able to block Directv's use of their 18 RDBS transponders at 103, they may have no choice.


Ceil has blocked Directv from using the 17/24 GHz BSS package. Directv will have to come to an agreement with Ciel to use it or maybe Directv is waiting to see if Ciel will have to forfeit that bandwidth due to not using it. A complete reading of the latest extension answers a boat load of questions.


----------



## Diana C

lwilli201 said:


> *Ceil has blocked Directv from using the **17/24 GHz BSS package.* Directv will have to come to an agreement with Ciel to use it or maybe Directv is waiting to see if Ciel will have to forfeit that bandwidth due to not using it. A complete reading of the latest extension answers a boat load of questions.


I don't see that in the ordering clauses:



> IT IS ORDERED that the application of DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC, IBFS File No. SAT-MOD-20140624-00075, for an extension through July 31, 2015 to meet its "launch and begin operations" milestone for the DIRECTV RB-2 space station, authorized to operate at the 102.825° W.L. orbital location and provide Broadcasting-Satellite Service using the 17.3-17.7 GHz (space-to-Earth) and 24.75-25.15 GHz (Earth-to-space) frequency bands, IS GRANTED.
> 
> IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition to Deny filed by SES Americom, Inc. and Ciel Satellite Limited Partnership IS DENIED for the reasons stated herein.
> 
> IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition to Condition filed by DISH Operating LLC IS DENIED for the reasons stated herein.


Seems to me that the FCC told SES/Ciel and Dish to pound sand, and take it up with the ITU. To do that they have to be able to prove that there is harmful interference, so this is not an issue for the near term.


----------



## David Ortiz

We must be missing something. :nono2:



Diana C said:


> I don't see that in the ordering clauses:
> 
> Seems to me that the FCC told SES/Ciel and Dish to pound sand, and take it up with the ITU. To do that they have to be able to prove that there is harmful interference, so this is not an issue for the near term.


----------



## slice1900

The FCC merely denied Ciel's and Dish's petition to deny the extension for the launch and begin operations date, which isn't surprising since it is sitting at the launch site next in line to go up. They affirmed that Directv must coordinate with Ciel for RDBS at 103, maintaining the FCC's previous position that Directv has a US license for RDBS at 103 and Ciel's license is for Canada only. It isn't clear whether the FCC thinks Ciel has priority, however. If Ciel has priority then Directv won't be able to use RDBS over all of the US, since delivering it to places like Seattle and Detroit that are near the Canadian border would not be possible without interference with Ciel's distribution to Canada.

Ciel's argument is that they have ITU priority that includes access to the whole US market as well, which is the basis of Dish's trojan horse plan to install 50,000 3.5m and 4.5m dishes at cell tower sites for broadband distribution using Ciel-6i. No matter what the FCC says, they can still go to the ITU and until that avenue and all legal means are exhausted, Directv is likely to be prevented from lighting up its RDBS transponders on D15. That's why I think there may eventually be some sort of agreement reached to clear that, since even if Directv wins they are unlikely to win to the degree they can use D15's RDBS payload over the entire US including areas near the Canadian border.


----------



## inkahauts

I don't buy it. Does ciel even have a sat ready to go to those slots and light up? I just don't see them getting anywhere. And everything they ever send to the fcc is denied time and again. They've never won anything with regard to that. And once DIRECTV is using it they will have an even harder time fighting DIRECTV to get it turned off.


----------



## David Ortiz

An interesting read: http://www.swys.org/filings/id/6017481179



inkahauts said:


> I don't buy it. Does ciel even have a sat ready to go to those slots and light up? I just don't see them getting anywhere. And everything they ever send to the fcc is denied time and again. They've never won anything with regard to that. And once DIRECTV is using it they will have an even harder time fighting DIRECTV to get it turned off.


----------



## slice1900

inkahauts said:


> I don't buy it. Does ciel even have a sat ready to go to those slots and light up? I just don't see them getting anywhere. And everything they ever send to the fcc is denied time and again. They've never won anything with regard to that. And once DIRECTV is using it they will have an even harder time fighting DIRECTV to get it turned off.


The sat has been there ready to go for a year or two. They built it for a "classified mission" (assumed US military) and it went on the other side of the world but the lease was not renewed long term as expected so it came back home. It has been sitting at 103 for some time, ready to replace one of SES Americom's other satellites' C & Ku band capability, but last I heard last year the FCC had been holding up the approvals for even doing that because of the RDBS dispute.


----------



## inkahauts

That is a god read, the part I read anyway. The entire first section seems to spell out that they don't deserve squat and I have a feeling that they won't get it either. They don't even have a sat on the books to be built that would actually make real use of the spectrum, which means they'd be 3 years or more out from that. They are throwing a wet paper towel against the wall in super sleazy fashion and hopping it sticks! Charlie probably suggested the international filing.. Yes, I think hes that manipulative.


----------



## James Long

All satellites are international ... no one country gets to decide what gets placed where. If DirecTV gets to use RDBS at 103 it will only be with ITU permission - even if there were no other countries or entities wanting the spot.


----------



## inkahauts

It's pretty obvious that the company has skirted the normal process though in trying to get the spot. The ITU and the FCC can't afford to allow them to do that. They should lose licenses as far as I am concerned for a malicious act... I can't stand unethical business practices.

What I want to know is why would the ITU not slice up the pie for different countries and then let the countries decide what company gets to use them? It seems that's how it's supposed to work and ceil is trying to say that's not how it works...


----------



## James Long

The ITU did that with DBS slots ... assigning certain slots to a country and then letting that country figure out who gets the slot. Currently DISH uses two Canadian DBS slots (one was formerly used by DirecTV) and most of one Mexican slot. There are other DBS slots that are going unused in the countries where they were assigned. Efforts to use those slots in the US have failed - in part due to potential interference with other US DBS service. There are four US DBS slots that are currently unused ... but they are so far west that they do not cover the entire US easily and no one has made the investment to create an Alaska/Hawaii Pacific Ocean DBS system.


There are rules involved in getting ITU permission to use a slot ... Ceil believes they have followed those rules. Unless the ITU disagrees then Ceil's use is protected. The FCC has final say as to whether the satellite can be used for US services ... but the ITU has final say over the FCC as to who gets to use the slot - and if they say Ceil gets the slot then everyone else has to work around that decision.


----------



## damondlt

Very interesting.


----------



## damondlt

inkahauts said:


> Charlie probably suggested the international filing.. Yes, I think hes that manipulative.


He's a Snake.


----------



## gpg

Good thing that Directv isn't using the Russians this time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/17/world/europe/russian-rocket-carrying-mexican-satellite-is-said-to-crash-in-siberia.html?_r=0


----------



## yosoyellobo

Once D-15 lights up can they be force to shut it down? I am only asking because I am having trouble understanding what Charlie and Ceil have anything to do with it.


----------



## HoTat2

yosoyellobo said:


> Once D-15 lights up can they be force to shut it down? I am only asking because I am having trouble understanding what Charlie and Ceil have anything to do with it.


Long story short, the controversy being discussed here is who has the legal claim to broadcast rights for 24/17 GHz RDBS band service at the 103W slot.

D15 is carrying a RDBS payload called "RB-2." But whether or not DIRECTV will ever be able to use it, or to what extent depends on the outcome of the legal wrangling with Ceil Inc. who has legal claims to the slot for RDBS service as well.

There is no issue with D15's Ka band payload lighting up when D15 becomes operational at 103W.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## yosoyellobo

Thanks


----------



## yosoyellobo

If Directv loses out on the RDBS issue could they lease it out to Ciel or Charlie? The RB-2 I mean.


----------



## James Long

yosoyellobo said:


> If Directv loses out on the RDBS issue could they lease it out to Ciel or Charlie? The RB-2 I mean.


Theoretically, yes. Or they could tell Ceil to use their own satellite and see how long that lasts.

I do not see the two major satellite providers helping each other out unless the benefits to each company outweigh the benefits to the other company. For that to happen, each company would have to believe that they were getting a better deal.

Historical Notes:
DISH (then Echostar) allowed the separate DBS company Dominion to use capacity on the Echostar satellite at 119 before moving to their own Dominion licensed space at 61.5. Echostar continued to provide Dominion transponders on a Echostar satellite at 61.5 ... the transponders remained FCC licensed to Dominion but were on an Echostar satellite. The "mutually beneficial" arrangement was that Dominion were able to use two transponders in exchange for DISH being able to use six of Dominion's licenses at 61.5. Content restrictions were placed on those six transponders and DISH agreed not to compete with Dominion's channel lineup. (Dominion was SkyAngel.) When SkyAngel went out of the satellite business DISH bought the licenses at 61.5.

DirecTV allowed the separate DBS company USSB to use capacity on their satellite. Similar to the DISH/SkyAngel pairing one could receive DirecTV and USSB programming on the same receiver. Eventually DirecTV bought USSB.

There is a history of providers using another provider's physical satellite ... but not competing companies cooperating.

The rest of the history of "Eastern Position" US DBS:
USSB held FCC permission to transmit on eight transponders. Only five transponders were hosted by DirecTV on 101. The FCC assigned three transponders at 110 to complete USSB's allotment, assigned one transponder to Directsat, then placed the other 28 transponders at 110 up for auction. MCI won the auction and then sold the allotments to Echostar. The three USSB/DirecTV assigned transponders remain in DirecTV's control.

Directsat held assignments to 11 transponders, 10 at 119 and the one at 110. Echostar bought Directsat's assignments.
Tempo held assignments to 11 transponders at 119. DirecTV bought Tempo's assignments.
DBSC held assignments to 11 transponders at 61.5. Echostar bought DBSC's assignments.
Continental (aka Cablevision/Voom) held assignments to 11 transponders at 61.5. They launched a satellite and provided service. When their business plan failed they sold the satellite and licenses to Echostar.
Two transponders remain unassigned (at 61.5). DISH has temporary permission to use those transponders. (Temporary is "until the FCC assigns them permanently". That permanent assignment is not pending.)


----------



## yosoyellobo

Thanks.


----------



## slice1900

Seems like it would have been smarter for them to assign 91/95/99/103/107/111 etc. for RDBS in the US and South America and 93/97/101/105/109 etc. in Canada and Mexico/Central America. The small amount of off-axis interference 2* off the dish's aim for people in say Detroit or San Diego (looking at 103) and Windsor or Tijuana (looking at 101 or 105) would be pretty easy to coordinate.

In fact, considering how similar the frequency ranges are for RDBS (17.3 - 17.7/8 GHz) and Ka lo (18.3-18.8 GHz) such interference should be almost non-existent - given that Ka slots were assigned 2* apart but RDBS slots were assigned 4* apart.

Anyone know why the ITU doesn't assign slots in that manner? It seems so logical, there must be something I'm overlooking.


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> Seems like it would have been smarter for them to assign 91/95/99/103/107/111 etc. for RDBS in the US and South America and 93/97/101/105/109 etc. in Canada and Mexico/Central America. The small amount of off-axis interference 2* off the dish's aim for people in say Detroit or San Diego (looking at 103) and Windsor or Tijuana (looking at 101 or 105) would be pretty easy to coordinate.
> 
> In fact, considering how similar the frequency ranges are for RDBS (17.3 - 17.7/8 GHz) and Ka lo (18.3-18.8 GHz) such interference should be almost non-existent - given that Ka slots were assigned 2* apart but RDBS slots were assigned 4* apart.
> 
> Anyone know why the ITU doesn't assign slots in that manner? It seems so logical, there must be something I'm overlooking.


Could it have something to do with the fact that you obviously cannot have RDBS satellite broadcasting co-located in the same slots with any DBS satellites as even a very small amount of off axis radiation of their downlink transmissions will interfere with a DBS satellite's uplink reception.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

James Long said:


> There are rules involved in getting ITU permission to use a slot ... Ceil believes they have followed those rules. Unless the ITU disagrees then Ceil's use is protected. The FCC has final say as to whether the satellite can be used for US services ... but the ITU has final say over the FCC as to who gets to use the slot - and if they say Ceil gets the slot then everyone else has to work around that decision.


The objection of Directv and the FCC is that the ITU was allowing applicants for slots designated for the US market before the FCC was ready to accept such assignments. This was a huge mess, and some companies were trying to apply to the FCC for slots and getting denied because they weren't ready to assign them. When the FCC finally opened assignments there was a land rush where a bunch of players (including Directv and Echostar) applied for a bunch of slots. Directv really wanted 99 & 103 and ended up with them thanks to a three way trade with Echostar and Pegasus that let each get what they wanted.

Here's a little snippet of the action for the 111 & 115 slots. Echostar ended up with 111 after the three way trade. They also have RDBS licenses for 62, 75, 79, 107. I have no idea if they have put them into use or will lose them soon.


Code:


File Number             P/E 	Applicant Name          Callsign 	Requested 	Assigned 	Frequency  	Status 	                        Last Action 	                AFFPN Date
SAT-LOA-20020328-00051	P	EchoStar Corporation	S2441	        114.5W	        110.4W	        17300- 17800	Action Taken Public Notice	Grant of Authority	 	07/02/2008
SAT-LOA-20030604-00108	P	EchoStar Satellite	S2452	        114.5W	 	                17300- 17800	Action Taken Public Notice	Dismissed at Applicant's Request	 	 
SAT-LOI-20041228-00228	E	Spectrum Five LLC	S2649	        114.5W	 	                17300- 17800	Action Complete	                Dismissed by Delegated Authority	 	 
SAT-LOI-20041228-00229	E	Spectrum Five LLC	S2650	        114.5W	 	                17300- 17800	Action Complete	                Dismissed by Delegated Authority	 	 
SAT-LOI-20050312-00062	E	Spectrum Five LLC	S2667	        114.5W	        114.5W	        17300- 17800	Action Complete	                Declare null and Void	 	04/15/2005
SAT-LOI-20050312-00063	E	Spectrum Five LLC	S2668	        114.5W	        114.5W	        17300- 17800	Action Complete	                Declare null and Void	 	04/15/2005
SAT-MOD-20101126-00245	E	Spectrum Five LLC	S2667	        114.5W	        114.5W	        17300- 17800	Action Complete	                Denied	 	                03/04/2011
SAT-MOD-20101126-00269	P	Spectrum Five LLC	S2668	        114.5W	        114.5W	        17300- 17800	Action Complete	                Denied	 	                03/04/2011


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> Could it have something to do with the fact that you obviously cannot have RDBS satellite broadcasting co-located in the same slots with any DBS satellites as even a very small amount of off axis radiation of their downlink transmissions will interfere with a DBS satellite's uplink reception.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


Dish holds an RDBS slot at 111 which they planned to use at 110.4. That's really close to 110 where Dish & Directv broadcast Ku. If the FCC accepted Dish's request to locate it at 110.4, there must not be that much interference. Maybe you can't use both from the same satellite, but it must work with a couple tenths of a degree of separation.


----------



## inkahauts

James Long said:


> The ITU did that with DBS slots ... assigning certain slots to a country and then letting that country figure out who gets the slot. Currently DISH uses two Canadian DBS slots (one was formerly used by DirecTV) and most of one Mexican slot. There are other DBS slots that are going unused in the countries where they were assigned. Efforts to use those slots in the US have failed - in part due to potential interference with other US DBS service. There are four US DBS slots that are currently unused ... but they are so far west that they do not cover the entire US easily and no one has made the investment to create an Alaska/Hawaii Pacific Ocean DBS system.
> 
> There are rules involved in getting ITU permission to use a slot ... Ceil believes they have followed those rules. Unless the ITU disagrees then Ceil's use is protected. The FCC has final say as to whether the satellite can be used for US services ... but the ITU has final say over the FCC as to who gets to use the slot - and if they say Ceil gets the slot then everyone else has to work around that decision.


And yet there is the rub. The FCC was given the authority by the ITU to determine who gets to use the spot and evidently when you win you also need to get permission from the ITU. They skipped the entire step of getting permission from the FCC. Or even if you get permission from The ITU you still then need permission from The FCC. Either way they didn't get permission from both and failed.

Kind of like I didn't get permission from mom but dad said I could so Im doing it even though you clearly need permission from both and while dads approval is important moms is the final word and they don't like what mom is saying so they keep whining like a 5 year old entitled little punk.

The best part is they don't even have anything on the books that could actually fully utilize and supply any real broadcast and there are laws from everyone about squatting.

I've been wondering if It's merely a tactic to try and keep DIRECTV from getting so far ahead dosh would never be able to buy them if AT&T deal falls through. Yes I know that's out there but.... It also could be that they want to try and get that space for dish so that they can be more attractive to suitors themselves and not look like they are massively behind DIRECTV in bandwidth and won't be able to compete with them in 4k.


----------



## James Long

slice1900 said:


> Dish holds an RDBS slot at 111 which they planned to use at 110.4. That's really close to 110 where Dish & Directv broadcast Ku. If the FCC accepted Dish's request to locate it at 110.4, there must not be that much interference. Maybe you can't use both from the same satellite, but it must work with a couple tenths of a degree of separation.


RDBS might be better off on the same satellite as the DBS. (Isn't one of DirecTV's new satellites capable of both DBS and RDBS?)

Trying to coordinate two satellites moving around inside of separate boxes kept a safe distance away from each other seems harder than designing one satellite in a way that would not interfere with itself. I've seen co-locations of close frequencies on earth (TV and radio) that would not be allowed if the stations were further apart. The co-location helped manage interference.


----------



## slice1900

James Long said:


> RDBS might be better off on the same satellite as the DBS. (Isn't one of DirecTV's new satellites capable of both DBS and RDBS?)
> 
> Trying to coordinate two satellites moving around inside of separate boxes kept a safe distance away from each other seems harder than designing one satellite in a way that would not interfere with itself. I've seen co-locations of close frequencies on earth (TV and radio) that would not be allowed if the stations were further apart. The co-location helped manage interference.


D15 has Ku & RDBS transponders, but AFAIK it isn't designed to use them both at once, since Directv doesn't hold any licenses for slots which would allow both. I suppose they could work from the same satellite if designed properly with the RDBS broadcast antenna on one side and the Ku uplink antenna on the opposite side.

The problem is that you probably won't have a single satellite providing all your RDBS and Ku - for example if Dish wanted to do this for 110, they'd probably have to relocate their spot beams to 119 because it is unlikely they could build a single satellite that could handle their CONUS RDBS, CONUS Ku and all their Ku spot beams. Having so many eggs in one basket they'd almost need to have a hot spare satellite standing by.

Anyway, I don't know why coordinating two satellites would be hard at all. You just choose the 'box' so the closest edge of each box exceeds whatever minimum separation you want to maintain. Once that's done there's no further coordination beyond keeping each satellite in its own box, which they must do anyway.


----------



## slice1900

inkahauts said:


> And yet there is the rub. The FCC was given the authority by the ITU to determine who gets to use the spot and evidently when you win you also need to get permission from the ITU. They skipped the entire step of getting permission from the FCC. Or even if you get permission from The ITU you still then need permission from The FCC. Either way they didn't get permission from both and failed.
> 
> The best part is they don't even have anything on the books that could actually fully utilize and supply any real broadcast and there are laws from everyone about squatting.


They don't just have the ITU application, they also have a license from Canada. They didn't start talking about using it in the US until Dish got involved with this 50,000 dishes at cellular sites idea. That use of the slot seems doomed to be denied since Directv is the US licensee as far as the FCC is concerned. That doesn't matter though if the ITU says they have priority. That would mean Directv would be unable to broadcast full CONUS RDBS, because they wouldn't be allowed to interfere at all with reception anywhere in Canada.

I don't know why you keep saying they don't have anything that can utilize this. Ciel-6i, a satellite with RDBS transponders, has been sitting in orbit at 103 for a couple years. The application Dish filed a month or so ago for 50,000 earth stations describes the capabilities of the payload and how it will work for Dish's intended use.



inkahauts said:


> I've been wondering if It's merely a tactic to try and keep DIRECTV from getting so far ahead dosh would never be able to buy them if AT&T deal falls through. Yes I know that's out there but.... It also could be that they want to try and get that space for dish so that they can be more attractive to suitors themselves and not look like they are massively behind DIRECTV in bandwidth and won't be able to compete with them in 4k.


Dish was granted RDBS licenses at 62, 75, 79, and 111, and Ku and Ka at 121. Maybe more, I just saw reference to that list in a filing earlier this afternoon when I was looking up stuff for the post where I listed the RDBS applications at 111/115. They have tons of bandwidth they can use if they choose to build the satellites to utilize it, but that costs money. The only 'tactic' is typical Charlie Ergen business practices where he thinks you win not be being better than the other guy but by screwing over the other guy. If he could get Directv's 110 & 119 transponders he wouldn't need to spend anything to launch new satellites or replace customer equipment in the western arc. Directv won't hand them over willingly (especially to him) so he's got to get them behind a barrel to make it happen.


----------



## harsh

inkahauts said:


> And once DIRECTV is using it they will have an even harder time fighting DIRECTV to get it turned off.


Is there even the slightest hint that DIRECTV is prepared to utilize RDBS?


----------



## studechip

harsh said:


> Is there even the slightest hint that DIRECTV is prepared to utilize RDBS?


Yes.


----------



## Diana C

slice1900 said:


> They don't just have the ITU application, they also have a license from Canada. They didn't start talking about using it in the US until Dish got involved with this 50,000 dishes at cellular sites idea. That use of the slot seems doomed to be denied since Directv is the US licensee as far as the FCC is concerned. That doesn't matter though if the ITU says they have priority. That would mean Directv would be unable to broadcast full CONUS RDBS, because they wouldn't be allowed to interfere at all with reception anywhere in Canada....


This still all seems like a tempest in a teapot. While the ITU is responsible for satellite location, no satellite may broadcast into a nation with that nation's permission. The fact that Ciel/Americom and DirecTV both hold ITU allocations at 103 is not relevant to the launch and operation of DirecTV-15.

The whole issue that Ciel and Dish brought up is, as the FCC said, moot. Until Ciel has an operating license (AFAIK, they have an authorization for the slot, but they don't have an operating license for RDBS) there is nothing with which DirecTV-15 can interfere. DirecTV holds an allocation for RDBS at 103 and presumably will get a license to broadcast on those frequencies into the U.S once it is on station. If DirecTV lights up RDBS from 103, and Ciel gets an operating license to broadcast into Canada, then, and only then, will coordination become an issue, and that would be an ITU negotiated issue. This is effectively what the ordering clauses from the FCC said.

ETA: There isn't really a Ciel-6 yet. There is a RDBS payload on SES-3, a satellite that Americom wants to use to replace AMC-1, that has been designated Ciel-6i (the 'i' standing for interim). SES-3 was built and launched without FCC approval but Americom later applied for Ku and C band authorizations from the FCC. The actual transfer of load from AMC-1 to SES-3 has been delayed for quite a while due to polarity differences between the two satellites (and therefore a need to replace the receive LNBs). So, it isn't like the satellite is sitting there waiting for this dispute to be settled. Bottom line, DirecTV, Ciel and Americom have been talking and they will work it out when they need to work it out. It is really nothing more than a footnote, IMO.


----------



## harsh

studechip said:


> Yes.


So you've seen the LNB assembly?

Did they go for the frequency dependent reflector?


----------



## harsh

There's an updated schedule from Salo today that shows a 24 minute launch window on May 27th for DIRECTV 15/SKYM-1. The goalposts are placed at 21:16 and 21:40 (Zulu)


----------



## slice1900

harsh said:


> So you've seen the LNB assembly?
> 
> Did they go for the frequency dependent reflector?


They won't need that to receive RDBS, they'd probably just widen the Ka feedhorns for 99/103 slightly to handle the longer wavelengths in the 17.3 - 20.2 GHz range instead of the current 18.3 - 20.2 GHz.

The frequency dependent reflector patent was for receiving Ku and Ka at 101. While a single feedhorn can receive both, doing so would reduce the reception efficiency since 12.2 - 20.2 GHz is a much wider range. There are better ways to accomplish this should Directv decide to use Ka for customer content in the future, so even if they do I very much doubt they'll use that design. That patent is from 2008, technology improves and makes things that would have been impossible or too expensive back then reasonably priced for consumer gear by the time Directv would need to do this.

The earliest possible date they'd need an LNB to receive Ka at 101 is 2020, since they'd need to replace the satellites at 101 with ones able to do full CONUS Ka band first. They currently don't have any pending contracts for new satellites, and it seems to take 4-5 years from announcement to in service date. Maybe after D15 is in the air and the AT&T deal is done there will be some action there. And of course they'd have to have a requirement for all that extra bandwidth, which they currently do not.


----------



## doctor j

VA 223 Launch Kit is available at Arianespace. com now.

http://www.arianespace.com/images/launch-kits/launch-kit-pdf-eng/VA223-launchkit-GB.pdf
Doctor j


----------



## Tom Robertson

harsh said:


> So you've seen the LNB assembly?
> 
> Did they go for the frequency dependent reflector?


Heck, sounds like you yourself knew of the slightest hint. So why did you ask the question? 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## harsh

slice1900 said:


> They won't need that to receive RDBS, they'd probably just widen the Ka feedhorns for 99/103 slightly to handle the longer wavelengths in the 17.3 - 20.2 GHz range instead of the current 18.3 - 20.2 GHz.


So has any documented or physical evidence of an RDBS capable LNB assembly for the Slimline surfaced?

