Jackson: “I Don’t Know How We Got Into This Position”

 

Via Satellite: What is going to happen over the rest of the year, and is the satellite industry in a stronger position now than it has been throughout the last few months?

Jackson: We are all preparing for the ITU World Radiocommunications meeting in October where this issue will be discussed. I think our preparations are well advanced and we have the advantage of having logic on our side. It really makes no sense to change the frequency allocation when lower frequencies are more suitable for WiMax and other terrestrial radio services, such as those available around 2.5 gigahertz or even lower which have a better building penetration performance are available.

Via Satellite: What are the key points in the satellite argument for retaining this spectrum?

Jackson: As there are applications that can only be served by satellite ,we need to facilitate their use and thus we need to allocate satellites a suitable frequency. When the ITU were faced with the same question many years ago, their studies indicated that a portion of the so-called C-band was the most suitable as it could offer a very reliable service throughout the world. They also allocated additional frequencies, one of which being Ku-band. This was a frequency that makes use of smaller dishes but is not suitable for use in heavy rainfall areas where high levels of reliability are required as it suffers from a type of attenuation called rain fade.

I can see why some regulators in countries where satellites only use a limited amount of C-band thought they could reallocate it to terrestrial without much problem, but I do not see how that can happen in regions where, for very good reasons, C-band is the lifeblood of the satellite Industry. If I was a WiMax equipment manufacturer or operator I would wish to use a common frequency worldwide and one that achieved maximum building penetration. I am not sure the satellite portion of C-band will achieve either.

Via Satellite: If we are having this conversation in early 2008, what do you expect to have happened?

Jackson: Unfortunately, some European regulators have taken a purely local view and allocated some of the satellite C-band frequency in their countries to WiMax, and that will be difficult to reverse. In Asia, regulators have now, I believe, recognized the problem, and so they are unlikely to follow that example. We will therefore either see two sets of frequencies being used in parallel, or the world will slowly change to a single lower frequency than C-band that is more suitable for terrestrial use.

• Via Satellite Magazine Announces 2011 Satellite Executive of the Year Nominees

• UAVs Unlimited: ISR-Focused Military Looks to More Capable Remotely Piloted Aircraft

• Satellite R&D Landscape Rich with Promise NASA Space Technology Focus, Military Requirements Driving Future Innovations

• EXTENDED INTERVIEW: Satellite Executive of the Year 2010 Petra Mateos, Chairwoman, Hispasat
• Shifting Market Dynamics Forces Content Providers to Explore New Revenue Streams

• The WiMax Point Of View
• The Defense Case for C-Band
• SUIRG: Satellite Players Must Keep C-Band
• Hartshorn: 'A Matter Of Life Or Death'
• NSR Sees Opportunity For Satellite Players In WiMax