- Thread starter Aayush Aggarwal
- Start date
- Replies: Replies 14
- Views: Views 2,923
supermachi
Banned
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2014
- Messages
- 3,002
- Reaction score
- 801
tata sky may move to chinasat 87.5
The 12 Ku band transponders of INSAT 4A satellite were allotted to Tata Sky on an exclusive basis. As its transponders were functioning with reduced power, Tata Sky voiced its concerns about the health of satellite and continuously represented at different levels in Government to launch GSAT 10 satellite to avoid adverse impact on its business. At the instance of Tata Sky, DOS launched (September 2012) GSAT 10 satellite having 12 Ku band transponders and positioned it at the same orbital slot (83°
east) as that of INSAT 4A. ICC (November 2012) proposed that the 12 transponders of INSAT 4A could be swapped with 12 transponders in GSAT 10. This proposal was agreed to by Space Commission (April 2013). Tata Sky, which was initially willing to swap the transponders of INSAT 4A with GSAT 10, subsequently declined (July 2013) the proposal on the ground that swapping would not provide additional capacity required by them. Audit observed that apprehending litigation from Tata Sky, DOS did not allocate capacity on GSAT 10 to any other service provider and entire 12
Ku band transponders capable of generating revenue of more than 82.80 crore a year continued to remain idle (May 2014) since its launch in May 2011. DOS replied (March 2014) that Ku band capacity in GSAT 10 was treated as spare capacity with appropriate approvals. The reply is not acceptable, as spare capacity of Ku band on GSAT 10 was not a planned
option, but a fall back option since Tata Sky was given exclusive first right of refusal on INSAT 4A, which is discussed in detail in para 3.4.2. Pending Tata Sky’s decision, the 12 transponders could not be utilised otherwise, with the implied pecuniary loss to the public exchequer. Audit further observed that allocation of satellite capacity being the
responsibility of ICC, the decision to keep satellite capacity as spare was taken without the specific approval of ICC
east) as that of INSAT 4A. ICC (November 2012) proposed that the 12 transponders of INSAT 4A could be swapped with 12 transponders in GSAT 10. This proposal was agreed to by Space Commission (April 2013). Tata Sky, which was initially willing to swap the transponders of INSAT 4A with GSAT 10, subsequently declined (July 2013) the proposal on the ground that swapping would not provide additional capacity required by them. Audit observed that apprehending litigation from Tata Sky, DOS did not allocate capacity on GSAT 10 to any other service provider and entire 12
Ku band transponders capable of generating revenue of more than 82.80 crore a year continued to remain idle (May 2014) since its launch in May 2011. DOS replied (March 2014) that Ku band capacity in GSAT 10 was treated as spare capacity with appropriate approvals. The reply is not acceptable, as spare capacity of Ku band on GSAT 10 was not a planned
option, but a fall back option since Tata Sky was given exclusive first right of refusal on INSAT 4A, which is discussed in detail in para 3.4.2. Pending Tata Sky’s decision, the 12 transponders could not be utilised otherwise, with the implied pecuniary loss to the public exchequer. Audit further observed that allocation of satellite capacity being the
responsibility of ICC, the decision to keep satellite capacity as spare was taken without the specific approval of ICC
Similar threads
- Question
