Row 44 - 11-19-2010

LETTER submitted by Row 44 Inc.

Letter - Notice re: Filing Deadlines

2010-11-19

This document pretains to SES-LIC-20100805-00992 for License on a Satellite Earth Station filing.

IBFS_SESLIC2010080500992_853536

                                        BEFORE THE

         Federal Communications Commission
                                  WASHINGTON, DC 20554



In re: Application of                         )
                                              )
Panasonic Avionics Corporation                       File Nos. SES-LIC-20100805-00992
                                              )                SES-AMD-20100914-01163
For Authority to Construct and Operate an     )                SES-AMD-20101115-01432
Aeronautical-Mobile Satellite Service Earth
Station Network Operating in the Ku-Band      )      Call Sign E100089


To: Chief, International Bureau




CONSOLIDATED REPLY OF ROW 44, INC. TO PANASONIC AVIONICS’ RESPONSE
        AND PANASONIC AVIONICS’ NOVEMBER 15 AMENDMENT




                                                     David S. Keir
                                                     Lerman Senter PLLC
                                                     2000 K Street, NW, Suite 600
                                                     Washington, DC 20006
                                                     Tel. (202) 429-8970

December 1, 2010                                     Counsel to Row 44, Inc.


                                                                    - ii -


                                                   TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................... iii
I.   Introduction. ........................................................................................................................ 2
II.  Panasonic Avionics Application Remains Incomplete in Several Key
     Respects. ............................................................................................................................. 4
     A.     Panasonic Avionics’ Effort to Incorporate by Reference the Prior
            Boeing Application for the MELCO Antenna is Faulty. ........................................ 4
            1.         Panasonic Avionics’ Application Fails to Comply With FCC
                       Requirements. ............................................................................................. 4
            2.         Panasonic Avionics Ignores the Considerable Differences
                       Between Boeing’s Licensed System and Its Own Proposal. ...................... 5
     B.     Panasonic Avionics’ Showing with Respect to Off-Axis EIRP
            Spectral Density along the GSO Arc is Incomplete................................................ 7
            1.         A Complete Set of Measured EIRP Spectral Density Patterns
                       Is Required. ................................................................................................. 7
            2.         Measured EIRP Spectral Density Patterns Will Properly Take
                       Into Account the Aging of the Antenna Equipment. .................................. 9
     C.     Panasonic Avionics’ Has Not Provided Antenna Gain Information
            Relative to Maximum Geographic Skew Conditions. .......................................... 10
     D.     Panasonic Avionics’ Application Contains Insufficient Information
            Concerning the Manner in Which It Maintains Pointing Accuracy to
            Avoid Interference to Adjacent Satellites. ............................................................ 11
            1.         Because Panasonic Avionics States That It Will Not Comply
                       with the 0.2° Antenna Pointing Accuracy Requirement, It
                       Must Demonstrate That It Will Not Exceed the Applicable
                       Off-Axis EIRP Limits. .............................................................................. 11
            2.         The Applicant Must Describe How It Will Control Off-Axis
                       EIRP To Prevent Harmful Interference When Antenna
                       Mispoint Exceeds 0.2° Or When Harmful Interference Would
                       Otherwise By Caused. ............................................................................... 14
     E.     It Remains Unclear Precisely What the Occupied Transmit Bandwidth
            Will Be for Panasonic Avionics’ Operating System............................................. 15
     F.     Panasonic Avionics Continues to Refuse to Provide Required
            Information Concerning Geographic Coverage of its Service. ............................. 17
III. In Light of the Omissions Outlined Above, The Commission Should Request
     Additional Information from Panasonic Avionics. ........................................................... 17
IV.  Panasonic Avionics Procedural Arguments Are Misplaced and
     Fundamentally Inaccurate. ................................................................................................ 19
V.   Conclusion. ....................................................................................................................... 22



Document Created: 2010-11-19 17:28:51
Document Modified: 2010-11-19 17:28:51

© 2024 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC