About Us

August 19th 04, 02:38 PM

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

Say you orbit a new, state of the art satellite. How much bandwidth
can it provide to how many customers?

A whole bunch. Even the old birds which have been up for years can
repeat something like 900 TV channels and those are not considered
high-capacity satellites.

That means 900 customers can have 6 MHz of bandwidth each. Or maybe 5400 can
have 1 MHz each.

That's with antique satellites, not with the monster birds being
tossed up these days each of which which has orders of magnitude more
capacity than the TV repeaters.

When the satellite repeats a channel, it doesn't matter how many
people watch
it. Internet bandwidth is a completely different beast.

Welp, I read recently that several new satellite ISPs have jumped into
that biz so common sense indicates that they have to have unused
bandwidth available in copious supply or they wouldn't have opened
shop. Fact is that the demand for sattelite access is very
cost-limited which automatically keeps the need for bandwidth down to
manageable levels. Sattelite comms will continue to grow in markets
where the users are 'way out in the boonies where cables will never go
and they don't have any options and there are plenty of those. Then
comes the huge and growing market for sattelite mobile comms. And the
consumer market populated by folk who just like working the birds.

It appears to me that in the limit and ignoring some obvious realities
the Wi-fi vs. Satellite market competition won't be a competition. By
their very natures Wi-fi or some evloutionary form of Wi-fi will grab
the big pieces of the light-duty consumer and business travel markets
and the sattelites will continue to carry the heavy duty business
mobile and remote access comms.

And all this with the monster volume of *really* broadband military
sattelite comms sharing the RF spectrum with the commercials.

Compare that to what is
available in a single fiber. Also remember that once the duct is in
place, pulling another fiber isn't that expensive, and that new
technologies permit more bandwidth in existing fibers.

What "ducts"?? There aren't any ducts running into farms and vacation
lodges out in the boonies. They'll have the last mile problem for
years to come. Until the phone companies replace their twisted-pair
wiring with cable, fiber optic and otherwise.

I meant ducts that carry it to within a mile of the customer.

Many people in this country live twenty and more miles from anything
even vaguely resembling a cable. Wi-fi is never gonna reach them.

Ducts that go
across the country, etc. Satellites can't create another RF spectrum.

What's a "duct" anyway? How many of those are running all over North
Dakota and Idaho??

73 de Jim, N2EY

August 19th 04, 02:49 PM

Subject: BPL Powers Off
From: (Brian Kelly)
Date: 8/19/2004 8:38 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

Say you orbit a new, state of the art satellite. How much bandwidth
can it provide to how many customers?

A whole bunch. Even the old birds which have been up for years can
repeat something like 900 TV channels and those are not considered
high-capacity satellites.

That means 900 customers can have 6 MHz of bandwidth each. Or maybe 5400
can
have 1 MHz each.

That's with antique satellites, not with the monster birds being
tossed up these days each of which which has orders of magnitude more
capacity than the TV repeaters.

For the quality of TV programming provided today (with the possible
exclusion of Discovery, History Channel and TLC) they could just use one of the
old ECHO balloon satellites for all they are worth.

73

Steve, K4YZ

August 20th 04, 05:09 PM

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: BPL Powers Off
From: (Brian Kelly)
Date: 8/19/2004 8:38 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

Say you orbit a new, state of the art satellite. How much bandwidth
can it provide to how many customers?

A whole bunch. Even the old birds which have been up for years can
repeat something like 900 TV channels and those are not considered
high-capacity satellites.

That means 900 customers can have 6 MHz of bandwidth each. Or maybe 5400
can
have 1 MHz each.

That's with antique satellites, not with the monster birds being
tossed up these days each of which which has orders of magnitude more
capacity than the TV repeaters.

For the quality of TV programming provided today (with the possible
exclusion of Discovery, History Channel and TLC)

I moved over a year ago and have yet to power up my TV rcvr . . but
now that DVD players are getting dirt cheap and a Blockbusters is only
a few blocks down the street maybe I'll be able to watch TV sans the
electronic air pollution.

they could just use one of the
old ECHO balloon satellites for all they are worth.

