FCC proposes to grant access to 900 MHz, 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz to satellites

The Amateur Services have a secondary allocation in this portion of the spectrum. We need to ensure that it remains allocated. The fact is this portion of the spectrum is utilized by amateurs. with respect, suggesting we do not "deserve it" is not appropriate in a public forum.

73

Tim VE6SH

 

Chip-

Thanks for the response. Very interesting. I can tell you as a retired stockbroker/options trader that most of Wall St has no understanding of the technology, or a vision of the future. Pricing of this stock is more a vote of confidence on the man, rather than the technology.

Bill

 

I could give a rats behind about starLink. Cheaper option? I pay $43 a month to AT&T for gigabit fiber. Sadly because the cartels refuse to replace their ancient copper with fiber because they can, this is the only reason why some are flocking to fixed wireless options, only to find out things like latency, data caps/throttling, etc are reality.

The introduction of technology hasn't driven prices up, elimination of real competition has, thanks to conglomeration and acquisitions. It's not hard to figure it out.

In the US, there are now three wireless MNOs. Three. Rest of the world most developed countries have four or more. This number is important. One has to be living under a rock to not see the net effect to consumers. T-Mobile shafting it's customers, AT&T and Verizon right behind them. Outages every week. Yeah, great marketplace. What great amazing technology and choice we have. SMH.

 

Do I see SpaceX lurking behind this FCC NPRM? Apologies if I stepped on the out of bounds line.

 

AI-chatGPT sez---

• Hubble Network — primary technological catalyst. They actually brought the Part-15-to-satellite concept into the FCC licensing machinery in a commercially meaningful way. Hubble had also received temporary authority in 2024 to operate terrestrial sites communicating with the Spire/Hubble constellation for customer demonstrations.

• Spire Global — very important enabler/partner. Spire's satellite licensing/modification was paired with the Hubble authorization, and the NPRM repeatedly cites the two together.

• Loft Orbital — earlier precedent. The FCC notes that Loft had previously received waivers allowing satellites to receive signals in Part 15-type bands, including 902–906 MHz and 2.4 GHz, although only for limited/infrequent operation. Loft therefore helped establish the regulatory precedent, even though Hubble seems to have supplied the commercial impetus for generalizing it.

• The much larger D2D industry — political/economic motivation rather than the technical origin. The NPRM's very first page emphasizes more than $40 billion of recent D2D transactions,

 

AI;DR

 

More from AI,

Between Hubble Network, Spire Global, or Loft Orbital, there is an immense cultural and professional crossover of personnel between these companies and the amateur radio (ham radio) community.

In the aerospace industry, the line between commercial satellite engineers and ham radio hobbyists is incredibly thin.

The Engineering Crossover

• The Talent Pool: These three companies hire extensively from aerospace engineering and radio frequency (RF) programs at universities like CalPoly, Stanford, and MIT. These specific university labs are famous for housing prominent student Amateur Radio Clubs and developing CubeSats that originally launched on amateur frequencies.
• Shared Technical Roots: Before the boom of commercial NewSpace companies like Loft and Spire, the only way for students or engineers to put a small satellite into orbit was via the Amateur-Satellite Service (AMSAT). Many senior engineers at these firms cut their teeth building amateur radio satellites.

The "TinyGS" & Open-Source Tracking Connection

• Crowdsourced Monitoring: A major point of intersection for personnel at these companies is TinyGS (Tiny Ground Station), an open-source network of amateur-built ground stations tracking LoRa and other low-power satellites.
• Hobbyist Intersect: Engineers working on low-power IoT networks like Hubble Network or payload operations at Spire frequently participate in these open-source and amateur tracking communities outside of their day jobs to experiment with cheap, homebrew SDR (Software Defined Radio) setups.

Ultimately, while the executives handle the commercial business, the hardware, firmware, and RF engineers on the ground at all three companies are heavily populated by licensed amateur radio operators who use the hobby as an extension of their professional passion for space communications.

 

Clearly LLM hallucinations here.

What, no citation of reliable statistics? Really!!??

 

Folks, an example: do you really think that Starlink was not built in part by ham radio Part 97 licensees? Why do we not have Part 97 transponders on Starlink birds? Even a partial constellation so equipped would have been a trivial cost.

Hardly an hallucination...;-) Unfortunately at least some of these executives have to handle the investors who see public rants and (at best) insults, and they just tend to bundle hams with the dirty diapers in the trash. We, at Part 97 as users, deserve better than that.

