The FCC (like many Federal agencies) has gone looking for available frequencies and money as part of this:
Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan, Recommendation 5.8, p.86 (FCC, 2010). The National Broadband Plan is available at
The rub? They want to auction off a portion of the L-band spectrum used for satellite downlink communications from NOAA GOES satellites. This comes just as new satellites have been launched with new transponders using these frequencies. It’s madness.
To add insult to idiocy, the frequencies provide a much needed EMWIN service to Civil Defense and Emergency Managers in the USA, and many pacific islands use it as their only source of hurricane information. It’s chock full of public domain info that includes warnings, data, forecasts, and imagery. It was about to get a face lift to a new high speed data transponder (HRIT) using the same frequencies, already in orbit on GOES-R. Ground based receivers are in test mode, waiting for full deployment.
The beauty of this system is that is affordable to most anyone, using simple satellite equipment costing just a few hundred dollars linked into a PC with software.
The NOAA LRIT imagery system in another valuable service that will be in jeopardy by FCC this auction.
GOES-East Full Disk Image Viewed Using LRIT
GOES GVAR is another service that will be affected, on 1685.7 MHz This service is used by many universities and meteorological research operations.
If the FCC succeeds in auctioning off this spectrum for use as ground based broadband use, not only will the EMWIN and LRIT services from NOAA via GOES be disrupted, poorly designed transceivers might spill radio energy over into other transponder frequencies used by GOES communications, making for noise and signal dropout issues.
These frequencies have been designated for satellite communication use for a very long time, now all of the sudden, the FCC proposes an auction that will put their use in jeopardy. It is as if the FCC and NOAA don’t talk to one another.
I urge all interested parties that are NOAA GOES users to file comments with the FCC regarding ET Docket 10-123. A letter and email to your Senator(s) and Representative(s) should also be considered.
Colorado State University has already filed comments. You can read their comments at this FCC link:
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment_search/execute?proceeding=10-123
Please see the attached Public Notice from the FCC released on 6-4-2010.
“The National Broadband Plan recommends that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should make 500 megahertz of spectrum available for broadband use, including 300 megahertz between 225 MHz and 3.7 GHz for mobile use in the next five years…NTIA has preliminarily identified the 1675-1710 MHz band for such use and is examining the impact on its incumbent federal users.”
Links to document on FCC site:
PDF version:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1035A1.pdf
Text Version
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1035A1.txt
The 1675-1710 MHz spectrum encompasses EMWIN satellite transmissions–as well as others that are components of our national meteorological and hydrological communications infrastructure. These resources are accessed directly by others beyond the federal government. Loss of them will be felt worldwide by the meteorological community.
The FCC comment period closes 6-28-2010.
Comments can be submitted here at the FCC Electronic Comments Filing System as full page documents, be sure to list proceeding number 10-123
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/upload/display?z=7tiot
Please consider submitting a comment.
UPDATE: I have posted my submission to the FCC, and in the public interest I’m placing it here (FCC-Lband PDF) should anyone wish to read it.
“”” Mindbuilder says:
June 10, 2010 at 2:02 pm
I don’t see a big problem with this. Most of the time there would probably be little interference. The tiny number of people who actually have an antenna to receive this service might just have to shield their dish from interfering signals if there is any interference. Put it down in a small valley, or put up a metal fence around it or something. They could also use a bigger dish to get a higher signal to noise ratio. For the tiny number of users for whom this data is critical, they can do what it takes to get the signal. Users who just receive this data source for fun, can just get the data over the internet.
On the other hand, you have many thousands, perhaps millions of people who could benefit from the services provided by the opening of this spectrum. Usually the value of such services exceeds the fees charged, by a wide margin. Also there is increased tax revenues for public use. “””
Where do you people come up with this drivel ?
How does the Government stealing more tax revenues from the Private Sector make more funds available to the public sector.
The removal of those funds from the Private Sector, means that private sector enterprise will not happen; and that is what fuels not only the private sector that creates it; but the public sector that feeds off the private sector.
