|
Lightsquared Put Cart Before the HorseThe FCC will not declare GPS devices at fault. That would reverse 80 years of spectrum policy and open the door for countless similar actions.
Lightsquared should have hired a competent RF engineer at the outset; it would have saved them millions of dollars.
The NDAA on Obama's desk will put the final nail in Lightsquared's coffin, as it authorizes DoD to shut Lightsquared down, unilaterally, in the name of national security. | |
|
| openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144 |
openbox9
Premium Member
2011-Dec-21 9:08 am
Re: Lightsquared Put Cart Before the Horsesaid by DaveRickmers:it would have saved them millions of dollars. Billions of dollars | |
|
| |
| |
to DaveRickmers
Im 100% fine with Lightsquares plans, as long as they replace my 2 Navigation units. | |
|
| | 25139889 (banned) join:2011-10-25 Toledo, OH |
25139889 (banned)
Member
2011-Dec-22 9:25 pm
Re: Lightsquared Put Cart Before the Horsewith their own phones - LoL. | |
|
microphone Premium Member join:2009-04-29 Parkville, MD |
How ridiculous can they getIt just seems like bad companies try to compete on how absurd of an idea, process, or product they can push out there and let it stick to the wall. There is no way the FCC is going to allow anyone to mess with GPS; there are way too many organizations, companies, and individuals depending on them. | |
|
1 recommendation |
LightSquared is CorrectFor years GPS device makers made sloppy devices figuring the adjacent spectrum would never be used, so their devices bleed into LS's spectrum. They should just be given another set of comparable spectrum (LS) and be done with it. Its the governments fault for selling spectrum thats not usable because of poorly designed (and unregulated) GPS devices. Those said designers should have to pay LS for use of their spectrum...Its quite simple and I have no idea why LS didnt make this argument at the get go | |
|
| Tomek Premium Member join:2002-01-30 Valley Stream, NY |
Tomek
Premium Member
2011-Dec-21 9:15 am
Re: LightSquared is CorrectFCC should give them alternate spectrum and obsolete the spectrum violated by GPS devices. Or simply charge manufacturers for violating the FCC rules. | |
|
| openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144
4 recommendations |
to CableConvert
said by CableConvert:For years GPS device makers made sloppy devices figuring the adjacent spectrum would never be used, so their devices bleed into LS's spectrum. GPS receivers are receivers. They don't "bleed" anything. said by CableConvert:Its the governments fault for selling spectrum LightSquared already owned the spectrum and somehow was able to get the FCC to waiver its use for terrestrial purposes...something it wasn't originally licensed for and should never been allowed to happen. The FCC screwed up waiving the restrictions that were in place. LightSquared screwed up designing its network based on this waiver. The FCC should solve this problem through a spectrum swap. Nobody needs to pay LightSquard anything. It is quite simple. | |
|
| | |
Re: LightSquared is CorrectAnd where do they receive from...the spectrum fairy perhaps | |
|
| | | openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144 |
openbox9
Premium Member
2011-Dec-21 9:30 am
Re: LightSquared is CorrectGPS receivers? Transmitters located on GPS satellites. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your response? | |
|
| | | | |
Re: LightSquared is CorrectHe's saying swap spectrum with whom? | |
|
| | | |
to CableConvert
said by CableConvert:And where do they receive from...the spectrum fairy perhaps The FCC will need to either give them usable spectrum in exchange for the GPS spectrum that they incorrectly allowed to be used for terrestrial purposes, or they'll likely have to pay LightSquared damages of some sort. The FCC made a mistake, but that doesn't mean we're going to allow GPS to be broken for most people until they go out and buy new units. The FCC should have never allowed the spectrum to be used for terrestrial transmissions in the first place, so they are at fault and will need to figure out how they're going to rectify this. | |
|
| | | | |
Re: LightSquared is Correctsaid by graycorgi:The FCC will need to either give them usable spectrum in exchange for the GPS spectrum that they incorrectly allowed to be used for terrestrial purposes, or they'll likely have to pay LightSquared damages of some sort. Incorrect on all counts. LightSquared obtained that spectrum allocation knowing in advance what it was licensed for. LS subsequently requested a use waiver, on the condition they could use it the way they wanted on a non-interfering basis. They can't, so they're stuck with it. It's kinda like the guy from who I bought our house. He'd bought it from the original owner, believing there was access to the back of the property from a shared private road, with the intention of sub-dividing it. Only thing he didn't know, and failed to properly research, was that there was no way he was going to get permission to continue that private road on up to the back of the property he purchased. Oops! said by graycorgi:The FCC made a mistake, ... The mistake the FCC made was granting the conditional use waiver. They should have known from the outset there was no way LightSquared was going to be able to operate the way they wanted on a non-interfering basis. Jim | |