Agreed.

73

Steve, K4YZ

w3rv

August 23rd 04, 08:55 AM

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

Say you orbit a new, state of the art satellite. How much bandwidth
can it provide to how many customers?

A whole bunch. Even the old birds which have been up for years can
repeat something like 900 TV channels and those are not considered
high-capacity satellites.

That means 900 customers can have 6 MHz of bandwidth each. Or maybe 5400
can
have 1 MHz each.

That's with antique satellites, not with the monster birds being
tossed up these days each of which which has orders of magnitude more
capacity than the TV repeaters.

Doesn't matter, they're still limited to the RF spectrum. Of which there is
only one. Each fiber is a whole new bunch of unshared spectrum.

When the satellite repeats a channel, it doesn't matter how many
people watch
it. Internet bandwidth is a completely different beast.

Welp, I read recently that several new satellite ISPs have jumped into
that biz so common sense indicates that they have to have unused
bandwidth available in copious supply or they wouldn't have opened
shop. Fact is that the demand for sattelite access is very
cost-limited which automatically keeps the need for bandwidth down to
manageable levels. Sattelite comms will continue to grow in markets
where the users are 'way out in the boonies where cables will never go
and they don't have any options and there are plenty of those. Then
comes the huge and growing market for sattelite mobile comms. And the
consumer market populated by folk who just like working the birds.

All of which says that while it's an answer for some, it's not a
general-purpose answer.

It appears to me that in the limit and ignoring some obvious realities
the Wi-fi vs. Satellite market competition won't be a competition. By
their very natures Wi-fi or some evloutionary form of Wi-fi will grab
the big pieces of the light-duty consumer and business travel markets
and the sattelites will continue to carry the heavy duty business
mobile and remote access comms.

Specialized tool in the toolbox for where other methods don't go.

And all this with the monster volume of *really* broadband military
sattelite comms sharing the RF spectrum with the commercials.

Compare that to what is
available in a single fiber. Also remember that once the duct is in
place, pulling another fiber isn't that expensive, and that new
technologies permit more bandwidth in existing fibers.

What "ducts"?? There aren't any ducts running into farms and vacation
lodges out in the boonies. They'll have the last mile problem for
years to come. Until the phone companies replace their twisted-pair
wiring with cable, fiber optic and otherwise.

I meant ducts that carry it to within a mile of the customer.

Many people in this country live twenty and more miles from anything
even vaguely resembling a cable. Wi-fi is never gonna reach them.

You'd be surprised at some of the boonie places that have Wi-Fi.

Ducts that go
across the country, etc. Satellites can't create another RF spectrum.

What's a "duct" anyway?

A pipe you can pull cable(s) and/or fiber(s) through. Usually installed along
various rights-of-way, such as interstate highways.

How many of those are running all over North
Dakota and Idaho??

More than you might suspect.

73 de Jim, N2EY

August 24th 04, 05:51 PM

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

That means 900 customers can have 6 MHz of bandwidth each. Or maybe 5400
can
have 1 MHz each.

That's with antique satellites, not with the monster birds being
tossed up these days each of which which has orders of magnitude more
capacity than the TV repeaters.

Doesn't matter, they're still limited to the RF spectrum. Of which there is
only one.

There's only one RF spectrum but that doesn't mean that a given
frequency can only have one user. Digital comms satellite operating
frequencies are shared via a bunch of schemes.

Each fiber is a whole new bunch of unshared spectrum.

Obviously fiber optics is the better choice vs. the satellites *IF*
the cable is in the neighborhood where service is needed. Big if.
It'll be years before optics cables are run into crossroads burgs and
made available for their use as neighborhood Wi-Fi feeds. I've watched
optics cables being run through places like Malvern. Took a tech
working in an air-conditioned mobile lab a full day to make and test a
single 1 1/2 inch splice. Which did not incxlude a repeater. Takes one
helluva lot of revenue traffic to justify those kinds of installation
outlays and that's why optics is a non-answer today except as
long-haul and/or enormous volume data pipes. Fiber optics cables are
cheaper and can provide more bandwidth than the old AT&T & Ma Bell
microwave systems and that's about as far as they've taken the optics
cables so far.

