Attachment Technical Annex

This document pretains to SES-MOD-20141022-00806 for Modification on a Satellite Earth Station filing.

IBFS_SESMOD2014102200806_1065431

                                   ATTACHMENT A

                Technical Information to Supplement Schedule S


1.      SCOPE


This attachment contains the information required by 47 C.F.R. §25.114 and other sections of the
FCC’s Part 25 rules that cannot be entered on Schedule S.


2.      GENERAL DESCRIPTION


The ECHOSTAR-3 satellite will operate at the 86.4° W.L. orbital location using the UK
Administration’s IOMSAT-S21 ITU network.              The satellite will be used to develop
Broadcasting-Satellite Services (“BSS”) to Chile and the South Pacific Ocean region.


The ECHOSTAR-3 satellite will operate in the 17.3-17.8 GHz BSS feeder uplink band (ITU
Appendix 30A) and the 12.2-12.7 GHz BSS downlink band (ITU Appendix 30). The satellite’s
frequency plan is identical to that prescribed in the ITU’s Region 2 BSS and associated feeder
link Plan. Full frequency re-use is achieved through the use of dual orthogonal polarizations.
The cross-polar isolation of the satellite’s receive and transmit antennas exceed 30 dB.


The satellite will transmit on all even channels and on odd channels 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25 and 29.
The maximum downlink EIRP level will be 54.7 dBW for the even channels and 54.2 dBW for the
odd channels.


The primary feeder link site is expected to be located in Santiago, Chile. The telemetry, tracking
and command (“TT&C”) earth stations will be located at EchoStar’s satellite control facilities in
Cheyenne, WY, Gilbert, AZ, and Blackhawk, SD.


4.      SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED


The ECHOSTAR-3 satellite will be used to develop mobile video and data applications to various
Chilean and South Pacific regions.     There will be one wideband digitally modulated signal


                                                 1


transmitted in each of the active transponders, supporting a range of information data rates
depending on the order of the modulation (e.g., QPSK, 8PSK) and the type and degree of FEC
coding used. Representative link budgets, which include details of the transmission characteristics,
performance objectives and earth station characteristics, are provided in the associated Schedule S
form. Link budgets for the TT&C transmissions are also included therein.


5.       RECEIVER AND TRANSMITTER CHANNEL FILTER RESPONSE
         CHARACTERISTICS


The typical receiver and transmitter frequency responses of each RF channel, as measured
between the receive antenna input and transmit antenna, fall within the limits shown in Table 5-1
below.


In addition, the frequency tolerances of §25.202(e) and the out-of-band emission limits of
§25.202(f) (1), (2) and (3) will be met.


                   Table 5-1: Typical Receiver and Transmitter Filter Responses

 Offset from Channel Center     Receiver Filter Response (dB)   Transmitter Filter Response (dB)
      Frequency (MHz)

            ±5                             > -0.35                          > -0.35

            ±7                             > -0.55                          > -0.45

            ±9                             > -0.8                           > -0.65

            ± 11                           > -1.3                            > -0.8

            ±12                            > -1.8                            > -0.9

           ±17.5                           < -18                              < -8

           ±20.2                           < -38                             < -18

           ±27.2                           < -50                             < -35




                                                     2


6.      CESSATION OF EMISSIONS

Each active satellite transmission chain (channel amplifiers and associated TWTA) can be
individually turned on and off by ground telecommand, thereby causing cessation of emissions
from the satellite, as required.


7.      TT&C


The TT&C earth stations will be located at EchoStar’s satellite control facilities in Cheyenne,
WY, Gilbert, AZ, and Blackhawk, SD. The satellite’s near-omnidirectional beams will be used
for TT&C purposes.


A summary of the on-station TT&C subsystem performance is given in Table 7-1.


            Table 7-1: Summary of the on-station TT&C Subsystem Performance

                       Parameter                              Performance

       On-Station Command Frequency                          17,301.5 MHz

                                                                                2
       Uplink Flux Density                                 -60 to -80 dBW/m

       Uplink Polarization                                  Linear (Vertical)

                                                             12,201.0 MHz
       On-Station Telemetry Frequencies                      12,203.0 MHz
                                                             12,699.0 MHz

       Maximum Downlink EIRP                                    3.2 dBW

       Downlink Polarization                                Linear (Vertical)




                                               3


8.      ORBITAL DEBRIS MITIGATION PLAN


8.1     Spacecraft Hardware Design

The ECHOSTAR-3 satellite was designed and manufactured by Lockheed Martin and was
launched in 1997.


EchoStar has assessed and limited the amount of debris released during normal operations. The
satellite was designed to minimize debris generated after separation from the launch vehicle and
to cause no debris during normal on-station operations. All pyrotechnic devices onboard the
satellite have been designed to retain all physical debris. In conjunction with the spacecraft
manufacturer, EchoStar has assessed and limited the probability of the space station becoming a
source of debris by collisions with small debris or meteoroids smaller than one centimeter in
diameter that could cause loss of control and prevent post-mission disposal. The possibility of
collisions with small debris and meteoroids was taken into account as part of the satellite design.
EchoStar has taken steps to limit the effects of such collisions through the use of shielding, the
placement of components, and the use of redundant systems. In addition, all sources of stored
energy are located within the body of the spacecraft, thereby providing protection from small
orbital debris.


8.2     Minimizing Accidental Explosions

EchoStar and Lockheed Martin have assessed and limited the probability of accidental
explosions during and after completion of mission operations. The satellite was designed to
ensure that debris generation does not result from the conversion of energy sources on board the
satellite into energy that fragments the satellite. The propulsion subsystem pressure vessels have
been designed to provide high safety margins. EchoStar and Lockheed Martin have limited the
probability of accidental explosions during mission operations by means of a failure mode
verification analysis.   All pressures, including those of the batteries, will be monitored by
telemetry. At end-of-life and once the satellite has been placed into its final disposal orbit, the
batteries will be left in a permanent state of discharge and all sources of stored energy (with the
exception of the oxidizer and helium tanks) will be vented at the spacecraft’s end-of-life by
leaving all fuel lines open. Because of Lockheed Martin’s design of the spacecraft bus, however,


                                                4


the small amount of oxidizer and helium remaining in their respective tanks cannot be vented at
the spacecraft’s end of life. Instead, as explained in the attached Declaration from Lockheed
Martin (“Lockheed Memorandum” included as Attachment B), this residual oxidizer and helium
will be securely sealed and stored under conditions that would make a leak extremely unlikely,
and an accidental, post-mission explosion more unlikely still.


As demonstrated in the Lockheed Memorandum, Lockheed has taken a number of measures to
avoid an explosion. Specifically, first, it has built hardy tanks that are extremely unlikely to leak.
The tanks are all-titanium pressure vessels that have been inspected, tested and qualified to the
stringent requirements of the MIL-STD-1522A (Standard General Requirements for Safe Design
and Operation of Pressurized Missile and Space Systems) and the EWR-127-1 (Eastern and
Western Range Safety Requirements). 1 Given the small amount of oxidizer and helium that will
remain in the oxidizer tanks, the tanks would have to be heated above 165° F (or 76° C) in order
for their designed pressure tolerances to be exceeded. Such temperatures are highly unlikely to
be experienced, and Lockheed’s worst-case analysis shows that temperatures will be less than
95° F (or 35° C) at end-of-life, resulting in a maximum pressure well below the pressure
tolerance of the tanks. 2 Similarly, the helium pressurant tanks that are sealed after the final
propulsion system repressurization will retain a small residual of gaseous helium, but as with the
oxidizer tanks, the worst case pressures are well below the design margin leaving little to no
chance of explosions or leaks. Second, Lockheed has designed and constructed the tanks in
accordance with stringent technical standards to leak rather than burst in the case of any flaw in
the materials. The tanks have accordingly been qualified as leak-before-burst pressure vessels. 3


The helium tanks were also built under the stringent MIL-STD-1522A (Standard General
Requirements for Safe Design and Operation of Pressurized Missile and Space Systems) and the
EWR-127-1 (Eastern and Western Range Safety Requirements).                 The maximum designed
operating pressure of the helium tanks is 4500 psia at 30°C, still with a burst factor of 1.5:1 for
additional safety margin. Based on manufacturer maximum expected temperatures of 35°C at
disposal orbit, worst case helium tank pressures are predicted to be approximately 500 psia, far

1
  See Lockheed Memorandum at 1.
2
  See id. at 1.
3
  See id. at 1-2.


                                                  5


below the designed operational maximum pressures. The estimated total remaining mass of
helium is expected to be 0. 226 kg after final spacecraft repressurization. Like the oxidizer
tanks, the helium tanks by design are sealed off from the rest of the system upon the final
propulsion system repressurization and therefore cannot be fully vented during end of mission
maneuvers. However, because of the relatively low pressure at EOL, the possibility of helium
tanks leaking or bursting is extremely unlikely.


