FCC Freezes C-Band

[osu1991]

FCC Freezes C-Band


The FCC has signaled the next spectrum band it is seriously eyeing to free up for advanced telecom.

The Wireless Telecommunications, International, Public Safety and Homeland Security bureaus said Thursday (April 19) that it was instituting a temporary freeze on applications for new or modified fixed satellite service earth stations and fixed microwave stations in the 3.7-4.2 GHz spectrum bands (C-band) to "preserve the current landscape" as it looks into possibly allowing mobile broadband and more "intensive" fixed use.

 

[comfortably_numb]

Welp, guess I won't be buying a C-Band dish. I'm sure KU is next.

 

[Radioguy41]

You'd think they'd at least wait to see some hard benefits from the first seizure before looking to another.

 

[comfortably_numb]

You'd think they'd at least wait to see some hard benefits from the first seizure before looking to another.

No doubt. The first phase of the OTA repack hasn't even happened yet, I don't think.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

We shouldn't be selling away all this spectrum. Someday we might need it.

 

[comfortably_numb]

I'm wondering how they would reduce C-Band spectrum from a technical standpoint. A satellite is capable of reflecting signals on a certain range of frequencies, correct? So would they be reducing the amount of transponders that can be active on a given satellite? Say, reduce transponders over or below a certain frequency? It also seems like a waste to shut off transponders on existing satellites as those birds aren't cheap to make.

The collective reasoning I've heard on this forum is that C-Band is still necessary and will be for at least 15-20 years, as the best means of cost-effectively distributing programming to MVPD's and also businesses that are in rural areas or don't have access to fast broadband.

I've been giving the FCC the benefit of the doubt for awhile now, but this decision really makes me scratch my head.

 

[Titanium]

Dear Chicken Little,

The sky is not falling.

Yours Truly,
The FCC

This would have to be approved by the WRC. It has been repeatedly rejected in past sessions.

 

[comfortably_numb]

So it's fake news then?

 

[Titanium]

I rewrote my reply to better reflect the reality of the situation.

 

[Trip]

Freezes like this are routine when something like this is under consideration. The idea is to prevent speculators from putting themselves in a position to profit off a near-future decision if it goes that way.

As an example, the FCC froze TV station channel changes on 5/31/2011, even though the Incentive Auction legislation didn't pass congress until 2/22/2012, and the auction itself didn't close until 4/13/2017. This was to prevent stations on VHF from moving themselves to UHF solely to sell out and profit from the auction.

There was no guarantee on 5/31/2011 that the Incentive Auction would ever happen, but it was frozen anyway because there was chatter about it, much like the chatter going on here surrounding C-band.

- Trip

 

[navychop]

What bands does the WRC control?

 

[navychop]

So, since the C band signals are directional and relatively powerful, can an existing satellite continue service while relatively low power cell towers operate in the same band? Maybe with dishes modified or shielded, made more directional?

 

[comfortably_numb]

And who, exactly, wants this spectrum? What would it be used for?

 

[N5XZS]

C band is too valuable, no ground based TX allowed except uplinkers stations!

How can FCC be so stupid!?

Looks like they are out of touch of reality these days.

Live long C band will stay forever!!

 

[Titanium]

Read the WRC 2016 report for an understanding how these proposals have been countered by the satellite industry. Here is a thread where we discussed the WRC 2016 consideration: www.satelliteguys.us/xen/threads/save-our-cband.346373/

 

[kofi123]

This time around though, the satellite industry appears to believe that taking away some of their spectrum is inevitable. SES and Intelsat have already basically conceded 100 MHz of the 500 MHz used in downlinking C-Band signals. Meanwhile one of the FCC commissioners is now publicly saying he'd like to take away 200-400 MHz.

Intelsat, SES propose joint use of C-band by satellite, terrestrial mobile operators | FierceWireless
FCC’s O’Rielly suggests freeing up 200-300 megahertz of C-Band spectrum | FierceWireless

 

[Lone Gunman]

This time around though, the satellite industry appears to believe that taking away some of their spectrum is inevitable. SES and Intelsat have already basically conceded 100 MHz of the 500 MHz used in downlinking C-Band signals. Meanwhile one of the FCC commissioners is now publicly saying he'd like to take away 200-400 MHz.

Intelsat, SES propose joint use of C-band by satellite, terrestrial mobile operators | FierceWireless
FCC’s O’Rielly suggests freeing up 200-300 megahertz of C-Band spectrum | FierceWireless

Yeah, it's like that old saying, ie, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help!" What they are really saying is, B. O. H. I. C. A.!

 

[comfortably_numb]

Maybe there is a silver lining here; maybe this would force more channels and feeds onto KU band?

 

[N5XZS]

And maybe put more use of lower Ku band 10.7 to 11.7 GHz in NA region with our regular 11.7 to 12.2 Ku band use?

 

[Martyn]

What I worry most about here is some sort of system for joint use that allows TV stations and cable headends to block C-band use for mobile broadband within, say, 1km of their dishes. But you can be sure no one will take private individuals into account.