Abheek:
In addition to the 70 GHz band allocation for HAPS, the proponent of HAPS
also proposed HAPS for the 2GHz band allocated for the 3G IMT-2000 wireless
systems. Substantial work have been done on the frequency coordination
criteria and coordination distance to make sure that HAPS and terrestrial
and satellite based 3G IMT-2000 wireless systems will not interfer with each
other. Therefore, under suitable conditions, HAPS may operate in the 2 GHz
IMT-2000 bands.
Sing Lin
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On
Behalf Of [email protected]
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 11:52 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Moving Targets
Sing Lin,
I seem to remember that the HAPS platform have to use frequencies in the
80Ghz range because they are classified as stratospheric devices. Wasn't
skystation (the constellation floated by Gen. Haig) based on HAPS platforms?
Any pointers on how hard it is to build terminals at those frequencies? What
happens to rain-fade and stuff like that?
-Very best regards,
Abheek
"Sing Lin]" <[email protected]> on 10/09/2000 08:33:55 PM
To: Abheek Saha/HSS@HSS, [email protected]
cc:
Subject: RE: Moving Targets
Shaun:
USA, Japan and Europe have been doing substantial R&D on High Altitude
Platform Station (HAPS) in recent few years. The technical contributions
from these R&D sources to ITU-R WP8F/TG8/1 in the last two years have
resulted in a Preliminary Draft New Recommendation (PDNR) and a Draft
Handbook on HAPS in ITU-R WP8F working on the Third Generation (3G) wireless
technologies and beyond. Therefore, HAPS is a serious project and technology
to consider. Each platform is at about 21 Km above the ground and can cover
a very large area.
Sing Lin
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On
Behalf Of [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 11:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Moving Targets
How about a small constellation of satellites in a highly inclined orbit
(HEO?).
Should
be much cheaper than a LEO constellation though more difficult to manage. I
understand
the Russians use these pretty effectively.
-Abheek
"Dani I. Widjanarko" <[email protected]> on 10/03/2000 05:33:57 AM
Please respond to "Dani I. Widjanarko" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
cc: (bcc: Abheek Saha/HSS)
Subject: Re: Moving Targets
I don't think that LEO is a good solution, may be you can try to use HAPS
(High Altitude Platform System) that now being explored by many countries.
-dani-
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Date: 03 Oktober 2000 2:50
Subject: Moving Targets
>Hi,
>
>I'm doing a research project about providing Internet access to moving
>targets on the eastern seabord of Australia. In this case, the moving
>targets are trains.
>
>We really need to provide around 1MB or so downstream, maybe 56k or so
>uplink. I've been doing a lot of searching but facts seem to be hard
>to come by.
>
>By my reckoning something like a link to an LEO constellation is
>needed to make this work because:
> - GEO satellites can't easily provide this type of bandwidth
> - GEO satellites require reasonably large dishes and need to
>fairly precisely targetted at the sat
> - Line of sight is needed for GEO links to work
>
>Basically, I'm hoping that with LEO links a dish won't even be
>required, some sort of antenna? Do any of the currently existing LEO
>constellations provide this sort of service? Future ones?
>
>Am I completely barking up the wrong tree here? Is there a better way
>of providing reasonably high speed internet access to moving vehicles
>without cabling etc.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>Shaun
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 12 2000 - 10:13:21 EDT