As you might already know, the public radio satellite system operates in the C-band. The downlink portion of that band is from 3.7GHz to 4.2GHz. A little over a year ago, terrestrial broadband services convinced the FCC to allow them to start offering data services in the extended C-band (just below 3.7GHz) within the U.S. NPR filed a formal argument against the idea, as did many others. Our arguments fell on deaf ears.
Fast forward to now. We are in the midst of an even bigger threat to our C-band operations in that the FCC has asked for comments on the idea of allowing terrestrial broadband providers to operate within the downlink band; the entire band (3.7 – 4.2). If the FCC allows this the result will be increased RF noise (interference) in those frequencies and lower performance at the downlinks located at many of our station customers.
As you might imagine we joined forces with a large number of other entities to fight this. The satellite owners such as Intelsat and SES submitted comments as did many satellite bandwidth users like NPR. We are analyzing all the filings, and reaching out to other constituencies. Industry associations such as the NAB, SIA and NABA also weighed in.
It's hard to say how this will go. The C-band is already shared with fixed microwave systems. In that case if our antennas are registered, then new microwave systems have to not interfere. The broadband network proposals would make this less secure, even if they only win access for fixed systems (antennas that don't move). If they were to get all they want, to include mobile operations (read cell phones), then the interference will be random and unpredictable.
The broadband advocates are saying that satellite antennas could be licensed for specific frequencies at specific look angles instead of the full-band and full-arc as we often do now. That might lessen the potential interference, but it would also mean that every time a network changes transponders or satellites there would be another filing process with the FCC. If a network has to move due to a problem on the satellite, then that migration needs to happen quickly; an impossibility if filing with the feds becomes a requirement every time a change is needed.
There is also an economic consideration. If satellite antennas have access to less of the C-band frequency block, then the value of what is accessible will go up. Less bandwidth availability (supply) means increased value for the bandwidth. Increased value means increased cost.
Fast forward to now. We are in the midst of an even bigger threat to our C-band operations in that the FCC has asked for comments on the idea of allowing terrestrial broadband providers to operate within the downlink band; the entire band (3.7 – 4.2). If the FCC allows this the result will be increased RF noise (interference) in those frequencies and lower performance at the downlinks located at many of our station customers.
As you might imagine we joined forces with a large number of other entities to fight this. The satellite owners such as Intelsat and SES submitted comments as did many satellite bandwidth users like NPR. We are analyzing all the filings, and reaching out to other constituencies. Industry associations such as the NAB, SIA and NABA also weighed in.
It's hard to say how this will go. The C-band is already shared with fixed microwave systems. In that case if our antennas are registered, then new microwave systems have to not interfere. The broadband network proposals would make this less secure, even if they only win access for fixed systems (antennas that don't move). If they were to get all they want, to include mobile operations (read cell phones), then the interference will be random and unpredictable.
The broadband advocates are saying that satellite antennas could be licensed for specific frequencies at specific look angles instead of the full-band and full-arc as we often do now. That might lessen the potential interference, but it would also mean that every time a network changes transponders or satellites there would be another filing process with the FCC. If a network has to move due to a problem on the satellite, then that migration needs to happen quickly; an impossibility if filing with the feds becomes a requirement every time a change is needed.
There is also an economic consideration. If satellite antennas have access to less of the C-band frequency block, then the value of what is accessible will go up. Less bandwidth availability (supply) means increased value for the bandwidth. Increased value means increased cost.
RSS Feed