[CRTech] Christian Radio Tech [MSG 82766]
[Thread Prev] [-- Thread Index --] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [-- Date Index --] [Date Next]
Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
To: CRTech <crtech@crtech.org>
Subject: Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
From: Fred Gleason <fredg@paravelsystems.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:10:52 -0400
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=paravelsystems-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to; bh=noW6aM5nPEPWKwPpXL9m6zHV0DIbwP4XZ1p5T5xhVDw=; b=b6UtHM5qFMK24OvgdGoM8xn2EX7odewZileyNCEMOHiGOVssIhaXFif6jIhd83Ebss YfsEF/VwyPkh+k5rOrJW+Dr+8eDz9LRQwqPBrsVDtfkNFbLsXoXICiFOevI2khHfxoD1 j9B1NfUsiH0YjlJ66F/w7frBWygeONTW0+dEnIAECqKO0/CvUN67QzdgyerHw4rqL/a4 dAdS1yd53LHta0/e+zo0O0ZwS1ldf3liSj+FUjaZQvcviHzncxCLMWSJfDFaOfC0/P/t oPr0hhHhCzByTQmzoPuW8pHf0j3ytDqFq2zc5CwrpGVREKCCjI0ZnXnez9dM3+6DoB+X YCoA==
In-reply-to: <dc3ddb89-2d0e-f894-2583-7107271ea680@whwl.net>
References: <CAAthHBZBXWTdLRxSXhgciKCOeariGQkiSN0xgHZFbMMgCUDEoQ@mail.gmail.com> <e058b127-4f6d-941c-9de0-c4a6d04efdff@knlr.com> <332291e1-422a-08a0-9861-d6fffe8a9116@reyware.us> <835ec0ff-912d-a1e7-99a8-9b3306941381@bosscher.org> <DM5PR20MB19778FBA65414B3A6691B8E8A48F0@DM5PR20MB1977.namprd20.prod.outlook.com> <005101d3dcab$6fb668a0$4f2339e0$@icloud.com> <EEBEE694-91EC-40D3-9988-821E4F997AEF@ieee.org> <CAA8ua=wmQLZhaTrBpHn9Pj0o8mwMjw9MnPS=H7GXBevmvHu-wQ@mail.gmail.com> <96E5AAA5-0785-4F7F-A0B4-9E7FAD4E2756@ieee.org> <008c01d3dcc1$7cfc1350$76f439f0$@icloud.com> <dc3ddb89-2d0e-f894-2583-7107271ea680@whwl.net>
On Apr 26, 2018, at 13:17, Andy Larsen <andy@whwl.net> wrote:

If I register now and the FCC goes ahead with this stupid idea, could I then do a PCN and *add* it to the registration? Since I'm already an existing user will I have any kind of priority to do that, or have I now lost any hope of having protection if the move is made and I don't have a coordinated downlink when that decision comes down? I guess the big question I'm really asking is this: As the manager of a small non-profit ministry, help me understand why this is a good use of resources. This is kind of what I got from the two responses below that I'm responding to, but really didn't see that conversation continue.

This really speaks to the Elephant In The Room that I’ve yet to hear anyone (on CRTech or in any other broadcast fora) address: what about *future* downlink earth stations? The whole point of building the original geosynchronous satellite constellation in the first place to enable one-to-many communication to *any* location within the antenna footprint of a given satellite. And we’re not just talking commercial broadcast; applications as diverse as remote telemedicine to distance education in rural school districts are all in play here. If this band-sharing plan goes forward, say goodbye to all of that (on C-band at least). Other than where a licensed/registered link already exists, every urban/suburban area in the country will be solidly covered by C-band wireless users within the next few years. The only areas in which new downlink stations will be feasible will be in far-out rural locations where there is little-to-no demand for wireless service. Consider this hypothetical scenario: five years from now, your studio lease is up and you need to move to a new building across town. You’d like to move your satellite dish(es) as well. Too bad! The wireless guys got there first, and the interference is now so intense that it cannot be remediated.

Make no mistake: this is an existential threat so far as the C-band satellite operators are concerned. Such service will no longer be practically feasible in that band in any long-term sense if the proposals as they currently stand are adopted.

Cheers!


|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Frederick F. Gleason, Jr. |              Chief Developer             |
|                           |              Paravel Systems             |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| WASHINGTON DC:  Fifty square miles almost completely surrounded by   |
|                 reality.                                             |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
Follow-Ups: Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(dave allen <crtech-mail@reyware.us>, 26 Apr 2018 18:35:03 -0000)
Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(Sherrod Munday <smunday@ieee.org>, 26 Apr 2018 21:56:25 -0000)
References: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(Michael Barnes <barnmichael@gmail.com>, 24 Apr 2018 22:40:48 -0000)
Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(Terry Cowan <tcowan@knlr.com>, 24 Apr 2018 23:18:55 -0000)
Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(dave allen <crtech-mail@reyware.us>, 24 Apr 2018 23:32:50 -0000)
Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(Tom Bosscher <tom@bosscher.org>, 25 Apr 2018 00:15:38 -0000)
Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(Gregg Richwine <gmsnrich@live.com>, 25 Apr 2018 03:23:29 -0000)
RE: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(nathaniel.steele@icloud.com, 25 Apr 2018 15:38:30 -0000)
Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(Sherrod Munday <smunday@ieee.org>, 25 Apr 2018 17:19:23 -0000)
Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(Pat Wahl <pwahl@wwib.com>, 25 Apr 2018 17:44:04 -0000)
Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(Sherrod Munday <smunday@ieee.org>, 25 Apr 2018 17:58:42 -0000)
RE: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(nathaniel.steele@icloud.com, 25 Apr 2018 18:16:18 -0000)
Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(Andy Larsen <andy@whwl.net>, 26 Apr 2018 17:17:17 -0000)
Prev by date: Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(Pat Wahl, 26 Apr 2018 17:57:31 -0000)
Next by date: Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(dave allen, 26 Apr 2018 18:35:03 -0000)
Prev by thread: Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(Pat Wahl, 26 Apr 2018 17:57:31 -0000)
Next by thread: Re: SBE Regulatory Alert - Apr 23, 2018
(dave allen, 26 Apr 2018 18:35:03 -0000)
CRTech.org