For all of these reasons, the secure storage of the residual oxidizer and helium in this manner is
no less safe than the venting of the oxidizer or residual helium. Tables showing the amount of
residual oxidizer and helium are listed below.


                                                               Internal T max   Internal P max
                  Volume        Liquid/        He (kg),
     Tank                                                           (C),            (psia),
                   (in3) 4       Gas          End of Life
                                                               Disposal Orbit   Disposal Orbit
Oxidizer                                      1.83 (amount
                   20,049         He                                35°              295
Tank #1                                      remaining b/w
Oxidizer                                     the 2 oxidizer
                   20,047         He                                35°              295
Tank #2                                          tanks)
Oxidizer                                     21.99 (amount
                   20,049        N2O4                               35°              295
Tank #1                                      remaining b/w
Oxidizer                                     the 2 oxidizer
                   20,047        N2O4                               35°              295
Tank #2                                          tanks)
Pressurant                                   0.226 (amount
                    4,157         He                                20°             269 5
Tank #1                                      remaining b/w
Pressurant                                  the 2 pressurant
                    4,156         He                                20°              269
Tank #2                                          tanks)

EchoStar offers further explanation of the table as follows:

•         The 0.226 kg of helium was calculated using the spacecraft manufacturer’s estimate of
          the mass of helium remaining in the tanks following the first repressurization of the
          hydrazine tanks, coupled with an estimate of the mass of helium required to bring the
          hydrazine and helium tanks near equilibrium during the final repressurization of the



4
    1 in3 is equivalent to 1.6387 x 10-5 cubic meters.
5
 This pressure is well below the burst pressure for the Helium tanks. The spacecraft
manufacturer’s documentation for the satellite states that “The maximum expected operating
pressure (MEOP) of each pressurant tank is 4500 psia with a 1.5:1 burst factor of safety.”



                                                    6


          hydrazine tank prior to end-of-life maneuvers.

•         The 35 degrees Celsius maximum internal temperature for the helium tanks in the
          disposal orbit is taken from the spacecraft manufacturer’s prediction of the worst case
          temperature for the spacecraft in this orbit.

•         The 500 pounds per square inch area (“psia”) maximum internal pressure for the helium
          tanks in the disposal orbit is also taken from the spacecraft manufacturer’s operations
          manual for the satellite; the pressure was not calculated using the figures contained in the
          above table. Notably, EchoStar estimates that the average pressure in the tanks will be
          well below the maximum estimated by the manufacturer. Specifically, calculations using
          the ideal gas law, an average temperature of 20° Celsius, and the above-referenced
          helium mass and tank volumes produce an estimated average pressure for the helium
          tanks of approximately 269 psia.


Residual Helium Cannot Be Vented:

Prior to end-of-life maneuvers, the helium will be used to repressurize the hydrazine tank. Once
the pressure in the hydrazine tank is in equilibrium with the pressure in the helium tanks, no
further helium can migrate from the helium tanks to the hydrazine tank, and the helium tanks
will be isolated from the rest of the spacecraft via latch valve in accordance with the spacecraft
manufacturer’s recommendation. There is no manufacturer recommended mechanism to vent
the residual helium from the helium tanks themselves after the final repressurization of the
hydrazine tank.


The Commission may waive its rules for “good cause shown,” including in cases where
compliance would impose an undue hardship and the policy underlying the rule will still be
served. 6 These circumstances are met here. First, of course, EchoStar 3 is incapable of
alteration at this stage. It was designed and launched before the adoption of the Commission’s
current orbital debris mitigation rules. The Commission is well aware of the limitations of the
Lockheed Martin A2100 spacecraft. 7 The bus design makes it impossible to vent the residual


6
 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.3; WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969); see also
Stamp Grant, IBFS File No. SAT-STA-20080219-00048, SAT-STA-20080229-00054 (Mar. 12,
2008) (explaining that “waiver is granted because modification of the [Lockheed Martin A2100]
spacecraft would present an undue hardship, given the late stage of satellite construction.”).
7
    See infra n. 6.


                                                   7


oxidizer and helium at the satellite’s end of life. At the same time, it is extremely unlikely that
the oxidizer or helium tanks will leak or burst. This means that the chance of accidental
explosions has been minimized, consistent with the purpose of Sections 25.283(c) and
25.114(d)(14)(ii) of the Commission’s rules. 8 For these reasons, the Commission has repeatedly
granted waivers of Sections 25.283(c) and 25.114(d)(14)(ii) of the Commission’s rules for
satellites based on the A2100 bus. 9

Based upon the foregoing, the Commission should grant the requested waiver.
8.3     Safe Flight Profiles

In considering current and planned satellites that may have a station-keeping volume that
overlaps the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite, EchoStar has reviewed the lists of FCC-licensed satellite
networks, as well as those that are currently under consideration by the FCC. In addition,
networks for which a request for coordination has been published by the International
Telecommunication Union (“ITU”) within ±0.15° of 86.4° W.L. have been reviewed.


Based on these reviews, EchoStar concludes that there are no operational or planned satellites
that could have a station-keeping overlap with the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite. Telesat Canada
operates the NIMIQ 1 satellite nominally at 86.5° W.L. with an east-west station-keeping
tolerance of 0.05 degrees. EchoStar will maintain the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite at the 86.4° W.L.
orbital location, with an east-west station-keeping tolerance of 0.05 degrees, thereby ensuring
there is no possibility of station-keeping volume overlap between the two satellites.


8
  See 47 C.F.R. § 25.114(d)(14)(ii) (addressing the discharge of energy sources in the context of
requiring satellite operators to assess and limit “the probability of accidental explosions during
and after completion of mission operations”); WAIT Radio, 418 F.2d at 1157 (noting that a
waiver may be granted when it would not undermine the purpose of the rule); Intelsat North
America LLC, 22 FCC Rcd. 11989 ¶ 6 (2007).
9
  Stamp Grants, SES Americom, Inc., File No. SAT-MOD-20121224-00221, Call Sign S2181, at
condition 5 (Mar. 22, 2013); SES Americom, Inc., File No. SAT-MOD-20111220-00243, Call
Sign S2162, at condition 7 (June 28, 2012); Intelsat License LLC, File No. SAT-RPL-20120216-
00018, Call Sign S2854, at condition 4 (May 25, 2012); New Skies Satellites B.V., File No.
SAT-MPL-20120215-00017, Call Sign S2463, at condition 7 (May 25, 2012); SES Americom,
Inc., File No. SAT-MOD-20110718-00130, Call Sign S2445, at condition 2 (Oct. 13, 2011);
EchoStar Satellite Operating Corp., File No. SAT-LOA-20071221-00183, at condition 4 (Mar.
12, 2008).


                                                  8


Based on the preceding, EchoStar concludes that there is no requirement to physically coordinate
the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite with another satellite operator at the present time.


8.4    Post Mission Disposal


Upon mission completion, the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite will be maneuvered to a disposal orbit at
least 270 km above its operational geostationary orbit. 10      Based on data from the satellite
manufacturer, less than 12 kg of fuel will be required to achieve this. Accordingly, 12 kg of fuel
will be reserved at the end of the satellite’s life. The fuel reserve will be calculated using two
methods. The first method is the pressure-volume temperature method, which uses tank pressure
and temperature information to determine remaining propellant. The second method is the
bookkeeping method, which evaluates the flow rate at average pressure and total thruster on-time
of orbital maneuvers to determine the amount of propellant used. EchoStar has assessed fuel
gauging uncertainty and has provided an adequate margin of fuel to address such uncertainty.


9.     INTERFERENCE ANALYSES - ANNEXES 1 TO APPENDICES 30 AND 30A

The ECHOSTAR-3 satellite at 86.4° W.L. will operate under the UK Administration’s IOMSAT-
S21 network filings with the ITU. Accordingly, EchoStar, through the UK Administration, is
responsible for coordination of the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite following the Appendix 30 and 30A
coordination procedures.


The analyses of the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite network at 86.4° W.L. with respect to the limits in
Annex 1 to Appendices 30 and 30A are given in Appendices 1 and 2 to this attachment. The
results of these analyses are discussed below.


The Appendices show that the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite network meets the ITU criteria in Annex
1, except for § 4.2.3(c) of Article 4 of Appendices 30 and 30A. There are three adjacent Region

10
        The ECHOSTAR-3 satellite was launched in 1997. Pursuant to the Commission’srules, a
calculation of the satellite’s disposal orbit according to the IADC formula is not required. See
Mitigation of Orbital Debris, Second Report and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 11567, ¶ 81(2004) (“we will
grandfather all on orbit GEO spacecraft that were launched as of the release of the Notice in this
proceeding”).



                                                 9


2 BSS networks that are deemed to be affected. These networks belong to the Bahamas, Peru
and the USA. None of these networks is operational. Each of the networks is discussed below:


   •   The ECHOSTAR-3 satellite will operate under the IOMSAT-S21 ITU network. The
       Bahamas did not comment on the IOMSAT-S21 network when it was published by the
       ITU. The OEPM degradation caused to the Bahamian network by the ECHOSTAR-3
       satellite network is less than that caused by the IOMSAT-S21 network and therefore
       there is no requirement to coordinate with the Bahamas.


   •   Similar to the Bahamas, Peru did not comment on the IOMSAT-S21 network when it was
       published by the ITU. The OEPM degradation caused to the Peruvian network by the
       ECHOSTAR-3 satellite network is less than that caused by the IOMSAT-S21 network
       and therefore there is no requirement to coordinate with Peru.


   •   The USA’s USABSS-27 network at 86.5° W.L. is deemed to be affected. This network
       was submitted to the ITU on behalf of EchoStar. In July 2011, the International Bureau
       determined that EchoStar had failed to meet the critical design review milestone for its
       authorization at 86.5° W.L. and declared the authorization null and void. Accordingly, it
       is expected that the USABSS-27 network will not be brought-into-use before the requisite
       eight-year period, and that the ITU will subsequently suppress the network.


In addition to the above, there are two UK ITU networks at 86.5° W.L. Coordination of the
IOMSAT-S21 network with these two other UK networks is a domestic matter for OFCOM. The
two other UK networks were filed on behalf of SES Satellites (GIB), LTD (“SES”). The NIMIQ 1
satellite, located at 86.5° W.L., operates under these UK networks. EchoStar and SES have a
coordination agreement for operation of their respective networks.


The preceding demonstrates that there is no possibility of the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite network
causing harmful interference into another network.




                                                10


___________________________________




                11


              CERTIFICATION OF PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR PREPARING
                          ENGINEERING INFORMATION




       I hereby certify that I am the technically qualified person responsible for preparation of

the engineering information contained in this application, that I am familiar with Part 25 of the

Commission’s rules, that I have either prepared or reviewed the engineering information

submitted in this application and that it is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge

and belief.



                                                     /s/ Stephen D. McNeil
                                                    Stephen D. McNeil
                                                    Telecomm Strategies Canada, Inc.
                                                    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                                                    (613) 270-1177




                                               12


                                      Appendix 1 to
              Attachment A (Technical Information to Supplement Schedule S)

                              Analysis of ANNEX 1 of Appendix 30


1       Limits for the interference into frequency assignments in conformity with the
        Regions 1 and 3 Plan or with the Regions 1 and 3 List or into new or modified
        assignments in the Regions 1 and 3 List

Not Applicable to Region 2.


2       Limits to the change in the overall equivalent protection margin for frequency
        assignments in conformity with the Region 2 plan

With respect to § 4.2.3 c) of Article 4, an administration in Region 2 is considered as being
affected if the overall equivalent protection margin corresponding to a test point of its entry in
the Region 2 Plan, including the cumulative effect of any previous modification to that Plan or
any previous agreement, falls more than 0.25 dB below 0 dB, or, if already negative, more
than 0.25 dB below the value resulting from:

    –    the Region 2 Plan as established by the 1983 Conference; or
    –    a modification of the assignment in accordance with this Appendix; or
    –    a new entry in the Region 2 Plan under Article 4; or
    –    any agreement reached in accordance with this Appendix.      (WRC-03)

The MSPACE analysis was performed utilizing the Region 2 BSS Plan as contained in IFIC
2697; the IFIC in which the IOMSAT-S21 network was published. The results of the analysis
are contained in Annex 1 to this Appendix.