|
| | |
to openbox9
LS OWNS the spectrum. GPS uses it illegally because the antennas search spectrum outside of what GPS has been allotted, thus the interference. Bad design. Just because your neighbor built a fabulous new pool that everyone gets to use, doesn't give them the right to build it in your back yard without buying the property first | |
|
| | | TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus join:2001-06-20 Cheyenne, WY
1 recommendation |
Re: LightSquared is CorrectI wonder does cableconvert have money invested in LS as for GPS illegally using spectrum I suggest you take that up with the Pentagon they where the ones who put the GPS satellites in orbit, see how far you get. | |
|
| | | | |
Re: LightSquared is Correctsaid by Transmaster:I wonder does cableconvert have money invested in LS as for GPS illegally using spectrum I suggest you take that up with the Pentagon they where the ones who put the GPS satellites in orbit, see how far you get. The problem here has nothing to do with the GPS satellites, the problem is purely with the receivers, the receivers are listing outside the bounds of the spectrum sent out by GPS satellites. The main problem is that the FCC has spent years authorizing the makers of GPS receivers to listen to signals outside of there authorized range which is why the original spectrum purchased by LS was not authorized to be used for a ground based network only for a satellite based system. Sadly tho this government was paid off to grant this waver knowing full well that it would never work as advertised and now it is going to cause this whole LS thing to turn into another Solyndra. | |
|
| | | | | |
Re: LightSquared is Correctsaid by flashcore:The problem here has nothing to do with the GPS satellites, the problem is purely with the receivers, the receivers are listing outside the bounds of the spectrum sent out by GPS satellites. No, they're not. What good would it do a GPS receiver to listen somewhere where there isn't anything to hear? That makes a receiver less functional, not more. said by flashcore:The main problem is that the FCC has spent years authorizing the makers of GPS receivers to listen to signals outside of there authorized range ... The FCC doesn't authorize receivers to listen anywhere. The only procedure for receivers is FCC type acceptance, and that merely ensures they don't radiate unacceptable levels of noise. said by flashcore:which is why the original spectrum purchased by LS was not authorized to be used for a ground based network only for a satellite based system. Incorrect. It was licensed for the use it was so it could be used in a non-interfering manner. My Lord, where do some of you get some of this nonsense from, anyway? said by flashcore:Sadly tho this government was paid off to grant this waver knowing full well that it would never work as advertised and now it is going to cause this whole LS thing to turn into another Solyndra. I don't know whether anybody was paid-off or pressured from above, but it certainly was never going to work on a non-interfering basis. Jim | |
|
| | | openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144 |
to CableConvert
LightSquared licenses the spectrum for use and has a conditional waiver from the FCC to use it for purposes other than initially intended. Read the conditions. | |
|
| | | Matt3All noise, no signal. Premium Member join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC
1 recommendation |
to CableConvert
said by CableConvert:LS OWNS the spectrum. GPS uses it illegally because the antennas search spectrum outside of what GPS has been allotted, thus the interference. Bad design. Just because your neighbor built a fabulous new pool that everyone gets to use, doesn't give them the right to build it in your back yard without buying the property first And the spectrum was approved for low power satellite to ground communication. LightSquared wants to now re-purpose it for high-powered terrestrial base station communication. That's the problem. They are free to use it - as it was approved - when they purchased it. All radio wave (and electromagnetic energy) "bleeds" for various reasons, which is why you either limit power or purposefully leave bands of frequencies unused (notched) to prevent or minimize interference. Using your pool analogy, you have the right to build a pool in your back yard, but you don't have the right to then decide you are going to ignore local noise ordinances. | |
|
| | | | n2jtx join:2001-01-13 Glen Head, NY |
n2jtx
Member
2011-Dec-21 10:01 am