Will this require a new (non-WB68) stack plan for outboard SWiM switchgear?


----------



## harsh

Tom Robertson said:


> Heck, sounds like you yourself knew of the slightest hint. So why did you ask the question?


I asked because I don't have any inkling of how DIRECTV intends to implement the receiving end of RDBS.

As slice1900 points out, I was confusing a Ku/Ka patent with what must be a RDBS/Ka configuration.


----------



## David Ortiz

The patent did say that reflecting the Ku signal away would make room for larger feedhorns for 99/103.



slice1900 said:


> They won't need that to receive RDBS, they'd probably just widen the Ka feedhorns for 99/103 slightly to handle the longer wavelengths in the 17.3 - 20.2 GHz range instead of the current 18.3 - 20.2 GHz.
> 
> The frequency dependent reflector patent was for receiving Ku and Ka at 101. While a single feedhorn can receive both, doing so would reduce the reception efficiency since 12.2 - 20.2 GHz is a much wider range. There are better ways to accomplish this should Directv decide to use Ka for customer content in the future, so even if they do I very much doubt they'll use that design. That patent is from 2008, technology improves and makes things that would have been impossible or too expensive back then reasonably priced for consumer gear by the time Directv would need to do this.
> 
> The earliest possible date they'd need an LNB to receive Ka at 101 is 2020, since they'd need to replace the satellites at 101 with ones able to do full CONUS Ka band first. They currently don't have any pending contracts for new satellites, and it seems to take 4-5 years from announcement to in service date. Maybe after D15 is in the air and the AT&T deal is done there will be some action there. And of course they'd have to have a requirement for all that extra bandwidth, which they currently do not.


----------



## slice1900

harsh said:


> So has any documented or physical evidence of an RDBS capable LNB assembly for the Slimline surfaced?
> 
> Will this require a new (non-WB68) stack plan for outboard SWiM switchgear?


No hard evidence to point to but one is obviously coming since they've stated repeatedly that RDBS would be used for consumer delivery of 4K content. No idea what the stack plan for the legacy version will be, but if it uses ADCs and a FFT transform of sufficient resolution it could maintain the same 250 - 2150 MHz plan by dropping the guard bands - instead utilizing the much smaller guard bands inherent in the transponder layout. That seems to make the most sense since such an LNB would be a drop in replacement and nothing else would need to change.

Since the SWM version won't have the artificial limitation at 13 tuners the SWM 13 LNB does, the legacy RDBS LNB will be a low volume item only used by customers that are spending far above the median with Directv so they are less likely to be concerned about squeezing every last penny out of the cost.


----------



## slice1900

David Ortiz said:


> The patent did say that reflecting the Ku signal away would make room for larger feedhorns for 99/103.


Yes, but there are other ways to change the geometry to attack that. They have patents with an array of waveguides in various configurations instead of full sized feedhorns, and various other stuff. It will be interesting to see what form the RDBS LNB takes, but I won't be shocked if it has pretty much the same form factor as today.


----------



## harsh

slice1900 said:


> No hard evidence to point to but one is obviously coming since they've stated repeatedly that RDBS would be used for consumer delivery of 4K content.


Wasn't the term "could" used as opposed to "would"? That it would or should be used for UHD is a plank in the party platform.


----------



## slice1900

harsh said:


> Wasn't the term "could" used as opposed to "would"? That it would or should be used for UHD is a plank in the party platform.


Directv has stated it "would" be used for that in FCC filings for satellites as well as in a couple other public statements. If you think it about it for two seconds, it is pretty obvious it makes much more sense to use it for a new service that will grow over time rather than causing a million customers to want a new LNB overnight. Just like they did with Ka and HD.


----------



## inkahauts

slice1900 said:


> No hard evidence to point to but one is obviously coming since they've stated repeatedly that RDBS would be used for consumer delivery of 4K content. No idea what the stack plan for the legacy version will be, but if it uses ADCs and a FFT transform of sufficient resolution it could maintain the same 250 - 2150 MHz plan by dropping the guard bands - instead utilizing the much smaller guard bands inherent in the transponder layout. That seems to make the most sense since such an LNB would be a drop in replacement and nothing else would need to change.
> 
> Since the SWM version won't have the artificial limitation at 13 tuners the SWM 13 LNB does, the legacy RDBS LNB will be a low volume item only used by customers that are spending far above the median with Directv so they are less likely to be concerned about squeezing every last penny out of the cost.


I know and hope you are right about the higher swim channel limit, but we don't know at all for sure anything about that possibility. And I have a feeling that if they do launch a new swim lnb like that it will be used for all installs. They could save time and money knowing all people could receive all programming from any of those birds. Also would make it easier to get all programming off the 95(?) sat and maybe even 119, because they could use some bss spectrum for that too, since those markets will require new lnbs anyway, at least many will if not all...

I have been starting to think though that they will move all that stuff to d14 and d15 without using BSS, and add a lot of hd, (there is room) and use 119 to point at PR and give them what D14 and D15 can't provide via their plus transponder setups.


----------



## HoTat2

doctor j said:


> VA 223 Launch Kit is available at Arianespace. com now.
> 
> http://www.arianespace.com/images/launch-kits/launch-kit-pdf-eng/VA223-launchkit-GB.pdf
> Doctor j


Well ...

I know they are a launch provider and therefore probably not too interested in providing accurate info, about the communications payloads of the satellites they launch.

But for the record anyhow, according to the FCC docs. D15 has 32 Ku band CONUS xpndrs, not "28."

38 of which up to 24 active Ka band xpndrs and 18 RDBS band xpndrs. Not "25 Ka-band/Rev-band active xpndrs."

SKYM-1 data appears to be accurate though ...


----------



## harsh

slice1900 said:


> Directv has stated it "would" be used for that in FCC filings for satellites as well as in a couple other public statements.


The application forms and narratives for DIRECTV 14, DIRECTV 15, RB1 and RB2 make no mention of Ultra HD content that I could find. Both the DIRECTV 14 and DIRECTV 15 narratives repeatedly mention HD content specifically but make no mention of higher quality formats. To be fair, when they were applied for, UHD was probably a pipe dream.

In the Q4 2014 conference call, Mike White mentioned that DIRECTV 14 would bring "additional capacity for new services such as 4K Ultra HD." There was no specific mention of the band that would be used and as is apparent, what UHD they're currently delivering to subscribers is riding on Ka band.


> If you think it about it for two seconds, it is pretty obvious it makes much more sense to use it for a new service that will grow over time rather than causing a million customers to want a new LNB overnight.


I absolutely agree with your reasoning but it is just reasoning. I'm looking for an authoritative indication that this is what DIRECTV intends to do and that doesn't seem to be available yet even though you're assuring me that it can be derived from bits and bites.

Given the UHD offerings that have been thus far been hinted at, there doesn't appear to be any need to turn up any RDBS bandwidth to support it. Until such time that there is a need, the RDBS payloads would seem to be relegated to squatting as far as residential subscribers are concerned.


----------



## studechip

And until the bird is alive, your opinion is shear conjecture.


----------



## slice1900

As James Long posted recently here, the FCC requirements for putting spectrum to use is not that high a bar. Calling it "squatting" because they aren't using it the minute the satellite reaches orbit is your wrong opinion, that's not how the FCC sees it and their opinion is the only one that matters.

Since no one is using RDBS anywhere in the US (maybe in the whole world) yet even if they were squatting what would it matter, since it isn't as though everyone is lining up wishing they could get their hands on the spectrum. Dish holds licenses for at least 4 RDBS locations and AFAIK they don't even have a satellite to fill them on the drawing board. Who's squatting now?


----------



## David Ortiz

I posted a link to a DIRECTV filing from December 16, 2013 which contains the following:

'By doing so, it asks the Commission to effectively ratify its efforts to block DIRECTV from operating state-of-the-art 17/24 GHz BSS satellites that will be used to provide the first ever commercial "ultra HD" television service in the United States.'

They even call it "ultra HD."

http://www.swys.org/filings/id/6017481179



harsh said:


> I'm looking for an authoritative indication that this is what DIRECTV intends to do and that doesn't seem to be available yet even though you're assuring me that it can be derived from bits and bites.


----------



## Laxguy

*It goes on to say* "The Commission must not reward such conduct. It should deny SES's** application. Failing that, it should at least defer action on this application until such time as SES ameliorates the effects of its prior activities by entering into appropriate spectrum coordination arrangements. Doing otherwise would invite future regulatory gamesmanship and run directly contrary to the Commission's ultimate criterion ­ the U.S. public interest."

*Web folk who put up gobs of text in grey - whole documents-should be drawn and quartered.....*

**SES Americom, Inc. - some DISH entity, though it's not readily apparent who they are from the filing.


----------



## cforrest

Arianespace's DirecTV-15 Program Director Franck Desnoues provides an update on Flight #VA223's preparations

https://t.co/UqTvCDF1zQ/s/X8jD


----------



## MarkN

I keep hearing Directv-15 is the most powerful satellite ever made for DTV. In what way?


----------



## slice1900

MarkN said:


> I keep hearing Directv-15 is the most powerful satellite ever made for DTV. In what way?


The amount of power its solar panels can generate, which allow it to power more transponders at once.


----------



## MysteryMan

MarkN said:


> I keep hearing Directv-15 is the most powerful satellite ever made for DTV. In what way?


30 high power transponders in Ku-band, 24 transponders in Ka-band, 18 transponders in Reverse Band, and will be able to operate from up to five orbital locations from 99 W to 119 W, covering Continental US (CONUS), Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico.


----------



## HoTat2

MysteryMan said:


> 30 high power transponders in Ku-band, 24 transponders in Ka-band, 18 transponders in Reverse Band, and will be able to operate from up to five orbital locations from 99 W to 119 W, covering Continental US (CONUS), Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico.


Up to 32 xpndrs for the Ku band ... 

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## MysteryMan

HoTat2 said:


> Up to 32 xpndrs for the Ku band ...
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


I stand corrected.


----------



## James Long

Laxguy said:


> **SES Americom, Inc. - some DISH entity, though it's not readily apparent who they are from the filing.


They are separate from DISH ... but they are working with DISH on this project.

SES is a global complany ... Americom is their US branch.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SES_Americom


----------



## woj027

I don't understand the "able to operate from up to five orbital locations from 99 W to 119 W, covering Continental US (CONUS), Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico" 

I always thought you could move a satellite anywhere to use it, not some specific slot.

I understand you need approval to work from a slot, but couldn't western hemisphere sat work in the eastern hemisphere? or couldn't this one work at 95? I get that it may not work for the US, but somewhere else? Say DirecTV somehow got a deal for Canada?


----------



## slice1900

woj027 said:


> I don't understand the "able to operate from up to five orbital locations from 99 W to 119 W, covering Continental US (CONUS), Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico"


They mean it has the all the right transponders for Directv to use it at any of their current satellite locations. In the past all their satellites have been limited, like the one at 119 could be used at 119 or 101, but not 99 or 103 because it doesn't have the right transponders. Likewise all the current satellites at 99 and 103 could be used at either 99 or 103, but not 101, 110 or 119 because they don't have Ku transponders.


----------



## Tom Robertson

MarkN said:


> I keep hearing Directv-15 is the most powerful satellite ever made for DTV. In what way?





slice1900 said:


> The amount of power its solar panels can generate, which allow it to power more transponders at once.


To add to this and the other good answers, one of the measures of satellites is the power capacity of the entire system at end of life. Thus it includes solar power generating capacity, battery storage, and electricity bus. The more electricity the satellite can generate, store, and use, the more power it can send to earth.

Satellites SW-1 and 2 were incredibly flexible spacecraft (and available at bargain prices as Hughesnet ended up not needing them), but their power generation and storage left them unable to broadcast CONUS. Thus they make great spotbeam satellites for local channels.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson

woj027 said:


> I don't understand the "able to operate from up to five orbital locations from 99 W to 119 W, covering Continental US (CONUS), Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico"
> 
> I always thought you could move a satellite anywhere to use it, not some specific slot.
> 
> I understand you need approval to work from a slot, but couldn't western hemisphere sat work in the eastern hemisphere? or couldn't this one work at 95? I get that it may not work for the US, but somewhere else? Say DirecTV somehow got a deal for Canada?


One limitation can be the reflectors sending the transponder amplifier energy to the Earth. More and more they are tuned to provide a particular footprint (generally the US or US with Mexico). While there is some flexibility in the reflector, they are no longer able to be placed anywhere in the satellite belt for US use. If the footprint is close enough for another use, yes it can be moved to another location and pointed to that region--if the ITU and countries involved all agree.

From a DIRECTV standpoint, Slice's excellent answer also applies. This satellite can serve many roles in the DIRECTV fleet. (Don't know if it can do all the spotbeams some other satellites do.)

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson

Laxguy said:


> *Web folk who put up gobs of text in grey - whole documents-should be drawn and quartered.....*


Slowly.

(While I am understanding that complex and overlapping style sheets can have unintended consequences of grey text, that doesn't excuse someone from not double checking their work and verifying the final results....)


----------



## woj027

Tom Robertson said:


> One limitation can be the reflectors sending the transponder amplifier energy to the Earth. More and more they are tuned to provide a particular footprint (generally the US or US with Mexico). While there is some flexibility in the reflector, they are no longer able to be placed anywhere in the satellite belt for US use. If the footprint is close enough for another use, yes it can be moved to another location and pointed to that region--if the ITU and countries involved all agree.
> 
> From a DIRECTV standpoint, Slice's excellent answer also applies. This satellite can serve many roles in the DIRECTV fleet. (Don't know if it can do all the spotbeams some other satellites do.)
> 
> Peace,
> Tom


thanks. and thanks Slice

more curiosity about limitations


----------



## slice1900

Tom Robertson said:


> (Don't know if it can do all the spotbeams some other satellites do.)


D15 has no spotbeam capability, so it can only fulfill CONUS roles at 99/103.


----------



## Tom Robertson

slice1900 said:


> D15 has no spotbeam capability, so it can only fulfill CONUS roles at 99/103.


Thanks. That was my general sense as I hadn't done my normal research on this satellite.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## HoTat2

Tom Robertson said:


> Thanks. That was my general sense as I hadn't done my normal research on this satellite.
> 
> Peace,
> Tom


That is, to be specific D15 has no LiL spotbeam capabilities. It does have dedicated spotbeams to mirror the CONUS+ xpndrs for Ka, Ku, and RDBS, payloads to Hawaii and PR.


----------



## bobnielsen

HoTat2 said:


> That is, to be specific D15 has no LiL spotbeam capabilities. It does have dedicated spotbeams to mirror the CONUS+ xpndrs for Ka, Ku, and RDBS, payloads to Hawaii and PR.


No Alaska?


----------



## inkahauts

I think the conus beams catch Alaska.


----------



## HoTat2

bobnielsen said:


> No Alaska?


Alaska is also covered by the footprint of the CONUS+ beam which covers the 48 contiguous states. Thus the "+" in the term "CONUS+"

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## doctor j

Final grant 5/20/2015

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/SATLOA2014082500094&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

Arianespace launch review got a GREEN light

*ARIANESPACE FLIGHT VA223 / DIRECTV 15 & SKY Mexico 1*​THE LAUNCH READINESS REVIEW (RAL) took place in Kourou on Friday May 22, 2015 and authorized count-down operations for the DIRECTV 15 & SKY Mexico 1 launch.
On the fourth launch of the year from the Guiana Space center in French Guiana, and the second with an Ariane 5, Arianespace will orbit 2 High Definition Direct To Home broadcast satellites: DIRECTV 15 for DIRECTV, one of the world's leading providers of television entertainment services, and SKY Mexico 1(SKYM-1) for SKY Mexico, the leading company in Mexican pay TV market. 
It will be launched from the Ariane launch complex N° 3 (ELA3), in Kourou, French Guiana.

All set to go 5/27

Doctor j


----------



## woj027

from DrJ's link

" DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC seeks authority to launch and operate the Ka-band payload of the DIRECTV 15 satellite at the nominal 103 WL orbital location, and to launch (*but not operate*) the 12/17 GHz DBS payload on the spacecraft."

*emphasis added.*


----------



## slice1900

woj027 said:


> from DrJ's link
> 
> " DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC seeks authority to launch and operate the Ka-band payload of the DIRECTV 15 satellite at the nominal 103 WL orbital location, and to launch (*but not operate*) the 12/17 GHz DBS payload on the spacecraft."
> 
> *emphasis added.*


That DBS payload they're talking about is the Ku payload, not the RDBS payload. That payload is referred to as RB-2A and will be filed under a separate LOA.


----------



## cforrest

Launch Readiness review clears #Ariane5 for Flight #VA223 on May 27

http://www.arianespace.com/news-mission-update/2015/1297.asp

Basic #VA223 schedule: today - launch readiness review
May 26 - #Ariane5 roll-out
May 27 - Final countdown and liftoff. #GoAriane5


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> That DBS payload they're talking about is the Ku payload, not the RDBS payload. That payload is referred to as RB-2A and will be filed under a separate LOA.


No, actually the RDBS payload on D15 is designated "RB-2" (S2712). RB-2A (S2796) is the limited four spotbeam RDBS payload on D12.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2

Mission Update:

Ariane 5 carrying D15 and SKYM-1 is rolled out to launch complex ELA-3 ready for tomorrow's launch.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In position: Ariane 5 rolls out for Arianespace's dual-passenger mission tomorrow with DirecTV-15 and SKY México-1

*May 26, 2015 - Ariane Flight VA223*


Riding atop its mobile launch table, Ariane 5 is moved to the Spaceport's ELA-3 complex in preparation for Arianespace's May 27 mission.

Arianespace's heavy-lift launcher has moved to its launch zone in French Guiana for the May 27 Ariane 5 flight with DirecTV-15 for DIRECTV and SKY México's SKY México-1.
During activity at the Spaceport today, Ariane 5 was transferred atop its mobile launch table from the Final Assembly Building - where payload integration occurred - to the dedicated ELA-3 launch complex. 
This step paves the way for tomorrow's mission - designated Flight VA223 in Arianespace's numbering system - which is planned to liftoff in a one-hour, 24-minute launch window that opens at 6:16 p.m. local time in French Guiana.
As Flight VA223's upper passenger, DirecTV-15 - built by Airbus Defence and Space - will be deployed first in the flight sequence at nearly 28 minutes after liftoff.
Approximately 10 minutes later, the Orbital ATK, Inc.-produced SKY México-1 - which is riding in Ariane 5's lower position - is to be separated, completing the flight sequence.
Underscoring the company's sustained operational pace at the Spaceport this year, Flight VA223 will be Arianespace's fourth total launch in 2015 for its complete launcher family, following one previous mission each for Ariane 5, the medium-lift Soyuz and lightweight Vega.


----------



## inkahauts

Big day tomorrow.


----------



## MysteryMan

inkahauts said:


> Big day tomorrow.


Yup. I'm looking forward to watching tomorrow's launch.


----------



## HoTat2

Showing in the guide now on private network channel 9549, but like D14 and IS30 before, don't look for it to be open for regular subscriber veiwing.

Don't know why DIRECTV keeps these launch telecasts private. Makes no sense ...

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith

inkahauts said:


> Big day tomorrow.


keep fingers crossed


----------



## Diana C

HoTat2 said:


> Showing in the guide now on private network channel 9549, but like D14 and IS30 before, don't look for it to be open for regular subscriber veiwing.
> Don't know why DIRECTV keeps these launch telecasts private. Makes no sense ...
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


Imagine all the panicked calls from customers if the launch fails.


----------



## alnielsen

Diana C said:


> Imagine all the panicked calls from customers if the launch fails.


Irrelivant since all that are interested can watch it from the ArianeSpace streaming video.


----------



## damondlt

Diana C said:


> Imagine all the panicked calls from customers if the launch fails.


I highly doubt many Customers outside of DBSTALK have any clue this is even taking place.


----------



## damondlt

alnielsen said:


> Irrelivant since all that are interested can watch it from the ArianeSpace streaming video.


I just downloaded the app! Look neat.


----------



## Diana C

Well, I WAS making a joke (apparently a feeble one). But, if the launch were listed in the guide it might be stumbled upon by viewers. If only 0.1% of subscribers found it, that's 20,000 calls all coming in at once.

However, I doubt that is really the reason.


----------



## Oli74

damondlt said:


> I just downloaded the app! Look neat.


I love the app it gives great updates on all satellite going up from that region

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## longrider

On previous launches they have opened up the private network to the public and right now 9549 is showing a slide and music.


----------



## cforrest

Link to launch video:

http://arianespace.tv/


----------



## KyL416

longrider said:


> On previous launches they have opened up the private network to the public and right now 9549 is showing a slide and music.


They didn't for D14. The channel isn't active yet, that's just the standby logo feed that appears on all part time channels when not in use.


----------



## longrider

KyL416 said:


> They didn't for D14. The channel isn't active yet, that's just the standby logo feed that appears on all part time channels when not in use.


I remembered after I posted that my recording of D14 failed due to it being not available to me. However I know previous launches were available to everybody as I watched and recorded them.

I did notice yesterday when I searched that it was also listed on a Cinema channel (163 I think) but that is gone now. However the way they are describing it in the guide sounds like they are promoting it to everyone. We can only hope


----------



## HoTat2

longrider said:


> I remembered after I posted that my recording of D14 failed due to it being not available to me. However I know previous launches were available to everybody as I watched and recorded them.
> 
> I did notice yesterday when I searched that it was also listed on a Cinema channel (163 I think) but that is gone now. However the way they are describing it in the guide sounds like they are promoting it to everyone. We can only hope


Well the previous two weren't, D14 and IS30 (DLA-1). Though perhaps since IS30 was for DIRECTV LA, it's closed telecast to DIRECTV USA subs. is understandable.

But what has me doubting it is that D14, which was a more significant launch to USA subs. than D15 (except for it's R-band payload) will be, was closed as well.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Tom Robertson

The Guide description for the broadcast itself informs this is a "Series, LIve, Premiere." 

Doesn't have an HD tag, alas.  (Nor UHD, though I'm not activated for 4k UHD present.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## richall01

D 15 launch channel is up 9549 showing launch from 5:00 - 7:00 p.m. and in HD


----------



## Nighthawk68

richall01 said:


> D 15 launch channel is up 9549 showing launch from 5:00 - 7:00 p.m. and in HD


just set it up to record!! We shall see what happens when I get home at 6

Ed


----------



## damondlt

Oli74 said:


> I love the app it gives great updates on all satellite going up from that region
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Does the app go right into a live feed, before the countdown, or am I supposed to switch to a certain section?


----------



## longrider

I think the 9549 channel will be available to everyone. The scheduled pre-launch slide is showing (this is not the logo/music filler)


----------



## longrider

It is going live as I type


----------



## FHSPSU67

9549 is live now!


----------



## doctor j

Arianespace.TV is live

Doctor j


----------



## HoTat2

Great news!

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Tom Robertson

They are using a 17m fairing to hold both satellites. DIRECTV 15 on top, Sky Mexico 1 is in the lower bunk.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson

And we have launch. 

And we start hearing "nominal" in the local language.


----------



## Tom Robertson

Boosters have separated away.


----------



## Tom Robertson

Going toplesss: The satellites are now naked, the fairing is jettisoned roughly at altitude 100Km.


----------



## Tom Robertson

Now the B-Roll about Kourou, filling until the next milestone.


----------



## Tom Robertson

Main stage engine cut off, and fall off. The second stage now runs for 16 minutes.

Phil Goswitz is on screen for a moment! Hi, Phil. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson

Now DIRECTV B-Roll. Cool, cool pictures of the satellite. Airbus' biggest satellite to-date.


----------



## peds48

Awesome piece they just did about D15


----------



## Tom Robertson

DIRECTV-15 is all alone now, having separated from Ariane-5 upper stage.

Next step is for the sylda, the internal frame/shield/platform/fairing covering Sky Mexico-1 is jettisoned--Done.

Then Sky Mexico-1 separates from the upper stage.


----------



## Tom Robertson

The crowd goes wild! (By convention, the applause waits until the second satellite is separated from the launch vehicle. Both birds are away from the nest. 

Woohoo!

Phil is looking very happy--they are both his responsibility. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## RAD

Tom Robertson said:


> Now DIRECTV B-Roll. Cool, cool pictures of the satellite. Airbus' biggest satellite to-date.


That's one big satellite, especially when they showed the solar panels extended.


----------



## MysteryMan

Once again great coverage of another successful launch. Congratulations to everyone at DIRECTV!


----------



## lwilli201

All of this to get the satellite 1000 KM up. Only 34000 KM to go


----------



## HoTat2

lwilli201 said:


> All of this to get the satellite 1000 KM up. Only 34000 KM to go


Well, at least to raise the perigee point of the current orbit to that height. The apogee point is already that high for a geosynchronous transfer orbit the satellites are in. .. 

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Starchild

So glad after 19 years as a continuous Directv customer that I finally had the chance to watch and enjoy a live directv launch!! 

Congratulations to directv for such a successful launch and I am giddy with anticipation for the upcoming advances!!


----------



## inkahauts

Now if they could just fire it up tomorrow..... :lol: nice seeing another sat go up. In a few months when it's active things should be interesting.


----------



## doctor j

Uncertain if this is the correct TLE but matches past Arianespace launches with Payload A/B Sylvia and Stage 2 booster as A.B.C.D

0 TBA - TO BE ASSIGNED_A
1 40663U 15026A 15147.69481146 -.00000462 00000-0 00000+0 0 9992
2 40663 004.3601 033.2077 7274442 176.6127 191.6672 02.28575149 02
0 TBA - TO BE ASSIGNED_B
1 40664U 15026B 15147.94306491 -.00000455 00000-0 00000+0 0 9992
2 40664 004.3420 032.8659 7275998 177.1822 035.8010 02.27668907 07
0 TBA - TO BE ASSIGNED_C
1 40665U 15026C 15147.94697200 -.00000452 00000-0 00000+0 0 9991
2 40665 004.4584 030.8236 7281102 178.9867 039.1655 02.28645797 06
0 TBA - TO BE ASSIGNED
1 40666U 15026D 15147.95162909 -.00000454 00000-0 00000+0 0 9998
2 40666 004.2843 033.9241 7278934 176.0694 042.8303 02.27704468 00

Let the tracking begin

Doctor j


----------



## doctor j

Name 0 TBA - TO BE ASSIGNED_A
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-05-27 16:40:31
Orbit # at Epoch 0
Inclination 4.360
RA of A. Node 33.208
Eccentricity 0.7274442
Argument of Perigee 176.613
Revs per day 2.28575149
Period 10h 29m 59s (629.98 min)
Semi-major axis 24 343 km
Perigee x Apogee 257 x 35 674 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 191.667
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)

10 TBA - TO BE ASSIGNED_A
Lon 118.0261° E
Lat 1.9635° S
Alt (km) 27 929.470
Azm 318.4°
Elv -56.6°
RA 00h 12m 22s
Decl -6° 48' 23"
Range (km) 39 459.928
RRt (km/s) 1.738
Vel (km/s) 2.620
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 89.9° (64)
TA 156.3°
Orbit # 1


Orbitron Data
Looks like the right launch!

Really early DATA set
Maybe SPACETRACK is as excited as I am about the D-15 launch 

Doctor j


----------



## inkahauts

Yes. I can't wait to see what d10 is doing in a year... I suspect they may do some sort of basic load balancing and keep it running, or sell it...


----------



## shyvoodoo

I DVRed this launch and this is the first time I ever seen one of these and I must admit, it was pretty awesome!! The amount of work and precision that goes into these launches are impressive. I like the story from the commentator about why they launch satellites from The equator. Fascinating. Hats off to Directv!!


Wants:
Universal Sports HD
Al Jazeera America HD


----------



## P Smith

shyvoodoo said:


> I DVRed this launch and this is the first time I ever seen one of these and I must admit, it was pretty awesome!! The amount of work and precision that goes into these launches are impressive. I like the story from the commentator about why they launch satellites from The equator. Fascinating. Hats off to Directv!!
> 
> Wants:
> Universal Sports HD
> Al Jazeera America HD


hehe, you are, as a first timer, did an error: so far kudos going to Arianspace, not dtv. If you'll look into old thread about D10 launch,you'll know the sats could be not fully functioning and require "amelioration " and sometimes still suffer for its life...


----------



## damondlt

P Smith said:


> hehe, you are, as a first timer, did an error: so far kudos going to Arianspace, not dtv. If you'll look into old thread about D10 launch,you'll know the sats could be not fully functioning and require "amelioration " and sometimes still suffer for its life...


Yes lots of things could still happen.
But Arian made it past the major obstacle. 
Now it's Directv's turn.


----------



## Sixto

Congrats to all involved within DirecTV and their partners. It sure is cool to now have all that bandwidth up there coming online soon. Very nice, certainly was a great looking launch.


----------



## longrider

damondlt said:


> Yes lots of things could still happen.
> But Arian made it past the major obstacle.
> Now it's Directv's turn.


Wee, technically it is now in Airbus' hands.  What I dont know is does Airbus turn it over to DirecTV once it is positioned at its testing location or not until it is in its final location?


----------



## Tom Robertson

longrider said:


> Wee, technically it is now in Airbus' hands.  What I dont know is does Airbus turn it over to DirecTV once it is positioned at its testing location or not until it is in its final location?


I haven't seen this contract, so I'm not 100% certain, but the ones I have seen typically the satellite is turned over to DIRECTV for their testing before moving to final location.

And commonly, Airbus would bear no responsibility during the launch phase as DIRECTV has historically not picked up launch insurance. That has worked very well for DIRECTV, launch insurance is expensive!

Peace,
Tom


----------



## doctor j

Spacetrack has updated D15 information.

The 4 pieces have been labeled, again more quickly than my past experience on other launches.
2015-026A is Directv 15
2015-026B is SkyMexico1
2015-026C is the 2nd stage rocket booster
2015-026D is "debris" the SYLDA shroud separating D15 and SkyM1 during launch

There are 2 TLEs for D15 but same Time Stamp so no new info
A second TLE for SkyM1 is published but not really different , probably just fine tuning the trajectory

Doctor j


----------



## harsh

doctor j said:


> Spacetrack has updated D15 information.
> 
> The 4 pieces have been labeled, again more quickly than my past experience on other launches.
> 2015-026A is Directv 15
> 2015-026B is SkyMexico1
> 2015-026C is the 2nd stage rocket booster
> 2015-026D is "debris" the SYLDA shroud separating D15 and SkyM1 during launch


This ordering seems odd the way the pieces are tracking according to GPredict. 26A and 26C seem to be on a similar path and are not moving West or gaining in altitude as quickly.

If I had to guess, 26A and 26C are closely associated and 26B and 26D are tied somehow.

GPredict shows all four items are descending so they must be headed toward a minor radius of an elliptical orbit (or the model -- or GPredict's interpretation -- is crap).


----------



## bakers12

New TLEs for D15 and Sky Mex 1 are out. I'm at work so I can't analyze these for you.

0 DIRECTV 15
1 40663U 15026A 15149.60000000 -.00000335 00000-0 00000+0 0 9990
2 40663 004.4100 031.5910 7279283 179.0030 314.7530 02.27856085 36
0 SKY MEXICO-1
1 40664U 15026B 15149.50000000 -.00000344 00000-0 00000+0 0 9990
2 40664 004.3990 031.6600 7276488 178.8990 234.3220 02.28092329 33


----------



## HoTat2

bakers12 said:


> New TLEs for D15 and Sky Mex 1 are out. I'm at work so I can't analyze these for you.
> 
> 0 DIRECTV 15
> 1 40663U 15026A 15149.60000000 -.00000335 00000-0 00000+0 0 9990
> 2 40663 004.4100 031.5910 7279283 179.0030 314.7530 02.27856085 36
> 0 SKY MEXICO-1
> 1 40664U 15026B 15149.50000000 -.00000344 00000-0 00000+0 0 9990
> 2 40664 004.3990 031.6600 7276488 178.8990 234.3220 02.28092329 33


Although at a quick glance with an orbital eccentricity that high and the mean revolution at over 2 days means the satellites are still pretty much at their GTOs.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## doctor j

TLE 3 = No Change

10 DIRECTV 15_3
Lon 171.4666° W
Lat 4.1552° S
Alt (km) 9 131.607
Azm 263.7°
Elv -20.5°
RA 20h 09m 18s
Decl -16° 13' 42"
Range (km) 16 543.191
RRt (km/s) 2.643
Vel (km/s) 5.921
Direction Descending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 24.0° (17)
TA 111.3°
Orbit # 4

Name 0 DIRECTV 15_3
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-05-29 14:24:00
Orbit # at Epoch 3
Inclination 4.410
RA of A. Node 31.591
Eccentricity 0.7279283
Argument of Perigee 179.003
Revs per day 2.27856085
Period 10h 31m 58s (631.97 min)
Semi-major axis 24 395 km
Perigee x Apogee 259 x 35 774 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 314.753
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)


----------



## doctor j

TLE #4 out

Still in 1st GTO orbital pattern

No Changes

Doctor j


----------



## Ken984

Perigee has been raised quite a bit from the last TLE from 257 KM to 4982 KM.

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-05-29 22:30:37
Orbit # at Epoch 5
Inclination 2.647
RA of A. Node 30.327
Eccentricity 0.5756605
Argument of Perigee 179.386
Revs per day 1.98194556
Period 12h 06m 33s (726.55 min)
Semi-major axis 26 772 km
Perigee x Apogee 4 982 x 35 805 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 226.132
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary

1DIRECTV 15
Lon 157.3247° W
Lat 2.6585° N
Alt (km) 11 177.780
Azm 257.5°
Elv 2.6°
RA 06h 57m 00s
Decl -9° 07' 20"
Range (km) 16 097.080
RRt (km/s) -3.590
Vel (km/s) 5.524
Direction Descending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 333.3° (236)
TA 272.3°
Orbit # 5
Mag (illum) ? (23%)
Constellation Mon


----------



## doctor j

oops 

Doctor j


----------



## doctor j

Well,
I wasn't totally BONKERs 
There were 4 TLEs in rapid succession yesterday.
#s 3,4,& 5 were of little change.
However # 6 as above did show the movement to the intermediate Transfer orbit with the raising or the Perigee to ~ 5000 Km. Inclination improved also.
The next move should bring it to a near circular orbit ~ 35000 to 36000 Km
See the Equatorial and Polar jpegs

Doctor j


----------



## doctor j

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/SATSTA2015041500023&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

STA for IOT of D15 at 66.8w granted 5/28/2015

Doctor j


----------



## doctor j

TLE #8 & 9 ( actually numbered as 9 and 10 published.) Photos represent the 4 different orbits seen thus far.
Nearing circular and looking GOOD.

10 DIRECTV 15_9
Lon 157.2545° W
Lat 0.0370° N
Alt (km) 35 763.840
Azm 259.0°
Elv 7.7°
RA 01h 33m 34s
Decl -4° 49' 06"
Range (km) 40 819.521
RRt (km/s) 0.062
Vel (km/s) 2.753
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 177.0° (125)
TA 177.9°
Orbit # 10

Name 0 DIRECTV 15_9
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
*Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-01 12:37:22*
Orbit # at Epoch 10
Inclination 0.895
RA of A. Node 29.130
Eccentricity 0.1987464
Argument of Perigee 183.254
Revs per day 1.31713921
Period 18h 13m 16s (1093.27 min)
Semi-major axis 35 154 km
*Perigee x Apogee 21 790 x 35 763 km*
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 34.304
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group N/A


----------



## Ken984

Getting really close!

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-02 22:01:11
Orbit # at Epoch 11
Inclination 0.129
RA of A. Node 267.158
Eccentricity 0.0014709
Argument of Perigee 224.518
Revs per day 1.00411605
Period 23h 54m 05s (1434.8 min)
Semi-major axis 42 126 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 685 x 35 809 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 18.096
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary



1DIRECTV 15
Lon 71.3657° W
Lat 0.1375° S
Alt (km) 35 725.740
Azm 142.6°
Elv 45.0°
RA 13h 38m 16s
Decl -5° 22' 17"
Range (km) 37 345.961
RRt (km/s) 0.004
Vel (km/s) 3.078
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 69.6° (49)
TA 69.7°
Orbit # 11
Mag (illum) ? (80%)
Constellation Vir


----------



## bakers12

If D15 stays in this orbit (highly unlikely), it will reach its IOT longitude of 66.8 W on June 12, according to Orbitron. I'm just putting this out there to provide a rough timeline.


----------



## HoTat2

bakers12 said:


> If D15 stays in this orbit (highly unlikely), it will reach its IOT longitude of 66.8 W on June 12, according to Orbitron. I'm just putting this out there to provide a rough timeline.


Good an estimate as any I guess;

Problem is the schedule given in the original 4/15 STA request for D15's IOT is based on the 5/20 launch date. And there have been no filings since mentioning a modification to this estimate for the actual 5/27 launch date.

But anyway, for the record as a reminder to the readership from the 4/15 STA for the 5/20 launch date:

-After launch and orbit raising maneuvers, DIRECTV 15 will be located at 
66.8° W.L. [no earlier than about June 3, 2015].

-After DIRECTV 15 reaches 66.8° W.L., DIRECTV will then commence IOT 
of the satellite for approximately 2 weeks.

-After IOT is completed, DIRECTV 15 will then be drifted to its assigned 
location at 103º W.L. (nominal) over the course of approximately 26 days 
[reaching that orbital position on or about July 12, 2015].

Obviously all these dates will be delayed a few days. Just by how many exactly we don't know of course ...

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## HarleyD

If D14 was any indication they can get to their slot pretty quickly if they want to. In fact as I recall D14 had to dance around just outside the box for a few days because it actually was on pace to get there too soon.


----------



## doctor j

Yep, almost there

10 DIRECTV 15_12
Lon 71.3710° W
Lat 0.0813° N
Alt (km) 35 726.980
Azm 153.4°
Elv 47.7°
RA 04h 10m 12s
Decl -5° 18' 06"
Range (km) 37 161.361
RRt (km/s) -0.003
Vel (km/s) 3.078
Direction Descending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 288.3° (204)
TA 288.1°
Orbit # 11
Name 0 DIRECTV 15_12
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-03 10:46:46
Orbit # at Epoch 11
Inclination 0.126
RA of A. Node 267.222
Eccentricity 0.0014701
Argument of Perigee 225.065
Revs per day 1.00413237
Period 23h 54m 04s (1434.7 min)
Semi-major axis 42 125 km
*Perigee x Apogee 35 685 x 35 809 km*
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 209.676
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)

PIXs TLE #10 vs TLE #12

















Picture work is essentially done.
Minor adjustments to get to 66.8 , then IOT, then move to final slot.
Smooth transition

Doctor j


----------



## harsh

I'm baffled that the byproducts of the launch have somehow continued to gain altitude.


----------



## bakers12

The rocket booster and SYLDA are still in geostationary transfer orbits. Their altitudes will be anywhere between 243 km and 35,662 km for the booster and 258-35,762 km for the SYLDA.


----------



## Ken984

New TLE

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-04 14:09:40
Orbit # at Epoch 13
Inclination 0.120
RA of A. Node 267.380
Eccentricity 0.0015059
Argument of Perigee 225.038
Revs per day 1.00408658
Period 23h 54m 08s (1434.13 min)
Semi-major axis 42 126 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 685 x 35 812 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 261.949
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary



1DIRECTV 15
Lon 70.3635° W
Lat 0.1216° S
Alt (km) 35 731.800
Azm 141.2°
Elv 44.5°
RA 14h 03m 30s
Decl -5° 20' 47"
Range (km) 37 392.250
RRt (km/s) 0.005
Vel (km/s) 3.077
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 75.0° (53)
TA 75.2°
Orbit # 14
Mag (illum) ? (83%)
Constellation Vir


----------



## bakers12

It's still looking like a June 12 arrival at 66.8 W for IOT at the earliest. I'm betting they won't drop it into a lower orbit to speed it up.


----------



## Ken984

Another adjustment. Closer and closer.

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-05 11:54:10
Orbit # at Epoch 14
Inclination 0.114
RA of A. Node 268.083
Eccentricity 0.0015306
Argument of Perigee 224.674
Revs per day 1.00407206
Period 23h 54m 09s (1434.15 min)
Semi-major axis 42 127 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 684 x 35 813 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 229.063
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary

1DIRECTV 15
Lon 70.3171° W
Lat 0.0110° N
Alt (km) 35 698.580
Azm 141.0°
Elv 44.6°
RA 06h 24m 39s
Decl -5° 12' 08"
Range (km) 37 352.301
RRt (km/s) -0.002
Vel (km/s) 3.080
Direction Descending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 320.2° (227)
TA 320.1°
Orbit # 14
Mag (illum) ? (6%)
Constellation Mon


----------



## ladannen

Ken984 said:


> Another adjustment. Closer and closer.


For those like me that can't interpret the data and need visual reference....


----------



## doctor j

Latest TLE essentially the same
Slowly moving toward 66.8 in near GSO orbit.
Simulation has it on slot 6/12 to 6/13

Doctor j


----------



## harsh

doctor j said:


> Slowly moving toward 66.8 in near GSO orbit.


Glacially may be a better term than slowly.


----------



## MysteryMan

harsh said:


> Glacially may be a better term than slowly.


I thought Nick was the Grammar Police. :sure:


----------



## lwilli201

harsh said:


> Glacially may be a better term than slowly.


Do glacers move at approximately 3.07 km/s (1.91 mi/s)?


----------



## bakers12

A new TLE is out. Orbitron is still estimating an arrival on Friday, June 12.

1 40663U 15026A 15159.47807620 -.00000285 00000-0 00000+0 0 9993
2 40663 000.1066 262.7379 0011436 235.6692 221.1156 01.00410949 161

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-08 11:28:25
Orbit # at Epoch 16
Inclination 0.107
RA of A. Node 262.738
Eccentricity 0.0011436
Argument of Perigee 235.669
Revs per day 1.00410949
Period 23h 54m 06s (1434.10 min)
Semi-major axis 42 126 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 699 x 35 796 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 221.116
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group N/A


----------



## HoTat2

For more continuous tracking (still based on released TLEs of course). There is n2yo.com.

http://www.n2yo.com/?s=40663

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Ken984

Another update, slow but steady progress.

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-08 22:06:45
Orbit # at Epoch 17
Inclination 0.106
RA of A. Node 262.725
Eccentricity 0.0011200
Argument of Perigee 237.362
Revs per day 1.00405123
Period 23h 54m 11s (1434.18 min)
Semi-major axis 42 127 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 702 x 35 796 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 19.663
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary


1DIRECTV 15
Lon 68.7324° W
Lat 0.1055° N
Alt (km) 35 772.250
Azm 138.8°
Elv 43.7°
RA 01h 33m 53s
Decl -5° 04' 36"
Range (km) 37 488.104
RRt (km/s) -0.003
Vel (km/s) 3.074
Direction Descending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 240.0° (170)
TA 239.9°
Orbit # 17
Mag (illum) ? (25%)
Constellation Cet


----------



## camo

Whats the big intrigue with this? Who cares where its at, I just want some frigging locals.


----------



## Renard

A question for you guys, do you know if the solar panels are deployed or not?


----------



## HoTat2

camo said:


> Whats the big intrigue with this? Who cares where its at, I just want some frigging locals.


Well you won't likely ever get them from this satellite. Unless for some reason DIRECTV wants to put them on CONUS transponders.

As D15 has no spotbeam payloads for local channels.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2

Renard said:


> A question for you guys, do you know if the solar panels are deployed or not?


Most certainly yes, and for a long time ....

As there would be no other way to power the satellite's electrical system. The batteries would be long flat by now, having been heavily consumed by the launch and early orbit phase (LEOP) without recharging from the deployed solar panals relatively soon after.
.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## harsh

Renard said:


> A question for you guys, do you know if the solar panels are deployed or not?


With DIRECTV 14, the panels were deployed before the satellite fired its main thrusters for the first time.


----------



## slice1900

camo said:


> Whats the big intrigue with this? Who cares where its at, I just want some frigging locals.


Where are you located? Are you in a market that Directv covers but too far to receive the locals they currently provide, or in a market that Directv doesn't cover at all?

D14 added a lot of spotbeam capability but it is still in the process of getting all that enabled. Once they have it fully operational I think it is likely they'll use the Spaceway satellites to both cover markets that currently aren't covered and maybe introduce some wider beams to help expand coverage in some of those very large DMAs out west. So like HoTat2 said, D15 doesn't matter for your locals, but there's still a lot going on with D14 that may help this summer.


----------



## Diana C

Renard said:


> A question for you guys, do you know if the solar panels are deployed or not?


Typically, solar panels are deployed immediately after separation from the booster and/or mating ring.


----------



## Ken984

Another TLE. Very small changes.

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-10 12:06:03
Orbit # at Epoch 19
Inclination 0.109
RA of A. Node 263.749
Eccentricity 0.0011294
Argument of Perigee 237.231
Revs per day 1.00405679
Period 23h 54m 10s (1434.17 min)
Semi-major axis 42 127 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 702 x 35 797 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 230.918
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary



1DIRECTV 15
Lon 68.1446° W
Lat 0.0072° N
Alt (km) 35 718.890
Azm 138.2°
Elv 43.2°
RA 06h 12m 28s
Decl -5° 11' 25"
Range (km) 37 468.205
RRt (km/s) -0.002
Vel (km/s) 3.078
Direction Descending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 308.7° (219)
TA 308.6°
Orbit # 19
Mag (illum) ? (5%)
Constellation Mon


----------



## P Smith

Adjusting to equatorial orbit...


----------



## Ken984

Meanwhile back to D15. Inclination is down slightly.

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-11 10:50:13
Orbit # at Epoch 19
Inclination 0.107
RA of A. Node 264.226
Eccentricity 0.0011476
Argument of Perigee 236.162
Revs per day 1.00405940
Period 23h 54m 10s (1434.17 min)
Semi-major axis 42 127 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 701 x 35 797 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 213.947
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary



1DIRECTV 15
Lon 67.6448° W
Lat 0.0012° S
Alt (km) 35 714.680
Azm 137.5°
Elv 42.9°
RA 06h 33m 44s
Decl -5° 11' 49"
Range (km) 37 487.617
RRt (km/s) -0.001
Vel (km/s) 3.079
Direction Descending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 314.5° (223)
TA 314.4°
Orbit # 19
Mag (illum) ? (6%)
Constellation Mon


----------



## doctor j

66.8 w tomorrow
Doctor j


----------



## bakers12

A new TLE from this morning shows D15 at 66.9474° W right now. Judging by past launches, the tendency is to overshoot a little, then a couple maneuvers are needed to park it. We should hopefully see a TLE showing D15 parked very soon.

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-12 11:07:06
Orbit # at Epoch 20
*Inclination 0.106*
RA of A. Node 264.646
*Eccentricity 0.0011499*
Argument of Perigee 235.863
Revs per day 1.00405677
Period 23h 54m 10s (1434.17 min)
Semi-major axis 42 127 km
*Perigee x Apogee 35 701 x 35 798 km*
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 219.528
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group N/A

10 DIRECTV 15
*Lon 66.9474° W
Lat 0.1009° S*
Alt (km) 35 702.640


----------



## doctor j

Should have been at 66.8 about 7:30 AM CDT
Maybe next TLE will show some change

Doctor j


----------



## Ken984

New TLE still not parked.

1DIRECTV 15
Lon 66.3763° W
Lat 0.1111° S
Alt (km) 35 716.000
Azm 136.1°
Elv 42.0°
RA 12h 45m 59s
Decl -5° 18' 38"
Range (km) 37 556.514
RRt (km/s) 0.003
Vel (km/s) 3.078
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 46.7° (33)
TA 46.8°
Orbit # 23
Mag (illum) ? (62%)
Constellation Vir

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-13 11:29:20
Orbit # at Epoch 22
Inclination 0.104
RA of A. Node 264.678
Eccentricity 0.0011469
Argument of Perigee 236.217
Revs per day 1.00404972
Period 23h 54m 11s (1434.18 min)
Semi-major axis 42 127 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 701 x 35 798 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 226.189
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary


----------



## doctor j

Latest TLE now a couple of days old.
I known I sound like a conspiracy theory fan BUT Directv Satellites have a history of "gaps" in reports till they suddenly are where they are supposed to be
I suspect D-15 is "On Station" at 66.8, has been since Saturday. The next TLE today or tomorrow will reflect that 

Doctor j


----------



## bakers12

DIRECTV 15 appears to be parked.

DIRECTV 15
1 40663U 15026A 15166.22868832 .00000000 00000-0 10000-3 0 9995
2 40663 000.1013 265.6315 0001240 252.6290 120.4541 01.00270305 136

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-15 05:29:18
Orbit # at Epoch 13
Inclination 0.101
RA of A. Node 265.632
*Eccentricity 0.0001240*
Argument of Perigee 252.629
*Revs per day 1.00270305
Period 23h 56m 07s (1436.12 min)*
Semi-major axis 42 165 km
*Perigee x Apogee 35 782 x 35 792 km*
BStar (drag term) 0.000100000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 120.454
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group N/A

DIRECTV 15
*Lon 66.7939° W*
Lat 0.1008° S
Alt (km) 35 781.570


----------



## HoTat2

Agreed;

Now comes some real exciting stuff like "transponder performance and antenna pattern verification testing."

Important of course I know, but a real yawner for the next two weeks or so nonetheless. .. 

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

Made extra exciting by the fact that we won't know whether the tests are successful or they run into problems until months later when it is revealed in an FCC filing!


----------



## Ken984

Another TLE. Eccentricity is lower. Let the testing commence!