Don’t they teach elementary economics any more in schools; it is at least as solid a science as is ancient astrology; and modern climatology.
Taxation schemes lower the economic efficiency of EVERY enterprise that employs that method of legal theft from the productive sector.
When I worked for the Coast Guard the FCC auctioned off one of the VHF channels that the internationally mandated AIS (Automatic Information System) used for broadcasting. AIS is a marine information sharing system that allows vessels to get real time navigation information from other vessels operating in the same area. It is a SOLAS mandated system for most commercial vessels. The Coast Guard had to fight years of legal battles to get the frequency back.
What!? To someone OTHER THAN the Japanese?
You _do_ remember in the 1980’s when Japanese investors purchased Pebble Beach and the Rockefeller Center among other … oh never mind; this is like addressing the dog on matters of physics …
References:
1) Japanese asset price bubble – 1986 to 1991
2) JAPAN’S BUBBLE ECONOMY AND RECESSION
We thought, at the time, that they were unstoppable too …
.
Everyone should take a good hard look at a map of the useful electromagnetic spectrum (for radio communications). Ham radio has chunks of bands from a wavelength of 160 m through 70 cm as well as 1.2 GHz and above. All of this fits in a thimble compared to the total spectrum. These gadget manufacturers want a 500 Mhz chunk out of multiple bands. That’s HUGE! At some point we need to stop and ask ourselves just how important it is that everybody have broadband access to the internet with a handheld device. Hell, I’m not allowed to have outside lights to light up my driveway to take my trash to the curb once a week because of local “light pollution” ordinances. I might be denying a neighbor a mile away of his perfectly black sky for 5 minutes. Now imagine the racket in the UHF radio spectrum if we exponentially increase the number of low power terrestrial gadgets.
BPL was not the first really bad idea the FCC tried to foist on the public at the behest of commercial interests. This crap has gone on for years. A few decades ago the “high ground” of frequencies above 1.2 GHz were only of interest to researchers and the military. Now it’s prime real estate to commercial interests. Geez…even consumer wireless phones operate above 6 GHz these days! Satellites NEED this end of the spectrum because physics dictate so. Wireless gadget manufacturers covet this end of the spectrum for portability and convenience. Who wants an 8″ antenna sticking out of their iPhone? I say…tough!
Are there any international considerations involved here? I can see that a single country like the USA can assign bandwith for nominated purposes of its own, but is there leakage that could affect canada and Mexico, or even larger areas?
Is there not an International Convention?
There are various Australian proposals, one to use 35 MHz of the 400-800 MHz band and another to use 98 MHz of the 2.3 GHz band, both for wireless internet of national coverage. I have no idea if these are at risk.
L/S-band is used specifically to keep line-of-sight tracking problems to a minimum. I suppose what they could do, is what some of the other science observing birds do, and transmit their data UP (directionally) to commercial of government satellites in geosynchronous orbit, relaying any location in their downlink footprint. But it adds complexity.
That is, if their antennae are steerable and situated opposite the camera/sensory aparatus, which I doubt. The diagrams show them 90 degrees to the camera payload on the ones that I can find.
Interesting comments by all. This is a polarizing issue…no pun intended.
I have to say I love the idea of additional spectrum available for consumer use. Access to the internet is important for our future. Our ability to stay ahead of foreign competition will depend on how smart our children are and not how many widgets they can manufacture in an hour. Better and faster communication enables this development.
I am also excited about disruptive competition. Right now ATT & VZ charge us whatever they want for broadband or voice service. We need a disruptive carrier to come in and compete. This will lower prices for all consumers on broadband connectivity. The FCC will likely limit ATT & VZ on the quantity of spectrum they can bid for thus giving rise to innovation.
Finally, I will acknowledge that this will certainly cause pain for some people. Without a doubt, the introduction of new devices in a reallocated band will result in years of interference mitigation. The best analogy is the SMR band. This interference continues to happen today. However, these issues can be overcome through technological advancement. Balancing the pros with the cons, this is the right way forward for our country’s future.