Re: LightSquared is Correctsaid by Matt3:[ They are free to use it - as it was approved - when they purchased it. That is the rub. They did not purchase it. They acquired the licenses through the acquisition of SkyTerra. However, it is my understanding that SkyTerra did not pay for those licenses. Also, according to some investment analysis reports, what LightSquared really wants/wanted to do is convert those licenses to more valuable spectrum that does not interfere. Basically they are/were hoping the government would give them a payoff by giving them valuable non-interfering spectrum in exchange for their satellite licenses. The real losers would be the taxpayers who would lose the potential revenue that an auction of those bands would provide. I am 110% sure if the FCC said to LightSquared we will give you the same amount of spectrum around 2500MHz in exchange for their 1500MHz holdings they would jump at it in a heartbeat. | |
|
| | | | | r81984Fair and Balanced Premium Member join:2001-11-14 Katy, TX |
r81984
Premium Member
2011-Dec-21 2:14 pm
Re: LightSquared is CorrectGive, no way. We could let them buy spectrum at market value, anything else would be corporate welfare. | |
|
| | | | | | |
Re: LightSquared is CorrectBetter lightsquared than at&t and verizon. I want some real wireless competition. | |
|
| | | | | |
to n2jtx
Problem is that the 2500 MHz block would not be worth as much as the 1500 MHz. The building penetration of the radio waves would be reduced by moving them to 2500 MHz. | |
|
| | | mix join:2002-03-19 Romeo, MI |
to CableConvert
Maybe the worst analogy I have ever read. Congratulations! | |
|
| | | ropeguru Premium Member join:2001-01-25 Mechanicsville, VA |
to CableConvert
said by CableConvert:LS OWNS the spectrum. GPS uses it illegally because the antennas search spectrum outside of what GPS has been allotted, thus the interference. Bad design. Just because your neighbor built a fabulous new pool that everyone gets to use, doesn't give them the right to build it in your back yard without buying the property first Totally incorrect. Yes, LS owns the spectrum but has a waiver from the FCC that allows them to run higher power devices in that spectrum that were not originally intended. Again, the waiver should have never been allowed and LS's engineers should have had enough sense to do their research before going full bore into this setup. If LS had not gotten the waiver and had to conform to the intended spectrum regulations, they would not be interfering with the GPS receivers. Is that so hard to understand? | |
|
| | | | r81984Fair and Balanced Premium Member join:2001-11-14 Katy, TX |
r81984
Premium Member
2011-Dec-21 2:12 pm
Re: LightSquared is Correctsaid by ropeguru:Totally incorrect. Yes, LS owns the spectrum but has a waiver from the FCC that allows them to run higher power devices in that spectrum that were not originally intended. Again, the waiver should have never been allowed and LS's engineers should have had enough sense to do their research before going full bore into this setup.
If LS had not gotten the waiver and had to conform to the intended spectrum regulations, they would not be interfering with the GPS receivers.
Is that so hard to understand? I dont see the problem with the FCC giving the waiver as it was a conditional waiver based on the companies claims they had advanced technology to prevent any interference. It had a non interference clause with things like GPS. So the FCC basically said we know there will be interference, but you claim to have magic technology to solve the interference so we will give a conditional waiver and if your tests are successful you can use the spectrum. The tests proved lightsquared cannot solve the interference with their magic technology so the waiver says they cannot use the spectrum. Cased closed. The FCC was nice enough to give them a chance, but lightsquared does not know what they are doing. | |
|
| | | |
to CableConvert
If you want to get technical, LS "bleeds" into GPS. LS is the one transmitting at such a high power level, thus harmonics/etc. in GPS spectrum that being so low power they cant handle. You are thinking the exact opposite of what it is. | |
|
| | | |
to CableConvert
The American People own the spectrum. Lightsquared got a lease that they knew they couldn't use until their plan was tested. They failed the test. They have no rights. They can ask for some of their money back, but the spectrum was part of a bigger acquisition. What is the spectrum worth? | |
|
| rradina join:2000-08-08 Chesterfield, MO |
to CableConvert
I thought this way too but in order to increase accuracy, it's important to get really good signals from the GPS satellites. To support that, sensitive receivers listen to a slightly wider range of signals than those allocated to the GPS spectrum. This is a by-design choice.
The reason receivers were designed this way is because the adjacent frequencies were "zoned" (i.e. like land zoning) by the FCC as low power, satellite bands. This means the signals from the GPS satellites and other satellites were weak and did not interfere with each other.
I too thought that it was the GPS folks fault but really it was a case of zoning. This is similar when folks buy a "premium lot" in a subdivision that backs to a golf course. They expect it to remain a golf course. 10 years later the same developer buys the golf course and puts hundreds of houses on it. It isn't necessarily anyone's fault except perhaps those who permitted the golf course to be rezoned as residential use from parks use.