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-14 11:44:37
Orbit # at Epoch 23
Inclination 0.105
RA of A. Node 263.770
Eccentricity 0.0000825
Argument of Perigee 235.177
Revs per day 1.00276567
Period 23h 56m 01s (1436.2 min)
Semi-major axis 42 163 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 782 x 35 789 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 232.863
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 1 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary

1DIRECTV 15
Lon 66.7648° W
Lat 0.0996° S
Alt (km) 35 783.670
Azm 136.5°
Elv 42.3°
RA 14h 05m 36s
Decl -5° 17' 28"
Range (km) 37 604.270
RRt (km/s) 0.000
Vel (km/s) 3.075
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 68.7° (49)
TA 68.7°
Orbit # 25
Mag (illum) ? (75%)
Constellation Vir


----------



## doctor j

Ken984 said:


> Another TLE. Eccentricity is lower. Let the testing commence!
> 
> Name DIRECTV 15
> NORAD # 40663
> COSPAR designator 2015-026-A
> Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-14 11:44:37
> Orbit # at Epoch 23
> Inclination 0.105
> RA of A. Node 263.770
> Eccentricity 0.0000825
> Argument of Perigee 235.177
> Revs per day 1.00276567
> Period 23h 56m 01s (1436.2 min)
> Semi-major axis 42 163 km
> Perigee x Apogee 35 782 x 35 789 km
> BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
> Mean anomaly 232.863
> Propagation model SDP4
> Element number / age 999 / 1 day(s)
> StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
> Diameters N/A
> Satellite group Geostationary
> 
> 1DIRECTV 15
> Lon 66.7648° W
> Lat 0.0996° S
> Alt (km) 35 783.670
> Azm 136.5°
> Elv 42.3°
> RA 14h 05m 36s
> Decl -5° 17' 28"
> Range (km) 37 604.270
> RRt (km/s) 0.000
> Vel (km/s) 3.075
> Direction Ascending
> Eclipse No
> MA (phase) 68.7° (49)
> TA 68.7°
> Orbit # 25
> Mag (illum) ? (75%)
> Constellation Vir


Now that's parked

Doctor j


----------



## Ken984

The orbit is even tighter now. Looking good D15!

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-16 10:48:01
Orbit # at Epoch 24
Inclination 0.102
RA of A. Node 263.469
Eccentricity 0.0000663
Argument of Perigee 252.865
Revs per day 1.00272855
Period 23h 56m 04s (1436.7 min)
Semi-major axis 42 164 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 784 x 35 789 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 203.264
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary

1DIRECTV 15
Lon 66.7969° W
Lat 0.0062° N
Alt (km) 35 784.510
Azm 136.5°
Elv 42.4°
RA 06h 31m 38s
Decl -5° 10' 23"
Range (km) 37 596.507
RRt (km/s) 0.000
Vel (km/s) 3.075
Direction Descending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 297.8° (211)
TA 297.8°
Orbit # 24
Mag (illum) ? (5%)
Constellation Mon


----------



## P Smith

I would adjust the parameter then say it's there: "Inclination 0.102"


----------



## bakers12

The FCC usually restricts longitude to a 0.05° tolerance. Is there a limit on inclination/latitude?


----------



## P Smith

I recal the box for a sat should be in +/- 0.025°


----------



## HoTat2

bakers12 said:


> The FCC usually restricts longitude to a 0.05° tolerance. Is there a limit on inclination/latitude?


Just briefly checked some of the Schedule S FCC documents including D14 and D15's.

Standard tolerance for a GSO is +/- .05° E-W, +/- .05° N-S.

However, due to the now crowding at the 99W and 103W nom. positions with among others, three and four co-located satellites respectively for DIRECTV alone, D14 and D15's E-W tolerance has been reduced to +/- .025° from their center operational slots of 99.235°W and 102.750°W.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> Just briefly checked some of the Schedule S FCC documents including D14 and D15's.
> 
> Standard tolerance for a GSO is +/- .05° E-W, +/- .05° N-S.
> 
> However, due to the now crowding at the 99W and 103W nom. positions with three and four co-located satellites respectively, D14 and D15's E-W tolerance has been reduced to +/- .025° from their center operational slots of 99.235°W and 102.750°W.


There are actually more satellites than that at those slots...you're only counting Directv's.


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> There are actually more satellites than that at those slots...you're only counting Directv's.


Thanks, duly noted.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## I WANT MORE

What should we be looking for on our signal strength meters when it gets parked in it's permanent location? 103cc?


----------



## KyL416

There won't be anything to look for this time, unlike D14, D15 isn't really opening up a new set of bandwidth.

The big indicator will be when we start seeing a shift of channels in the transponder maps to take advantage of the mirroring ability for Puerto Rico like they did with D14.


----------



## HoTat2

KyL416 said:


> There won't be anything to look for this time, unlike D14, D15 isn't really opening up a new set of bandwidth.
> 
> The big indicator will be when we start seeing a shift of channels in the transponder maps to take advantage of the mirroring ability for Puerto Rico like they did with D14.


Agreed;

Even though I see Gary adding a speculative new blank signal level screen grid labeled "103_" in the Network Decoder diagrams in anticipation of D15. I really don't think we are going to see one since it's Ka band payload fully overlaps with the existing 103ca and 103cb screens.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

Well at some point, some receivers will see something for 99 & 103 RDBS, Whether if it is used exclusively for 4K or used for some HD/SD programming (mirroring of 95 & 119 is the only non-4K thing they could reasonably put there) will determine which receivers will see those two new screens appear.


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> Well at some point, some receivers will see something for 99 & 103 RDBS, Whether if it is used exclusively for 4K or used for some HD/SD programming (mirroring of 95 & 119 is the only non-4K thing they could reasonably put there) will determine which receivers will see those two new screens appear.


Oh, for sure

My post earlier was pertaining to a prospective future SS screen for D15's Ka band payload.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Ken984

Another TLE update. I didn't post the last one it was too similar to the one before. This one is more of a change.

1DIRECTV 15
Lon 66.7751° W
Lat 0.0710° S
Alt (km) 35 785.810
Azm 136.5°
Elv 42.3°
RA 15h 18m 48s
Decl -5° 15' 32"
Range (km) 37 603.996
RRt (km/s) 0.000
Vel (km/s) 3.075
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 83.5° (59)
TA 83.5°
Orbit # 28
Mag (illum) ? (84%)
Constellation Lib

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-06-19 05:42:05
Orbit # at Epoch 27
Inclination 0.097
RA of A. Node 262.003
Eccentricity 0.0000446
Argument of Perigee 240.466
Revs per day 1.00272377
Period 23h 56m 05s (1436.8 min)
Semi-major axis 42 165 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 785 x 35 788 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 143.403
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary


----------



## P Smith

Perhaps IOT position does not required maintain in tight box and the sat is just testing with relaxing hold on place...


----------



## lwilli201

Looks like plenty of room for D-15 to move around.

http://www.satellite-calculations.com/Satellite/satellitelist.php


----------



## HoTat2

Would the satellite really need the freedom to "move around" from it's orbital slot in order to reorient or change it's attitude with respect to the earth to position and move it's downlink beams over Castle Rock from peak to edge for antenna pattern measurement and verification?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## bakers12

Has anyone with a spectrum analyzer been able to detect signs of life from DIRECTV 15?


----------



## P Smith

bakers12 said:


> Has anyone with a spectrum analyzer been able to detect signs of life from DIRECTV 15?


want some? There is cheap one -BLSA PCI card - it has nice software, you could make "waterfall" spectrum and see changes during a day


----------



## bakers12

P Smith said:


> want some? There is cheap one -BLSA PCI card - it has nice software, you could make "waterfall" spectrum and see changes during a day


I'm too lazy to aim a new dish at the IOT location, though. :grin:


----------



## Diana C

HoTat2 said:


> Would the satellite really need the freedom to "move around" from it's orbital slot in order to reorient or change it's attitude with respect to the earth to position and move it's downlink beams over Castle Rock from peak to edge for antenna pattern measurement and verification?
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


Doesn't "require" it, but each time they rotate the satellite (which is usually done with the momentum wheels) the thrusters point in a different direction, which means the station keeping delta-V has to be recalculated. That can certainly be done, but it slows things down, since they would need to stabilize it in its new orientation before proceeding with testing. If they have the room, and no one objects, it makes life a lot easier to let it drift a bit out of the standard box now and then.


----------



## slice1900

So with 14 days of IOT scheduled, it should be starting its drift westward about now. Any TLEs showing movement?


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> So with 14 days of IOT scheduled, it should be starting its drift westward about now. Any TLEs showing movement?


FWIW, just doing the quick lazy check, N2YO has nothing so far. Still at 66.8W hovering over the NW conner of Brazil.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith

as usual - just wait for final destination TLE

[is DTV have a power to suppress posting TLEs ? seem to me it does  ]


----------



## I WANT MORE

Thats long enough. Light er up!!!


----------



## slice1900

According to the TLEs it doesn't appear to have even started its drift from the IOT location, so it won't even reach 103* until August unless they schedule a faster drift to make up whatever delay is keeping it at the IOT location longer than planned.


----------



## fleckrj

slice1900 said:


> According to the TLEs it doesn't appear to have even started its drift from the IOT location, so it won't even reach 103* until August unless they schedule a faster drift to make up whatever delay is keeping it at the IOT location longer than planned.


Has a TLE been published since June 19? IF so, I have not seen it. If not, the bird could already be well on its way to 103. I doubt we will hear anything official until it is parked at 103.


----------



## slice1900

I don't know how to tell how old they are, but the sites I found googling show D15 still at 66, though that's useless if the TLE is out of date. For whatever reason there were blackouts of TLE updates on D14 and the Ku-79W satellites, so maybe the same is true here, though those were only for a few days not 2+ weeks.


----------



## Ken984

There have been several TLE's but nothing major changing. Inclination has been lowered from over 1 to around .68 if my memory serves ( i am not infront of Orbitron at the moment). The last TLE I saw showed Eccentricity was around 1500, which could be a sign of a small change to the orbit but it was still sitting at 66.7 or so when I looked at it.


----------



## HoTat2

fleckrj said:


> Has a TLE been published since June 19? IF so, I have not seen it. If not, the bird could already be well on its way to 103. I doubt we will hear anything official until it is parked at 103.


Here's the latest TLE from Spacetrak;

1 40663U 15026A 15188.39377387 -.00000287 00000-0 00000+0 0 9990
2 40663 000.0684 247.4006 0001495 286.6467 185.9466 01.00273220 466

As you can see the Epoch day is 188 which is July 8th or today. Someone can run Orbitron on it.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Ken984

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-07-07 09:27:02
Orbit # at Epoch 46
Inclination 0.068
RA of A. Node 247.401
Eccentricity 0.0001495
Argument of Perigee 286.647
Revs per day 1.00273220
Period 23h 56m 04s (1436.7 min)
Semi-major axis 42 164 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 780 x 35 793 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 185.947
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 1 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary

1DIRECTV 15
Lon 66.7970° W
Lat 0.0344° S
Alt (km) 35 781.740
Azm 136.5°
Elv 42.3°
RA 08h 32m 56s
Decl -5° 13' 08"
Range (km) 37 596.459
RRt (km/s) 0.000
Vel (km/s) 3.075
Direction Descending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 310.4° (220)
TA 310.4°
Orbit # 47
Mag (illum) ? (6%)
Constellation Hya


----------



## doctor j

Eccentricity is very slightly up and predictions move slowly a little westward compared to other TLE's this month.

Is THIS the beginning of the drift? I wonder. Hopefully more data soon.

Doctor j


----------



## doctor j

_If it's drifting it's less than .03 degrees per day._
_So ,I'd say no for now, maybe SOON _


----------



## slice1900

Well it is odd. Directv requested and was granted a 30 day IOT window but said they'd conduct two weeks of testing(?) and have the satellite at 103* no earlier than July 12th. But they said they'd begin the testing when the satellite reached the IOT destination, and they informed the FCC that it did so as of June 15. If they took the full 30 days of testing they were authorized that would mean it is time to leave today, and a 26 day drift would put us at around August 10th when it reached 103.


----------



## doctor j

Last TLE is at least 2 days OLD.
Hopefully next will confirm movement

Doctor j


----------



## The Scotsman

According to n2y0 this morning, the altitude of DirecTV 15 is steadily decreasing. I know the info will be based on an old TLE, but is this some sign of movement?


----------



## HoTat2

The Scotsman said:


> According to n2y0 this morning, the altitude of DirecTV 15 is steadily decreasing. I know the info will be based on an old TLE, but is this some sign of movement?


Should be the opposite if this is really the onset of drift. Altitude and thus orbital period both need to increase to begin a westward drift from 66.8 to 102.75W

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## bakers12

These orbits are not perfectly circular, so the satellites will spend half of the day ascending and half descending.


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> Should be the opposite if this is really the onset of drift. Altitude and thus orbital period both need to increase to begin a westward drift from 66.8 to 102.75W


Maybe they'll take it the long way around so it can see the world :rolling:


----------



## doctor j

3+ days, NO new TLE.
Expected this based on past activity.
Suspect D-15 is on the move and will confirm with next data whenever Directv will allow

Doctor j


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> Maybe they'll take it the long way around so it can see the world :rolling:


Doubt if they could make such a world sightseeing tour in the 26 days they just requested in their recent STA, unless they plan for a giant drift rate of about 12.5 degrees/day. ... LoL


----------



## inkahauts

I don't know the space equivalent of a road trip sounds pretty cool!!!


----------



## doctor j

Peculiar filing

Apparently filed a request on 7/14/2015 to extend IOT ("was still ongoing")

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/SATSTA2015071600046&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

Then withdrawn on 7/16/2015 published 7/17

Doctor j


----------



## doctor j

4+ days 
No new TLE

Doctor j


----------



## Ken984

New TLE is out but very little changed. Still at 66.8.


----------



## P Smith

Look like "huston" had some problems... should I stay or should I go? Blah blah blah....


----------



## inkahauts

Or maybe they have been so busy doing all the local movement they have a minimum crew on d15 and are taking their time....


----------



## HoTat2

inkahauts said:


> Or maybe they have been so busy doing all the local movement they have a minimum crew on d15 and are taking their time....


But even if they don't want to rush and "take their time," I would think it still has to comply with the limits of their request to the FCC for an STA to move the satellite in a certain time period.

On July 14 DIRECTV filed for a 30 day STA extension for D15 to complete IOT and includes 26 days to drift the satellite. Therefore D15 should be on the move any moment now.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## doctor j

Ken984 said:


> New TLE is out but very little changed. Still at 66.8.


But it is still 2 days old when published???

Doctor j


----------



## HoTat2

Well ... N2YO is showing D15 further west and outside the box at 66.88W now. And azimuth to my location (LA) is now 114.1W whereas it was 113.8W throughout the testing.

So perhaps so movement. ..

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Ken984

Its above GEO now should start drifting west.

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-07-20 06:04:13
Orbit # at Epoch 58
Inclination 0.059
RA of A. Node 228.576
Eccentricity 0.0002051
Argument of Perigee 179.893
Revs per day 1.00211104
Period 23h 56m 57s (1436.95 min)
Semi-major axis 42 182 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 795 x 35 812 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 272.732
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary

1DIRECTV 15
Lon 67.6974° W
Lat 0.0088° S
Alt (km) 35 811.380
Azm 137.6°
Elv 42.9°
RA 14h 17m 00s
Decl -5° 11' 32"
Range (km) 37 581.788
RRt (km/s) 0.000
Vel (km/s) 3.073
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 162.1° (115)
TA 162.1°
Orbit # 59
Mag (illum) ? (51%)
Constellation Vir


----------



## Jacob Braun

It's about time!


----------



## bakers12

I like to look at revs/day to see if it's drifting. 1.00270 is geosynchronous. A smaller number means it's drifting to the West.

Revs per day 1.00211104
Period 23h 56m 57s (1436.95 min)

Period will tell the same thing, but it's just not my favorite.


----------



## The Scotsman

When I zoom in on n2yo, I see a yellow trace line which D15 seems to follow. What is that exactly? Is it the predicted path or the mandatory path?


----------



## doctor j

A very very minor drift at present.
At this rate it won't be at 103 till Thanksgiving!!

Maybe a bit more adjustments coming


----------



## HoTat2

The Scotsman said:


> When I zoom in on n2yo, I see a yellow trace line which D15 seems to follow. What is that exactly? Is it the predicted path or the mandatory path?


Looks like both as the actual ground track of the satellite resulting from it's drift west combined with it's slight orbital inclination describes a very low amplitude serpentine path as it drifts westward around the earth.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

So I wonder if they will need to request another small extension for RB-2, since the last extension was for July 31 and D15 won't make it to 103 until August? Or is the fact they've completed IOT and the satellite is en route enough?


----------



## fleckrj

doctor j said:


> A very very minor drift at present.
> At this rate it won't be at 103 till Thanksgiving!!
> 
> Maybe a bit more adjustments coming


Actually, I am pretty sure it would not be until January 3, 2016 at the current rate; however, I expect that by the next update the altitude will be higher, which means revolutions per day will be lower, the period will be longer, and the drift will speed up significantly.


----------



## Ken984

New TLE. Drifting quite a bit faster. Should reach 103 on August 31st according to Orbitron.

Name DIRECTV15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-07-22 07:04:53
Orbit # at Epoch 60
Inclination 0.066
RA of A. Node 262.111
Eccentricity 0.0025447
Argument of Perigee 169.151
Revs per day 1.00042840
Period 23h 59m 23s (1439.38 min)
Semi-major axis 42 229 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 743 x 35 958 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 266.313
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group N/A


1DIRECTV15
Lon 68.5015° W
Lat 0.0460° S
Alt (km) 35 858.570
Azm 138.7°
Elv 43.4°
RA 11h 17m 56s
Decl -5° 13' 57"
Range (km) 37 594.378
RRt (km/s) 0.007
Vel (km/s) 3.072
Direction Descending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 94.4° (67)
TA 94.7°
Orbit # 61
Mag (illum) ? (16%)
Constellation Leo


----------



## inkahauts

That assumes it doesn't speed up even more...


----------



## Ken984

Well it appears that they have slowed the drift considerably. New TLE is out. Inclination is down quite a bit from the last TLE so maybe they are working on that now.

Basically with this TLE it would be next year before it got to 103.

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-07-22 23:58:32
Orbit # at Epoch 60
Inclination 0.031
RA of A. Node 235.058
Eccentricity 0.0001416
Argument of Perigee 295.967
Revs per day 1.00263652
Period 23h 56m 12s (1436.20 min)
Semi-major axis 42 167 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 783 x 35 795 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000100000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 62.134
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> So I wonder if they will need to request another small extension for RB-2, since the last extension was for July 31 and D15 won't make it to 103 until August? Or is the fact they've completed IOT and the satellite is en route enough?


No need to wonder about it any longer. DIRECTV just did for up until Aug. 31st.

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/SATMOD2015072200052&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

They also state in the request doc. a date of Aug. 26th as the estimated arrival time at a drift rate of ~1 degree/day


----------



## slice1900

Wonder why they're making the move so slowly? I'm sure there's a reason behind it, but I have no idea what it is.


----------



## cforrest

slice1900 said:


> Wonder why they're making the move so slowly? I'm sure there's a reason behind it, but I have no idea what it is.


Conserve as much propulsion fuel perhaps. Otherwise it makes no sense to move it so slowly off the top of my head.


----------



## inkahauts

I question just how accurate all these games are sometimes. Have seen they are not always good and sometimes out of order...


----------



## slice1900

cforrest said:


> Conserve as much propulsion fuel perhaps. Otherwise it makes no sense to move it so slowly off the top of my head.


The original plan before launch had it reaching 103 already. They completed testing late, about 10 days ago, and won't reach 103 until the 29th which is 37 days from now with a 26 day drift - so 11 days of doing not much. Something changed after launch that caused them to delay. I doubt a slower move saves all that much fuel, but if it does that would mean something happened that caused them to waste/lose fuel.


----------



## inkahauts

I wonder if they had the same team testing this Sat that was doing the migration of all the locals and such on the d14 and that's why it took longer, since d14 got a late start after having to help out with d10 problems.


----------



## doctor j

New TLE still has it at 66.9 w/o much movement
? more testing??
Doctor j


----------



## Ken984

New TLE
Should be at 103 by August 25.


Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-07-23 16:48:00
Orbit # at Epoch 62
Inclination 0.060
RA of A. Node 261.520
Eccentricity 0.0002538
Argument of Perigee 156.826
Revs per day 0.99995994
Period 24h 00m 03s (1440.5 min)
Semi-major axis 42 242 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 853 x 35 875 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 64.727
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary


1DIRECTV 15
Lon 70.4340° W
Lat 0.0059° S
Alt (km) 35 873.180
Azm 141.2°
Elv 44.6°
RA 17h 53m 45s
Decl -5° 11' 52"
Range (km) 37 522.107
RRt (km/s) -0.001
Vel (km/s) 3.071
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 206.8° (147)
TA 206.8°
Orbit # 62
Mag (illum) ? (87%)
Constellation Oph


----------



## HoTat2

If so, now it's on schedule with the latest DIRECTV estimate of Aug. 26 for the migration given in the recent RB-2 milestone extension request.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## thelucky1

Nothing new in 6 days???


Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk


----------



## HoTat2

thelucky1 said:


> Nothing new in 6 days???
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk


Still drifting west at ~1°/day now somewhere past 76W over eastern Ecuador.

Still on target for an arrival date of Aug. 26th. at 102.75W.

Not really sure why DIRECTV chose this slow drift rate though, other than I guess there's just no hurry. ..

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## bobnielsen

It saves fuel.


----------



## inkahauts

Yep fuel and I still think they want to get all the locals sorted first because I bet it's the same crew so they want to finish that first then get d15 sorted. I bet it takes a while for that to happen because I think there's going to be a lot to sort.


----------



## doctor j

RB-2 filing for extension to " launch and operate" till 8/31/2015

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0731/DOC-334674A1.pdf

Doctor j


----------



## slice1900

doctor j said:


> RB-2 filing for extension to " launch and operate" till 8/31/2015
> 
> http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0731/DOC-334674A1.pdf
> 
> Doctor j


Interesting that the approval says it can operate only at reduced power and without full interference protection. I assume that has something to do with the dispute over Ciel's claim on that location in Canada. At least the fact they are being allowed to operate RB-2 at all means Dish's shady attempt to prevent Directv from operating it even in the US obviously went nowhere with the FCC.


----------



## yosoyellobo

slice1900 said:


> Interesting that the approval says it can operate only at reduced power and without full interference protection. I assume that has something to do with the dispute over Ciel's claim on that location in Canada. At least the fact they are being allowed to operate RB-2 at all means Dish's shady attempt to prevent Directv from operating it even in the US obviously went nowhere with the FCC.


What would be the difference with it operating at full power?


----------



## P Smith

yosoyellobo said:


> What would be the difference with it operating at full power?


deal with rain fade perhaps


----------



## HoTat2

Must have something to due with the legal wrangling for BSS rights at 103W still going on with SES, Ceil and others. Because why (to my knowledge anyhow) no such power restrictions on RB-1 at 99W?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

yosoyellobo said:


> What would be the difference with it operating at full power?


It isn't clear what "reduced power" is, it may be so attenuated a small dish can't even receive it, at least near the northern border of the US. Directv doesn't have to be in any hurry to resolve this, they don't need 103 until 99 fills up, and with zero 4K channels so far it probably won't matter until after 2020, if ever.


----------



## bakers12

There have been a few minor TLE changes over the last week or so, but nothing noteworthy. Most (un)important is that the drift is not speeding up. We're still looking at an arrival around the 25th. Add a couple days to park it.


----------



## doctor j

bakers12 said:


> There have been a few minor TLE changes over the last week or so, but nothing noteworthy. Most (un)important is that the drift is not speeding up. We're still looking at an arrival around the 25th. Add a couple days to park it.


Repeat above

New TLE's no change in arrival date or general orbital parameters

Doctor j


----------



## HoTat2

DIRECTV request another 30 day extension STA for satellite drift beginning Aug. 12th for D15 (S2930) and RB-2 (S2712). Yet still gives an arrival date of Aug. 25th. 

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/SATSTA2015081000057&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

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/SATSTA2015081000056&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith

Are they still testing something up to 12th?


----------



## inkahauts

Well could be they only offer extensions at a minimum of 30 days? I wonder, they have a new ground location to use for bss broadcasts right? Was the original test location a bit to far for it to test properly?

Or do we think they want to test more with this new not full power requirement?

Or maybe this has more to do with them wanting to prep the other satelites in some way before it gets in place? So many possibilities.


----------



## bakers12

HoTat2 said:


> DIRECTV request another 30 day extension STA for satellite drift beginning Aug. 12th for D15 (S2930) and RB-2 (S2712). Yet still gives an arrival date of Aug. 25th.


I might not know how tho read these documents but this

*Term End Date:* 09/10/2015

and this

Requested Extended Expiration Date
2015-09-10 00:00:00.0

makes me think DIRECTV is requesting an extension until Sept. 10.


----------



## P Smith

Deja vu - It remind me D10 tests what does sublimated as an amelioration ...


----------



## yosoyellobo

P Smith said:


> Deja vu - It remind me D10 tests what does sublimated as an ameliopration ...


Shouldn't that be ameiriantion?


----------



## Go Beavs

yosoyellobo said:


> Shouldn't that be ameiriantion amelioration?


Fixed it for ya.


----------



## slice1900

The previous filings SAT-STA-20150716-00048 and SAT-STA-20150716-00049 were granted on July 13th for a period of 30 days, so they need an extension to cover the remaining drift.

I think inkahauts is probably correct that 30 days is the typical term, which is why they mention that it is still on schedule to arrive on the 25th.


----------



## ladannen

According to the Satellite AR app, D15 is much closer than at last check.


----------



## inkahauts

Well in a week or two it'll likely be parked


----------



## HoTat2

ladannen said:


> According to the Satellite AR app, D15 is much closer than at last check.


Just curious, but to make sure I'm interpreting displays like this on the Satellite AR app correctly.

