On 12/Jul/20 14:00, Paul Nash wrote:
> Not quite VSAT, but in the bad old SA days (pre-demicracy), I did some work
> for a company that used a UK-based satellite provider for data to the client
> (data was sent in the VBI), and dial-up for the traffic from the client.
>
> Still relied on a lo
Not quite VSAT, but in the bad old SA days (pre-demicracy), I did some work for
a company that used a UK-based satellite provider for data to the client (data
was sent in the VBI), and dial-up for the traffic from the client.
Still relied on a local provider for the dial-up, though, so could be
On 10/Jul/20 10:50, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> With common Ku band TVRO (receive only) dishes and decoders, one of
> the constraints for moving to higher bitrates is the physical sizes of
> the customer dish and economics.
>
> For a good example go to a very densely populated developing nation
> envir
With common Ku band TVRO (receive only) dishes and decoders, one of the
constraints for moving to higher bitrates is the physical sizes of the
customer dish and economics.
For a good example go to a very densely populated developing nation
environment. Saddar, central Rawalpindi, Pakistan would be
On 9/Jul/20 22:49, Masataka Ohta wrote:
> We should also use IP even over radio waves. IP over MPEG2-TS
> over DVB (or terrestrial broadcast network) is doable though
> IP directly over DVB should be better.
Well, when we moved over from traditional satellites to inclined orbit
satellites back
Mark Tinka wrote:
It's just that with more and more stuff being loaded on to IP (not to
mention, good ol' IPTV),
Good.
does it make sense for broadcasters to upgrade
satellite infrastructure and decoders to support 1080p, 4K, 8K, 16K,
e.t.c., when all you need is an app and an Internet conne
Proprietary startups for M2M in most of cases bad idea, especially if
they require
custom hardware (those operate in VHF band).
And with such history:
On 9/Jul/20 18:00, Christopher Munz-Michielin wrote:
> I'd assume it's a question of available bandwidth and availability of
> decoders. From my observations most HD satellite feeds seem to sit
> between 3 and 5 mbps, a typical Ku band transponder might have a
> bandwidth of around 20-25mbps.
On 9/Jul/20 17:51, Joel M Snyder wrote:
> Oh man I wish that were wholly true... Satellite/VSAT has another very
> very important attribute: it's not subject to the whims of the local
> government or regulators. So when there's an election or some unrest or
> coup or the prime minister has ver
On 09/07/2020 08:00, Mark Tinka wrote:
So is there a reason why we are not seeing widespread 1080p TV via
satellite? They seem to exist where a broadcaster also supports an IPTV
platform.
Mark.
I'd assume it's a question of available bandwidth and availability of
decoders. From my observations
On Jul 8, 2020, at 3:05 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
>Satellite earth stations are not irrelevant, however. They still do get
>used to provide satellite-based TV services, and can also be used for
>media houses who need to hook up to their network to broadcast video
>when reporting in the region (even
On 9/Jul/20 16:51, Christopher Munz-Michielin wrote:
>
> There are a few 4K test streams. NASA TV is one:
>
> https://www.lyngsat.com/tvchannels/us/NASA-TV-UHD.html
>
> I just piped it into ffmpeg and the NASA TV feed runs 10-15mbps, H.265
> encoding at a resolution of 3840x2160. So definitely
On 09/07/2020 05:34, Mark Tinka wrote:
Does anyone know of (m)any satellite TV services delivering 1080p or
greater? The most I've seen on our side of the rock is 1080i.
If there is an inherent commercial restriction in how many pixels we can
grab over satellite at scale, it might be tricky for
On 9/Jul/20 04:47, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
>
> I don't think traditional satellites have much future as backbone.
> Only as broadcasting media.
Does anyone know of (m)any satellite TV services delivering 1080p or
greater? The most I've seen on our side of the rock is 1080i.
If there is
For the IoT/M2M stuff that doesn’t require huge amounts of data, there is a
Silicon Valley startup that is deploying cube sats for just that.
