New Satelite In Sky planned for More HD channels..WHEN will Dish Do This?
- Thread starter rickbb
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 17
- Views 3K
Hi there, welcome to Satelliteguys!
Dish currently has a leased satellite (AMC-16) at 105 right now which is being tested. Been up for a couple weeks. It's replacing AMC-2 which is currently providing all of the programming there. Although hopes of new HD is high, we expect Dish to round out their local channels (hopefully my area) with the space that is available.
Dish currently has a leased satellite (AMC-16) at 105 right now which is being tested. Been up for a couple weeks. It's replacing AMC-2 which is currently providing all of the programming there. Although hopes of new HD is high, we expect Dish to round out their local channels (hopefully my area) with the space that is available.
Small correction...SES Americom AMC-15 is currently being tested at slot 136 West and is slated to replace AMC-2 at 105 West. And there is another bird, AMC-16 which scheduled for launch before the end of the year and will end up at 85 West. Both birds are Lockheed Martin A2100AX High Power (140 watt) Hybrid models and are capable of both Ka and Ku band.
http://www.ses-americom.com/satellites/amc-15.html
http://www.ses-americom.com/satellites/amc-16.html
More info here.
Jason
http://www.ses-americom.com/satellites/amc-15.html
http://www.ses-americom.com/satellites/amc-16.html
More info here.
Jason
More and More Dishes!
Unless E* helps substantially with the upgrades, it will probably less expensive for me if I sell all of my E* equipment on E-Bay and switch to D* with one of their super new customer deals! To date E* has given me OK deals for upgrades, but I am sure going to be checking things out during the next few months!
According to Charlie, there is not room on the current satellites including apparently the new 105 for additional HD. That means that additional HD will be on the 85 West Satellite. Currently I have a Dish 500 and a Dish 300 pointed at the 61.5 Satellite. The large spread between the 85 location and the other satellites apparently means that another Dish 300 will be needed. The DPP44 switch supports 4 satellites, but requires a substantial outlay for the new switch to replace my SW64 and new LNB's. It would really get wild if my locals were on 105!nippjas said:
Unless E* helps substantially with the upgrades, it will probably less expensive for me if I sell all of my E* equipment on E-Bay and switch to D* with one of their super new customer deals! To date E* has given me OK deals for upgrades, but I am sure going to be checking things out during the next few months!
This is not correct to my knowledge. I have to look it up as it was discussed in the past, but AMC-15 and 16 have room for many HD channels and it's original intent was to do so. There was a preliminary assignment chart posted somewhere.
And DirecTV is also building new birds and is also rumored to be working on MPEG4 as well...Thinking your safe from having to upgrade by switching is a wrong reason to switch...
I will dig up the past on AMC-15 for information.
Jason
And DirecTV is also building new birds and is also rumored to be working on MPEG4 as well...Thinking your safe from having to upgrade by switching is a wrong reason to switch...
I will dig up the past on AMC-15 for information.
Jason
Correct. There are so many other right reasons for switching, he doesn't need this one.nippjas said:
Some clarification on AMC-15 and AMC-16. First both are Ku band not DBS so a D300 dish will not work for 105 or 85, a Superdish sized dish will be needed.
The reason it is believed that AMC-15 will have more channel capacity than what AMC-2 provides currently at 105 is based on comparing it to Echostar-9 (E-9) at 121 which is also a Ku band satellite. These satellites all use the same frequency range but E-9 has 32 TPs with 12 channels of SD programming on each TP for a total SD channel capacity of 384. AMC-2, AMC-15 and AMC-16 only have 24 TPs but AMC-2 also only uses 12 SD channels per TP. I am not sure exactly why this is but it may have something to do with the relatively low power output of AMC-2 of 60 watts compared to 140 watts for AMC-15/16. So in comparing E-9 to AMC-15/16, one would expect 16 SD channels per TP for a total of (16x24) 384 for AMC-15/16 or 33 percent more capacity than what is currently being used on AMC-2. Therefore even if AMC-2 was completely full, AMC-15 at 105 should have 33 percent of its TPs available (8) and still carry all of AMC-2's current channels. Actually there is about 2 TPs of space available on AMC-2 currently.
Now in terms of HD, there are apparent advantages of putting it on AMC-15/16. Looking at HD at 110, Dish has either 2 or 3 HD channels per TP with some complaints of poor picture quality (PQ) with 3 HD channels. The ratio of HD channels to SD channels per TP is 2/12 or 3/12 at 110. Now with a SD capacity of 16 for AMC-15/16, these ratios become 2/16 or 3/16. Now others have posted that 3 HD channels/TP on AMC-15 should give the approximate PQ as 2 HD channels/TP on 110 and that 4 HD channels/TP would be better than 3 HD channels/TP on 110. This is because we aren't comparing the same frequency range between AMC-15 and the satellite at 110 since it is DBS and not regular Ku band.
Now Charlie Ergen's statement at the Earnings Conference Call may have referred to the satellites that are currently up and operational and that AMC-15 may not be ready until after the first of the year (2005). Also AMC-16 that is going to 85 W, is scheduled to be launched on December 16th so that satellite should be operational around March 1, 2005.
Regarding upgrades, Dish historically has given away free upgrades of dishes and switches in exchange for a commitment for new programming usually a year.
The reason it is believed that AMC-15 will have more channel capacity than what AMC-2 provides currently at 105 is based on comparing it to Echostar-9 (E-9) at 121 which is also a Ku band satellite. These satellites all use the same frequency range but E-9 has 32 TPs with 12 channels of SD programming on each TP for a total SD channel capacity of 384. AMC-2, AMC-15 and AMC-16 only have 24 TPs but AMC-2 also only uses 12 SD channels per TP. I am not sure exactly why this is but it may have something to do with the relatively low power output of AMC-2 of 60 watts compared to 140 watts for AMC-15/16. So in comparing E-9 to AMC-15/16, one would expect 16 SD channels per TP for a total of (16x24) 384 for AMC-15/16 or 33 percent more capacity than what is currently being used on AMC-2. Therefore even if AMC-2 was completely full, AMC-15 at 105 should have 33 percent of its TPs available (8) and still carry all of AMC-2's current channels. Actually there is about 2 TPs of space available on AMC-2 currently.
Now in terms of HD, there are apparent advantages of putting it on AMC-15/16. Looking at HD at 110, Dish has either 2 or 3 HD channels per TP with some complaints of poor picture quality (PQ) with 3 HD channels. The ratio of HD channels to SD channels per TP is 2/12 or 3/12 at 110. Now with a SD capacity of 16 for AMC-15/16, these ratios become 2/16 or 3/16. Now others have posted that 3 HD channels/TP on AMC-15 should give the approximate PQ as 2 HD channels/TP on 110 and that 4 HD channels/TP would be better than 3 HD channels/TP on 110. This is because we aren't comparing the same frequency range between AMC-15 and the satellite at 110 since it is DBS and not regular Ku band.
Now Charlie Ergen's statement at the Earnings Conference Call may have referred to the satellites that are currently up and operational and that AMC-15 may not be ready until after the first of the year (2005). Also AMC-16 that is going to 85 W, is scheduled to be launched on December 16th so that satellite should be operational around March 1, 2005.
Regarding upgrades, Dish historically has given away free upgrades of dishes and switches in exchange for a commitment for new programming usually a year.
Finally somebody actually did the math, good job. The one thing I'd like to reiterate thought is that AMC 15 and 16 deliver both Ka and Ku band payloads. SES Americom spec sheets and footprint maps are attached in post #3.
Total channel capacity was posted previously....I have to find that post.
Jason
Total channel capacity was posted previously....I have to find that post.
Jason
That's right. Wait till you see what the FCC does during these next four years. They might as well just change its name to NAB.nippjas said:Be nice Gary, There's only 4 more years until the next big election...
nippjas said:
It is interesting that AMC-9 at 85 W will carry the video of the launch via C-band. AMC-9 also has Ku band and that is currently being used to download network feeds, primarily from NBC. This casts some doubt on Dish's near term use of the Ku band on AMC-16. If there is nothing posted about this apparent conflict, I think this would be a good question to raise at the Charlie Chat on December 8th.
Another item to look for is where AMC-16 will be tested. If it is 136 W, then one would expect that AMC-15 will be on its way to 105 within a week or so of the AMC-16 launch.
GaryPen said:
Yeah. The sky will turn red, the oceans will boil, yadda...yadda...yadda. Liberals are such drama queens. Guess that explains Hollywood.
Now let's all forget politics and get back to HD!
NightRyder
Again great comments. Yes I would think this is a very good question for the next Charlie chat. It was originally said that AMC-15 will be implemented before the new year, I do not know, however, what the status of the implementation is...E* has been being very tight lipped lately...go figure!rocatman said:
Jason
Yeah AMC 16 due to launch Ded 16th from Cape Canaveral!
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/launchers-04zzk.html
Wonder how the AMC 15 is doing? They have put allot of hardware up in the last 3 months.
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/launchers-04zzk.html
Wonder how the AMC 15 is doing? They have put allot of hardware up in the last 3 months.