The reason the geo-satellites are always shown somewhat south of the 0° equatorial meridian is I assume because of where they appear to be in the sky due the declination offset angle of observing a relatively close in object to the earth (astronomically speaking) from locations in the northern hemisphere?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## doctor j

Latest TLE shows same Tract.
Arrives at 103 ~ early AM 8/25/2015

Doctor j


----------



## Tom Robertson

Hmmm... doesn't sound like I'll see any new HD from D15 before I get on a plane on the 26th. 

Though maybe by the time I get back in September... 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Nighthawk68

Tom Robertson said:


> Hmmm... doesn't sound like I'll see any new HD from D15 before I get on a plane on the 26th.
> 
> Though maybe by the time I get back in September...
> 
> Peace,
> Tom


Soon though!!


----------



## HoTat2

Nighthawk68 said:


> Soon though!!


Yeah, ... but just how much HD from D15 will be really "new" as opposed to simply old HD being migrated over to it, particularly the national channels on D10 (103cb), remains to be seen.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## inkahauts

Well it's a net of all the new sat space. It appears we will have close to a net of 24 new tps that will be available now across all the sats so maybe a lot.

I expect reconfiguring first though. Then new channels in a strategic way. 

I also expect the stuff from 79 to be duplicated on either d11 or d12. Which is probably around four or five transponders. 

I wouldn't be surprised if the stuff on conus 119 got moved there too. That'd be another seven I think. Actually may be closer to five....

So that'd still leave 12 transponders for all new Hi Definition channels. And that's what over 50 channels? 

If those moves even happen. 

And none of this calculates bss space either.


----------



## alnielsen

inkahauts said:


> Well it's a net of all the new sat space. It appears we will have close to a net of 24 new tps that will be available now across all the sats so maybe a lot.
> 
> I expect reconfiguring first though. Then new channels in a strategic way.
> 
> I also expect the stuff from 79 to be duplicated on either d11 or d12. Which is probably around four or five transponders.
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if the stuff on conus 119 got moved there too. That'd be another seven I think. Actually may be closer to five....
> 
> So that'd still leave 12 transponders for all new Hi Definition channels. And that's what over 50 channels?
> 
> If those moves even happen.
> 
> *And none of this calculates bss space either.*


Since there hasn't been any good information on BSS hardware (at least that I have seen), it will probably be an other year before those frequncies get used.


----------



## inkahauts

alnielsen said:


> Since there hasn't been any good information on BSS hardware (at least that I have seen), it will probably be an other year before those frequncies get used.


The only hardware is a swim switch or lnb change. I expect that may just start showing up out of nowhere at some point relatively soon for all.


----------



## slice1900

inkahauts said:


> Well it's a net of all the new sat space. It appears we will have close to a net of 24 new tps that will be available now across all the sats so maybe a lot.
> 
> I expect reconfiguring first though. Then new channels in a strategic way.
> 
> I also expect the stuff from 79 to be duplicated on either d11 or d12. Which is probably around four or five transponders.
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if the stuff on conus 119 got moved there too. That'd be another seven I think. Actually may be closer to five....
> 
> So that'd still leave 12 transponders for all new Hi Definition channels. And that's what over 50 channels?
> 
> If those moves even happen.
> 
> And none of this calculates bss space either.


I assume you mean 95* not 79* since only the former not the latter is used in the US...a while back I calculated out how many transponders would be needed, making the assumption they'd use MPEG4 SD instead of MPEG2 SD at half the data requirement, and figuring in the slightly higher bit rate they get from 36 MHz wide Ka or BSS transponders, and it comes to only a half dozen at most required to mirror both 95* and 119*.

They probably would use Ka but they could use BSS for this - since they'd only be doing this for new installs and not converting existing installs once the standard install includes a BSS capable LNB they have both options available.


----------



## doctor j

No changes yet
Getting close however
SOOON


----------



## richall01

How will D 15 show-up on the signal meter?


----------



## HoTat2

richall01 said:


> How will D 15 show-up on the signal meter?


With the possible exception of xpndr numbers 1-8 being added to 103ca, there likely won't be any other visible signs of D15 lighting up. As the rest of D15's Ka band payload xpndrs exactly overlaps with the current 103ca xpndrs 9-24 and 103cb xpndrs 1-14.

It's R-band payload RB-2 though, whenever it becomes operational, will be new of course as will the RB-1 payload aboard D14 at 99W.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

richall01 said:


> How will D 15 show-up on the signal meter?


If low numbered 103s transponders eventually go away as we expect to happen, you will see the N/As in transponders 1-8 on 103ca replaced with actual readings as those transponders become active. That wouldn't happen until later in the fall at the earliest though; other than that you won't see any changes on the signal screen.


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> It's R-band payload RB-2 though, whenever it becomes operational, will be new of course as will the RB-1 payload aboard D14 at 99W.


I think it will take a couple years before we see that active from 103, given that the inevitable legal battle with Ciel over that hasn't even begun. At some point when Directv needs those transponders if 4K is successful, they'll probably end up paying them to go away


----------



## peds48

slice1900 said:


> I think it will take a couple years before we see that active from 103, *given that the inevitable legal battle with Ciel over that hasn't even begun.* At some point when Directv needs those transponders if 4K is successful, they'll probably end up paying them to go away


Can you expand on that....


----------



## inkahauts

slice1900 said:


> I think it will take a couple years before we see that active from 103, given that the inevitable legal battle with Ciel over that hasn't even begun. At some point when Directv needs those transponders if 4K is successful, they'll probably end up paying them to go away


I don't think DIRECTV will pay a dime. And I think since it now appears it's a dish backed swing it'll get totally ignored by everyone and nothing will come of it. I expect it'll be up when d14 is. But who knows.


----------



## slice1900

peds48 said:


> Can you expand on that....


I posted some stuff a few months ago. Basically there's a company that holds the Canadian license for RDBS at 103; since they applied via the ITU it was done before Directv got the US license. If they are ruled to have priority, Directv can't interfere with them, which basically means Directv customers with a couple hundred miles of Canada would be unable to receive these broadcasts making it effectively useless for Directv.

The Canadian company has a satellite in orbit at 103 but hasn't been able to light up the RDBS transponders yet. They don't appear to have any use for them, at one point Dish was talking with them about using it but once the FCC ruled against them being able to use it in the US that seems to have gone nowhere. Still, Ergen is probably in the background somewhere trying to screw with Directv, and unless the situation gets legally resolved in Directv's favor paying them off to go away is IMHO the most likely outcome.


----------



## slice1900

inkahauts said:


> I don't think DIRECTV will pay a dime. And I think since it now appears it's a dish backed swing it'll get totally ignored by everyone and nothing will come of it. I expect it'll be up when d14 is. But who knows.


I think the FCC effectively shot down Dish, or at least 50,000 dishes on cell towers in the US plan. If the ITU rules that Ciel has precedence, they will have Directv over a barrel and the easiest solution would be to pay them off to go away.

Of course, if 4K turns out to be more like 3D than like HD, Directv won't need those 18 transponders and they could just forget the whole thing. I doubt they're in any hurry to see it resolved, they won't need to worry about it until all 18 transponders on D14 are filled up with 4K programming which will be years from now in even the most optimistic projections.


----------



## inkahauts

Not to mention DIRECTV could always build another sat by then that used spots for bss from 103. 

I still think this will play out in dtvs favor overall. And if it did cost then something 110 might be what it'd cost before actual cash....


----------



## James Long

DTV is not desperate to get BSS up. There is plenty of space on current satellites which work with current LNBs. BSS is for future needs, not immediate needs.


----------



## inkahauts

Very true. Doesn't mean they don't want that fired up sooner rather than latter though overall.


----------



## slice1900

inkahauts said:


> Not to mention DIRECTV could always build another sat by then that used spots for bss from 103.


For what purpose? They don't need more spots... Plus that's a pretty long term strategy, since they probably won't launch another satellite to 103 for almost a decade. In the meantime the investment they made making 103 powerful enough to handle 24 Ka transponders and 18 RDBS transponders at once (we assume) is wasted, along with the cost of those 18 transponders.



inkahauts said:


> I still think this will play out in dtvs favor overall. And if it did cost then something 110 might be what it'd cost before actual cash....


Some deal involving 110 or 119 would only have a chance if Ergen is the man in the shadows pulling all the puppet strings. That may well be, but Dish seems to be out the dispute now with the FCC ruling against their plan that would have used Ciel's satellite to receive downlink data into the US. If he's out of the picture and it is just Directv vs Ciel, then it is down to legalities.

Directv has basically has to win outright, if the ITU calls it a "draw" and says Ciel can use [email protected] in Canada and Directv has the rights in the US, it is still useless to Directv on a CONUS basis because they won't have a usable signal near the border. Neither would Ciel, of course, but given the military provenance of its RDBS package, it is probably spot based and would be useful even if it can't be used close to the US border. A long fight would cost more money and create more uncertainty for Directv, which is why I think it'll come down to a little cash - Ciel doesn't really have anything useful to do this with spectrum at the moment, so it shouldn't take too much. Probably just reimbursing them for what it cost them to install the RDBS transponders in their satellite would be enough.

The only reason they put them in in the first place was because they thought they had a long term contract with the US DOD, but it ended up getting canceled after only a few months. Otherwise that satellite would be on the other side of the world making a lot of money for Ciel and there would be no dispute.

As James says, Directv is in no hurry. In fact they haven't even requested a LOA to light up RDBS on D14 yet....don't have a LNB officially released that can receive it...haven't announced any date to begin 4K broadcasting... So I don't expect anything major to happen with this for a while, it is just something that Directv must eventually resolve one way or another.


----------



## doctor j

D-15 should be at or near 103W
No TLE today.
Watch is on for confirmation update

Doctor j


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> .... In fact they haven't even requested a LOA to light up RDBS on D14 yet....don't have a LNB officially released that can receive it...haven't announced any date to begin 4K broadcasting... So I don't expect anything major to happen with this for a while, it is just something that Directv must eventually resolve one way or another.


The FCC filings by DIRECTV for S2711 (RB-1) and S2712 (RB-2) are titled as "Launch and Operate Authority" (or "LOA") for those payloads as I understand it.


----------



## HoTat2

doctor j said:


> D-15 should be at or near 103W
> No TLE today.
> Watch is on for conformation update
> 
> Doctor j


Since it's not actually a misspelling, but a different word than what's obviously meant. but still may cause confusion to some readers.

It's "confirmation." 

So not saying the satellite is scheduled to "conform" to something today, but to look soon for a TLE to "confirm" D15's arrival at (within tolerance that is) the operational slot of 102.75W.


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> The FCC filings by DIRECTV for S2711 (RB-1) and S2712 (RB-2) are titled as "Launch and Operate Authority" (or "LOA") for those payloads as I understand it.


The only LOAs filed for RB-1 & RB-2 were dated 2009. If you look at D15, there was a LOA filed from May when it launched, which specifically covered only the Ka band, and noted that operations with the RB-2 payload required international coordination (i.e. with Ciel)

The same is probably true for RB-1, if there is anyone who holds a RDBS license in Canada or Mexico that is active. AFAIK there are no other RDBS capable satellites at 99 so without anyone to coordinate with that step should be pretty easy.


----------



## Go Beavs

lwilli201 said:


> Question. Why are they using RB-2 for telemetry, tracking and command during the drift?
> 
> http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0814/DA-15-920A1.pdf


If you look at the document you posted, the same TTC frequencies are used for both RB-2 and D-15. The FCC apparently treats them as two separate entities but it's one physical satellite and DIRECTV has to apply for both.

If I understand correctly, of course.


----------



## doctor j

HoTat2 said:


> Since it's not actually a misspelling, but a different word than what's obviously meant. but still may cause confusion to some readers.
> 
> It's "confirmation."
> 
> So not saying the satellite is scheduled to "conform" to something today, but to look soon for a TLE to "confirm" D15's arrival at (within tolerance that is) the operational slot of 102.75W.


Fixed
Yes you are right

Doctor j


----------



## cypherx

Last post on this thread 8/25. Its now two days later, any idea where D15 is at the moment?


----------



## doctor j

cypherx said:


> Last post on this thread 8/25. Its now two days later, any idea where D15 is at the moment?


Usual "Delay" in posting TLE update.
Last posted TLE was a little after 8 AM GMT on Sunday the 24th 
Virtually certain D-15 is "parked" at it's 102.75 slot but who knows when we'll see confirmation

Doctor j


----------



## cypherx

Anything we should look for in the guide / signal strength screens when it comes up? I think with D14 it was labeled 99a or something?


----------



## doctor j

Space-Track TLE for D-15 now giving 8 versions of the last TLE with 3rd line of 3Line TLE ending in 000931 instead of the last true set of 931.
Corrupted data somehow
Maybe it will get fixed sooon 

Doctor j


----------



## HoTat2

cypherx said:


> Anything we should look for in the guide / signal strength screens when it comes up? I think with D14 it was labeled 99a or something?


See my post here and slice's next following one.

http://dbstalk.com/index.php?/topic/[email protected]#entry3383656

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith

cypherx said:


> Anything we should look for in the guide / signal strength screens when it comes up? I think with D14 it was labeled 99a or something?


I wrote a couple times about connection between sat transponders and SS screen numbers... now Tom Speer come again about the conversion yesterday, read his post!


----------



## doctor j

Space-Track data is jacked!
Last night and this AM if I search any of the 4 objects on the D-15 launch by most recent or last 5 I get NO DATA.
If I search by DATE RANGE I get info up to about 2 or 3 days ago
Some of the more recent TLE on B and D are not reported
Nothing on D-15 since version 931 on DAY 235.37438050

Maybe it will get corrected sooon!
I again find this reporting curious!!

Doctor j


----------



## Ken984

i was wondering if it was just me Doctor J. I can't even pull results for D14 from Space Track. They must be having server issues.


----------



## doctor j

I get some data if I search "by date range"
But been off since yesterday afternoon.
Thought I was having "internet " issues last night
Yet same thing this AM at different location does put the error on "Space-Track"

Doctor j


----------



## doctor j

INFORMATIVE
SAT-LOA-20060908-00100 S2712 DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC
The Satellite Division has determined that DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC has met the launch and begin operations milestone associated with
its authorization for the RB-2 space station at 103° W.L.(Call Sign S2712) and may release the bond associated with this space station, as
provided in the Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and Policies, First Report and Order and Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, IB Docket No. 02-34, 18 FCC Rcd 10760 (2003); Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules
and Policies, First Order on Reconsideration and Fifth Report and Order, IB Docket No. 02- 34, 19 FCC Rcd 12637 (2004), 47 C.F.R. §
25.165(d).

FCC Release today

Doctor j


----------



## Go Beavs

So, does that mean it's parked or does testing at a different orbital location count as beginning operations?


----------



## slice1900

That probably means it is officially parked, because the release was dated yesterday and Directv had indicated it would reach 103 on the 26th.


----------



## doctor j

We are now 1 week without an update on Directv-15.
But at least Space-Track data is accessible!

Doctor j


----------



## dogbreath

Where is Directv 15 actually located now?


----------



## HoTat2

dogbreath said:


> Where is Directv 15 actually located now?


It's supposed to be parked within it's assigned location at 102.75°W +/- .025° scince the 25th.

But there has been no public TLE release yet to confirm this.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## bobnielsen

HoTat2 said:


> It's supposed to be parked within it's assigned location at 102.75° +/- .025° scince the 25th.
> 
> But there has been no public TLE release yet to confirm this.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


Sounds familiar.


----------



## Ken984

Space Track is still having issues. No TLE's are available at all, even for D14.


----------



## doctor j

Space-Track.org

"The Database was unable to satisfy your request."

e-mail to site ADMIN re errors
No Response

Doctor j


----------



## P Smith

DTV mandate to blackout your requests !


----------



## cypherx

Yeah its a conspiracy. Of all times space track could possibly go down, it does it timed perfectly when D15 is supposed to be parked.


----------



## doctor j

I'd believe that!
But Ken984 is out of luck also.
Maybe widespread conspiracy 

Doctor j


----------



## P Smith

They do guard a secret "hook" maneuvre to park their sats from spies !


----------



## Ken984

Space Track seems to be back. But the TLE is from last week. So its business as usual while we wait on an updated TLE.


----------



## HarleyD

Jon J said:


> This is from N2YO. Haven't a clue what it means...if anything.
> 
> LOCAL TIME:
> 13:37:54
> UTC:
> 18:37:54
> LATITUDE:
> 0.00
> LONGITUDE:
> -110.17
> ALTITUDE [km]:
> 35863.85
> ALTITUDE [mi]:
> 22284.76
> SPEED [km/s]:
> 0.01
> SPEED [mi/s]:
> 0.01
> AZIMUTH: 216.3 SW ELEVATION:
> +41.3
> RIGHT ASCENSION:
> 09h 46m 21s
> DECLINATION:
> 0-6° 37' 09''
> Local Sidereal Time:
> 11h 33m 53s


It means they're just continuing to extrapolate based on the week-old TLE.

IF D15 had continued at the speed and altitude that was last reported over a week ago it would now be a good 7 degrees past its' designated orbital slot and instead would be sitting at the 110.15° position they show in those calculated values.
.

But I think we're all pretty sure that ain't what happened.


----------



## Ken984

New TLE. Not quite parked for use but its close.
1DIRECTV 15
Lon 102.7698° W
Lat 0.0087° S
Alt (km) 35 790.110
Azm 196.4°
Elv 51.0°
RA 07h 46m 27s
Decl -5° 16' 25"
Range (km) 37 015.136
RRt (km/s) -0.001
Vel (km/s) 3.074
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 230.8° (163)
TA 230.8°
Orbit # 104
Mag (illum) ? (15%)
Constellation Mon

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-09-02 22:01:36
Orbit # at Epoch 103
Inclination 0.018
RA of A. Node 115.811
Eccentricity 0.0001454
Argument of Perigee 131.339
Revs per day 1.00271206
Period 23h 56m 06s (1436.10 min)
Semi-major axis 42 165 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 781 x 35 793 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 322.225
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary


----------



## doctor j

Finally!
Doctor j


----------



## HoTat2

Ken984 said:


> New TLE. Not quite parked for use but its close.
> 1DIRECTV 15
> Lon 102.7698° W ...


What do you mean?

102.7698° W

102.75°W + .025° = 102.775°

That's within operational tolerance on the western side of it's box.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Ken984

The orbit is still not as circular as the rest of the DirecTV sats. The eccentricity is much higher than it will be when it is operational. They have a few more adjustments to do before it is stable enough for broadcast to home.
Here is the data for DirecTV 14. The perigee v apogee is much tighter = low eccentricity.

Name DIRECTV 14
NORAD # 40333
COSPAR designator 2014-078-B 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-09-02 05:59:01
Orbit # at Epoch 266
Inclination 0.016
RA of A. Node 142.274
Eccentricity 0.0000346
Argument of Perigee 146.456
Revs per day 1.00269232
Period 23h 56m 08s (1436.13 min)
Semi-major axis 42 165 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 786 x 35 789 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 42.860
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 1 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary


----------



## doctor j

New TLE
Not really changed
Apogee-Perigee the same
Eccentricity essentially the same = 0001447

Doctor j


----------



## Oli74

Uta been 3 days since last update. Anything new? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## doctor j

Several new TLEs, no change
D-15 is parked in it's assigned position

No public signs of life.
Maybe tomorrow?

BUT, given Directv's pace recently, they don't seem to be in any hurry to utilize the massive space available from D14 and D15

Doctor j


----------



## slice1900

doctor j said:


> BUT, given Directv's pace recently, they don't seem to be in any hurry to utilize the massive space available from D14 and D15


There was a lot of action on D14 as far as locals go earlier this summer, but they left a few non-PR locals on the Spaceways for some reason. Maybe that was because they were concentrating on D15, or they are working on stuff related to the AT&T deal being considered a higher priority.

Here's a question though: how will we even know when they start lighting up D15's Ka lo transponders and displacing D10's 103cb transponders? It won't show up in the system tables, so it could be happening today and we wouldn't even know. They'll need to move channels around onto D15's CONUS+ transponders so they can shut off the remaining SW1/SW2 tpns for PR HD channels. Then they can activate 103ca tpns 1-8...that might be the first time we know anything is happening with D15.


----------



## P Smith

slice1900 said:


> There was a lot of action on D14 as far as locals go earlier this summer, but they left a few non-PR locals on the Spaceways for some reason. Maybe that was because they were concentrating on D15, or they are working on stuff related to the AT&T deal being considered a higher priority.
> 
> Here's a question though: how will we even know when they start lighting up D15's Ka lo transponders and displacing D10's 103cb transponders? *It won't show up in the system tables*, so it could be happening today and we wouldn't even know. They'll need to move channels around onto D15's CONUS+ transponders so they can shut off the remaining SW1/SW2 tpns for PR HD channels. Then they can activate 103ca tpns 1-8...that might be the first time we know anything is happening with D15.


I wouldn't say that for sure, usually new sat/tpn appears with new TIDs.


----------



## HoTat2

P Smith said:


> I wouldn't say that for sure, usually new sat/tpn appears with new TIDs.


But with the possible exception of new TIDs needed for new Ka-hi band CONUS+ xpndrs 1-8 @ 103W from D15, why would it be necessary to assign new TIDs for CONUS+ xpndrs on the same frequencies, polarities, and satellite slot as the current Ka-hi xpndrs 9-16 and Ka-lo xpndrs 1-14 @ 103W?

The receivers don't need to know or care about what specific co-located satellite a xpndr is located on at a given orbital slot does it?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith

YES, BUT YOU're MISSED other PART OF WHOLE PATH - for distributing programs you'll need TID eg address of transponder for upload content


----------



## tomspeer46

To see signs of D15 life on anything other than the RDBS bands, we will first see them have to clear the spectrum space for it. The first sign would be shutting down remaining SW1 transponders, at least the ones aimed at the lower 48, or else clearing off stuff from D10. Any other frequencies they could use from 103 West are currently in use by perfectly functioning , spectrum efficient satellites, as far as we know. They might migrate D10 one transponder at a time. But I expect they will clear everything off the D10 transponder first. If they reuse the TID numbers, and channels come back on to that TID , we might not know it is now coming from D15. They could do a flash cutover, but that would involve shutting down the transponder on D10 and turning on the one on D15, without any prior testing from 103W I highly doubt they will do that. 

I doubt that the transponders are addressable by TID, but I could be wrong. The way I understand it, transponders are turned on and off, and their components configured by the Command and Control channels. Once enabled they just repeat whatever they get on their uplink channel from a specific earth station location. It would be nice for our tracking of changes, if they assign new TIDs to D15, but they may not, and we will have trouble telling the difference.


----------



## HoTat2

tomspeer46 said:


> ... I doubt that the transponders are addressable by TID, but I could be wrong. The way I understand it, transponders are turned on and off, and their components configured by the Command and Control channels. Once enabled they just repeat whatever they get on their uplink channel from a specific earth station location. It would be nice for our tracking of changes, if they assign new TIDs to D15, but they may not, and we will have trouble telling the difference.


Yes agree with this ...

I don't see satellite xpndrs addressable by TID, but activated/deactivated and configured by TT&C link channels from ground stations tipically located on the up/downlink band edges.

The large satellite uplink stations have sufficient pointing accuracy to see the individual satellites within the clusters at a "nominal" slot on the Clarke belt such as "103W." The uplink stations then merely transmit (usually) on the center frequencies of the various uplink radio channels of the active xpndrs for reception, down-conversion, and retransmission back to earth.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith

I don't know how much historical data you guys keep in your logs/memory, but just looking how new sat came up [D10-11-12-14] will clearly show you how new "TID"s came with new sats.
Nay, you are missing a lot to make conclusions, hehe


----------



## HoTat2

P Smith said:


> I don't know how much historical data you guys keep in your logs/memory, but just looking how new sat came up [D10-11-12-14] will clearly show you how new "TID"s came with new sats.
> Nay, you are missing a lot to make conclusions, hehe


But in each case it was only when a new satellite operated on a new band were new TIDs issued.

When an already existing band was used by a new satellite the same TIDs are shared or co-opted. For example the spotbeam payloads of D4S and D9S, D10 and D12, and lately SW2 and D14.

Though as noted, D15 is the first time CONUS+ beam xpndrs will overlap with already existing bands and xpndrs at the same slot. So perhaps the TID assignment scheme will be different than when spotbeam payloads overlap.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Gary Toma

At this time, only 6 SD spotbeams from 101W are identified as "D4S or D9S" because we cannot clarify the source hardware. At one time, when D10 spotbeams were still operational, there were some TIDs we could not identify as either D10 or D12 hardware. They were identified as "D10 or D12" spotbeams.

Those have been our only exceptions.

Except for those 6 SD spots from 101W, every TID in every network is now clearly and specifically associated with a specific TPN/frequency/polarity/beam.

Just check out Tom Speer's "Band Plan" spreadsheets in the Tips & Resources Forum; all the details are there.


----------



## slice1900

Those are the only exceptions because as HoTat2 stated, in all previous cases, each satellite had a specific role in a specific slot. i.e. D10 is Ka lo @103, D11 is Ka lo @99, D12 is Ka hi @103, D14 is Ka hi @99, D8/D9S are odd/even tpns @101, respectively, with D4S spot beam only, D5 and D7S are alone in their respective slots.


----------



## P Smith

We are exercising our speculation for now; we will see what will happen soon...