Swarm Technologies
https://www.swarm.space/
-Mike
> On Jul 8, 2020, at 19:49, Denys Fedoryshchenko
> wrote:
>
> On 2020-07-08 10:05, Mark Tinka wro
On 2020-07-08 10:05, Mark Tinka wrote:
On 7/Jul/20 21:58, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
Watching the growth of terrestrial fiber (and PTP microwave) networks
going inland from the west and east African coasts has been
interesting. There's a big old C-band earth station on the hill above
Freetown, Sierra Le
On 8/Jul/20 15:21, Paul Nash wrote:
> When we started TICSA (Internet Africa/Verizon/whatever), we went with a 9600
> bps satellite link to New Jersey specifically because the SAT-2 fibre had
> just been installed and traffic was being moved off satellite. The satellite
> folk were getting *
When we started TICSA (Internet Africa/Verizon/whatever), we went with a 9600
bps satellite link to New Jersey specifically because the SAT-2 fibre had just
been installed and traffic was being moved off satellite. The satellite folk
were getting *very* nervous, and gave us a heavily discounted
On 7/Jul/20 21:58, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> Watching the growth of terrestrial fiber (and PTP microwave) networks
> going inland from the west and east African coasts has been
> interesting. There's a big old C-band earth station on the hill above
> Freetown, Sierra Leone that was previously the cap
Watching the growth of terrestrial fiber (and PTP microwave) networks going
inland from the west and east African coasts has been interesting. There's
a big old C-band earth station on the hill above Freetown, Sierra Leone
that was previously the capital's only link to the outside world. Obsoleted
Any idea what network protocol(s) used with Starlink?
On Tue, Jul 7, 2020, 5:08 AM Saku Ytti wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 06:35, Harry McGregor
> wrote:
>
> > Once the laser based inter-sat links are running (Starlink 2.0?), it
> should be lower latency vs Fiber.
>
> I understood it's not cle
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 06:35, Harry McGregor wrote:
> Once the laser based inter-sat links are running (Starlink 2.0?), it should
> be lower latency vs Fiber.
I understood it's not clear if this will ever happen. In local
constellation it might, but supposedly technology does not currently
actua
On 7/Jul/20 10:07, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> The most noteworthy thing I'm seeing in C band these days, is many
> customers formerly 100% reliant upon it shifting their traffic to
> newly built submarine fiber routes.
Before most of Africa had submarine fibre, a lot of our traffic was
carried on C-B
On 7/Jul/20 08:51, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
>
> And as Ku is often covering specific regions, often it means rainy
> days for most transponder customers.
> This is why in zones closer to equator, with their long-term monsoon,
> C-Band was only option,
> no idea about now.
In much of Afric
The most noteworthy thing I'm seeing in C band these days, is many
customers formerly 100% reliant upon it shifting their traffic to newly
built submarine fiber routes.
On Mon, Jul 6, 2020, 11:51 PM Denys Fedoryshchenko <
nuclear...@nuclearcat.com> wrote:
> On 2020-07-07 08:32, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
On 2020-07-07 08:32, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
"no clouds" is overstating the effect somewhat. I've operated a number
of mission critical Ku band based systems that met four nines of
overall link uptime. The operational effect of a cloud that isn't an
active downpour of rain is negligible. Continual ove
"no clouds" is overstating the effect somewhat. I've operated a number of
mission critical Ku band based systems that met four nines of overall link
uptime. The operational effect of a cloud that isn't an active downpour of
rain is negligible. Continual overcast of clouds is not much of a problem
a
On 2020-07-07 06:48, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
This is why adaptive coding and modulation systems exist. Also dynamic
channel size changes and advanced computationally intensive FECs.
You don't think people working on microwave band projects above 10GHz
with dollar figures in the hundreds of millions a
This is why adaptive coding and modulation systems exist. Also dynamic
channel size changes and advanced computationally intensive FECs.
You don't think people working on microwave band projects above 10GHz with
dollar figures in the hundreds of millions are unaware of basic rain fade
and link bud
On 2020-07-07 05:04, joe mcguckin wrote:
Theoretically, Starlink should be faster cross country than terrestrial
fiber.
Joe McGuckin
ViaNet Communications
j...@via.net
650-207-0372 cell
650-213-1302 office
650-969-2124 fax
When there is no clouds.
Hi,
Startlink 1.0, probably will not have lower latency vs Fiber (either
cross country or across oceans)
Once the laser based inter-sat links are running (Starlink 2.0?), it
should be lower latency vs Fiber.
With ground stations only: https://youtu.be/m05abdGSOxY
With laser links: https://
"In Theroy" -- ROFL
Don't get me wrong it would be awesome if that turns out to be the case.
On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 10:05 PM joe mcguckin wrote:
> Theoretically, Starlink should be faster cross country than terrestrial
> fiber.
>
>
> Joe McGuckin
> ViaNet Communications
>
> j...@via.net
> 650-2
Theoretically, Starlink should be faster cross country than terrestrial fiber.
Joe McGuckin
ViaNet Communications
j...@via.net
650-207-0372 cell
650-213-1302 office
650-969-2124 fax
33 matches
Mail list logo