In the meanwhile back at the ranch the sattelites are already up and
running . .

What "ducts"?? There aren't any ducts running into farms and vacation
lodges out in the boonies. They'll have the last mile problem for
years to come. Until the phone companies replace their twisted-pair
wiring with cable, fiber optic and otherwise.

I meant ducts that carry it to within a mile of the customer.

Many people in this country live twenty and more miles from anything
even vaguely resembling a cable. Wi-fi is never gonna reach them.

You'd be surprised at some of the boonie places that have Wi-Fi.

Like that remote village in Nepal which gets it's broadband feed from
a satellite . . ?

What's a "duct" anyway?

A pipe you can pull cable(s) and/or fiber(s) through. Usually installed along
various rights-of-way, such as interstate highways.

How many of those are running all over North
Dakota and Idaho??

More than you might suspect.

I doubt it. Where's the map?

73 de Jim, N2EY

w3rv

August 25th 04, 12:08 PM

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

That means 900 customers can have 6 MHz of bandwidth each. Or maybe 5400
can
have 1 MHz each.

That's with antique satellites, not with the monster birds being
tossed up these days each of which which has orders of magnitude more
capacity than the TV repeaters.

Doesn't matter, they're still limited to the RF spectrum. Of which there is
only one.

There's only one RF spectrum but that doesn't mean that a given
frequency can only have one user. Digital comms satellite operating
frequencies are shared via a bunch of schemes.

To a certain extent. But ultimately there's a very definite limit. You can't
put geostationary satellites just anyplace in the sky, either.

End result is that the total capacity of satellite retransmission is limited.
There's also the transmission delay.

Each fiber is a whole new bunch of unshared spectrum.

Obviously fiber optics is the better choice vs. the satellites *IF*
the cable is in the neighborhood where service is needed. Big if.

Yep. But for bazillions of folks, it is.

It'll be years before optics cables are run into crossroads burgs and
made available for their use as neighborhood Wi-Fi feeds. I've watched
optics cables being run through places like Malvern. Took a tech
working in an air-conditioned mobile lab a full day to make and test a
single 1 1/2 inch splice.

When was this? Things have improved somewhat.

Which did not incxlude a repeater. Takes one
helluva lot of revenue traffic to justify those kinds of installation
outlays and that's why optics is a non-answer today except as
long-haul and/or enormous volume data pipes. Fiber optics cables are
cheaper and can provide more bandwidth than the old AT&T & Ma Bell
microwave systems and that's about as far as they've taken the optics
cables so far.

In the meanwhile back at the ranch the sattelites are already up and
running . .

Sure. And they'll play a role.

But as a general-purpose solution, fiber will dominate. In fact, it already
does. Satellite broadband comms will always be a supplement.

What "ducts"?? There aren't any ducts running into farms and vacation
lodges out in the boonies. They'll have the last mile problem for
years to come. Until the phone companies replace their twisted-pair
wiring with cable, fiber optic and otherwise.

I meant ducts that carry it to within a mile of the customer.

Many people in this country live twenty and more miles from anything
even vaguely resembling a cable. Wi-fi is never gonna reach them.

You'd be surprised at some of the boonie places that have Wi-Fi.

Like that remote village in Nepal which gets it's broadband feed from
a satellite . . ?

Sure!

What's a "duct" anyway?

A pipe you can pull cable(s) and/or fiber(s) through. Usually installed
along various rights-of-way, such as interstate highways.

How many of those are running all over North
Dakota and Idaho??

More than you might suspect.

I doubt it. Where's the map?

Not allowed to tell ya!

73 de Jim, N2EY

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
BPL Powers On	Phil	General	0	August 26th 04 10:17 PM
What does "power up" mean?	Doug Shields	Boatanchors	22	September 29th 03 04:41 AM
Complex line Z0: A numerical example	Roy Lewallen	Antenna	11	September 13th 03 01:04 AM
Derivation of the Reflection Coefficient?	Dr. Slick	Antenna	104	September 6th 03 02:27 AM

Menu

About Us