Regardless of who is to blame, I believe LightSquared is screwed. | |
|
| TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus join:2001-06-20 Cheyenne, WY |
to CableConvert
This may well be true except for the fact there is a multi billion dollar industry already there, LS should have been advised by competent people what the realty is. I am sure FCC commissioners gave quiet behind the scenes approval, until the crap avalanche rolled down the mountain. When LS called their bud's at the FCC all of the sudden it was Lightsquared who? | |
|
| | openbox9 Premium Member join:2004-01-26 71144 |
openbox9
Premium Member
2011-Dec-21 9:55 am
Re: LightSquared is Correctsaid by Transmaster:LS should have been advised by competent people what the realty is. Donning my tinfoil hat, I'm sure competent engineers advised LightSquared throughout the process. The FCC acknowledged the potential for interference in its conditional waiver. Falcone is facing investigation by the SEC. He's already got some questionable political ties. The White House's fingerprints are on this. Do the math. Fun times. | |
|
|
1 recommendation |
to CableConvert
said by CableConvert:For years GPS device makers made sloppy devices figuring the adjacent spectrum would never be used, so their devices bleed into LS's spectrum. No they didn't and no they don't. You have absolutely no clue whatsoever as to what you're talking about. said by CableConvert:Its the governments fault for selling spectrum thats not usable because of poorly designed (and unregulated) GPS devices. No it's not and no they're not. The portion of the spectrum licensed to LightSquared was licensed for SatCom, not high-powered terrestrial transmitters. You have absolutely no clue whatsoever as to what you're talking about. said by openbox9:LightSquared already owned the spectrum and somehow was able to get the FCC to waiver its use for terrestrial purposes.. Yes, conditionally. Said condition being non-interference with the existing GPS services. LightSquared cannot meet that requirement, so the condition for the waiver is not satisfied. End of story. Incorrect. Again. Nobody in the U.S. "owns" spectrum. They're granted conditional licenses to use it. said by CableConvert:GPS uses it illegally because the antennas search spectrum outside of what GPS has been allotted, Utterly, completely and absolutely incorrect in every respect. You have absolutely no clue whatsoever as to what you're talking about. None at all. Jim | |
|
| | yabos join:2003-02-16 London, ON |
yabos
Member
2011-Dec-21 10:44 am
Re: LightSquared is CorrectEven if it WAS true what the gp is saying(which it's not), does anyone really think the FCC would allow LS to interfere with possibly millions of existing GPS receivers? Absolutely not. All modern smart phones have GPS chips and would most likely not work as they should. Imagine the public outcry if LS was allowed to proceed. | |
|
| |
to CableConvert
said by CableConvert:For years GPS device makers made sloppy devices figuring the adjacent spectrum would never be used, so their devices bleed into LS's spectrum. They should just be given another set of comparable spectrum (LS) and be done with it. Its the governments fault for selling spectrum thats not usable because of poorly designed (and unregulated) GPS devices. Those said designers should have to pay LS for use of their spectrum...Its quite simple and I have no idea why LS didnt make this argument at the get go The spectrum LightSquared is proposing to use is set aside for augmentation of space based transmissions from satellites. It was never intended for use as a terrestrial network which is the reason they had to seek a waiver of the rules in the first place. The spectrum, even though it is under the FCC's authority to regulate within the United States is also governed by international treaties. LightSquared's operation of high-powered transmitters will cause interference to satellites owned and operated by foreign governments that overfly the US. What's truly the fallacy of the argument that the GPS receivers "bleed into LS's spectrum" is that those same frequencies LS claims are theirs are also shared by other satellite companies transmitting precision information to GPS receivers used for everything from wireless communications system timing to land survey and agriculture. | |
|
| r81984Fair and Balanced Premium Member join:2001-11-14 Katy, TX |
to CableConvert
said by CableConvert:For years GPS device makers made sloppy devices figuring the adjacent spectrum would never be used, so their devices bleed into LS's spectrum. They should just be given another set of comparable spectrum (LS) and be done with it. Its the governments fault for selling spectrum thats not usable because of poorly designed (and unregulated) GPS devices. Those said designers should have to pay LS for use of their spectrum...Its quite simple and I have no idea why LS didnt make this argument at the get go That is not true at all. The devices all work as designed. GPS satellites are moving so the signal will red shift (lower in frequency) or blue shift (raise in frequency) based on which direction it is going. The GPS signal will red shift about 25 mhz into the frequencies lightsquared is trying to use. Red shifting is the laws of physics, there is no changing it. GPS was using the spectrum first and all GPS devices are designed to pick up the satellite only spectrum lightsquared is trying to use to pick up red shifted signals. Lightsquared can use that frequency for satellite only, but if they try to use it with powerful ground transmitters they will jam GPS. Lightsquared screwed up with their lack of understanding of radio waves and took a huge gamble to see if they could buy satellite only spectrum for cheap and flip it is as ground spectrum. They lost the gamble big time. FYI, the government sold satellite only spectrum. Years later lightsquared abandoned their satellite plans and tried to get a waiver to switch the frequencies for ground base use. Lightsquared and their foreign indian CEO = fail The indian CEO did not realize how important GPS is to americans. | |
|
| | ••• |
| |
to CableConvert
GPS spectrum is in the middle of a space to earth sub band. The spectrum Lightsquared wants to use is also space to earth. Signal strengths of -120 dBm or weaker are expected. Lightsquared emits at +13dB above 1,000 Watts, which wipes out everything.
