NASA TV is moving

[DefCon4]

c/p from NASA Homepage(Please delete if posted previously):


NASA Television Satellite Information


NASA Television Moving to AMC 3 Satellite Jan. 16, 2010

NASA Television is moving to satellite AMC 3.
The transition will take place January 16, 2010.
Cable and satellite providers will access NASA TV on AMC 3 Transponder 15C.
NASA TV’s Live Interactive Media Outlet (LIMO Channel) will be available at AMC 3 Transponder 9C.

Effective Jan.16, 2010:

NASA TV (Public, Education and Media Channels) Digital Satellite C-Band Downlink for continental North America, Alaska and Hawaii:

Uplink provider = Americom
Satellite = AMC 3
Transponder = 15 C
87 Degrees West
Transmission Format = DVB-S, 4:2:0
Downlink Frequency: 4000 Mhz
Downlink Polarity: Horizontal
FEC = 3/4
Data Rate = 38.860 MHz
Symbol Rate = 28.1115

"Public Channel" Programming:
SD Program = 101 (HQ1)
Video PID = 111
MPEG I Layer II Audio PID = 114
AC-3 PID = 115

"Education Channel" Programming:
SD Program = 102 (HQ2)
Video PID = 121
MPEG I Layer II Audio PID = 124
AC-3 Audio PID = 125

"Media Channel" Programming:
SD Program = 103 (HQ3)
Video PID = 1031
MPEG I Layer II Audio PID = 1034
AC-3 Audio PID = 1035

NASA TV Occasional HD Programming:
HD Program = 105
Video PID = 82
MPEG-1 Layer II Audio PID =83
AC-3 Audio PID = 238

Effective Jan.16, 2010:

NASA TV (Live Interactive Media Outlet – LIMO Channel) Digital Satellite C-Band Downlink for continental North America, Alaska and Hawaii:

Uplink provider = Americom
Satellite = AMC 3
Transponder = 9 C
Orbital Position = 87 Degrees West
Transmission Format = DVB-S, 4:2:0
Downlink Frequency: 3865.5 Mhz
Downlink Polarity: Horizontal
FEC = 3/4
Data Rate = 6.0 Mbps
Symbol rate = 4.3404 Msps

 

[Pismire]

Thanks for the info. Glad they aren't moving out of range for me.

 

[toucan-man]

Thanks for the info. Glad they aren't moving out of range for me.

Hah! Bye bye NASA here.

 

[Pismire]

That sucks. Hopefully you can get 119 but no HD feed. Amc3 is somewhat marginal for me. I get ThisTV about 50%Q so Nasa should be doable with the 3/4 fec.

 

[Lucky53]

Just wondering if they are only moving off AMC-6,but still staying on AMC-7 137.0w..or just use the one satellite now..( AMC-3)..??

 

[crackt]

i read on another site nasa was up on 101w. info is sposed to be posted on satbeams. doesnt seem like anyone can lock it so maybe it was temp or isnt active yet.

crackt out,.

 

[goaliebob99]

Looks like they are trying to go with 1 sat feed instead of paying for 2.

 

[Mr Tony]

They'll still stay on 137W as Alaska/Hawaii cant see 87W. Reason for moving is solar issues

http://www.satelliteguys.us/2040282-post24.html

It said AMC6 is having solar panel issues and NASA is moving to AMC3 Cband Transponder 15 on 1/16/2010

I trust MrMars...If I remember, he is in the satellite industry

 

[N5XZS]

I just wish NASA-TV, would move to KU band make our life easer......:rant:

 

[Mr Tony]

just reread it and it they might do just one feed

interesting as in Alaska its under a 5 elevation whereas 137W is at 16 elevation

 

[dashaund]

I'm gonna go with they're doing away with two feeds as well. I do agree I wish they'd put a feed up on Ku as well simply to give more people access to their programming. But I'm not paying the bill so my opinion doesn't carry much weight I guess we'll wait and see how it all plays out.

 

[Blindowl1234]

Well at least a good channel is only moving instead of totally disappearing for a change. Right now 87w is ok on the six footer. 72W is over the top of the house and I'd have to manually move the 8.5 foot Paraclipse...no fun with it's dead acuator. Blind

 

[Cham]

Is that DVB-S for all the NASA channels on AMC-3?
-C.

 

[dashaund]

Is that DVB-S for all the NASA channels on AMC-3?
-C.

Yes. Regular ol' 4:2:0 SD for the four channel mux, and 4:2:0 HD for the occasional HD content (which is 99% of the time only on for the shuttle launches and landings) which is the 5th channel in the mux when it is on. The HD content looks AMAZING, even with it being on a mux. I recorded the most recent shuttle landing on my AZBox and did a little editing on my computer...wow. It looks great even after encoding it into MPEG4. Kinda fun to do once you get the hang of it.

 

[skysurfer]

It said AMC6 is having solar panel issues and NASA is moving to AMC3 Cband Transponder 15 on 1/16/2010

I trust MrMars...If I remember, he is in the satellite industry

It's not that he is in the industry, he's stealing (or repeating) info originally posted in another satellite forum.

As for AMC-7, I bet it will stay because NASA may not want to disenfranchise AK/HI sites where there is no coverage or the look angle is very very low. If NASA wanted to combine full coverage of the two muxes into one, there are a few options on SES WS birds that could have been considered...

 

[Mr Tony]

It's not that he is in the industry,

could have sworn he said to me once he was....but oh well thats not the point

The point is NASA is moving to AMC3

 

[Jim S.]

But I'm not paying the bill so my opinion doesn't carry much weight

Actually, you are, so it should. But getting them to realize that is another matter entirely. :rant:

 

[tvropro]

For those who will have problems getting Nasa on C band in the future I think there still up on 119 ITC on Dish.

 

[Tron]

At least there's a bit more content on 87w that would make me feel better with a fixed dish there for NASA...

 

[B.J.]

It's not that he is in the industry, he's stealing (or repeating) info originally posted in another satellite forum.

.....

It's not that he's stealing anything. He was just kind enough to explain what was discussed in a link that I "tried" to post about a discussion on another forum.

I tried to post a link to a discussion in the satforums forum because it referenced the problems NASA was having with AMC6, which was the reason they were leaving AMC-6. I tried to post the url rather than the info so people would see the original, but I somehow had a typo in the link, and it went to the wrong discussion. Someone replied that for some unknown reason they couldn't view the forum, and I still didn't realize that I had the wrong URL, so I didn't correct it (now it's apparently too late to edit). The person who responded with the info was kind enough to summarize the correct post and was simply re-phrasing what was being discussed at Satforums.
The correct URL should have been:
http://forums.satforums.com/SatForumMaster/common/messages.php?bpr=1&msg=15864.1#15864.1
{somehow I had switched 864 to 862???... hope I got it right this time }

The person who initiated the Satforums discussion is communicating with NASA, and they previously requested help from the people on Satforums with respect to the quality of their sat signal, and that discussion is recommended as a place to find additional information about the transition to AMC3. The link referenced in this thread was posted there a couple days ago.