Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Technology Stocks : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ftth who wrote (2585)	12/14/1998 10:51:00 PM
From: RocketMan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

Thanks for the info, Dave. Is DBS3 collocated with DBS1 or 2? And is it truly an on-orbit spare, or is it being used operationally? I believe Echostar has a couple of satellites collocated at 119 serving the entire CONUS, and one at 61.5 launched last summer (as I recall) dedicated to the East Coast. I think the two at 119 are both operational, although I assume the intent is to use one as a backup for the other in case of failure, as an operational on-orbit spare. Seems they were going to put another one in a 148 slot, dedicated to the West Coast, and now with this News Corp deal they get some transponders at 110. I also recall their having rights to some other slots, for future growth. Currently Echostar and Hughes appear to have similar capacity, although Echostar has more slots authorized, but as far as I know Hughes is the only one providing internet service to the public. It would be interesting if Hughes dedicated their spare to data services. With 1Gbs capacity, and CONUS coverage that would be a formidable system, although by serving the entire CONUS you still run out of bandwidth pretty quick as you add users. Unlike TV, where everyone gets the same max number of channels, data download size scales with the number of customers. I think Direct TV imposes throttling on individuals after a certain number of megabytes downloaded, and from what I have heard the system really slows down at peak times (just like every other system). When you say full-CONUS coverage for the Hughes satellite, is that with several spot beams? That would also limit the download capacity. I still can't imagine their using that satellite for full duplex instead of an asynchronous system such as DirectTV now uses. Maybe they are considering some sort of bent pipe system, with selective use of uplink to handle congestion of terrestrial lines?

To: ftth who wrote (2585)	12/15/1998 11:37:00 AM
From: WTC	Respond to of 12823

Isn't there a seriously gating factor insofar as dedicating DBS3 to data service delivery even on a preemptable basis? I'm thinking of the 500MHz DBS license frequence allocation (with 2 RH and LH polarization, so, say, ~1000MHz total. I understood that DBS2 and DBS3 had their transponders strapped so they were operating with 8 transmission streams each, at 240w. The higher transmit power allowed operating with less robust FEC that also reduced data overhead, so more payload data (and program streams) come down to the receivers. I found it most intriguing that the system had been originally designed with such an FEC switchable capability in the earliest to the present settop boxes, but I got this explanation directly from Hartenstein a couple of years ago at a conference. My point about the gating factor is that the spectrum allocation seems pretty well exhausted operating the transponders up there now, and at that, not all of them in independent FDM subbands. Where would the ~1Gb/s of data for data services live on the electromagnetic spectrum, if DBS3 were repurposed for internet data? If I really had an idea of implementing such an undertaking, wouldn't I use a satellite with multiple spot beams at Ku or Ka band, and if at Ku, wouldn't I go for a BSS license rather than DBS?