 |
Via Satellite: What are your thoughts on this issue and what do you see as the key points in the satellite argument here? Do you think satellite players should keep the entire C-Band spectrum?Carrigan: Yes. Two reasons. 1) Satellite users have built an infrastructure costing billions of dollars and were there first. 2) C-Band is ideally suited for satellite communication as noted above. This is also true for radars and weapon systems that DoD has developed over many years and is vital to not only U.S. national security, but are also deployed world over to Defend Freedom.
Via Satellite: If we are having this conversation in early 2008, what do you expect to have happened in the whole C-Band arena? Carrigan: This issue will not go away by 2007 for sure. The ITU is bent on selling more and more spectrum for broadband wireless access (BWA). It is our intent to try to steer ITU out of C-band and to show why C-Band is not optimal for IMT or IMT advanced. The range and coverage provided at lower frequencies are optimal for WiMAX mobile deployment, as it has better coverage, longer range, cheaper development costs, faster deployment, NLOS and LOS coverage, and not impeded by rain, or foliage. Stay out of C-Band. I also firmly believe that WiMAX 802.16-2004 back-haul will become obsolete when mobile WiMAX (802.16e) gets deployed, much like 802.11g superseded 802.11b. In the near future 802.11n will be replacing 802.11b,g and a.
|
|
ALSO IN THIS EDITION
RECOMMENDED STORIES
SATELLITE TRANSPONDER GUIDE
Click here to get $100 off the cover price when you enter promo code DK6503 during checkout.
The Satellite Transponder Guide is your one-stop resource for information on North American transponders.
|
|
Email
Comments
Print
Reuse