Tp 11510 Fec Changed By Tatasky

[Chinmay Kore]

Multiple sat nor required as high power sat is coming

+1 :tup

 

[banyal21721]

GSAT10 was never meant for additional capacity, according to CAG report it's a replacement/backup satellite of INSAT 4A. ICC in it's 70th meeting clearly noted that Tata sky got extra preference than all other dth players as Tata sky was 5th in list for getting satellite but actually got as 2nd. ICC meeting also formulated a plan in which additional capacity will be met according to first come first serve basis & in that case Tata sky is last one.

Dear, tata sky requested additional satellite from isro in around 2007-2008 to increase its capacity, as it was necessary for them to place a request in advance. The new satellite was supposed to launch within 2 years of request. But it did not happen. And when finally it was launched tata sky was asked to use gsat10 only and leave in sat 4a. So the satellite which was requested for capacity addition ,was ultimately offered to them as replacement. So tata sky refused to use it as replacement as it would have meant in no capacity addition. Therefore till today isro has not been able to offer gsat10 to other operator fearing legal action from tata sky. This all has been mentioned in CAG report. Secondaly gsat10 as replacement for insat 4a, then you should also take the view of tata sky into account. It is not what isro offered ( gsat10 as replacement for insat4a) but , what tata sky requested ( gsat10 in addition to insat4a for capacity addition). This was main reason for tata sky going for large scale replacement and migration to new technology MPEG 4.

 

[abhinaba]

Dear, tata sky requested additional satellite from isro in around 2007-2008 to increase its capacity, as it was necessary for them to place a request in advance. The new satellite was supposed to launch within 2 years of request. But it did not happen. And when finally it was launched tata sky was asked to use gsat10 only and leave in sat 4a. So the satellite which was requested for capacity addition ,was ultimately offered to them as replacement. So tata sky refused to use it as replacement as it would have meant in no capacity addition. Therefore till today isro has not been able to offer gsat10 to other operator fearing legal action from tata sky. This all has been mentioned in CAG report. Secondaly gsat10 as replacement for insat 4a, then you should also take the view of tata sky into account. It is not what isro offered ( gsat10 as replacement for insat4a) but , what tata sky requested ( gsat10 in addition to insat4a for capacity addition). This was main reason for tata sky going for large scale replacement and migration to new technology MPEG 4.

You are right. Actually during Madhavan Nair regime DOS done some malpractice in dealing with private operators for which Tata sky is in deadlock situation - Tata sky want foreign satellite but they can't get it without PM nod who is really serious about security matter as downlinking foreign satellite can hamper strategic users. Besides govt. don't want to free the space to foreign satellite operators as in future it will be one of the most revenue earning sector. If DOS delay the transponder allocation process foreign operators will loose their interests & they'll not crowd their satellites at India specific orbital slots - that is the motive behind slow transponder allocation process. As you know as per ITU rules all orbital slots from 48 degree east to 117 degree east are belong to that region's lead nations i.e India or other major Southeast nations but India have to put satellite at those positions & ISRO failed to do so. As a result all those slots are now open & foreign operators exploit them which is a serious security threat to India.

 

[Ankit_bpl]

@InReplyToAll Insat 4A, which was launched in December, 2005, was expected to have a mission life of 12 years, i.e., upto 2017. It has about 12 Ku band transponders which have been put to use by TATA-SKY for its DTH service. Insat 4A is now technically nearing the end of its life-cycle.

TATA-SKY initially was using MPEG-2 encryptation which was less efficient and required more transponders for the same number of channels in comparision to the MPEG-4 encryptation that some other DTH providers were using. When TATA-SKY HD came in, MPEG-4 was being used for the HD channels, and MPEG-2 for the SD channels. Since MPEG-4 was backward compatible with MPEG-2, and the TATA-SKY HD STBs were MPEG-4, there was no problem with this arrangement. But at some point, adding any more channels without reducing the bit rate (i.e., image information, not to be confused with the resolution) for the existing channels became impossible for the TATA-SKY. Initially they tried to circumvent this problem by deploying Ericsson's MPEG-2 encryptation technology (which claimed "MPEG-4 like" efficiency) at the head-end. When this did not solve the problem, they went whole hog and shifted to the MPEG-4 encryptation, in the process exchanging millions of MPEG-2 STBs installed at the customers' places with MPEG-4 STBs free of cost. By doing so, TATA-SKY could add few more channels to its bouquet.

GSAT-10, launched in September, 2012, became operational in 2013. Its 12 Ku-band transponders were pre-booked by TATA-SKY. But then, there was a minister in the earlier Union Government who owned a DTH service that ran into trouble because of a failed satellite. This minister started arm-twisting the TATA-SKY folks to let go their claim on the GSAT-10 Ku-band transponders. This went on for sometime, and only towards the middle of 2014, things started clearing up (we all know why), and TATA-Sky has finally got to use the GSAT-10's Ku-band transponders. GSAT-10 is expected to have a mission life of 15 years, i.e., till 2027.

Now the question comes as to whether TATA-SKY will be able to add "many more channels" including the HD ones, once the GSAT Ku-band transponders become operational?

GSAT-10 has 12 Ku-band transponders, just like the INSAT 4A. The number of channels that can be crammed into each transponder is fixed, and is unlikely to be any different from the INSAT 4A, unless the bit-rate for individual channels is drastically reduced. So how would TATA-SKY be able to accommodate more channels once it shifts to the GSAT-10?

A telecommunications satellite's death is generally not sudden, unless its Master Control decides to destroy it by making use of the explosive payload that every modern satellite now a days contains. When a satellite dies, transponders go off one by one, and this would sometimes take years. My personal opinion is that TATA-SKY will continue to use the functional transponders on INSAT 4A along with GSAT-10. That way, it will get more transponders, and so will be able to accommodate more channels. If this is not the case, then the TATA-SKY's fundamental problem remains as it is, i.e., how to add more channels without reducing the bit rate for the existing channels?

As to the alignment of the dish, not the slightest change in alignment is required, as both the satellites are parked at 83 Degrees East in the geo-stationary orbit, and appear to be exactly the same spot from the Earth (even though in space they may be hundreds of kilometers apart). Only in case of those dish antennas which got slightly misaligned due to rain / wind, some kind of realignment would be required. This may be so, because GSAT-10 has a tighter Ku-band beam.

Finally, the signal from INSAT 4A / GSAT 10 is digital. It is all or none. So the "washed out" images are certainly not due to poor signal. They may be due to reduction in bit-rate for individual channels, and the reason for this may be cramming of more channels into each transponder. It has nothing to do with shifting of the service to GSAT-10

 

[Chinmay Kore]

? Bro they will take good secession :tup

 

[Ankit_bpl]

C'mon !!!! What ? Other Forum Advertising ? Good Joke.

 

[ashis2014]

Tatasky unnecessary Fec changes