----------



## HoTat2

P Smith said:


> We are exercising our speculation for now; we will see what will happen soon...


True;

Though on one note which might suggest what will happen.

For DIRECTV LA, DLA-1's new Pan-Regional xpndrs that overlap G3C's previous ones of the same frequency and polarity (15 on Pan-Regional 1 and 12 on Pan-Regional 2) use the same TIDs. Thus we cannot be fully certain which satellite they are coming from and therefore labled as from "G3C or DLA1" in the Net. Decoder map for LA.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith

Perhaps Tom could take a deep look into DLA TID numbering... he has some advantage on such analisis as relatively new participant of digging in NIT, TID , eg not overloaded by many years long discussions


----------



## tomspeer46

The only thing that is absolutely true, is that the Net, TID combination at a given orbital position group must be unique if there is any possibility that two signals may have different, modulation, FEC, etc. characteristics. That's why different spot beams on the the same frequency have different TIDs. Anything more than that is at the DirecTV engineers discretion.


----------



## HoTat2

tomspeer46 said:


> The only thing that is absolutely true, is that the Net, TID combination at a given orbital position group must be unique if there is any possibility that two signals may have different, modulation, FEC, etc. characteristics. That's why different spot beams on the the same frequency have different TIDs. Anything more than that is at the DirecTV engineers discretion.


Of course this would be further reason to believe that D15's CONUS+ TIDs outside of xpndrs 1-8 on the Ka-hi band will be the same as those on D10 and 12.

For why should the duplicate Ka-hi/lo CONUS+ xpndrs of D15 have different modulation parameters than the existing ones on D10 and D12?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## tomspeer46

I don't think the TID is used anywhere but the receivers.


----------



## HoTat2

tomspeer46 said:


> Why would they ever turn on the Ka-Lo transponders on D15, unless D12 failed? They cannot coexist. I can see D15's Ka Hi transponders replacing D10, and adding 8 CONUS+ transponders, if the SW1 spot beams can be moved to satellites at 99. Except for RDBS and the spotbeams on the lowest four frequencies of the Ka Hi band, the licensed spectrum at 103 is fully utilized, but D10 is nearing the end of its life.


You have it mistakenly reversed Tom;

D10's CONUS+ xpndrs are on the Ka-lo band and D12's are on the Ka-hi.

Therefore at the very least it is most likely D15's Ka-lo band xpndrs will be activated to replace the ailing D10's.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## tomspeer46

You are correct. I misspoke.


----------



## HoTat2

Don't anyone here get me wrong though;

I'm really hoping for new TIDs for D15.

As I would hate to see Gary's TPN maps or Tom's band plan maps entries have to start awkwardly reading from "D10 or D15" and "D12 or D15" for the overlapping CONUS+ xpndrs.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

Directv only uses that information for the receivers; they don't care about people trying to interpret the data so there is no reason to assign new TIDs for Ka lo. If D15 takes over for D10 but D10 doesn't relocate, we'll have that uncertainty since we can't be sure they aren't sharing duties to some extent. I think we'll be on safe ground with Ka hi, assuming only transponders 1-8 are enabled on D15, since we know D12 doesn't have those.


----------



## P Smith

> Directv only uses that information for the receivers


"the trick works on weakminded people" hehehe ... you could continue post your personal statements, it wouldt not change anything


----------



## James Long

P Smith said:


> "the trick works on weakminded people" hehehe ... you could continue post your personal statements, it wouldt not change anything


Other than the receivers, where is the TID used?
Can you answer that question with facts and not speculation?


----------



## HoTat2

James Long said:


> Other than the receivers, where is the TID used?
> Can you answer that question with facts and not speculation?


Agreed;

Specifically where, how, and why does the satellite care anything about the TID information contained in the system tables of the SI data stream transmitted on the Ku band?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Tom Robertson

Perhaps I've missed previous discussion(s) about this, there could be a couple reasons DIRECTV might fire up D15s transponders in favor of anything already up there.


Electrical power utilization and balance on the various satellites. (Including remaining battery capacity.)
Broadcast power control or flexibility on D15 vs. the others.
Number of transponder spares (either remaining on existing satellites or built into D15.)
And even possibly fuel. If the older satellites can use less fuel by turning off certain transponder groups which might not work as well with a slightly larger orbit box (going to the edges of the FCC approved box.) Ok, I'm thinking out loud, though I could envision a situation where an older reflector arrangement needs tighter control in the box to maintain efficiency.
Basically if D15s newer technologies represent advantages over what is already up there, there might be good reasons to use D15 instead.

As for TIDs--we don't know how DIRECTV might utilize TID information beyond the obvious channel mappings. What if DIRECTV tracks transponder efficiency via TIDs? Or maintenance? If it were me, I would consider new TIDs for each satellite just so I can track them uniquely in the database.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson

HoTat2 said:


> Agreed;
> 
> Specifically where, how, and why does the satellite care anything about the TID information contained in the system tables of the SI data stream transmitted on the Ku band?
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


The satellite might not care, the receiver might not care, but the humans on the ground might use the information in a database to track performance, required power, maintenance issues, etc. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## HoTat2

Tom Robertson said:


> The satellite might not care, the receiver might not care, but the humans on the ground might use the information in a database to track performance, required power, maintenance issues, etc.
> 
> Peace,
> Tom


Oh I'm quite sure the receivers care a great deal about the TIDs. But the satellite itself? I don't see it ...

As far as things like xpndr performance monitoring and assessment, shouldn't that really fall into the area of part of the satellite's telemetered data under TT&C operations?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Tom Robertson

HoTat2 said:


> Oh I'm quite sure the receivers care a great deal about the TIDs. But the satellite itself? I don't see it ...
> 
> As far as things like xpndr performance monitoring and assessment, shouldn't that really fall into the area of part of the satellite's telemetered data under TT&C operations?
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


How does the receiver care which satellite a TID relates to? Doesn't it only care about which frequency group and subgroup to select? So it could be D10 or D15--the receiver doesn't care.

I only theorize some reasons why DIRECTV might pick different TIDs where the only difference is the satellite. There might be other reasons DIRECTV might or might not change TIDs. We don't know. We only speculate. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## James Long

A TID is a number ... nothing special about the number, except that when one looks up that number in a table along with the network ID (another simple number) one has enough information to tell the receiver how to receive the signal. Think of the combination of NID and TID as a license plate. The number itself contains no information ... the table contains the information needed to find the channel.

There may be some pattern to the numbers ... for example, in Indiana most truck plates now start TK then six characters. With physical plates distributed before issuing one is likely to find similar plates in the same community. But (still in Indiana, your state may vary) SUVs and vans can be licensed as a car or a truck ... a van can have a car license plate. Vehicles can also have affinity plates and vanity plates. The important part is that the plate has a unique number that can be looked up in a table.

The receiver's channel table has the NID and TID and looks up the rest of the information needed to tune the channel (orbital location, frequency, Polarity, Bit Rate, FEC, Modulation). If you have access to the NIT (network information table) then you have what you need to find the correct transponder.

As noted, there may be patterns to the combinations of NID and TID ... but there does not have to be. The patterns help keep the humans on track ... the machines are happy using tables to look up the answers.


----------



## HoTat2

Tom Robertson said:


> How does the receiver care which satellite a TID relates to? Doesn't it only care about which frequency group and subgroup to select? So it could be D10 or D15--the receiver doesn't care. ...


Agreed;

The receiver doesn't care what actual co-located satellite a particular xpndr at an orbital slot resides on. Just about the xpndr itself at that slot.



> ...
> I only theorize some reasons why DIRECTV might pick different TIDs where the only difference is the satellite. There might be other reasons DIRECTV might or might not change TIDs. We don't know. We only speculate.
> 
> Peace,
> Tom


True;

Though from what I understand about DIRECTV's systems the TIDs used for D15 won't be different except for it's xpndrs 1-8 on the Ka-hi band.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

Tom Robertson said:


> Perhaps I've missed previous discussion(s) about this, there could be a couple reasons DIRECTV might fire up D15s transponders in favor of anything already up there.
> 
> 
> Electrical power utilization and balance on the various satellites. (Including remaining battery capacity.)
> Broadcast power control or flexibility on D15 vs. the others.
> Number of transponder spares (either remaining on existing satellites or built into D15.)
> And even possibly fuel. If the older satellites can use less fuel by turning off certain transponder groups which might not work as well with a slightly larger orbit box (going to the edges of the FCC approved box.) Ok, I'm thinking out loud, though I could envision a situation where an older reflector arrangement needs tighter control in the box to maintain efficiency.
> Basically if D15s newer technologies represent advantages over what is already up there, there might be good reasons to use D15 instead.


D15 has several advantages over what is up there now.

1. Its CONUS transponders have spots that also cover Hawaii, Alaska, and Puerto Rico. D10 & D12's CONUS transponders cover the first two, but not Puerto Rico.
2. It can broadcast on Ka hi transponders 1-8, D12 cannot.
3. It is claimed to be the US's most powerful television broadcast satellite, so it can handle a lot more than D10 or D12.

Due to #1, they'll want to use it to carry a lot, to eliminate the current need for the Spaceways to mirror 'CONUS' channels in PR. Once it does Ka hi transponders 1-8 will no longer be used anywhere for locals, enabling its use for #2. Since D10 has had issues, and it has plenty of power thanks to #3, it is reasonable to assume it will take over all of D10's Ka lo transponders. It appears to have been designed to broadcast 42 transponders at once (24 Ka and 18 RDBS) so using it this way won't even hit that much totaling only 40 transponders (eventually, once they resolve the potential Canada/ITU issues that may delay lighting up its 18 RDBS transponders)


----------



## Tom Robertson

HoTat2 said:


> Agreed;
> 
> The receiver doesn't care what actual co-located satellite a particular xpndr at an orbital slot resides on. Just about the xpndr itself at that slot.
> 
> True;
> 
> Though from what I understand about DIRECTV's systems the TIDs used for D15 won't be different except for it's xpndrs 1-8 on the Ka-hi band.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


And that is cool too. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## P Smith

James Long said:


> Other than the receivers, where is the TID used?
> Can you answer that question with facts and not speculation?


Can you provide facts to oppose it ?

Why I must provide THE facts when I'm in same boat as all participants here ?
My point was about slice's firm statement, he is the same kind and speculating as enveryone.


----------



## mexican-bum

P Smith said:


> Can you provide facts to oppose it ?


It's proper to answer a question before asking another.

But I suppose what you said sounds better than your true answer which is ..... I don't know and No.


----------



## P Smith

It's proper to read the thread's post and follow content, not just pick words and turn the topic into personal pressure!


----------



## mexican-bum

P Smith said:


> It's proper to read the thread's post and follow content, not just pick words and turn the topic into personal pressure!


Lol! Just answer his question dude, with some facts. It's an easy question.

They are right but you are too proud say "my bad, I am wrong"

See easy.


----------



## P Smith

Dude ! Read my last posts here ! You have common with JL who are SPECULATING by using licence plates is not stating facts, but do REQUIRE them from others. Sush...

I did my resoning in using TID not only in FW of IRD.
Just read posts dude.


----------



## mexican-bum

P Smith said:


> Dude ! Read my last posts here ! You have common with JL who are SPECULATING by using licence plates is not stating facts, but do REQUIRE them from others. Sush...
> 
> I did my resoning in using TID not only in FW of IRD.
> Just read posts dude.


They are just making an educated guess.... But unlike you they DO have historical data that points to their way of thinking. These thing are rarely 100% certain.

Your welcome to speculate anything you want but others won't take your stance seriously unless facts support it.

Example:
If a person picks up a can of spray paint that says "red" on the label one would "speculate" red paint would come out the nozzle.

But if the salesman says those can's of paint are 1/2 off because the paint is actually black not red.

The paint salesman provided information that changed my logical point of view.

In your case you have failed to do this, thus they don't agree with you.

See, simple.


----------



## P Smith

stop trolling
if you want participate then say something usefull on the topic, if you don't get about TID at all, stay out

enough for me not to follow the offtopic spiral


----------



## James Long

P Smith said:


> Why I must provide THE facts when I'm in same boat as all participants here ?


I was hoping that your claim was more than mere speculation ... but apparently it was not. So I am sorry but your claim that the TID is used for internal routing (or anything more than what we can agree that it IS used for) must be dismissed.

Are you claiming that the NID+TID pair are NOT used to tell the receiver where to look for the channel?

I used the license plate example because license plates are something that nearly all are familiar with and can relate to. Such comparisons are common when using the English language to explain things. I could tell people to go read the MPEG satellite standards but I do not feel that would be as helpful as explaining the tags in simple language.


----------



## P Smith

"must be dismissed" ? seem to me you did not get a spirit of the discussion. Mod mode is not appropriate here now, sorry.

actually enough of the sinister spinoff ... I said what I'm thinking about using TIDs - I'm done !


----------



## James Long

P Smith said:


> "must be dismissed" ? seem to me you did not get a spirit of the discussion. Mod mode is not appropriate here now, sorry.
> 
> actually enough of the sinister spinoff ... I said what I'm thinking about using TIDs - I'm done !


Here is the unsupported statement I specifically dismiss:


P Smith said:


> YES, BUT YOU're MISSED other PART OF WHOLE PATH - for distributing programs you'll need TID eg address of transponder for upload content


I believe we agree on how NID+TID are used by receivers ... but you're finding no agreement with your belief that TID is used earlier in the transmission chain for routing.


----------



## P Smith

and again , that's my thoughts; I don't need any agreement.
Done with it.


----------



## studechip

Nerd fight! Nerd fight!


----------



## Ken984

Meanwhile back to D15. Not too far from "normal" operating tolerances.

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-09-14 15:18:34
Orbit # at Epoch 115
Inclination 0.032
RA of A. Node 105.553
Eccentricity 0.0001092
Argument of Perigee 127.826
Revs per day 1.00271503
Period 23h 56m 06s (1436.10 min)
Semi-major axis 42 165 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 782 x 35 791 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 246.779
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary

1DIRECTV 15
Lon 102.7906° W
Lat 0.0244° S
Alt (km) 35 789.360
Azm 196.5°
Elv 51.0°
RA 06h 31m 48s
Decl -5° 17' 29"
Range (km) 37 015.794
RRt (km/s) 0.000
Vel (km/s) 3.074
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 225.9° (160)
TA 225.9°
Orbit # 116
Mag (illum) ? (36%)
Constellation Mon


----------



## Ken984

Its parked, or its so very close to it, that we can put this thread to bed.

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-09-17 15:56:33
Orbit # at Epoch 118
Inclination 0.025
RA of A. Node 95.622
Eccentricity 0.0000407
Argument of Perigee 118.133
Revs per day 1.00268437
Period 23h 56m 08s (1436.13 min)
Semi-major axis 42 166 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 786 x 35 789 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000100000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 278.895
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group Geostationary

1DIRECTV 15
Lon 102.7800° W
Lat 0.0131° N
Alt (km) 35 786.040
Azm 196.5°
Elv 51.0°
RA 10h 28m 46s
Decl -5° 14' 58"
Range (km) 37 009.778
RRt (km/s) 0.000
Vel (km/s) 3.075
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 304.8° (216)
TA 304.8°
Orbit # 118
Mag (illum) ? (2%)
Constellation Sex


----------



## HoTat2

Ken984 said:


> Its parked, or its so very close to it, that we can put this thread to bed. ...


That is, unless beyond positioning this thread also serves for discussion of evidence of D15 lighting up to begin service, the Mods may wish to keep it open for that.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Ken984

True. I thought about that after i posted also. At least till we get the first signs of operation.


----------



## YUMA11

When D15 begins operating?


Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk


----------



## HoTat2

YUMA11 said:


> When D15 begins operating?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using DBSTalk


Yes by activating its xpndrs for service of relaying programming.

Though as has been discussed here just recently (heated at times unfortunately) with the possible exception of Ka-hi xpndrs 1-8 if used, it may be problematic to actually determine when this will happen on our end if D15 takes the some or all of the TID numbers as the existing ones for D10 and 12's CONUS+ xpndrs.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## David Ortiz

I'm enjoying the dark channels already. :rolling:


----------



## bakers12

When I looked at Orbitron last night, i saw that D15 was out of its box and figured a new TLE would be coming soon. I see a new TLE this morning, but D15 is still out of the box. Here is what Orbitron is saying right now on the latest TLE.

Remember, D15 only has a 0.025 degree margin on longitude, half of what is usual.

1DIRECTV 15
Lon 102.7950° W
Lat 0.0088° N
Alt (km) 35 785.950
Azm 201.6°
Elv 39.4°
RA 09h 17m 41s
Decl -6° 23' 57"
Range (km) 37 821.153
RRt (km/s) -0.001
Vel (km/s) 3.075
Direction Ascending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 272.2° (193)
TA 272.2°
Orbit # 119
Mag (illum) ? (9%)
Constellation Hya

With the revs per day/period as they are, D15 isn't drifting at all.

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-09-18 08:21:49
Orbit # at Epoch 119
Inclination 0.036
RA of A. Node 105.609
Eccentricity 0.0001034
Argument of Perigee 123.497
Revs per day 1.00271616
Period 23h 56m 05s (1436.8 min)
Semi-major axis 42 165 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 782 x 35 791 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 150.531
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group N/A


----------



## slice1900

D15 is supposed to be at 102.75 and D12 at 102.80, so if this TLE is accurate D15 is not only out of its box but well into D12's box.


----------



## bakers12

According to TLEs that came out today, Orbitron shows these positions (at the time of this post) for D12 and D15:

1DIRECTV 12
Lon 102.7978° W
Lat 0.0122° S

1DIRECTV 15
Lon 102.7876° W
Lat 0.0272° N

I don't think D15 can legally broadcast from this longitude, since the West edge of its box is 102.775° W.

Since the revs-per-day on D15 at 1.00268676 have been getting slightly smaller, a drift to the East is not happening yet. Eastward drift requires revs-per day to be greater than about 1.000272. If anything, D15 is headed further West!


----------



## slice1900

How precisely do they need to aim those really big dishes they uplink from? Maybe they moved D15 over next to D12 until they install a new big dish aimed in the slot D15 is supposed to go?


----------



## bakers12

I don't know about the uplink. My concern is the downlink, which I don't think can happen from their current location.


----------



## bakers12

The latest TLE from early this morning shows that DIRECTV put D15 back in the box.

DIRECTV 15
Lon 102.7436° W
Lat 0.0062° N
Alt (km) 35 784.360
Azm 201.5°
Elv 39.4°
RA 20h 35m 10s
Decl -6° 24' 09"
Range (km) 37 818.578
RRt (km/s) 0.000
Vel (km/s) 3.075
Direction Descending
Eclipse No
MA (phase) 64.1° (45)
TA 64.1°
Orbit # 130
Mag (illum) ? (79%)
Constellation Aqr

Name DIRECTV 15
NORAD # 40663
COSPAR designator 2015-026-A 
Epoch (UTC) 2015-09-28 13:28:10
Orbit # at Epoch 129
Inclination 0.039
RA of A. Node 108.587
Eccentricity 0.0000885
Argument of Perigee 137.978
Revs per day 1.00272193
Period 23h 56m 05s (1436.8 min)
Semi-major axis 42 165 km
Perigee x Apogee 35 783 x 35 790 km
BStar (drag term) 0.000000000 1/ER
Mean anomaly 219.749
Propagation model SDP4
Element number / age 999 / 0 day(s)
StdMag (MaxMag) / RCS N/A
Diameters N/A
Satellite group N/A

This data is from Orbitron at the time of this post.


----------



## P Smith

should we/DTV write off the satellite ?
no news, no activity in system tables, no new SS screen in last FW versions ... nothing ! it's just drifting in and out of its "box"


----------



## HoTat2

P Smith said:


> should we/DTV write off the satellite ?
> no news, no activity in system tables, no new SS screen in last FW versions ... nothing ! it's just drifting in and out of its "box"


Unless the movement to D15 so far is simply invisible on our end due to CONUS+ xpndr overlap with D10 and 12 and reuse of the same TIDs as discussed earlier.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

P Smith said:


> should we/DTV write off the satellite ?
> no news, no activity in system tables, no new SS screen in last FW versions ... nothing ! it's just drifting in and out of its "box"


Are you taking over for the beagle's FUD? With the merger who knows how the planned schedule has been interrupted or delayed...


----------



## dennisj00

slice1900 said:


> Are you taking over for the beagle's FUD? With the merger who knows how the planned schedule has been interrupted or delayed...


Haven't seen the beagle in a while . . . site says Aug 2 was the last active. Wonder what's up?


----------



## studechip

He's been posting at Satguys, perhaps there is an issue with the local gendarmes here?


----------



## KyL416

Again, for those who weren't paying attention when D14 litup or forgot:

D14 was a new block of bandwidth which is why 99ca was added to the display, that is NOT the case for D15. It's replacing bandwidth on 103 so its transponders will show up on 103ca and/or 103cb.

As we saw when D14 first went live the evening of the D10 fiasco, they do NOT need a firmware update to make the signal level display change from N/A to an actual reading.

And as we saw when D14 first went live before everyone got the latest firmware to show 99ca/99cb instead of 99c, the signal level display has NOTHING to do with the ability to receive channels.

Since D15 is replacing existing bandwidth, they can't really do anything until it's in position and they move the existing channels to other satellites. The first sign of activity will likely be a transponder map showing a block of channels moving from D10 to another satellite, followed by *TEST channels that are moving to D15 to take advantage of the mirroring for Puerto Rico like they did with D14. (i.e. for D14 we saw two pairs of *TEST channels pointing to the same TIDs and VPIDs, but with one channel number that matched USA and another that matched Puerto Rico)

There's a possibility it will replace some spotbeam bandwidth with Conus bandwidth so you might see a few more TPNs change from N/A to actual levels, but as mentioned above, that has nothing to do with the ability to receive channels on those transponders.


----------



## P Smith

I did named a few points of observation what are avaialble for us... perhaps there is more as KyL mentioned above.


----------



## Whiskey River

No news is usually good news, but not this time. How is the new D15 doing ? are they still moving TPN's to P.R. ?
or are they sitting around waiting for AT&T to tell them what to do ? Seems not much has happened lately.


----------



## P Smith

can't see a future of d15 - dark clouds blocking it 
[by voice of Yoda]


----------



## inkahauts

They are taking their time as they did with d14. No surprise there.


----------



## P Smith

inkahauts said:


> They are taking their time as they did with d14. No surprise there.


it become a mantra  over dead body


----------



## Gary Toma

Whiskey River said:


> No news is usually good news, but not this time. How is the new D15 doing ? are they still moving TPN's to P.R. ?


All the recent activity we have seen is ReMapping Domestic Local-Into-Local channels from one sat to another. D14 now has all but 8 TID/Beam slots in service. The only Puerto Rico activity we saw was waaaay back at the beginning of D14's service life.

It is possible that D15 has been tasked to provide mirrored CONUS service to Puerto Rico. But added new channels to Puerto Rico, like added new channels for US Domestic, simply have not happened. Not one new un-served DMA has been added since 9/17/2014. Actual 'growth' is pretty close to zero.


----------



## I WANT MORE

They could at least turn a bright light on so we could walk outside at night, look at it, and say there is D15, it was supposed to bring us a bunch of new channels and 4k.
Isn't it an amazing sight? :blackeye:


----------



## P Smith

somehow it's turned into a zombie last Halloween... boo !


----------



## HoTat2

I WANT MORE said:


> They could at least turn a bright light on so we could walk outside at night, look at it, and say there is D15, it was supposed to bring us a bunch of new channels and 4k.
> Isn't it an amazing sight? :blackeye:


Well, what you should say is something to the effect of ..."Hey, there's D15 in the sky, and along with D14 over there to the left it's supposed to give us future 4K on a brand new reverse band, well ... that is assuming there's ever any created to really give. And except for Puerto Rico, D15 can't really give us much new HD since it mostly covers the same old bandwidth D10 and D12 already have for years."


----------



## inkahauts

HoTat2 said:


> Well, what you should say is something to the effect of ..."Hey, there's D15 in the sky, and along with D14 over there to the left it's supposed to give us future 4K on a brand new reverse band, well ... that is assuming there's ever any created to really give. And except for Puerto Rico, D15 can't really give us much new HD since it mostly covers the same old bandwidth D10 and D12 already have for years."


Except for about 8 more transponders from d15 when they shut down the space way there. . That's a big add...


----------



## HoTat2

inkahauts said:


> Except for about 8 more transponders from d15 when they shut down the space way there. . That's a big add...


Just not sure what to make of the sudden stop and slight reversal to vacating SW1 though.

For a good while like with it's brother SW2, it looked like full steam ahead to emptying out and shutting down SW1. Now a strange stop, a backup, and placed on hold.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith

original plan didn't work well ? need amelioration in orbit ?


----------



## slice1900

Someone speculated that some of D14's spots aren't quite covering everywhere they need to cover. I'm not sure if there's a bit of wiggle room possible in the beam footprint, or maybe they can crank up the power to cover the edges better. Another possible option might be swapping around with D11 and D12 beams. They don't seem to have done much with locals lately, maybe there is higher priority stuff to get done - like if they have some sort of target date for public 4K broadcasts and are still working out kinks there.