 3     Limits to the change in the power flux-density to protect the broadcasting-satellite
service in Regions 1 and 2 in the band 12.2-12.5 GHz and in Region 3 in the band 12.5-
12.7 GHz

With respect to § 4.2.3 a), 4.2.3 b) or 4.2.3 f) of Article 4, as appropriate, an administration in
Region 1 or 3 is considered as being affected if the proposed modification to the Region 2 Plan
would result in exceeding the following power flux-density values, at any test point in the service
area of its overlapping frequency assignments:

               –147 dB(W/(m2 · 27 MHz))                              for   0°     ≤ θ < 0.23°
               –135.7 + 17.74 log θ dB(W/(m2 · 27 MHz))              for   0.23° ≤ θ < 2.0°
               –136.7 + 1.66 θ2 dB(W/(m2 · 27 MHz))                  for   2.0° ≤ θ < 3.59°
               –129.2 + 25 log θ dB(W/(m2 · 27 MHz))                 for   3.59° ≤ θ < 10.57°
               –103.6 dB(W/(m2 · 27 MHz))                            for   10.57° ≤ θ



                                                 1


where θ is the minimum geocentric orbital separation in degrees between the wanted and interfering
space stations, taking into account the respective East-West station-keeping accuracies. (WRC-03)

The closest Regions 1 and 3 BSS network is the Russian INTERSPUTNIK-47.5W-B network at
47.5°W, which is greater than 10.57 degrees from the 86.4° W.L. location, therefore the –103.6
dB(W/(m2 . 27 MHz)) PFD level applies for this network and all other Regions 1 and 3
networks. The GIMs Appendix 30 PFD tool was used to assess compliance with this Section.
Using the antenna gain contours and power levels of the beams of the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite,
the GIMS PFD tool showed that no administrations are affected. Therefore the ECHOSTAR-3
satellite network is compliant with this Section.


4      Limits to the power flux-density to protect the terrestrial services of other
       administrations

With respect to § 4.1.1 d) of Article 4, an administration in Region 1, 2 or 3 is considered as
being affected if the consequence of the proposed modified assignment in the Regions 1 and 3
List is to increase the power flux-density arriving on any part of the territory of that
administration by more than 0.25 dB over that resulting from that frequency assignment in the
Plan or List for Regions 1 and 3 as established by WRC-2000. The same administration is
considered as not being affected if the value of the power flux-density anywhere in its territory
does not exceed the limits expressed below.

With respect to § 4.2.3 d) of Article 4, an administration in Region 1, 2 or 3 is considered as
being affected if the consequence of the proposed modification to an existing assignment in the
Region 2 Plan is to increase the power flux-density arriving on any part of the territory of that
administration by more than 0.25 dB over that resulting from that frequency assignment in the
Region 2 Plan at the time of entry into force of the Final Acts of the 1985 Conference. The same
administration is considered as not being affected if the value of the power flux-density anywhere
in its territory does not exceed the limits expressed below.

With respect to § 4.1.1 d) or § 4.2.3 d) of Article 4, an administration in Region 1, 2 or 3 is
considered as being affected if the proposed new assignment in the Regions 1 and 3 List, or if the
proposed new frequency assignment in the Region 2 Plan, would result in exceeding a power
flux-density, for any angle of arrival, at any point on its territory, of:

               –148 dB(W/(m2 ⋅ 4 kHz))                      for       θ ≤ 5°
               –148 + 0.5 (θ – 5) dB(W(m2 ⋅ 4 kHz)          for 5° < θ ≤ 25°
               –138 dB(W/(m2 ⋅ 4 kHz))                      for 25° < θ ≤ 90°

where θ represents the angle of arrival.   (WRC-03)


The GIMS PFD tool was used to determine the administrations whose terrestrial services may be
affected by the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite network. Using this tool, the results show that the PFD



                                                 2


limits are not exceeded over the territory of any administration and therefore the ECHOSTAR-3
satellite is compliant with this Section.


5       Limits to the change in the power flux-density of assignments in the Regions 1 and 3
        Plan or List to protect the fixed-satellite service (space-to-Earth) in the band 11.7-
        12.2 GHz in Region 2 or in the band 12.2-12.5 GHz in Region 3, and of assignments
        in the Region 2 Plan to protect the fixed-satellite service (space-to-Earth) in the
        band 12.5-12.7 GHz in Region 1 and in the band 12.2-12.7 GHz in Region 3


With respect to § 4.2.3 e), an administration is considered as being affected if the proposed
modification to the Region 2 Plan would result in an increase in the power flux-density over any
portion of the service area of its overlapping frequency assignments in the fixed-satellite service
in Region 1 or 3 of 0.25 dB or more above that resulting from the frequency assignments in the
Region 2 Plan at the time of entry into force of the Final Acts of the 1985 Conference.


The analysis shows that the PFD levels produced by the ECHOSTAR-3satellite are less than
those resulting from the frequency assignments in the Region 2 Plan at the time of entry into
force of the Final Acts of the 1985 Conference and therefore the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite network
is compliant with this Section.


