how-to block ads
|
PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| reply to RayW
Re: 700 MHz?
I think you're getting confused by the title of this story. It has nothing to do with 700 MHz spectrum. These channels (52-62) are being re-assigned to non-TV use, and being auctioned off, and will not be available to the devices covered by this Order.
This Order covers operation on TV channels 5-13, 21-36, & 38-51. That's 234 MHz worth of spectrum (OK, not quite 300). But that's alot of very good spectrum, including some in the Low-VHF region. This might increase in the future once the FCC feels that operation on 2-4 won't interfere with VCR's and STB's, and operation on 14-20 won't interfere with public safety comm systems.
quote:
Now the area from 512-608 (ch 21-36) and 614-698 (ch 38-51) is TV broadcasting only. So you have almost 200 MHz that you tell the TV folks they can't use anymore and to lose their equipment investment.
No, you're missing the point. These devices will only get to use channels that the TV folks aren't using. There are separation, adjacent-channel, and "taboo" channel rules that the FCC uses for keeping 1 MW TV stations apart, that don't need to apply when you are talking about 1-10 watt WISP base stations. | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
1 edit | reply to RayW
said by RayW  :Now the area from 512-608 (ch 21-36) and 614-698 (ch 38-51) is TV broadcasting only. So you have almost 200 MHz that you tell the TV folks they can't use anymore and to lose their equipment investment. I haven't studied the FCC docs, but I don't think they'll lose equipment investments as they will probably continue on their issued frequencies. The broadcasting industry could make a stink over losing open frequencies for new licensees, though.
One thing that makes this a good rural solution at first glance I think is that you have less UHF TV stations in more rural areas, so there would be more whitespace to work with. Here in NE PA, there's only five or six big stations. I haven't scanned the UHF TV band in ages as I'm on cable, but there's probably several little LPTV stations to steer around in some communities. That may be an issue.
I wonder why they don't open up the VHF TV channels as well. Here in Eastern PA, AFAIK only stations in Philly and NYC are on VHF TV channels, with one exception being one in Lancaster. Unless population density/distrubution really changes here in the East, is there anyone lining up investments for building new TV stations when the four big networks have stations covering everywhere and there's cable and satellite everywhere? I dunno...
Update: I see the FCC is asking for comments about VHF channels... | |
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
 ·XMission
| reply to PDXPLT
said by PDXPLT :said by RayW :Not much bandwidth there for a nice high speed internet with multiple users. yes there is, like about 300 MHz worth. Unmm.. It is interesting that even though the channel/frequency lists show freqs as being fairly contiguous from ch 14 at 470-476 Mhz through ch 83 at 884-890 Mhz, in reality the actual allocations are not all those channels. In the 700 MHz area only 698-764 (ch 52-62) and 776-794 (ch 65-67) are allocated to broadcast according to the spectrum usage chat I have (dated 2003 or see »www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf), and they share that with other mobile and fixed services.
Now the area from 512-608 (ch 21-36) and 614-698 (ch 38-51) is TV broadcasting only. So you have almost 200 MHz that you tell the TV folks they can't use anymore and to lose their equipment investment.
said by PDXPLT :This is a huge deal for rural broadband. It could be the big break that BPL was never going to be. In many rural areas, WISPs just don't cut it at 2.4 and GHz - trees and hills kill connectivity. 900 MHz had good propagation, but there's only a tiny sliver available there.
900 is jammed packed anyway. But not all the GHz spectrum is absorbed/reflected by trees, have to look at the absorption patterns over the range of frequencies and you see a lot of peaks and valleys (of course, the valleys are probably all claimed). Anyway, you are more worried about hills and dales in many places, and for that you are looking at low VHF and HF, or tall antennas and lots of cells on the higher ground (500-700 MHz is still very line of sight).
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
|
