AMC 8 @ 139w

[Diamond Jim]

Are you sure you can't get the 4056 at 139W? When did you last try? There have been changes.

I have tried to get 4056-13250 countless times over the years with out any luck. A few nights ago I tried again with no results. I am talking as far back as 2005 when I got my first FTA receiver. I have always been told the I am too far east here in West Central Indiana to get it. The GCI channels came in fine on AMC7 and later on AMC8 for many years.

 

[Diamond Jim]

Why doesn't Lyngsat show 135w or 137w on list of satellites?

Sat Hints shows them : AMC 10 @ 135.0° West Frequencies and AMC 7 @ 137.0° West Frequencies. There is not much on AMC 10 @ 135w and there is nothing on AMC 7 @ 137w at this time.

 

[kofi123]

Sat Hints shows them : AMC 10 @ 135.0° West Frequencies and AMC 7 @ 137.0° West Frequencies. There is not much on AMC 10 @ 135w and there is nothing on AMC 7 @ 137w at this time.

That information is outdated. Here are the new assignments.

135 °W: AMC-10 was retired. AMC-7 in now at this location in inclined orbit and AMC-4 is in geostationary orbit at 134.9 °W.

137 °W: Intelsat took over this slot and placed Intelsat 5 here in a highly inclined orbit. The only geostationary satellite nearby is the GOES-17 weather satellite at 137.2 °W

139 °W: AMC-18 moved here and replaced AMC-8 as the geostationary satellite in this slot. AMC-8 was placed in an inclined orbit. New footprints for AMC-18 direct the signal toward Alaska and northwest Canada.

 

[907TECH]

That information is outdated. Here are the new assignments.

135 °W: AMC-10 was retired. AMC-7 in now at this location in inclined orbit and AMC-4 is in geostationary orbit at 134.9 °W.

137 °W: Intelsat took over this slot and placed Intelsat 5 here in a highly inclined orbit. The only geostationary satellite nearby is the GOES-17 weather satellite at 137.2 °W

139 °W: AMC-18 moved here and replaced AMC-8 as the geostationary satellite in this slot. AMC-8 was placed in an inclined orbit. New footprints for AMC-18 direct the signal toward Alaska and northwest Canada.

I can't speak to 135 and 137, but can confirm what kofi123 posted about AMC-8. AMC-18 has no spot beams, the footprint in Alaska is weaker than AMC-8. The new footprint looks like it could be strong enough to receive further east (lower 48) than AMC-8, with a 10 to 12 foot dish.

 

[Titanium]

If the satellite antenna isn't providing a global footprint and you state it isn't a spotbeam, what is this directed beam, which is only providing coverage of a small portion of the visible area? LOL!!!

 

[Diamond Jim]

AMC-18 has no spot beams, the footprint in Alaska is weaker than AMC-8. The new footprint looks like it could be strong enough to receive further east (lower 48) than AMC-8, with a 10 to 12 foot dish.

I just check the footprint on Satbeams for AMC 18 and according to it the eastern part of the signal goes from the Dakotas down to West Texas, so no, I can't get it here in West Central Indiana. As far as I can tell there are no live signals on AMC8/18 @ 139 that I can get at my location. Thanks for all of your post and information, I did learn something from this thread.

Satbeams - World Of Satellites at your fingertips

Satbeams - Satellite footprints, news and charts

www.satbeams.com

 

[907TECH]

I just check the footprint on Satbeams for AMC 18 and according to it the eastern part of the signal goes from the Dakotas down to West Texas, so no, I can't get it here in West Central Indiana. As far as I can tell there are no live signals on AMC8/18 @ 139 that I can get at my location. Thanks for all of your post and information, I did learn something from this thread.

Satbeams - World Of Satellites at your fingertips

Satbeams - Satellite footprints, news and charts

www.satbeams.com

I didn't say much about 139 since it is not entirely in the public domain yet kofi123 nailed it. There are bits and pieces of data on various sites none have the whole story.

 

[harshness]

Why doesn't Lyngsat show 135w or 137w on list of satellites?

The birds that are in those slots are getting up there in years. Satbeams says that 135W is home to AMC-4, 7 and 10; the youngest of which is going on 16 years old. 137W is where Intelsat5 sits and it is 22 years old. I suppose the location isn't particularly ideal for FTA programmers that I reason would want the broadest possible coverage of something other than ocean.

According to Wikipedia, AMC-7 was set up as an in-orbit spare to AMC-10 in 2015. AMC-4 was reportedly moved over to 134.9W (replaced by AMC-10) with no FTA carriage. At 20 years since launch, there can't be much fuel left (it was originally launched to 101W).

 

[MikeI]

Can someone post a few of the data feeds? Are 3902 H 6214 or 3813 H 6905 2 of them?

Sent from my LM-G710VM using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[907TECH]

If the satellite antenna isn't providing a global footprint and you state it isn't a spotbeam, what is this directed beam, which is only providing coverage of a small portion of the visible area? LOL!!!

I was under the impression that a spot beam was much tighter in area and one of more than one beams on the bird for a given polarity. To get Alaska coverage on AMC-18 the entire pattern appears to have been adjusted to optimize the signal for Alaska on a bird that was designed to cover CONUS. The footprint is weaker in AK than it was for AMC-8. It could be called "wide beam" I suppose but spot beam doesn't quite fit.