----------



## inkahauts

I think it's impossible to figure out what the reason is for some of this stuff right now but it has been discussed that some of it may have to do with uplink centers to still playing the shell game moving things around. And now we know they are messing with the RDBS feeds too it seems so they have a lot happening we just aren't privy to it all. I think the spaceways will end up not doing much pretty soon.


----------



## Gary Toma

Just in case anyone missed it, this is a post in this thread, in April, 2015.

This lady is eloquent. Technically and logically - eloquent.

It is worth re-reading. http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/212402-directv-satellite-discussion-d-15-103w/page-10?p=3351911#entry3351911


----------



## Tom Robertson

Gary Toma said:


> Just in case anyone missed it, this is a post in this thread, in April, 2015.
> 
> This lady is eloquent. Technically and logically - eloquent.
> 
> It is worth re-reading. http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/212402-directv-satellite-discussion-d-15-103w/page-10?p=3351911#entry3351911


Indeed, she done said it well. I'm glad you reminded us.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## HoTat2

Tom Robertson said:


> Indeed, she done said it well. I'm glad you reminded us.
> 
> Peace,
> Tom


Yep indeed ....

Haven't heard from her in a good while though (or the basset hound either for that matter).

She'd gone with FiOS with TIVO units last I remember and haven't seen her post here since around autumn of last year ...

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## tomspeer46

Gary Toma said:


> Just in case anyone missed it, this is a post in this thread, in April, 2015.
> 
> This lady is eloquent. Technically and logically - eloquent.
> 
> It is worth re-reading. http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/212402-directv-satellite-discussion-d-15-103w/page-10?p=3351911#entry3351911


I miss her technically astute, and well thought out posts.


----------



## I WANT MORE

I'd rather someone post about all of the new programming D 15 has provided including 4K UHD.


----------



## HoTat2

I WANT MORE said:


> I'd rather someone post about all of the new programming D 15 has provided including 4K UHD.


Well, anything really "new" from D15 at this point would mainly be for Puerto Rico subs. since D15 largely overlaps the CONUS xpndrs we already receive from D10 and D12, except for the fact neither of those 2 earlier satellites have the ability to mirror their CONUS channels to PR as D15 can.

The only real new spectum D15 can offer are CONUS beam xpndrs for the first 8 Ka-hi xpndr channels once SW1 is vacated and shut down.

And from its 18 Reverse Band xpndrs, 4K programming or otherwise, if and when the legal squabbling over RB broadcast rights to that slot is settled.

So to sum up, no activity has been detected from D15 as of yet.

It's like it's asleep.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## dpeters11

tomspeer46 said:


> I miss her technically astute, and well thought out posts.


Many of us do, but she had been involved for a long time back to her own forum and deserved at least a bit of a break.


----------



## alnielsen

What forum might that be?


----------



## Tom Robertson

alnielsen said:


> What forum might that be?


She founded a forum on DBS, just before DBStalk(?). I think it was dbsforums.com. Several of us participated there too, way back in the day. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## cypherx

Wow, sounds like she's someone's ultimate wife! Seriously gals like that are RARE.


----------



## P Smith

cypherx said:


> Wow, sounds like she's someone's ultimate wife! Seriously gals like that are RARE.


you are a member here long enough to know her coming out post and could read back much more ...

but we got enough offtopic
:backtotop:


----------



## doctor j

Earth Station Update
License for UPLINK to RB-1 and RB-2

Maybe soon some action??

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/SESLIC2015111300843&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number

Doctor j


----------



## HoTat2

doctor j said:


> Earth Station Update
> License for UPLINK to RB-1 and RB-2
> 
> *Maybe soon some action??*
> 
> 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/SESLIC2015111300843&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number
> 
> Doctor j


Except for the fact that the TBC article reports that the LABF uplink station which that earth station is to be the first of, isn't expected to be completed until sometime in the later half of 2016.

http://dbstalk.com/index.php?/topic/216777-Tech-Reference-Library#entry3402989

Can that earth station reasonably be expected to begin operation before the entire facility is actually completed?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

Well they are already uplinking to RB-1 (whichever one is at 99) from somewhere since they have had four modulated transponders for weeks now.


----------



## Diana C

Tom Robertson said:


> She founded a forum on DBS, just before DBStalk(?). I think it was dbsforums.com. Several of us participated there too, way back in the day.
> 
> Peace,
> Tom


Just stopped by to say hi! :wave: Thanks for the kind words about my posts.


----------



## Jon J

Diana C said:


> Just stopped by to say hi! :wave: Thanks for the kind words about my posts.


Hi right back at ya! We had great discussions at the old site when many of us were transitioning from a BUD. Stop by more often.


----------



## hancox

At what point would this seemingly endless wait would the useful life of the bird be impacted? May be a stupid/crazy question, but i can't remember any TV satellite waiting this long, either...


----------



## P Smith

perhaps it's mothballed


----------



## hancox

P Smith said:


> perhaps it's mothballed


I was thinking more like jammed...


----------



## HoTat2

Yeah ...

Like they could at least have long begun the process migrating D10's 103(cb) nationals over to D15's Ka-lo band payload so Puerto Rico subs can receive them too by now.


----------



## inkahauts

Have we heard if anything is happening with the ground station?

There's so many reasons why they may not be using it yet. Maybe they don't need it to mirror channels to Puerto Rico Hawaii etc.? I keep expecting the Spaceway satellite to be turned off so they can turn on the eight additional transponders on this one to fill in that gap. But maybe that's just us thinking it will happen and never will? 

It could be they are waiting because The only thing they plan on really using it for at this time is BSS. And we know they are not using BSS yet because they don't have the LNBs out to the market yet.

And it can't hurt the satellite to be running it super low power right now versus running at full blast.


----------



## slice1900

Well D15's BSS may be delayed for years depending onhow long it takes them to resolve that fight with Ciel. I assume it will end up with the ITU at some point, unless Directv offers some sort of settlement. Maybe they'll offer them D10, SW1 and SW2 

There's a lot about the rollout of D14 and D15 that don't make sense. Why are some 99ca transponders N/A on D14? Why haven't its remaining spotbeams been lit up? Why hasn't Directv made any moves to fill in the unserved DMAs, especially since they have dedicated spot beams on D14 for some of them? Why did they stop the movements to get more HD channels for PR? Why are they still using the (presumably) less trustworthy D10 instead of migrating those transponders to D15?

As far as impact on useful life that hancox brought up, I wouldn't worry about it. The design life of a satellite is typically 15 years, but the fuel life is usually longer. Directv published some stats a few years back showing the design life and fuel life of their fleet and all had fuel life extending past 2020 except for one (can't remember if it was D4S or D5, either way it doesn't affect anything)


----------



## inkahauts

I agree that's there's a lot that doesn't seem to make sense. But in guessing it does to them and I'm guessing that some of it is us not having the software to see what's actually happening.


----------



## KyL416

Yeah, everyone was speculating why so many D14 transponders were still 0, a few months later more Puerto Rican moves happened for some of them, and then a few weeks ago they added more linear 4K test channels to the other transponders. Also, none of the previous Puerto Rican moves actually resulted in Puerto Rico getting new channels, they were already getting those channels via SW1 and/or SW2. (i.e. right now D11 TPN 7 is being mirrored to SW1 TID 035 for Puerto Rico) The moves just consolidated things so that instead of requiring an additional spotbeam on another satellite, the same transponders on D14 are delivering the channels to both USA and Puerto Rico.

The remaining "0"s are either leftovers from the temporary homes of some locals during the SW2 migration and from the night of the D10 issue where channels were added to D14 within a few hours. Also as we saw that night, they can switch the signal level screen from N/A to active without needing a firmware upgrade.

As for D15, apparantly they feel safe enough about whatever caused the D10 issue last year and are in no rush to offload it, if they were really worried about the state of D10 they would have kept those temporarily displaced channels on D14 and wait for D15 to start the Puerto Rican mirrors. Plus like mentioned above, the dispute with Ciel over who has the rights to the Reverse Band at 103. (It's not like there's a rush of new linear 4K channels that would require that bandwidth in the near future anyway)

There's still 2 empty transponders on D11 from the latest round of D14 migrations, so it's not like they're lacking bandwidth for new HD channels compared to the pre-D14 era where anything we got was either a result of a dispute (WeatherNation), lawsuit settlement (Reelz and Ovation) or some new "must have" in HD content (TWC Sportsnet, Root Southwest and SEC). They'll have even more whenever they start deploying the Reverse band LNBs to 4K subscribers and can move those D14 linear 4K channels to the Reverse band transponders.


----------



## David Ortiz

slice1900 said:


> Well D15's BSS may be delayed for years depending onhow long it takes them to resolve that fight with Ciel...


http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=1088910

http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=1095657

The above indicate that a coordination agreement has been reached regarding BSS at 103 W.L., in April 2015. I can't find a link to the actual agreement.


----------



## slice1900

Good catch, that's the first I've seen that. I guess Dish has given up on the plans for location those cell tower sited dishes in the US, and this will be a Canada only offering. Still not sure what exactly they're doing since the dishes are receive only. Sounds like the way is clear for Directv to make use of the reverse band transponders on D15, so maybe we'll see some non-zero readings on those at some point.


----------



## P Smith

KyL416 said:


> Yeah, everyone was speculating why so many D14 transponders were still 0, a few months later more Puerto Rican moves happened for some of them, and then a few weeks ago they added more linear 4K test channels to the other transponders. Also, none of the previous Puerto Rican moves actually resulted in Puerto Rico getting new channels, they were already getting those channels via SW1 and/or SW2. (i.e. right now D11 TPN 7 is being mirrored to SW1 TID 035 for Puerto Rico) The moves just consolidated things so that instead of requiring an additional spotbeam on another satellite, the same transponders on D14 are delivering the channels to both USA and Puerto Rico.
> 
> The remaining "0"s are either leftovers from the temporary homes of some locals during the SW2 migration and from the night of the D10 issue where channels were added to D14 within a few hours. Also as we saw that night, they can switch the signal level screen from N/A to active without needing a firmware upgrade.
> 
> As for D15, apparantly they feel safe enough about whatever caused the D10 issue last year and are in no rush to offload it, if they were really worried about the state of D10 they would have kept those temporarily displaced channels on D14 and wait for D15 to start the Puerto Rican mirrors. Plus like mentioned above, the dispute with Ciel over who has the rights to the Reverse Band at 103. (It's not like there's a rush of new linear 4K channels that would require that bandwidth in the near future anyway)
> 
> There's still 2 empty transponders on D11 from the latest round of D14 migrations, so it's not like they're lacking bandwidth for new HD channels compared to the pre-D14 era where anything we got was either a result of a dispute (WeatherNation), lawsuit settlement (Reelz and Ovation) or some new "must have" in HD content (TWC Sportsnet, Root Southwest and SEC). They'll have even more whenever they start deploying the Reverse band LNBs to 4K subscribers and can move those D14 linear 4K channels to the Reverse band transponders.


KyL, what you could say about the D15 sat ?


----------



## slice1900

Does anyone know where (or if?) one can find the text of international coordination agreements? Supposedly Directv reached a coordination agreement with Ciel over the use of reverse band frequencies at 103.

If you recall, Ciel had moved a satellite to 103 capable of broadcasting in reverse band and claimed international priority for broadcasts from that location in Canada as well as the US. Dish jumped in (no doubt to screw Directv) to use these frequencies as the basis for downlinks to their still non-existent cellular network, and had an application before the FCC to construct 50,000 earth stations on cell towers to receive broadcasts from Ciel's satellite. The FCC was not allowing Ciel to enable the other services (C band etc.) band from this satellite until a coordination agreement was reached.

It has been reported by both sides that they reached an agreement, and the FCC allowed Ciel to begin their C band broadcasts, so everything looked to be resolved. Except Dish is pressing forward with building all those earth stations, and just submitted a modification to give them another six months to complete them. Why would Dish be building earth stations in the US to receive reverse band from 103 unless the coordination agreement basically said that D15 will never be able to enable reverse band operations from 103?

Could this be why D15 has been sitting around doing nothing, and while we have seen some action from 99(cr) there has been nothing on 103(cr)? Without being able to use reverse band, there isn't a whole lot of reason for D15 to be located at 103. If they can't ever use it for reverse band from 103, it probably makes sense to move it to 101 in 2019 when they cease MPEG2 operations and no longer need the spot beams from 101. Until then it would just be a hot spare sitting at 103 against another D10 failure. If they miss the 18 transponders worth of bandwidth they would have had with 103(cr) they would have the capability to add 24 Ka lo or Ka hi transponders from 101 via a new LNB.

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/SESMOD2016060600485&prepare=&column=V_SITE_ANTENNA_FREQ.file_numberC/File+Number


----------



## lwilli201

Are the 3D2RB and 5D2RB LNB's only capable of recieving RB from 103? Does Directv or any one else have an RB license at 101?


----------



## HoTat2

lwilli201 said:


> Are the 3D2RB and 5D2RB LNB's only capable of recieving RB from 103? Does Directv or any one else have an RB license at 101?


No, the 3D2RB and 5D2RB can receive Reverse Band from both 99 and 103W.

However, only RB xpndrs from 99W (a RB payload on D14) are showing any activity at this time.

RB service from 103W was tied up in litigation with Canada for a long time, but an accommodation was supposedly reached early last year. Though no one has heard of any news since or can locate a copy of the accommodation agreement.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## lwilli201

HoTat2 said:


> No, the 3D2RB and 5D2RB can receive Reverse Band from both 99 and 103W.
> 
> However, only RB xpndrs from 99W (a RB payload on D14) are showing any activity at this time.
> 
> RB service from 103W was tied up in litigation with Canada for a long time, but an accommodation was supposedly reached early last year. Though no one has heard of any news since or can locate a copy of the accommodation agreement.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


I understand the 103 RB problem. I was just wondering who had RB authority at 101. It would seem strange that the current RB LNB's would be limited to 103 since the RB license problem has been going on for a long time. How Directv would use RB at 101, if that is even possible, is another question.


----------



## HoTat2

lwilli201 said:


> I understand the 103 RB problem. I was just wondering who had RB authority at 101. It would seem strange that the current RB LNB's would be limited to 103 since the RB license problem has been going on for a long time. How Directv would use RB at 101, if that is even possible, is another question.


AFAIK, the FCC and ITU regulations settled on a 4° nominal minimum separation for the 17/24 GHz BSS (aka "DBS Reverse Band") satellite slots.

So RB can't be licensed for both 99 and 101W.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## lwilli201

HoTat2 said:


> AFAIK, the FCC and ITU regulations settled on a 4° nominal minimum separation for the 17/24 GHz BSS (aka "DBS Reverse Band") satellite slots.
> 
> So RB can't be licensed for both 99 and 101W.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


That clears up a lot of questions. Thanks


----------



## slice1900

Directv has the following licenses for the US:

99 - 24 Ka hi, 24 Ka lo, 18 RDBS (RDBS not yet used for programming)
103 - 24 Ka hi, 24 Ka lo, 18 RDBS (RDBS may not be usable)
101 - 32 Ku, 24 Ka hi, 24 Ka lo ([email protected] is not configured for user programming and no LNBs can receive it)
110 - 3 Ku (no longer used in the US)
119 - 11 Ku

With replacement satellite(s) at 101 and a new LNB, they could make use of Ka from 101, but if they ever do that it would be in the far future, after the 2019 MPEG2 shutdown and only if 4K really took off in a major way.

There are no RDBS licenses available from 101, and no Ku licenses for 99/103, so they've got all the full power DBS licenses they can get in the 99/101/103 constellation.


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> Directv has the following licenses for the US:
> 
> 99 - 24 Ka hi, 24 Ka lo, 18 RDBS (RDBS not yet used for programming)
> 103 - 24 Ka hi, 24 Ka lo, 18 RDBS (RDBS may not be usable)
> 101 - 32 Ku, 24 Ka hi, 24 Ka lo ([email protected] is not configured for user programming and no LNBs can receive it)
> 110 - 3 Ku (no longer used in the US)
> 119 - 11 Ku ...


True,

Though I don't think you would phrase the Ka and RDBS licenses by x'pndr channels that way, but by the total allotted bandwidth.

Unlike the Ku DBS band that specified the x'pndr channelization scheme, the FCC allows the license holder to apportion those other bands into x'pndr channels of any size they wish as long as they make full utilization of the band on both polarities.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> True,
> 
> Though I don't think you would phrase the Ka and RDBS licenses by x'pndr channels that way, but by the total allotted bandwidth.
> 
> Unlike the Ku DBS band that specified the x'pndr channelization scheme, the FCC allows the license holder to apportion those other bands into x'pndr channels of any size they wish as long as they make full utilization of the band on both polarities.


They do, but chipsets that can handle transponders wider than 45 MHz are pretty much nonexistent, so Directv would have to have a custom solution designed if they wanted to use the 250 MHz and 500 MHz wide transponders they're configured for with Ka @ 101 presently, and only equipment using it would be capable of receiving them. Pretty sure that if they put the [email protected] into use they'd split them up into the same 36 MHz transponders they're using for Ka and RDBS at 99/103, but you're right they do have the _option_ do something different. Anyway, at this point I'd say the odds are against them ever using [email protected] for customer broadcasts, because I don't think we're ever going to see enough 4K channels for them to need that extra bandwidth.

Do the license holders have no freedom to change things with Ku even if they control the entire 500 MHz band at a given location? I'd imagine that if Directv really wanted to use 24 36 MHz transponders at 101 with a new satellite, that the FCC would allow it. What difference could it possibly make? Maybe the FCC originally thought there would be a market for third party receivers and wanted to standardize things, but that is no longer a concern..


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> They do, but chipsets that can handle transponders wider than 45 MHz are pretty much nonexistent, so Directv would have to have a custom solution designed if they wanted to use the 250 MHz and 500 MHz wide transponders they're configured for with Ka @ 101 presently, and only equipment using it would be capable of receiving them. Pretty sure that if they put the [email protected] into use they'd split them up into the same 36 MHz transponders they're using for Ka and RDBS at 99/103, but you're right they do have the _option_ do something different. Anyway, at this point I'd say the odds are against them ever using [email protected] for customer broadcasts, because I don't think we're ever going to see enough 4K channels for them to need that extra bandwidth.
> 
> Do the license holders have no freedom to change things with Ku even if they control the entire 500 MHz band at a given location? I'd imagine that if Directv really wanted to use 24 36 MHz transponders at 101 with a new satellite, that the FCC would allow it. What difference could it possibly make? Maybe the FCC originally thought there would be a market for third party receivers and wanted to standardize things, but that is no longer a concern..


I never understood satellite receiver's tuner bandwidth as necessarily equal to the x'pndr bandwidth, but only wide enough to receive the spectrum of largest individual transmission it needs relayed through the satellite.

So if you had for instance one broad band 500 MHz x'pndr relaying an ensemble of 13-14 36M0G7W digitally modulated individual carriers sent in frequency division multiple access fashion, the receiver only needs the ability to tune any one of the carriers.

However, it could be that the cheap cost (needed for mass consumer production) and thereby lower quality of the tuner selectivity in the receivers may not be sufficient for FDMA over a broadband x'pndr to reject interference from an adjacent transmission without the help of additional selective filtering from the satellite x'pndr as well.

Commercial equipment can of course, but perhaps not consumer.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> I never understood satellite receiver's tuner bandwidth as necessarily equal to the x'pndr bandwidth, but only wide enough to receive the spectrum of largest individual transmission it needs relayed through the satellite.
> 
> So if you had for instance one broad band 500 MHz x'pndr relaying an ensemble of 13-14 36M0G7W digitally modulated individual carriers sent in frequency division multiple access fashion, the receiver only needs the ability to tune any one of the carriers.
> 
> However, it could be that the cheap cost (needed for mass consumer production) and thereby lower quality of the tuner selectivity in the receivers may not be sufficient for FDMA over a broadband x'pndr to reject interference from an adjacent transmission without the help of additional selective filtering from the satellite x'pndr as well.


Yeah, I have to think that if it was possible to do this without seriously degrading SNR due to amplifying noise between carriers, they would do so for cost reasons. There are other potential problems too, like possibly the cost/difficulty of amplifying an entire 500 MHz frequency block, versus smaller amplifiers that handle 24 or 36 MHz at a time. To get the same power at the carriers it would need to be something like 15x more powerful.


----------



## cypherx

What about the recent advance of single tuner chips capeable of full bandwidth capture? My cable modem for example has one tuner chip and receives 54-1002 MHz forward path in one giant swath. Its also visible with the built in spectrum analyzer display at its internal UI at http://192.168.100.1:8080 (Arris SB6183)


----------



## slice1900

Full band capture chips digitize the incoming spectrum (the HR54's digitizes from 250 to 2350 MHz) but still require one or more demodulators to decode the signal into a usable form. This design saves money in a chip designed to implement multiple tuners, because it has a single ADC (analog to digital converter) instead of splitting the signal and needing a separate ADC for each tuner.

Full band capture tuners have the same width limits and couldn't handle a 250 or 500 MHz wide transponder.


----------



## doctor j

This is the most recent "official" notice about Ciel 6, SES3 Dish and Directv at RB 103.
The S2892 "Grant" references a "co-ordination" that should have occurred on or around 4/2015

Anyone else have anything to add to this legal maze

Doctor j


----------



## David Ortiz

doctor j said:


> This is the most recent "official" notice about Ciel 6, SES3 Dish and Directv at RB 103.
> The S2892 "Grant" references a "co-ordination" that should have occurred on or around 4/2015
> 
> Anyone else have anything to add to this legal maze
> 
> Doctor j


http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/212402-directv-satellite-discussion-d-15-103w/?p=3415774

Links to two other docs.


----------



## lwilli201

Should any co-ordination between Ceil and Directv that has to do with the use of bandwidth have to be approved by the FCC and become public record?


----------



## slice1900

The only reason I can think of why Dish would continue with their plans to deploy all those earth stations in the US to receive data from the Ciel satellite if Directv is legally allowed to broadcast would be if the Ciel satellite is broadcasting at a power low enough to be under the Slimline's noise floor. I should think something like 15 db or so weaker than Directv broadcasts in CONUS would be sufficient.

Since Dish is using 4.5m and 6.5m dishes, and the Ciel satellite is offset from D15 by several tenths of a degree, I think those dishes would be able to focus precisely on the Ciel satellite and there would be little or no interference from D15. It may be that the Ciel satellite does not have sufficient power to use C, Ku and reverse band all at once at full power, if so perhaps this type of solution would be acceptable to all concerned.


----------



## P Smith

Last days spotted RB activity on D-15, see the post http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/170004-directv-satellite-discussion-d-14-99w/#entry3442184


----------



## hancox

Something that's been in the back of my mind for a while...

At what point do ATT shareholders ask what's going on with this fairly expensive asset? I understand that the answer might be as simple as "we're waiting for content," but that seems like an awful waste of money.

I understand "mothballing" this bird extends its service length, but this is getting a little ridiculous.


----------



## inkahauts

It was always called an in orbit spare and they may want to keep one true in orbit spare here on out since they did have d10 just shut down on them one day ages ago. So other than the boss maybe they don’t plan on turning it on. Or you know, this has been their plan all along and they are waiting to finish all the migratoin they have been doing and off loading of channels from certain satellites before they really start using it. Granted for all we know it is in use now we just can’t tell.


----------



## slice1900

Having a satellite sit unused in orbit is no different than a company that has a secondary data center that's redundant and not used unless some sort of disaster takes out the first one. Almost all large companies have that type of setup with millions of dollars worth of unused or at least seriously underutilized computing resources.

I think long term the plan is D15 will be used for reverse band and perhaps 103ca tpns 1-8 if they ever successfully decom SW1. The other possibility is that it will go to 101, and D16 currently being built will go to 103 and take on that role.

Everyone who is whining about D15 not being used, exactly what do you think they be using it FOR? It isn't as though they have licenses to use spectrum they aren't using now that D15 is capable of broadcasting. Well, other than reverse band, but what's the point of lighting that up today when there are no 4K channels for them to carry? Not to mention that they don't even have legacy reverse band LNBs out yet, and all those MDUs with shared dishes will need to replace theirs to permit those customers a way to receive 4K channels when they finally do arrive.


----------



## P Smith

while we are guessing about _future_ use of the D15, I'm thinking of its current utilization - we cannot prove/disprove if some D15 tpns already substitute D10 malfunctioned tpns


----------



## hancox

inkahauts said:


> It was always called an in orbit spare and they may want to keep one true in orbit spare here on out since they did have d10 just shut down on them one day ages ago. So other than the boss maybe they don't plan on turning it on. Or you know, this has been their plan all along and they are waiting to finish all the migratoin they have been doing and off loading of channels from certain satellites before they really start using it. Granted for all we know it is in use now we just can't tell.


That's sort of my point - their "migration" has been molasses:

1) Internationals haven't moved - to the point where they have to release a different LNB for RB service and 95 - could have avoided that cost?
2) 119 still used, including East coast locals (which was never a good idea to begin with), and guide data
3) No MPEG4 simulcasting with their self-imposed MPEG2 retirement looming (and likely about the time they would need to retire at least 1 bird too)

I get the need for redundancy (I work in IT), and it's potentially just as likely that a bid failure might force their hand first, but things have slowed down enough at both the 4k content front, and at ATT in general, that the mind wanders a bit.


----------



## HoTat2

But keep in mind as P. Smith noted, we can't be completely certain D15 is not already in use if DIRECTV is reusing the same TID numbers as before with D10 and D12's CONUS+ beam transponders.

