[Starlink] Starlink filings for D-Band via Tonga

Wed Dec 6 07:02:13 EST 2023

In another context someone pointed me to spacex saying 'D-band' in april 
2023 in this "NTIA Docket No. 230308-0068 / Docket NTIA-2023-0003" 
https://www.ntia.gov/sites/default/files/publications/spacex.pdf

 From that text, I understand it would, or could, be for sat-to-gnd.

Le 23/11/2023 à 14:40, Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink a écrit :
>
> Le 17/11/2023 à 23:56, Ulrich Speidel via Starlink a écrit :
>>
>> Right. Word from the Tongan government's MEIDECC is that it's D band 
>> as per the filing and that the reports on W band are wrong.
>>
> Can MEIDECC point me to the precise place at the ITU filing that says 
> it's D band?  Thank you!
>
> I could not find the word 'D-band' or 'D band' in the 'ESIAFI 
> application file  ("'ESIAFI II API-A(1).mdb"  at ITU 
> https://www.itu.int/ITU-R/space/asreceived/Publication/DisplayPublication/53068)
>
> People nominate bands in various ways.  As an example of a potential 
> confusion, there is this other wikipedia image that shows the freqs in 
> question (123-ish, 170-ish GHz) being called 'EHF' by ITU and 'W' by 
> IEEE.  Further to the confusion, the diagram says that the EU, NATO 
> and US ECM (not sure what  is ECM) call 'D' band something around 2 
> GHz or so, which is much lower than this 123-ish, 170-ish GHz. 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_spectrum#/media/File:Frq_Band_Comparison.png
>
> I will look later at maybe joining that ITU group to ask it there as 
> well.
>
> Alex
>
>> Beyond that, they're not authorised to say anything except that yes, 
>> it's a genuine filing.
>>
>> I don't think Tonga is a likely launch base (no large tracts of land 
>> to launch a rocket from, except as some locals would probably tell 
>> you, from the driveway of a certain royal residence). Who knows.
>>
>> I'd also say that SpaceX filings to the FCC at least have a track 
>> history of being superseded by the next filing a few weeks later with 
>> completely different parameters. Whether that's just rapid 
>> prototyping at SpaceX or whether they're deliberately designed as a 
>> groundhog version of April Fool's Day for the competition's lawyers 
>> to keep them spend money on litigation while SpaceX spends on 
>> innovation is anyone's guess. Similarly, having slept over it, the 
>> Tongan story could be a SpaceX attempt at establishing a "flag of 
>> convenience" operation, or it could simply be another of Elon's 
>> pranks to whip us and the media all up into a frenzy to keep people 
>> talking about his enterprises.
>>
>> On 17/11/2023 11:43 pm, Ulrich Speidel wrote:
>>>
>>> OK, so this seems to be related to a somewhat bigger development 
>>> that Starlink is pushing through Tonga as the regulatory authority:
>>>
>>> https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/175ttvz/spacex_files_29988satellite_wband_network_using/ 
>>>
>>> https://www.spaceintelreport.com/spacex-files-29988-satellite-w-band-network-using-kingdom-of-tonga-as-regulatory-home/ 
>>>
>>>
>>> ESIAFI 1 was bought by Tonga - it was the old COMSTAR 4 satellite 
>>> and named after their women's rugby team.
>>>
>>> Quite why they've chosen Tonga as regulatory home - no idea. Maybe 
>>> because they think Tonga owes them a favour. Currently trying to 
>>> find out more - stay tuned.
>>>
>>> On 17/11/2023 6:29 am, David Fernández via Starlink wrote:
>>>> Hi Alex,
>>>>
>>>> "A person on twitter seems to be saying this filing is precisely the
>>>> filing that spacex did at FCC"
>>>>
>>>> Would you mind linking to that tweet, if it is public?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 14:27:03 +0100
>>>> > From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu at gmail.com>
>>>> > To: starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>> > Subject: Re: [Starlink] Starlink filings for D-Band via Tonga
>>>> > Message-ID: <805d52ce-b517-49b9-a053-8306cd20b8aa at gmail.com>
>>>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>>>> >
>>>> > Towards clarification,
>>>> >
>>>> > The .mdb file of the ITU filing can be read with Excel (tab Data ->
>>>> > leftmost button 'Access'). The .mdb is on the web page of the ITU
>>>> > filing, at the bottom of the page.
>>>> > 
>>>> https://www.itu.int/ITU-R/space/asreceived/Publication/DisplayPublication/53068
>>>> >
>>>> > It might be that this 'ESIAFI II' is just a name because of some 
>>>> reason.
>>>> >
>>>> > There are some interesting dates like '06/03/2023', '13/03/2023' and
>>>> > '20/03/2023' and '6/10/2023'.
>>>> >
>>>> > There is much data about orbits, powers, beams that I dont know 
>>>> how to
>>>> > interpret. I would need the precise description of the database 
>>>> format,
>>>> > but I dont know where to get it from.
>>>> >
>>>> > The frequencies are listed, as I interpret these fields: 123 GHz 
>>>> - 130
>>>> > GHz centered on 126.5 GHz, 158.5-164 c 161.25 and 167-174.5 c 
>>>> 170.75.
>>>> >
>>>> > About D-band: I am not sure what is precisely a 'D band' and I think
>>>> > that discussion about bands is very complicated. I know there is
>>>> > wikipedia page about it, yes.
>>>> >
>>>> > A person on twitter seems to be saying this filing is precisely the
>>>> > filing that spacex did at FCC; but comparing the numbers shows some
>>>> > differences: total sats per plane differ at some altitudes like 
>>>> at 525km
>>>> > altitude: ITU says 3600 sats whereas FCC says 3360 sats. There 
>>>> can be
>>>> > speculations as to why they differ as there can be errors of various
>>>> > people including myself.
>>>> >
>>>> > The person on twitter tells that ITU filing is in this table, but 
>>>> I dont
>>>> > know how he generated it. Not sure whether he made some syntax 
>>>> error.
>>>> >
>>>> >> Altitude (km) Inclination (degrees) Satellites per Plane Planes
>>>> >> Total Satellites
>>>> >> 340 53 110 48 5280
>>>> >> 345 46 110 48 5280
>>>> >> 350 38 110 48 5280
>>>> >> 360 96.9 120 30 3600
>>>> >> 525 53 120 28 3600 [nota by me: FCC says 3360 and not 3600, see
>>>> >> table below]
>>>> >> 530 43 120 28 3600
>>>> >> 535 33 120 28 3600
>>>> >> 604 148 12 12 144
>>>> >> 614 115.7 18 18 324
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > I found this earlier FCC document has this table at this URL
>>>> > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-22-91A1.pdf (not sure
>>>> > whether it is the most authoritative, but at least the mathematics
>>>> > 28*120 at altitude 525 does make sense to be 3360).
>>>> >
>>>> >> Altitude (km) Inclination (degrees) Orbital Planes sats/plane 
>>>> Total sats
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 340 53 48 110 5280
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 345 46 48 110 5280
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 350 38 48 110 5280
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 360 96.9 30 120 3600
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 525 53 28 120 3360 [nota by me:
>>>> >> 28*120 == 3360 indeed]
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 530 43 28 120 3360
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 535 33 28 120 3360
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 604 148 12 12 144
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 614 115.7 18 18 324
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > Alex
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Le 16/11/2023 à 10:30, Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink a écrit :
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Le 15/11/2023 à 16:48, David Fernández via Starlink a écrit :
>>>> >>> I have got news about the recent filing by Starlink for the use of
>>>> >>> frequencies in D-band:
>>>> >>> 
>>>> https://www.itu.int/ITU-R/space/asreceived/Publication/DisplayPublication/53068
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> This has been done via Tonga, not the USA, and is for both, 
>>>> uplink and
>>>> >>> downlink frequencies, although only downlink seems to be 
>>>> allocated now
>>>> >>> for satellite use.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Thanks for the pointer.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> It is the first time I hear about this 'ESIAFI II' constellation. I
>>>> >> understand it is a different thing than the starlink existing
>>>> >> constellation.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> It adds to the list of plans of LEO Internet constellations 
>>>> (starlink,
>>>> >> kuiper, oneweb etc.)
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Alex
>>>> >>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Regards,
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> David
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Starlink mailing list
>>>> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>>> -- 
>>> ****************************************************************
>>> Dr. Ulrich Speidel
>>>
>>> School of Computer Science
>>>
>>> Room 303S.594 (City Campus)
>>>
>>> The University of Auckland
>>> u.speidel at auckland.ac.nz http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~ulrich/
>>> ****************************************************************
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> -- 
>> ****************************************************************
>> Dr. Ulrich Speidel
>>
>> School of Computer Science
>>
>> Room 303S.594 (City Campus)
>>
>> The University of Auckland
>> u.speidel at auckland.ac.nz  http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~ulrich/
>> ****************************************************************
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Starlink mailing list
>> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink