Yes. Didn't link it here for that reason, however. I didn't know about this til another broadcaster sent me the link.
C Band Dish Registration
- Thread starter towerdude
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 144
- Views 14K
- Status
I found this particularly interesting (and potentially concerning):
"The CTIA, which represents the wireless carriers and device manufacturers in Washington, said it’s possible to find a solution that will make all C-band users happy. But it tells the FCC the answer may be found in how television spectrum use was repurposed. 'There are myriad ways to enable repurposing while ensuring that existing users of the band can continue to receive their services, including repacking existing operations into a smaller portion of the band, relocating to other spectrum, moving to remote areas, and transitioning to another medium such as fiber,' CTIA said."
Seems to me the question is, how do we balance the need for innovation and progress without disruption of service? Obviously, fiber isn't an option for everybody, nor is "moving to remote areas." I speculated earlier that some broadcasters could "relocate to other spectrum" (Ku) but as others pointed out, Ku is highly susceptible to rain fade.
Will be interesting to see how the vote turns out next month.
"The CTIA, which represents the wireless carriers and device manufacturers in Washington, said it’s possible to find a solution that will make all C-band users happy. But it tells the FCC the answer may be found in how television spectrum use was repurposed. 'There are myriad ways to enable repurposing while ensuring that existing users of the band can continue to receive their services, including repacking existing operations into a smaller portion of the band, relocating to other spectrum, moving to remote areas, and transitioning to another medium such as fiber,' CTIA said."
Seems to me the question is, how do we balance the need for innovation and progress without disruption of service? Obviously, fiber isn't an option for everybody, nor is "moving to remote areas." I speculated earlier that some broadcasters could "relocate to other spectrum" (Ku) but as others pointed out, Ku is highly susceptible to rain fade.
Will be interesting to see how the vote turns out next month.
What’s the possibility of the FCC allocating, say transponders 1 to 4, to the wireless carriers? That would still leave 20 transponders to be used for C-Band audio and video. Since we no longer need one transponder per channel (like the early analog days) this may be a compromise.
It strikes me as reaching a compromise with a burglar in your home.
I’m not quite sure how to feel about it. Is it compromise? Is it eminent domain? Is it political? Is it greed? Is it progress in the best public interest? Who knows?
The Intelsat and SES proposal to give up 100 MHz of C-band spectrum would, according to preliminary research, require 7 or 8 transponders per satellite to be shut down. This is the presentation they filed with the FCC showing their research so far.
The proposal summary clearly states no c bandpass filters = lnb saturation and oob = unfilterable noise. I invested several hundred dollars in pair of norsats lnb's and ortho feed, now may also require pair of filters @ $400 a piece and lose multiple transponders. Compromise? I feel compromised.
That's how I felt about the fee for registering our radio station's dish(es). Even at around $500 to the FCC and $500 to the engineers to do it, we'd have been paying the very same people who hold the cards as to whether or not the situation will exist where we NEED the registration, and ..they offered no guarantee of mediating issues, nor a guarantee of not charging us for filing the frequency coordination study. This, of all the things the FCC has done that's GOOD for broadcasters is the least thought-through of anything I can remember.
To me, as a broadcaster, and likely to you as satelliteguys.us member, This article is not good news. As a broadcaster, it's my duty to be ready for emergencies
with news available from the National and International fronts. I chose CBS. There are only two pipelines of news and talk radio for this nation. One is owned by Cumulus, the other by I-heart, and you get the appropriate receiver from either when you choose satellite programming. Barter ads that run in the news pay our network staff AND pay the carrier which is one of the two I mentioned earlier. For a small market station, it's a roundabout way of paying your own competition.
It's sad that with only those pipelines in place that C-band is headed in a bad direction. Personally, I had great faith in the common sense of our current FCC leadership, but that faith is quickly dying. It sure looks more like "sell out to big interests while trashing broadcasting, charge broadcasters who want (supposed) protection on their C-band dishes and don't even look for alternatives." Stinks to high heaven. Faith in this C-band issue leaning toward the broadcaster in my opinion, is now gone. Oh, and by the way...the EAS system has ALWAYS been a joke. It's only getting worse. A mandated box we have to buy ourselves, maintain and do weekly reports-on or be fined..but it is SO flawed. Why do people in suits get paid so much to be such idiots!
Sigh....from a broadcaster tired of government B.S. infringing on services we are expected to provide and are proud to do-so.
with news available from the National and International fronts. I chose CBS. There are only two pipelines of news and talk radio for this nation. One is owned by Cumulus, the other by I-heart, and you get the appropriate receiver from either when you choose satellite programming. Barter ads that run in the news pay our network staff AND pay the carrier which is one of the two I mentioned earlier. For a small market station, it's a roundabout way of paying your own competition.
It's sad that with only those pipelines in place that C-band is headed in a bad direction. Personally, I had great faith in the common sense of our current FCC leadership, but that faith is quickly dying. It sure looks more like "sell out to big interests while trashing broadcasting, charge broadcasters who want (supposed) protection on their C-band dishes and don't even look for alternatives." Stinks to high heaven. Faith in this C-band issue leaning toward the broadcaster in my opinion, is now gone. Oh, and by the way...the EAS system has ALWAYS been a joke. It's only getting worse. A mandated box we have to buy ourselves, maintain and do weekly reports-on or be fined..but it is SO flawed. Why do people in suits get paid so much to be such idiots!
Sigh....from a broadcaster tired of government B.S. infringing on services we are expected to provide and are proud to do-so.
I don't see anything new there. They still haven't voted yet, correct? I'm waiting for the vote before I freak out!
From an industry standpoint of the broadcaster, IF this article is really tracking the pulse of this, and..given the history of big business "winning" lately in getting what they want, I'm pretty much guessing the outcome. There were some heavy hitters on the "leave it alone" side during first round comments, but...there were some pretty big ones on the side of Gimme...gimmee...take from others and "give to us" (at auction costs, of course.) I try to be optimistic most of the time, but this, like the EAS that was forced on us with no help offered for financing shows me a poor track record of looking at the broadcasters' side at all.
Here's the Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking the FCC issued on the matter. After reading through the whole thing, my feeling is the FCC favors the "market-based" approach where they permit the satellite companies (primarily Intelsat and SES) to sell their C-band spectrum to cell phone providers and wireless internet providers, rather than going through an FCC auction. This is the approach Intelsat and SES want the most, but the one T-Mobile in particular has opposed. The FCC will likely set a minimum amount of spectrum to be sold off. Intelsat and SES would want this to be 100 MHz, but FCC Commissioner O'Rielly (who, along with the two other Republican commissioners on the board, is just about certain to vote in favor of the proposal on July 12th) has publicly stated that he wants a higher amount. The FCC may also make funding available to current C-band users to encourage them to ditch satellite and move to fiber or internet solutions, if available.
The Order part of the document calls for the FCC to essentially undertake a census of satellite operations in the C-band. They are going to require all people and businesses with registered C-band dishes to submit a filing explaining how they use their dishes: namely, which satellite(s) they tune to, which transponder(s) they tune to, and how often they use their dish. To keep the information current, the FCC may implement a requirement to resubmit the filing at specific intervals. Any registered user who doesn't submit a filing explaining how their satellite dish is used will have their registration cancelled, which means they would lose any guarantee of protection from interference should the FCC also permit shared use of C-band frequencies between satellite users and cell phone/internet service providers.
Speaking of C-band dish registration, in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the FCC proposes to modify the law to permanently close off registration of C-band dishes on October 17, 2018. After that date, existing registrations could be modified so long as they stay at the same physical location, but new registrations in new locations would be forbidden.
The Order part of the document calls for the FCC to essentially undertake a census of satellite operations in the C-band. They are going to require all people and businesses with registered C-band dishes to submit a filing explaining how they use their dishes: namely, which satellite(s) they tune to, which transponder(s) they tune to, and how often they use their dish. To keep the information current, the FCC may implement a requirement to resubmit the filing at specific intervals. Any registered user who doesn't submit a filing explaining how their satellite dish is used will have their registration cancelled, which means they would lose any guarantee of protection from interference should the FCC also permit shared use of C-band frequencies between satellite users and cell phone/internet service providers.
Speaking of C-band dish registration, in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the FCC proposes to modify the law to permanently close off registration of C-band dishes on October 17, 2018. After that date, existing registrations could be modified so long as they stay at the same physical location, but new registrations in new locations would be forbidden.
Just reading thru this thread for first time. Is this happening globally or just North America? What an unexpected turn of events and sad end to the hobby. I'm a bit confused on the "registration" comments. Is this for broadcasters or does the FCC expect hobbyists to now register as well?
No, this registration isn't mental for us. Its meant for the broadcasters.
Sent from my C6730 using the SatelliteGuys app!
Not necessarily globally, but more than just the United States is involved. Europe and the Far East, Japan in particular, are also in the process of turning over C-band spectrum for the buildout of 5G wireless services in their countries. For example, Ireland and the United Kingdom auctioned off the 3.4-3.8 GHz frequencies, and Italy will soon do the same. The UK is further investigating whether to let mobile providers share the 3.8-4.2 GHz frequencies. Australia and Canada have also made inquiries into whether 3.7-4.2 GHz should remain reserved for satellite use, but I don't know if anything has been decided yet in those countries.
There's no requirement to register a dish that can only receive signals and not transmit them. However, anybody can voluntarily register a receive-only C-band dish, no matter if they are a business or hobbyist. The cost to do so was normally over $1,000, though the FCC modified the paperwork so the price is "only" $435 at this time. The benefit of registration is that, according to FCC rules, registered dishes receive protection from interference caused by other services operating in the C-band. This may come in useful if the FCC ultimately decides to let cell phone and internet service providers share the C-band frequencies. In such a case, the FCC would be obligated to ensure current C-band users can continue to use their dishes without fear of interference.
Is the registration fee a one time thing or annual? Not being paranoid but somehow putting my name on another government list, no matter how trivial, never seems like a good idea.
Paying the FCC for "protection" from a future wireless provider....
Paying the FCC for "protection" from a future wireless provider....
This is like paying the mob for protection. The national area quiet zone is looking good right now. Or a deserted island.
- Status