6       Limits to the change in equivalent noise temperature to protect the fixed-satellite
        service (Earth-to-space) in Region 1 from modifications to the Region 2 Plan in the
        band 12.5-12.7 GHz

With respect to § 4.2.3 e) of Article 4, an administration of Region 1 is considered as being
affected if the proposed modification to the Region 2 Plan would result in:

    –    the value of ∆T / T resulting from the proposed modification is greater than the value of
         ∆T / T resulting from the assignment in the Region 2 Plan as of the date of entry into
         force of the Final Acts of the 1985 Conference; and
    –    the value of ∆T / T resulting from the proposed modification exceeds 6%, using the
         method of Appendix 8 (Case II). (WRC-03)

From a review of the available ITU space network databases there are no assignments registered
in the Earth-to-space direction in the frequency band 12.5-12.7 GHz. Therefore no Region 1
space stations can be affected and the ECHOSTAR-3 satellite network is compliant with this
Section.




                                                 3


          Annex 1 to Appendix 1 to Attachment A


        ECHOSTAR-3 at 86.4° W.L. MSPACE Results



        Orbital                              Max. OEPM
Admin   Position           Network           Degradation
         (°W)                                   (dB)

BAH      87.20     BAHIFRB1                       0.730
PRU      85.80     PRU00004                       2.990
USA      86.50     USABSS-27                      1.442




                               4


                                      Appendix 2 to
              Attachment A (Technical Information to Supplement Schedule S)

                           Analysis of ANNEX 1 of Appendix 30A




1       Limits to the change in the overall equivalent protection margin with respect to
        frequency assignments in conformity with the Region 2 feeder-link Plan (WRC-2000)

With respect to the modification to the Region 2 feeder-link Plan and when it is necessary under
this Appendix to seek the agreement of any other administration of Region 2, except in cases
covered by Resolution 42 (Rev.WRC-03), an administration is considered as being affected if the
overall equivalent protection margin corresponding to a test point of its entry in that Plan,
including the cumulative effect of any previous modification to that Plan or any previous
agreement, falls more than 0.25 dB below 0 dB, or, if already negative, more than 0.25 dB below
the value resulting from:

    –     the feeder-link Plan as established by the 1983 Conference; or
    –     a modification of the assignment in accordance with this Appendix; or
    –     a new entry in the feeder-link Plan under Article 4; or
    –     any agreement reached in accordance with this Appendix except for Resolution 42
          (Rev.WRC-03). (WRC-03)

See the results described under Section 2 of the Appendix 30 Annex 1 Analysis.


2       Limits to the interference into frequency assignments in conformity with the
        Regions 1 and 3 feeder-link Plan or with the Regions 1 and 3 feeder-link List or
        proposed new or modified assignments in the Regions 1 and 3 feeder-link List (WRC-
        03)


Not Applicable to Region 2.




                                               5


3      Limits applicable to protect a frequency assignment in the bands 17.3-18.1 GHz
       (Regions 1 and 3) and 17.3-17.8 GHz (Region 2) to a receiving space station in the
       fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space)

An administration in Region 1 or 3 is considered as being affected by a proposed modification in
Region 2, with respect to § 4.2.2 a) or 4.2.2 b) of Article 4, or an administration in Region 2 is
considered as being affected by a proposed new or modified assignment in the Regions 1 and 3
feeder-link List, with respect to § 4.1.1 c) of Article 4, when the power flux-density arriving at
the receiving space station of a broadcasting-satellite feeder-link would cause an increase in the
noise temperature of the feeder-link space station which exceeds the threshold value of ∆ T / T
corresponding to 6%, where ∆ T / T is calculated in accordance with the method given in
Appendix 8, except that the maximum power densities per hertz averaged over the worst 1 MHz
are replaced by power densities per hertz averaged over the necessary bandwidth of the feeder-
link carriers. (WRC-03)

The analysis shows that there are no affected Region 1 or Region 3 networks.


