If E8 is going to be available, I'll suggest that they send it to 129 and retire E5. Then when Ciel-2 goes up, E8 can be the in-orbit spare.
Echostar 11
- Thread starter wied
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 77
- Views 18K
"If E8 is going to be available, I'll suggest that they send it to 129 and retire E5. "
Exactly what I was thinking. Please, please replace E5 ASAP.
Exactly what I was thinking. Please, please replace E5 ASAP.
If needed E* would un-mothball E6 and move it to 129 before they put E11 at 129.
With the launch delay because of the accident at Sea Launch Ciel-2 might be in the sky before E11 is launched.
With the launch delay because of the accident at Sea Launch Ciel-2 might be in the sky before E11 is launched.
Something needs to be done with the 129 sat . If only they would temporarily move the echostar 6 sat there till the new sat is ready. Then they could get good steady coverage for hd for all viewers. I guess that a better satellite would give us a bigger footprint for 129 right?
Moving a satellite has an impact on its usefull life. It is only as good as the fuel it carries in order to maintain its position. Before a move is made there would have to be lots of considerations to take into account.
To be very clear here. It will end up being Echo 11 for conus @ 110 and Echo 10 for spots @ 110. Echo 6 has not been used for almost a year now. It is an in orbit spare... Echo 13 is going up a year after E11. I do not however know where that will be going. I doubt dish does yet even! ;0 Echo 8 should replace E3 in my opinion althogh I heard through the grapevine that amc 14 which was specially modified may end up taking that job up. 61.5 is in bad shape too. E3 is on it's last legs for sure.
-B
-B
Moving E8 to 61.5 would probably not work too well, 50 degrees out of place would probably result in a poor footprint. E3 was specifically designed for that slot.
I thought that E11 was supposed to have steerable spots on it. Would be a shame to only use it for CONUS and not add spot beam coverage. Dish has 10 uplink centers, and 29 TPs on 110. They could uplink 290 TPs. They are using about 150? of their 290 right now?
I thought that E11 was supposed to have steerable spots on it. Would be a shame to only use it for CONUS and not add spot beam coverage. Dish has 10 uplink centers, and 29 TPs on 110. They could uplink 290 TPs. They are using about 150? of their 290 right now?
Who cares where it ends up... if you look closely only one out of the fleet of 4 SSL sats is working close to OK... Sure not a very impressive record. Hope they do not use it for much until it proves its self in 6 months to a year past its launch.
The satellite foot print at 61.5 W is not a big concern. It only has to cover the areas on the east coast that can not use 129 W and this should not be a problem for E-6 or E-8. It doesn't make sense for Dish to move E-8 to 61.5 W since it can't cover all the TPs provided by E-3 included some of the Dish licensed TPs that E-3 can't provide now because of E-3 failures. E-6 is the only logical choice to move to 61.5 w of the Dish satellites currently on-orbit. E-6 along with E-12 and perhaps a few TPs on E-3 would allow Dish to get full use out of the 61.5 W slot. I don't see E-6 moving anywhere until E-11 launched which probably won't happen now until late in 2007 or early 2008.
Moving E-8 to 129 W provides some interesting options specifically related to its spotbeams. Check out this website for the current spotbeam locations:
http://ekb.dbstalk.com/pictures/echo8.gif
Certainly the western spotbeams could not be used since they would be out in the Pacific Ocean. These would be spotbeams 1 - 4 and probably 5 from the website referenced above. If you move the other spotbeams 19 degrees west you could see that these may be useful for providing locals including HD locals. It should be noted that E-8 can not provide signal for all 32 TPs at 129 W either so E-5 is needed for some TPs until the Ciel-2 satellite is launched sometime in late 2008. It should also be noted that moving either E-6 or E-8 to 129 W may marginally improve the foot print and signal strength but neither was designed for that orbital location.
If E-11 is going to 110 W I would expect it to be able to provide double power CONUS TPs for the 19 TPs not being used by E-10 for spotbeams. This would allow Dish to keep the error correction lower and therefore put more channels per TP. In the near term it will interesting what Dish does with the Anik F3 satellite at 118.7 W especially related to HD locals.
Moving E-8 to 129 W provides some interesting options specifically related to its spotbeams. Check out this website for the current spotbeam locations:
http://ekb.dbstalk.com/pictures/echo8.gif
Certainly the western spotbeams could not be used since they would be out in the Pacific Ocean. These would be spotbeams 1 - 4 and probably 5 from the website referenced above. If you move the other spotbeams 19 degrees west you could see that these may be useful for providing locals including HD locals. It should be noted that E-8 can not provide signal for all 32 TPs at 129 W either so E-5 is needed for some TPs until the Ciel-2 satellite is launched sometime in late 2008. It should also be noted that moving either E-6 or E-8 to 129 W may marginally improve the foot print and signal strength but neither was designed for that orbital location.
If E-11 is going to 110 W I would expect it to be able to provide double power CONUS TPs for the 19 TPs not being used by E-10 for spotbeams. This would allow Dish to keep the error correction lower and therefore put more channels per TP. In the near term it will interesting what Dish does with the Anik F3 satellite at 118.7 W especially related to HD locals.
There is more to it than that.
Due to its contractual obligation with SkyAngel, Dish must offer a CONUS footprint from 61.5.
Also, contrary to what many believe, 61.5 is usable from many west coast locations - albeit with a very low elevation. I had a 61.5 dish in northern California with great signal strength (but I did need to use an elevation offset adapter due to the low angle).
Now if Sky Angel ever launches their own bird or if D* and SA write a new contract... Well, then, that changes everything!
Cheers,
Red
I highly doubt E8 would goto 61.5.
E7 and E8 were designed to be interchangable incase of a failure.
So if E8 were moved to 129 and for some reason E7 had a catstrophic failure there would not be a replacement that could cover the spot beam locations that E7 covers.
E7 and E8 were designed to be interchangable incase of a failure.
So if E8 were moved to 129 and for some reason E7 had a catstrophic failure there would not be a replacement that could cover the spot beam locations that E7 covers.
There is more to it than that.
Due to its contractual obligation with SkyAngel, Dish must offer a CONUS footprint from 61.5.
Also, contrary to what many believe, 61.5 is usable from many west coast locations - albeit with a very low elevation. I had a 61.5 dish in northern California with great signal strength (but I did need to use an elevation offset adapter due to the low angle).
Now if Sky Angel ever launches their own bird or if D* and SA write a new contract... Well, then, that changes everything!
Cheers,
Red
I thought the contract deals with E3 only. Leave it in place for the SkyAngel TP's. When it dies it dies.
You could be right - I'll have to dig into this and find out if it is E3 or 61.5.
Either way, SkyAngel seems to be showing early signs of demise based on recent business decisions.
That's true, but when E3 (and the contract) dies, Dish will lose the use of the 6 Sky Angel transponders that they currently use as part of the agreement (Sky Angel owns TP's 25-32).
If E3 dies, expect Dish to quickly come up with two other TP's for Sky Angel to use so they can continue to use the other 6.
Sure seems that way. But maybe a rich "angel" will save them. Seems to happen a lot with Christian stations, schools, etc.