GPS was constructed (dozens of expensive satellites and coordinated ground control facilities) knowing that the table of allocations protected it from adjacent channel interference. Calling GPS receivers "sloppy devices" tells me you are no expert, and quick to repeat spin. | |
|
| JuggernautIrreverent or irrelevant? Premium Member join:2006-09-05 Kelowna, BC |
to CableConvert
said by CableConvert:For years GPS device makers made sloppy devices figuring the adjacent spectrum would never be used, so their devices bleed into LS's spectrum. Frequencies are not imprecise things. They do not randomly 'meander' across said boundaries. They are precise by necessity, and by nature. You're talking out of the back of your front... | |
|
WiseOldBearLaissez les bons temps rouler! Premium Member join:2001-11-25 Litchfield Park, AZ Motorola MB8600 Synology RT2600ac
|
LightSquared Drinks AT&T KoolaidRepeat the lie enough times and it becomes the reality. Get your shills to repeat the lie and it helps move it to the side of truth. HOWEVER, you really can't ignore the rules of physics and expect that your lies will be ignored by the truly knowledgeable. | |
|
|
asdfdfdfdfdf
Anon
2011-Dec-21 1:14 pm
bpl, lightsquared, white space broadband...Do people not see a consistent pattern, in this country of supposed innovation, of powerful forces consistently strangling nascent technologies to protect entrenched interests? I don't believe that new entrants should be able to come in and willy nilly wreak havoc but it seems to me that the standards we are setting are making it nearly impossible to develop new technologies. There seems to be more innovation and movement happening in other parts of the world, while america increasingly seems old and arthritic. | |
|
| r81984Fair and Balanced Premium Member join:2001-11-14 Katy, TX |
r81984
Premium Member
2011-Dec-21 2:18 pm
Re: bpl, lightsquared, white space broadband...said by asdfdfdfdfdf :Do people not see a consistent pattern, in this country of supposed innovation, of powerful forces consistently strangling nascent technologies to protect entrenched interests? I don't believe that new entrants should be able to come in and willy nilly wreak havoc but it seems to me that the standards we are setting are making it nearly impossible to develop new technologies. There seems to be more innovation and movement happening in other parts of the world, while america increasingly seems old and arthritic. FYI, lightsquared is perfectly able to license spectrum meant for ground use by the FCC to make their network. No one is stopping them from doing this. | |
|
2 edits |
LS is and always was in the wrong.They are playing a legal game of chicken. They pushed thru a conditional waiver (shortest authorization of a waiver in history, BTW) and want to get enough infrastructure in place so they can make that "We invested billions in good faith, so you have to ignore the rules for us" argument. As to how and who got this travesty in place, follow the money and promises of political appointments. Ask why FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski instructed his FCC engineers to "not get involved" when they questions the lack of background investigation and no comments period. Also ask why an Air Force general with oversight of maintaining the American GPS satellite constellation was "directed" by the White House to change the content of his report on LS impacts on the military GPS. This is just as damming as his choosing not to appear before the strategic armed forces subcommittee when the FCCs actions were being questioned. LightSquared went into this knowing full well that it was unethical and risky. They paid a lot of people off to get a crack in the rules by way of an waiver, and immediately started on working to widen that crack while investing investors money in a rapid build out to get the "just a little pregnant" while the waiver issue was sorted. Now that attention is being focused on their actions, they are pulling the "rightful indignation" act and demanding use of the spectrum based on how much they have invested in doing something unethical and in many points verging on illegal. Its a bluff, and Falcone is willing to gamble a few billion of other peoples money on the premise that if he can pull this off, the payback to him and his investors will be bloody enormous. He has stacked the deck, knows his opponents hand, is still holding a few surprises. Don't blink, or we'll loose GPS. And as to being arthritic, there is a difference between innovation and exploitation. | |
|
mcdonn_3422 |
Not wanting to double post, but it's been quiet here.If LightSquared could keep their transmitters out of the GPS bands - Not the 3dB points of 2 KW terrestrial transmitters, but keep their signal levels and all harmonics & spurious emissions at the current GPS spectrum noise floor. In other words, fully comply with the FCC part 15 rules that every other user of spectrum in the US must comply with. | |
|
|
|