4      Limits applicable to protect a frequency assignment in the band 17.8-18.1 GHz
       (Region 2) to a receiving feeder-link space station in the fixed-satellite service
       (Earth-to-space) (WRC-03)

With respect to § 4.1.1 d) of Article 4, an administration is considered affected by a proposed
new or modified assignment in the Regions 1 and 3 feeder-link List when the power flux-density
arriving at the receiving space station of a broadcasting-satellite feeder-link in Region 2 of that
administration would cause an increase in the noise temperature of the receiving feeder-link
space station which exceeds the threshold value of ∆T/T corresponding to 6%, where ∆T/T is
calculated in accordance with the method given in Appendix 8, except that the maximum power
densities per hertz averaged over the worst 1 MHz are replaced by power densities per hertz
averaged over the necessary bandwidth of the feeder-link carriers. (WRC-03)

Not Applicable to Region 2.




                                ___________________________




                                                 6


   ATTACHMENT B




LOCKHEED MEMORANDUM


                                                        Lockheed Martin Space Systems              LockwEED m a W

                                             Engineering Memorandum                                               ~
Program:              A2100                                                           Date: 18 December 2007
Title:                 EOL A2100 Oxidizer System Pressures                            EM No.: PSS$07—A2100—0040
Key Words: End of Life, Oxidizer, Pressures
Prepared For: B. Noakes                                               Prepared by: J. Henderson
LMCSS Chief Engineer                                                  LM Propulsion Fellow_.._~— *
                                                                                       l

   1.0 Summary
   Currently, the A2100 propulsion system has no way to vent off the oxidizer tanks following
   transfer orbit. The pressure and residual oxidizer is sealed via pyrotechnic valves in the two
   oxidizer tanks. We consider it very unlikely that these tanks could catastrophically lose pressure
   either during the mission or after the spacecraft has been placed in a disposal orbit.


   2.0 Background
   The oxidizer tanks are all titanium pressure vessels that have been inspected, tested and
   qualified to the requirements of the MIL—STD—1522A (Standard General Requirements for Safe
   Design and Operation of Pressurized Missile and Space Systems) and the EWR—127—1 (Eastern
   and Western Range Safety Requirements) as hazardous leak before burst pressure vessels.
    These documents place stringent requirements on the design, manufacturing, test and operation
   of the pressure vessels so that it is extremely unlikely that these tanks will leak external and even
   more unlikely that they would rupture with explosive force. The leak before burst requirement was
   demonstrated on the qualification tank.

   Specifically, the tanks are designed to a Maximum Expected Operating Pressure of 300 psia, and
   are proof tested during manufacturing and after system integration to 375 psia. The tanks are
   designed such that their rupture pressure is not less than 450 psig — the qualification test unit for
   this tank design actually ruptured at 664 psig. At the end of transfer orbit, the tanks have
   between 255 — 265 psia inside them. The maximum expected amount of remaining oxidizer is
   less than 3%of the tank volume. To get the tanks to a pressure above the design rupture
   pressure, the tank temperature would have to increase to above 165 F (76 C). Analysis of the
   spacecraft at end of life indicates a worst case temperature less than 95 F(35 C), with a
   corresponding maximum pressure in the tanks less than 295 psia. Therefore, there is no risk of
   rupture of the tanks after retirement of the spacecraft. The other failure mode for the tank is
   leakage. The tanks are designed such that they will leak before they burst — the tank materials
   have been inspected to such an extent that flaws, if they are present in the material, will not
   propagate catastrophically —— they will growth through the wall and the tank will leak, relieving the

                          PROPRIETARY NOTICE_                                    _                                Page 1
This material is the property of Lockheed Martin Corporation and contains material
proprietary to Lockheed Martin Corporation. The contents are for confidential use
only, for purpases of recipient‘s contractual performance, and are not to be
disclosed to any others in any manner, in whole or in part, except with the express
written approval of Lockheed Martin Corporation.


                                                        Lockheed Martin Space Systems

                                             Engineering Memorandum
   pressure, rather than grow in a manner that the stored energy in the tank will be released in an
   instant. Because of this design, the tanks will not fail in such a manner that debris is generated.


   3.0 Conclusion

   It is extremely unlikely that the oxidizer system in an A2100 will catastrophically lose pressure
   after the system has been isolated following transfer orbit.




                           PROPRIETARY NOTICE           ______
This materialis the property of Lockheed Martin Corporation and contains                       Page 2 of 2
material proprietary to Lockheed Martin Corporation. The contents are for
confidential useonly, for purposes of recipient‘s con‘ractual porformance, and
are not to be disclosed to any others in any manner, in whole or in part, excopt
with the express wilten approval of Lockheed Martin Corporation



Document Created: 2014-10-22 14:17:15
Document Modified: 2014-10-22 14:17:15

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