We need to up our game IMO.

This D2D/LEO initiative is not another Broadband over power lines...CAN there be real problems? Maybe. Better to engineer them out as best as possible early in the game. There is no need to make those who comment on these systems punching bags. People notice. Actions are then taken that , IMO, do not help Part 97.

73
Chip W1YW

 

Kindly help us achieve clarity with your own technical analyses, not just dissing comments.

73
Chip W1YW

 

K6CLS--

Maybe this will help you get started... happy to actually show all the equations and assumptions AFTER YOU and others show your analysis. Note that any future FCC filings would contain said equation-based analysis. Mine sure will. So if you don't want to show your stuff, well, you can see mine along with everyone elses. Filings on the NPRM are due 60 days from Fed publication, and that pub is imminent.

A toy calculation relevant to Part 97--I calculated WORST CASE values and differential in the SINR noise floor for D2D/LEO transmitting at the ground horizon vs one overhead. Note that at 2.4 and 5.8 GHz the path link differential goes by a lambda squared factor (I will let YOU show if it is a 'division' or a 'multiplication') but the antenna gain increases with frequency by the same amount. So the RX power is virtually the same, even though the illuminated ground spot increases from beam dilution and projected spot size from lateral illumination. Its really power density not total illuminated power, so the power density is much lower at 2.4.

In any case, assuming similar spot sizes both from overhead and near horizon sat positions (a worst case), and other assumptions (same antenna polarizations TX/RX, which is highly unlikely, and others) , such as the amateur radio QSO at 2.4 or 5.8 is continuously 'interfered', I found that a D2D/LEO sat degrades the SINR, in that worst case scenario by 10 dB for the sat transmitting at the ground's horizon and in contrast, the sat degrades said SINR by less than 0.1 dB if transmitting virtually overhead. This assumes the amateur radio antennas for ground based QSO are , as we have seen, designed for horizon based comms. You can have fun going backwards to see what a low gain ham antenna will do. I don't care. You will find the SINR degradation goes into a few dB at worst at the horizon and is not noticeable with the sat at zenith.

So obviously if you have a sat system designed -- when only overhead with its finite ground illumination-- and you have typical ground= based ham antennas that look at the horizon, there is no practical interference to Part 97. Clearly a sat system designed to be seen overhead only (within a illumination spot on the ground) is the way to go. Hence my approach, optimized for same, including cost and other factors. Gateway to LEO as needed, mesh otherwise.

Your analysis please, then I will NOT do a 'CLS: DR' on your assertions made prior.

73
Chip W1YW

 

Ok - I feel like a broken record - two things

First, when the FCC was staffed by engineers, they knew not to mix terrestrial users with sky users. And they provisioned guard bands between the uses.

There are specific allocations for ground to space and space to ground. Go over there and use those.

(So many recent examples of failures because of neglecting this: radar altimeters, Lightspeed nearly destroyed GNSS, the EU putting part of Galileo outside of GNSS allocation, etc.)


Do not pollute the ISM bands with inappropriate users.

Second, I encourage you and everyone else to post comments to the NPRM.

Although I question the efficacy, because as you previously pointed out:

So it is inherently not trustworthy being LLM AI, and it is unread and unverified by a human, certainly not a technical expert.

Ok, got it. I guess that's what you want.

 

What I want is progress in the human condition. AI is a tool and like all tools it has its place when used properly and verified by humans.

This NPRM, if implemented, will lead to a new era for Part 15 devices. It is an exciting time! Huge opportunities for hams in making new industries. A huge opportunity for Part 97 users to make friends and maybe get a free ride with a Part 97 transponder sat constellation.

Will ham radio be interfered by this new Part 15 D2D/LEO initiative?

Go ahead: show us the numbers.

I did.

The unfortunate outcome of this thread has been to turn off at least some investors on backing a free ride transponder sat constellation option for Part 97. As a result, I cannot be involved in same. But hey--some of you guys had measureable impact!

Why make friends when you can so easily turn the switch to 'off'?

Anyway, I am personally moving ahead with my own use of Part 97 and new systems for Part 15.

73
Chip W1YW

 

If you want to 'encourage' them then at least take the time to find out how the FCC system works and the fact that you CANNOT respond to the NPRM right now.

So before you empty your spleen, make sure the door is open first.

Sheesh! Some hams, IMO, need to feel less entitled and more attune to reality.