The other (indirect) way of confirming D15's use is if PR subscribers begin to receive mirrored national programming from 103(ca) and -(cb), which hasn't been reported.

But the problem here is that just because D15's PR mirror spotbeams may downlink signals to the island does not mean the receivers there are authorized to receive them yet. So even this lack of particular PR programming from 103W would not necessarily indicate that D15 is inactive.

Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

hancox said:


> That's sort of my point - their "migration" has been molasses:
> 
> 1) Internationals haven't moved - to the point where they have to release a different LNB for RB service and 95 - could have avoided that cost?
> 2) 119 still used, including East coast locals (which was never a good idea to begin with), and guide data
> 3) No MPEG4 simulcasting with their self-imposed MPEG2 retirement looming (and likely about the time they would need to retire at least 1 bird too)
> 
> I get the need for redundancy (I work in IT), and it's potentially just as likely that a bid failure might force their hand first, but things have slowed down enough at both the 4k content front, and at ATT in general, that the mind wanders a bit.


While I think they could have moved the international channels - temporarily to reverse band if nothing else - there is probably some reason we aren't aware of that's not a good idea.

There's no way D15 could replace the use of 119, especially for locals, so I'm not sure what your complaint is about. That's like complaining that the HR24 isn't upgradeable for 4K viewing. And what would be the point of 'MPEG4 simulcasting'? Sounds like you want MPEG4 SD duplicates of MPEG2 channels...why? You will get that when MPEG2 goes away, what's the hurry?


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> While I think they could have moved the international channels - temporarily to reverse band if nothing else - there is probably some reason we aren't aware of that's not a good idea.
> 
> There's no way D15 could replace the use of 119, especially for locals, so I'm not sure what your complaint is about. That's like complaining that the HR24 isn't upgradeable for 4K viewing. And what would be the point of 'MPEG4 simulcasting'? Sounds like you want MPEG4 SD duplicates of MPEG2 channels...why? You will get that when MPEG2 goes away, what's the hurry?


Although for some reason in various articles on his S.S. blog about or when he happens to mention the '19 SD shutdown, Stuart frequently links the shutdown to a supposed turn-off the 119W satellite as though they're related somehow. And hancox may be referring to this.

While DIRECTV may indeed turn-off the 119W bird in '19, I see this largely as a non-sequitur to shutting down SD, which like you I think is really not going to be a "shutdown" outside of maybe the local SD spotbeams. But mainly a "conversion" over to only national MPEG-4 SD on the DBS Ku band at 101W.

Unless converting to MPEG-4 SD at 101W will allow DIRECTV room to move all their SD Spanish national programming there so 119W may be turned-off is why the two are connected.

Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk


----------



## longrider

Why do some of you think they will still broadcast SD duplicates in MPEG-4? The reason for the duplication now is the millions of MPEG-2 boxes in the field, once those are gone just let the receiver do the downrezing for customers who only want SD. All that would have to be set up in MPEG-4 SD are the SD only channels.


----------



## HoTat2

longrider said:


> Why do some of you think they will still broadcast SD duplicates in MPEG-4? The reason for the duplication now is the millions of MPEG-2 boxes in the field, once those are gone just let the receiver do the downrezing for customers who only want SD. All that would have to be set up in MPEG-4 SD are the SD only channels.


Rain fade backup for national Ka band channels. Continued ease for RV, tailgating, and boat installations to deal with.

And what else would DIRECTV logically do with their Ku DBS spectrum?

Surrender it? 

Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> Unless converting to MPEG-4 SD at 101W will allow DIRECTV room to move all their SD Spanish national programming there so 119W may be turned-off is why the two are connected.


It would. Plus everything on 95W. MPEG4 requires basically 50% of the bit rate of MPEG2, so fitting the 26 CONUS transponders from 101, plus 7 CONUS transponders from 119, plus 7(?) transponders from 95 would be very easy to do after the MPEG4 conversion. They'd even have some spare bandwidth to increase the quality - especially once they replace the satellites at 101 so they can use all 32 transponders for CONUS. They could even move the few MPEG4 SD only channels off 99/103 if they want, though some I think must be located there because of PI needs (KyL416 knows more about how those deals work)

I doubt rain fade backup is something Directv cares about. If they did, they would have receivers automatically switch to Ku based SD where possible. Streaming or on demand / cloud DVR seems a better way to handle signal loss from rain fade for the large majority of their customers post-2019. It isn't like Ku is immune to rain fade, it just takes a little more rain to kill it.

Sure, Directv could move a subset of their HD channels to 101 and free up a lot of bandwidth on 99/103, but what for? Assuming they decom SW1 eventually to open up 103ca tpns 1-8, and after they move channels 104-106 to reverse band, they'll have more than enough room to add every remaining channel in HD. Which they won't, because contracts or other reasons, but they won't need to move HD channels to 101. They simply don't need the bandwidth that would be freed up by this move, so why lose a bunch of RV customers if they don't have to?

Even if there are a few who are still optimistic enough about 4K to believe there will someday be more 4K channels than can fit in the 36 reverse band transponders Directv still has 48 Ka band transponders at 101 they can use in the future if necessary. Just need a satellite at 101 able to deliver it (D16 perhaps will have this capability, like D15 already does) and a new LNB...


----------



## longrider

I never considered shutting down 101, I was thinking to move the more popular HD channels there for the exact reasons you posted.


----------



## Gary Toma

D15 had its 2-year-old birthday on 5/27/17. It is now going on 3 years old. It may be the first satellite ever to fail due to boredom.


----------



## TheRatPatrol

I think the frustration is everyone thought new satellite = more bandwidth = more HD channels being added.


----------



## inkahauts

Shutting down mpeg2 means all the spot beams at 119 won’t be needed anymore...

They could be thinking of moving all the conus 119 and 97 to 101 when mpeg2 gets shut down.

Time will tell. I expect 119 will never die, but rather be used only for PR duplication of conus channels coming from d10 d11 d12


----------



## HoTat2

inkahauts said:


> ...
> 
> Time will tell. I expect 119 will never die, but rather be used only for PR duplication of conus channels coming from d10 d11 d12


Perhaps ...

That is if they reorient the 119W satellite like they did with D5 at 110W. Since to my knowledge, D7S is like those at 101W. Where its CONUS beam cannot hit PR while serving the mainland US, AK, and HI.

Either way, I can't see DIRECTV giving away 11 DBS transponders there to Dish or something.

Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk


----------



## inkahauts

HoTat2 said:


> Perhaps ...
> 
> That is if they reorient the 119W satellite like they did with D5 at 110W. Since to my knowledge, D7S is like those at 101W. Where its CONUS beam cannot hit PR while serving the mainland US, AK, and HI.
> 
> Either way, I can't see DIRECTV giving away 11 DBS transponders there to Dish or something.
> 
> Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk


Yea a reorientation would be needed I think. Then again, what dishes are they installing there? If they are not installing 5lnb dishes then they won't do this but I think they are only installing 5lnb dishes...


----------



## HoTat2

inkahauts said:


> Yea a reorientation would be needed I think. Then again, what dishes are they installing there? If they are not installing 5lnb dishes then they won't do this but I think they are only installing 5lnb dishes...


Yes, they are ...

PR subs nowadays use SL5s.

However, they only receive on 99, 103, and 110W.

101 and 119W are unused as there are no acceptable signal levels there.

Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> Yes, they are ...
> 
> PR subs nowadays use SL5s.
> 
> However, they only receive on 99, 103, and 110W.
> 
> 101 and 119W are unused as there are no acceptable signal levels there.


I think its a given that once D16 is launched and operational, PR will receive 101. Either D16 will go to 101, or it goes to 103 and D15 moves to 101.

They couldn't tilt 119 until the MPEG2 cutoff, but they won't need if there is a new satellite at 101 by then. So it all comes down to the schedule for D16... If I had to bet, I'd say they plan to have it launched and operational before the MPEG2 cutoff - and I'm assuming that is scheduled for late 2019.

How much lead time did Directv give people for the MPG cutoff? They'll need at least that much notice - probably more - for the MPEG2 cutoff since many more receivers will be affected. If they haven't notified anyone by the end of this year, I think it is safe to say that the MPEG2 cutoff is at least H2 2019, if not Dec. 31.


----------



## inkahauts

slice1900 said:


> I think its a given that once D16 is launched and operational, PR will receive 101. Either D16 will go to 101, or it goes to 103 and D15 moves to 101.
> 
> They couldn't tilt 119 until the MPEG2 cutoff, but they won't need if there is a new satellite at 101 by then. So it all comes down to the schedule for D16... If I had to bet, I'd say they plan to have it launched and operational before the MPEG2 cutoff - and I'm assuming that is scheduled for late 2019.
> 
> How much lead time did Directv give people for the MPG cutoff? They'll need at least that much notice - probably more - for the MPEG2 cutoff since many more receivers will be affected. If they haven't notified anyone by the end of this year, I think it is safe to say that the MPEG2 cutoff is at least H2 2019, if not Dec. 31.


Yes they may. I doubt they plan on shutting off d10, d11, and d12. So they still need a way to broadcast their stuff to pr if the long term goal is to have that market have all the same channels as conus.


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> I think its a given that once D16 is launched and operational, PR will receive 101. Either D16 will go to 101, or it goes to 103 and D15 moves to 101.
> 
> They couldn't tilt 119 until the MPEG2 cutoff, but they won't need if there is a new satellite at 101 by then. So it all comes down to the schedule for D16... If I had to bet, I'd say they plan to have it launched and operational before the MPEG2 cutoff - and I'm assuming that is scheduled for late 2019.
> 
> How much lead time did Directv give people for the MPG cutoff? They'll need at least that much notice - probably more - for the MPEG2 cutoff since many more receivers will be affected. If they haven't notified anyone by the end of this year, I think it is safe to say that the MPEG2 cutoff is at least H2 2019, if not Dec. 31.


Whatever the plans for D16, I'm just very surprised it's gone this long without an LOA filing yet with the FCC.

First time I know of this happening as LOAs are regularly submitted well before the actual satellite building starts to give the FCC time to study and then accept, reject, or request a modification to the plans.

Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

inkahauts said:


> Yes they may. I doubt they plan on shutting off d10, d11, and d12. So they still need a way to broadcast their stuff to pr if the long term goal is to have that market have all the same channels as conus.


Who said they'd shut off D10, D11 or D12? D10 maybe since it has proven to be a bit flaky, since D15 could take over for it if they wanted, but D11 and D12 should have years of service remaining.

If they have a satellite at 101 broadcasting MPEG4 SD of all channels to CONUS+PR, that would solve that problem. Put the popular HD channels on D14 and D15 (if they ever start using it) to use the mirroring capability, and they can have SD for the rest until D11 and D12 are replaced in the mid 2020s.


----------



## slice1900

HoTat2 said:


> Whatever the plans for D16, I'm just very surprised it's gone this long without an LOA filing yet with the FCC.
> 
> First time I know of this happening as LOAs are regularly submitted well before the actual satellite building starts to give the FCC time to study and then accept, reject, or request a modification to the plans.


I don't think they need to file a LOA for a satellite that's replacing an existing satellite. It is only if they are making use of new bands that they have to file the LOA, place the $3 million deposit, and submit paperwork for construction milestones.


----------



## inkahauts

slice1900 said:


> Who said they'd shut off D10, D11 or D12? D10 maybe since it has proven to be a bit flaky, since D15 could take over for it if they wanted, but D11 and D12 should have years of service remaining.
> 
> If they have a satellite at 101 broadcasting MPEG4 SD of all channels to CONUS+PR, that would solve that problem. Put the popular HD channels on D14 and D15 (if they ever start using it) to use the mirroring capability, and they can have SD for the rest until D11 and D12 are replaced in the mid 2020s.


What?

First... Do d11 revivers get mpeg4? I don't think they've ever had those in PR did they?

I do not expect there to be two feeds (separate hd and sd) of any channels after they shut off mpeg2.

And I think you missed my point. They will want to be able to show what's on d10,11&12 in PR so they can use 119 and 105 for that. And with the new sat if it goes to 101 then assuming it can mirror over there they could/will have pretty much close to the same bandwidth to point at PR that they have to point at conus. Wouldn't surprise me if they move a 101 sat with more life left to 110 if that's where d16 is headed.


----------



## P Smith

inkahauts said:


> What?


we are all good for such +speculations+ ...
so, don't fight up to your last soldier ,

DTV will show their card eventually ... soon


----------



## slice1900

inkahauts said:


> What?
> 
> First... Do d11 revivers get mpeg4? I don't think they've ever had those in PR did they?
> 
> I do not expect there to be two feeds (separate hd and sd) of any channels after they shut off mpeg2.
> 
> And I think you missed my point. They will want to be able to show what's on d10,11&12 in PR so they can use 119 and 105 for that. And with the new sat if it goes to 101 then assuming it can mirror over there they could/will have pretty much close to the same bandwidth to point at PR that they have to point at conus. Wouldn't surprise me if they move a 101 sat with more life left to 110 if that's where d16 is headed.


I thought you were talking about D10, D11, D12 satellites. Perhaps I'm wrong, but isn't PR MPEG4 only? If so, they don't have any D1x receivers to worry about.

It remains to be seen what happens with 101, but I really do expect to see MPEG4 SD duplicates of everything. Otherwise RVs will need Slimline dishes to pick up all the channels which are bigger and more expensive (especially for built ins) and they'll lose a lot of those customers to Dish.


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> .... Perhaps I'm wrong, but isn't PR MPEG4 only? If so, they don't have any D1x receivers to worry about ...


They are an MPEG-4 only local market ...

PR locals are only on the MPEG-4 Ka band spotbeam tps. "B23-1" and "B24-1" from D14 at 99W.

There are no local MPEG-2 SD duplicates on 110W.

(PR's mirrored CONUS+ nationals are also channeled through the same spotbeams B23/24 used by the local tps.).

Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

If they're an MPEG4 only local market they're fully MPEG4 only, since they can't receive 101 or 119 at this time, which is where the only MPEG2 content currently originates.


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> If they're an MPEG4 only local market they're fully MPEG4 only, since they can't receive 101 or 119 at this time, which is where the only MPEG2 content currently originates.


Almost, but there are still a handful of MPEG-2 SD channels for PR on 110W.

Not nearly as many as before, but still a few (about 7 currently I think) ...

Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk


----------



## inkahauts

Ok, what I have been trying to say...

Everyone in PR has a 5 lnb dish... 

Everyone in PR can receive HD because all their boxes have to be mpeg4 and all mpeg 4 boxes can do hd....

My simple assumption is that once Directv kills MPEG2 then there will only be one version of every channel they broadcast anywhere. I also assume at that point Directv will terminate its use of 97.


I expect D16 to go to 101 to replace all their sats at that location. 

After that only three sats total at 99, 101, and 103 that will not be able to mirror to PR, which will be D10, D11, and D12. 

I think d10 will become a spare, and d15 will take care of its work, so then you only have two sats that can not mirror at the main 3 locations.

I expect them to then make a lot of moves that will result in the following...

Core HD will be at 101

All foreign channels ( anything on 119, and 97) will be moved to one of the 99, 101, 103 slots.

This will leave nothing at 119 or 110, so they will use whatever sats they have with the longest life left from 101 110, and 119 that aren't one of the newest sats that can mirror to PR, and will move them at 110 and 119... Especially 110 since I believe its on its way out first. They will then orient those sats so they only hit PR.

Then they will put everything that is coming from (D10 if it still does anything which I doubt) , D11, and D12 onto sats at 110 and 119 which will allow them to likly have full coverage of every channel in conus, HI, AK, and PR. Including all foreign language channels.

This would also allow them to greatly simplify their install process, you would never need anything but 3 lnb dishes everywhere but PR, so PR would be the only location they would need to produce 5 lnbs for anymore.


----------



## P Smith

you forgot 95W filled with International channels !


----------



## HoTat2

P Smith said:


> you forgot 95W filled with International channels !


I'm sure inky meant "95W" in his latest post, not "97" ...

" ...All foreign channels ( anything on 119, and **97**) will be moved to one of the 99, 101, 103 slots. ..."

Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900

I don't buy that PR, with its population of a mere three million people - meaning probably under 100K subscribers - is a real factor in Directv's decisions. I'll bet the US market for RVs, boats and other 'portable' satellite reception is at least as large the market for satellite in PR, so converting 101 to carrying MPEG4 SD of every single channel Directv has makes more sense.

That still allows them to move all the SD channels on 95/119 to 101 and make SL3 the standard install, since the conversion from MPEG2 to MPEG4 saves tons of bandwidth. Once there's a satellite at 101 that can mirror to PR, they'll have every channel the US can receive available in MPEG4 SD, and the ones Directv wants to give them in HD will be on D14 (16 transponders) and D15 (as many as 22 transponders, depending on if D10 is replaced and SW1 goes away) You don't think 38 transponders worth of HD is enough for PR subscribers? We barely had more than that in the US until D14 launched...

Given that Directv hasn't made it a huge priority to give US subscribers every channel in HD, why do you think Directv will make it a priority in a market 1/100th the size? It just doesn't make sense. They will make the decision about whether to carry MPEG4 SD mirrors of everything on 101 versus moving popular HD channels there based on what they think is best for the RV/marine/mobile market. PR will not factor into that decision, the people there will be fine either way.


----------



## inkahauts

I can’t figure out why you think they would ever want to continue broadcasting every channel twice to the entire country. It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. Moving core Hi Definition to 101 would allow them to offer a RV package that would take care of those people. Frankly I doubt there are that many more of those people who actually move constantly around the country. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the same amount as subs in PR. 

And it’s not about getting PR all Hi Definition, it’s about not duplicating channels which would save them tons of money. We have all figured contracts cause them to spend more for two versions of a channel, as does all the extra equipment dedicated to a duplicate channel. Why on earth would you think they wouldn’t want to lower costs per channel (maybe contract, defiantly hardware wise) and only broadcast it once. Mpeg4 SD if they don’t have a contract for a Hi Definition feed, and Hi Definition if they do.

I just don’t by the mobile market is as big as you believe it is either maybe. But either way I don’t buy the duplicate channels lasting forever.


----------



## HoTat2

slice1900 said:


> ... Directv wants to give them in HD will be on D14 (16 transponders) and D15 (*as many as 22 transponders*, depending on if D10 is replaced and SW1 goes away) You don't think 38 transponders worth of HD is enough for PR subscribers? We barely had more than that in the US until D14 launched ...


Note:

D15 can actually have as many as 24 active Ka tps. for a total of 40 possible Ka band tps. capable of mirroring their CONUS+ tp. feeds from 99 and 103W to PR.

(That is, if SW1 and D10 are shutdown, and D12 turns off 10 of its CONUS+ beam tps. all at 103W of course.)

Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk


----------



## Laxguy

TheRatPatrol said:


> I think the frustration is everyone thought new satellite = more bandwidth = more HD channels being added.


Yes, but are we really missing any important HD channels now?


----------



## RAD

inkahauts said:


> I can't figure out why you think they would ever want to continue broadcasting every channel twice to the entire country. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Moving core Hi Definition to 101 would allow them to offer a RV package that would take care of those people. Frankly I doubt there are that many more of those people who actually move constantly around the country. I wouldn't be surprised if it's the same amount as subs in PR.


Moving core HD to 101 would allow all those mobile folks, which includes airlines like United and JebBlue plus Air Force One to continue to use Ku band unless DIRECTV expects all those mobile folks to upgrade their systems to support Ka band.


----------



## TheRatPatrol

Laxguy said:


> Yes, but are we really missing any important HD channels now?


Well it depends on who you ask, but yes we are. But thats a discussion for another thread.........


----------



## longrider

I can tell you if I was a full time RVer I would much rather get 80% of my viewing in HD while moving or at camp without setting up a dish than getting everything while in motion but in SD.


----------



## slice1900

Well I hope you guys are right, even though there isn't much difference in rain fade resistance of Ku versus Ka, it is a bit better so I'd be all for having the most popular HD channels coming off 101.

Since Directv never announces anything we may not know for at least two more years, time will tell...


----------



## inkahauts

One thing to ponder is, will replacing all mpeg2 equipment also require upgrading to a new 3lnb dish as well no matter what. If so then no one will only have a 101 dish.... still I expect the core to move, only because of businesses and such that cost a lot more to upgrade their systems.


----------



## slice1900

inkahauts said:


> One thing to ponder is, will replacing all mpeg2 equipment also require upgrading to a new 3lnb dish as well no matter what. If so then no one will only have a 101 dish.... still I expect the core to move, only because of businesses and such that cost a lot more to upgrade their systems.


Well that's part of the reason why I think we'll see them go MPEG4 SD on 101. That way all those 101 only dishes don't need to be upgraded. When Directv upgrades SD customers, they will just send them new receivers that do MPEG4. Not having to visit a million or two homes to replace dishes will save them a LOT of money. That would probably cost them a quarter billion dollars or so. Do they really want to spend that money? I've found whenever you're in doubt of Directv's direction, guess they'll do whatever is cheapest. That's almost always what they do.

Whether they go MPEG4 SD or most popular HD on 101, IMHO they'd be foolish not to continue supporting use of 101 only dishes. There are a lot of them out there, on RVs (well those Ku only since they don't have a fixed aim but same thing) as well as on cabins and other second home type situations.


----------



## inkahauts

slice1900 said:


> Well that's part of the reason why I think we'll see them go MPEG4 SD on 101. That way all those 101 only dishes don't need to be upgraded. When Directv upgrades SD customers, they will just send them new receivers that do MPEG4. Not having to visit a million or two homes to replace dishes will save them a LOT of money. That would probably cost them a quarter billion dollars or so. Do they really want to spend that money? I've found whenever you're in doubt of Directv's direction, guess they'll do whatever is cheapest. That's almost always what they do.
> 
> Whether they go MPEG4 SD or most popular HD on 101, IMHO they'd be foolish not to continue supporting use of 101 only dishes. There are a lot of them out there, on RVs (well those Ku only since they don't have a fixed aim but same thing) as well as on cabins and other second home type situations.


And I think they will require truck rolls because I don't think they will want to swap everyone with hr2xs. I think the mass change will involve moving to genies and swim system. The only current basic (non dvr) receiver they have is swim only, the h25. I doubt they have a stockpile of h24 somewhere.


----------



## slice1900

inkahauts said:


> And I think they will require truck rolls because I don't think they will want to swap everyone with hr2xs. I think the mass change will involve moving to genies and swim system. The only current basic (non dvr) receiver they have is swim only, the h25. I doubt they have a stockpile of h24 somewhere.


Why wouldn't they have a stockpile of H24s? They still offer them, and they could easily have saved as many as needed in a warehouse somewhere against the 2019 date. Perhaps we'll know which route they'll go when they send out announcements to SD only customers (and a few of them come here to post wondering what's up)

If they offer incentives to voluntarily upgrade to HD for free, they may be doing that to try to reduce the number of forced upgrade truck rolls they have to do later. If offer upgrades to Genie but don't make it free (i.e. no mention of avoiding the $10 HD fee that an SD only customer upgrading today would have to pay) then they are probably planning to do it without truck rolls.


----------



## KyL416

slice1900 said:


> (and a few of them come here to post wondering what's up


Oh we'll know, a certain DUDE will come here to complain about it like he did when he was forced to give up his ancient MPG receiver a few years ago and held on until they finally deactivated it.

As for only using 101 and just sending out replacement receivers, that will only work if they also plan to keep MPEG4 SD duplicates of all the locals currently on 101 and 119 so people with Round 18" and Phase II/III dishes will continue to get their locals. Otherwise they'll have to have truck rolls to replace all those dishes, which for convenience wll probably done in phases on a regional basis.


----------



## inkahauts

I’ve always thought that if they still keep spots for 101 after the mpeg4 shut off it will be for some sub channels in certain markets. But not all. But the I realized they’d have to fix their data base even to do that so....

I haven’t seen them offer h24 in ages, I thought they only offer h25 now.


----------



## slice1900

KyL416 said:


> As for only using 101 and just sending out replacement receivers, that will only work if they also plan to keep MPEG4 SD duplicates of all the locals currently on 101 and 119 so people with Round 18" and Phase II/III dishes will continue to get their locals. Otherwise they'll have to have truck rolls to replace all those dishes, which for convenience wll probably done in phases on a regional basis.


Ah yeah, didn't think about the locals. They renewed D7S's license until 2021, and D9S should last even longer, but an extra couple years isn't really worth the hassle. Guess they probably will need truck rolls, and 101 only dishes would only be useful for RV accounts that can use the DNS feeds.


----------



## slice1900

inkahauts said:


> I've always thought that if they still keep spots for 101 after the mpeg4 shut off it will be for some sub channels in certain markets. But not all. But the I realized they'd have to fix their data base even to do that so....
> 
> I haven't seen them offer h24 in ages, I thought they only offer h25 now.


They still have to offer H24s, unless/until they quit supporting legacy installs. Solid Signal and other dealers still offer them.


----------



## inkahauts

slice1900 said:


> They still have to offer H24s, unless/until they quit supporting legacy installs. Solid Signal and other dealers still offer them.


Using them for replacements as others go bad maybe, but I don't see them having massive stockpiles. And solid signal probably has inventory of plenty of older stuff....


----------



## Laxguy

I was asking you, and am not looking for another thread, nor a discussion. 
What are we missing??


----------

