SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Microcap & Penny Stocks : Globalstar Telecommunications Limited GSAT
GSAT 62.88-0.5%Nov 14 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Maurice Winn who wrote (23743)7/12/2001 11:53:04 PM
From: Clarksterh  Read Replies (1) of 29987
 
Maurice - You could actually do what you are talking about:

1) When it would take less power to talk to a basestation then to talk to the satellite, use the basestation.

2) When it would take less power to talk to a satellite than to the nearest basestation, use the satellite.

The users of the basestation would impact the capacity of the satellite since they would add to the interference that the satellite user links see. But overall it would still be a net gain in total users, probably by a substantial margin. The largest problem is that this would then entail each G* satellite having to hand off not just to another G* satellite, but probably multiple ground basestations. Probably a pretty complex venture.

Clark

PS There is another reason above and beyond antenna gain that the power required for a satellite link is substantially less than proportional to the power required for a terrestrial cell link times the (range satellite/cell radius)^2. On the ground the power required is proportional to r^3 to r^4 due ground reflections, buildings, ... so that the cell radius is much less than you would naively think for a given power.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext