>1S

<J2

X

w

n

C O

to

VD H

00

*0 C

O t2

H £3

DJ n>

Ed

O I

w -»

^ ^J

H .P

a vr>

H ro

H oo

!o m

U) M

x o

3 Ui H

a

P> 0)

o

~ O

n 3

*ri cs

>n a

o 2

— H

COMMUNICATION PLATFORM PAYLOAD

DEFINITION STUDY FINAL REPORT

VOLUME I

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

MARCH 1986

NASA CR174928

WDL TR-10631>

Prepared for:

NASA LEWIS RESEARCH CENTER

Contract No. NAS3-24235

.- .^

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporal)' •>
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section

1.0 Overview

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Approach

' 1.3 Major Findings

1.4 Selected Concepts

1.5 Future Region 2 Network

2.0 Data Base Development

2.1 Traffic Forecasts

2.2 Guidelines and Constraints

2.3 Approach to Payload Concept Devlpmnt

3.0 Payload Concept Descriptions

3.1 Overview

3.2 Scenario II

3.3 Scenario IV

3.4 Scenario V

3.5 Non-U.S. Coverage

3.5.1 Scenario VI-A

3.5.2 Scenario VI-B

4;0 Comparison of Concepts

1.1 Comparison of Payload Physical

Characteristics and Cost

1.2 Space Segment Cost Comparisons

5.0 Implementation Issues

5.1 Barriers Counter to Implementation

5.2 Technology Development

5.3 STS and Space Station Support

6.0 Conclusions

6.1 Overall Ranking of Scenarios

6.2 Epilogue

Page Figure

1

1

2

2

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Future Network of Platforms for Region 2

WARC Region 2 Traffic Forecasts

Approach to Developing Payload Concepts

Scenario II - Services Allocation

Scenario IV - Services Allocation

Scenario V - Services Allocation

Traffic Flow for Scenarios VI-A and VI-B

Scenario VI-A - Services Allocation

Scenario VI-B - Services Allocation

Table

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Baseline & Variation Scenario Requirements

Summary of Scenario Configurations •

Comparison of Services

Transponder Costs per Year

Other Implementation Issues

Advanced Technology Development

STS and Space Station Support

Overall Ranking of Scenarios

Page

3

5

9

13

15

17

19

21

23

Page

7

11

25

27

29

31

33

35

-iFord Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1 Purpose

This study was accomplished by Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation in support of the NASA

Communications Platform Payload Definition (CPPD)

Study Program.

This program consists of two parallel payload

studies sponsored by NASA Lewis-Research Center

(LeRC) and two parallel studies under the sponsorship of NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) to

examine the non-communications aspects of a large

geostationary facility in the mid- to late 1990's.

The specific goals of the payload study were to:

(1) determine the types of communications payloads

that would be appropriate for a large geostationary

facility initially operational in the late 1990's;

(2) provide conceptual designs and descriptions of,

and intercomparisons between such payloads when

implemented on a single spacecraft; (3) provide

indications as to the enabling and supporting high

risk technology development efforts required for

their implementation; and (4) produce a report

detailing the foregoing efforts.

The study established a data base of prior geostationary platform study efforts and evaluated the

impacts of new traffic forecasts, regulatory changes and updated institutional information on their

results. The aggregation of services and the

resulting payloads were to provide NASA with

guidance to answering the following questions:

»See Section 2.2

Is the existence of one or more large scale

geostationary facilities, each consisting

of a payload providing a single communications service or a variety of communications services, desirable in the mid to

late 1990's?

If so, what are the most viable operational

systems (payload, spacecraft, transportation, and space operations) for that

time frame?

For those operational systems, what enabling and supporting technologies are

required prior to implementation and, in

particular, which of those technologies is

of high technical and/or economic risk?

1.2 Approach

The study was organized

sequence of tasks:

into the following orderly

Task 1: Assemble a data base consisting of

traffic models, market forecasts,

technology forecasts, criteria for

selection of aggregation scenarios and

evaluation of payload concepts, and cost

estimating methodology to be used for

the remainder of the study tasks. Task

Task 2: Using the data base and criteria, select

at least six service aggregation

scenarios for development and

evaluation.

Task 3: Develop a payload concept for each of

four* of the service aggregation

scenarios developed in Task 2.

* See Section 2.2.

-1-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Task 4: Develop four* detailed payload system

configurations, and define the payload

to the component level.

Task 5: Provide system cost estimates and

identify cost drivers for the payload

configurations.

Task 6: Identify both enabling and supporting

technologies critical to the eventual

implementation and operation of each of

the concepts.

Task 7: Provide system comparisons between the

communications payloads.

The output documentation of this study consists of

Volume I Executive Summary, Volume II Final

Technical Report, and Volume III Addendum to Final

Report.

1.3 Major Findings

The major findings of the study were: (1)

Although satellite traffic is not growing at the

rate some of the earlier studies projected, it is

in fact increasing. (2) The use of ISL's (Intersatellite Links) to link high capacity east and

west satellites over CONUS did not appear attractive because of the ISL's required high capacity.

(3) Large capacity communications platforms appear

to be economically sound for reducing cost per

equivalent capacity. (4) The highest payoff technology development item identified is a method of

polarization tracking at Ka-band to maintain isolation during rainstorms. This would allow simultaneous reuse of the entire 2.5 GHz bandwidth from

high traffic density areas.

* See Section 2.2

1.4 Selected Concepts

The study describes five scenarios which provide an

increasing capability to serve projected Region 2

traffic. Briefly, these scenarios are:

o A medium capacity CONUS FSS and medium power

DBS capability. (Scenario II)

o A high capacity CONUS FSS capability.

(Scenario V)

o A large capacity medium and high power video

distribution and broadcast satellite.

(Scenario IV)

o A complementary pair of satellites with a

high capacity CONUS FSS payload, and incorporating ISL's to "European" and "Asian"

platforms to carry all Region 2 international

traffic, plus providing all non-U.S. domestic

and maritime coverage in the Western

Hemisphere. (Scenarios VI-A and VI-B)

1.5 Future Region 2 Network

Figure 1 below shows a possible constellation of

eleven large platforms that would accommodate all

of the WARC Region 2 projected traffic in the year

2008. The constellation is comprised of two each

Scenario VI-A and VI-B satellites that provide the

2 for 1 sparing of capacity for international and

regional services; four Scenario V satellites, that

with the CONUS package on the VI-A and VI-B satellites provide all of the CONUS capacity; two of the

Scenario IV video distribution satellites for

Region 2 and a mobile communications satellite to

operate in the northern hemisphere of Region 2.

This constellation would exist at saturation in the

year 2008.

-2-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Figure 1 FUTURE NETWORK OF PLATFORMS FOR REGION 2

IV IV

VI-B

VI-B

o 3 CC c

TV BROADCAST

MOBILE

COMMUNICATIONS

TO VI-B

ISL

ASIAN

PLATFORM

TO VI-A

VI-A

ISL

EUROPEAN

PLATFORM

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation

-3-
2.0 DATA BASE DEVELOPMENT

As part of the data base development task, traffic

forecasts and distribution models for all of Region

2 were established.

2.1 Traffic Forecasts

Several satellite demand forecasts have indicated a

growing pressure on arc/spectrum resources. More

efficient use of this scarce resource will be

required to meet projected demands in the year 2000

and beyond. In addition, economic pressure from

terrestrial systems such as fiber optics will

require a significant reduction in per-circuit

costs in order for satellite systems to remain

competitive, especially for point-to-point high

density routes.

A potential solution to these problems is the use

of large geostationary platforms which can provide

significant improvement in the communications

capacity of an orbital slot as well as economies of

scale. These improvements are obtained through a

high degree of frequency reuse at multiple bands -

C, Ku, and Ka - and by aggregating multiple

payloads — e.g. FSS, DBS and International — on a

single platform.

Overall, traffic demand is growing and will continue to grow over this time frame of interest.

The actual rate at which it will grow is and always

will be a question that is difficult to answer.

The forecasts used in the study are identified

below with the resulting summary graphs shown in

Figure 2.

Traffic forecasts used in the study utilized the

NASA synthesis (Ref. 1) of Western Union (Ref. 2 &

3) and ITT (Ref. U) studies, Intelsat forecasts

(Ref. 5), and various sources for non-U.S. domestic

requirements. Growth rates in the different

categories for the period 2000-2008 were estimated.

All traffic loadings utilized were relative to year

2008 based on an assumed 10 year life and 1998

launch date.

The traffic forecasts show that communications

services (voice, data and video conferencing)

dominate broadcast video. Within communications

services, U. S. domestic requirements account for

most of the total. The distribution of U. S.

domestic traffic is skewed significantly to the

Northeast and Midwest areas. This complicates the

design of payloads which use a high degree of

frequency reuse to increase the capacity provided

by a single orbital slot.

-4-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Figure 2 WARC REGION 2 TRAFFIC FORECASTS

o

500

200

100

50

20

10

1980

COMMUNICATIONS

(VOICE. DATA, VIDEO CONFERENCING)

U. S. DOMESTIC

INT'L/REGIONAL

NON-U.S.

DOMESTIC

1990 2000

YEAR

2010

1000

500

LU

u

200

100

50

20

10

1980

BROADCAST VIDEO

(INCLUDING DBS)

TOTAL

INT'L/REGIONAL

1990 2000 2010

YEAR

-5-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
2.2 Guidelines and Constraints

The study was conducted on the basis that the

payloads would be launched in 1998 as an operational system. Therefore, the use of 1994-mature

technology was assumed to allow a four year

development period for the platform. The system

was to provide a minimum 10 years on-orbit life and

not require any in-orbit payload assembly to

achieve the mission. The system should also conform to "anticipated" regulatory requirements.

The scenarios to be developed were to consider at

least two "baseline" and two "variation" payloads

as defined in Table 1. A minimum of six service

aggregation scenarios were to be developed. In

fact, eight scenarios were provided to NASA for

selection. From the service aggregation scenarios

evaluated, four were to be recommended by FACC to

NASA for development. FACC recommended four

scenarios, II, IV, V and VI-A, to meet all the

study constraints. NASA elected to add development

of a fifth scenario, scenario VI-B. This scenario

completes the complementary pair of payloads

developed as scenarios VI-A and VI-B. These two

payload scenarios handle all the international and

regional communications for all of WARC Region 2

and also provide a high capacity CONUS

service.

FSS

An additional constraint on the study was that of

the four scenarios to be developed, two were to be

compatible with launch concept 1 and two with

launch concept 2, defined as follows:

Launch Concept 1:

Launch Concept 2:

Up to a maximum single shuttle

launch of combined spacecraft

and upper stage, with a

spacecraft weight of up to

12,000 pounds.

Allows a separate spacecraft

(without upper stage) of size

and weight up to a full shuttle

launch capability (65,000

pounds).

After the five scenarios were selected for

develppment, the detailed concept development and

definition proceeded.

-6-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Table 1 BASELINE AND VARIATION SCENARIO REQUIREMENTS

Communications service aggregation scenario baseline requirements

- Up to CONUS coverage

- Domestic FSS and DBS services (only)

- C/Ku/Ka frequency bands

Service aggregation scenario requirements variations

- Service coverage area up to entire Western Hemisphere

- Additional services: mobile (land, sea, air), data collection

- C/Ku/Ka and other frequency bands

- Intersatellite link capability to international satellites or

other non-U.S. satellites or platforms.

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
2.3 Approach to Payload Concept Development

All traffic forecasts were established as computer

data bases so that a set of programs could be used

in developing payload concepts. Additional

programs to process the NASA-provided 316X316 SMSA

distribution tape, were developed.

The traffic forecasts can be manipulated in several

ways. For example, the original 316X316 matrix was

reduced to a 20X20 matrix for traffic between the

twenty Ka-band fixed spot beams. A given distribution matrix could be used to generate forecasts for

voice, data, etc.

The earth station data base is a file of earth

stations that will be operating with the payload

being evaluated. The capabilities (such as frequency bands and access/modulation type) of each

earth station are also contained in this data base.

A spacecraft payload data base is required, consisting of such elements as beam coverages,

transponders, and connectivity capabilities.

The system, called Satellite/Network Integration

Planning System (SNIPS), consists of two interactive computer programs. The first program translates point-to-point traffic to a set of beam-tobeam traffic matrices by type (modulation,

frequency band, etc.). The second program utilizes

a combination of user input from the terminal and

an optimization routine. The information the user

must supply is how each transponder is operated

(e.g., FDMA, TDMA) and the interconnection or

switching of transponders, including SS-TDMA. A

maximal flow algorithm is used to find the optimum

loading using the set of beam-to-beam matrices

discussed above. Outputs are available at the

terminal which guide the user in determining a

better transponder usage and interconnect plan.

These outputs include such items as transponders

with low fill, or unsatisfied demands. This

iterative process continues until the traffic

satisfied is maximized. The final output gives the

complete loading and can be used to evaluate the

efficiency of a particular payload design. Based

on this evaluation, the earth station or spacecraft

data bases can be altered and the process

repeated. A flow diagram depicting the above

process is shown in Figure 3.

-8-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Figure 3 APPROACH TO DEVELOPING PAYLOAD CONCEPTS

(NASA]

iSMSAj

PROCESS

TAPE

MANUAL

ENTRY

INTELSAT

& OTHERS

TRAFFIC

DATA

BASES

EARTH

TERMINAL

DATA BASES

PAYLOAD

DATA BASES

SNIPS*

BEAM

ASSIGNMENT

PROGRAM

TRANSPONDER

LOADING

PROGRAM

MODIFY PAYLOAD DESIGN

(OFFLINE ANALYSIS)

RESULTS

•SATELLITE/NETWORK INTEGRATION PLANNING SYSTEM

-9-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
3.0 PAYLOAD CONCEPT DESCRIPTIONS

Once the concepts were approved for development to

handle the scenario for the types of service,

modulation and access, and coverage areas, more

detailed definition of the five payloads was

performed:

3.1 Overview

The study describes five scenarios which provide an

increasing capability to serve projected Region 2

traffic.

Each of the five selected scenarios was reduced to

a simplified block diagram. The simplified block

diagram and the required coverages were then

provided to the antenna, transponder and baseband

processing subsystem organizations for development

of the block diagram to the component level. These

organizations provided weight and power estimates

for 1984 and 199U technology. They also provided

inputs to the cost modeling. From this data an

estimate of the total payload weight was

established. The total platform weight was

estimated based on standard

discussed later.

rules of thumb

The first three scenarios are sized such that the

platform (payload and bus), upper stage and fuel

can be carried to low earth orbit (LEO) with a

single shuttle launch; the last two scenarios would

require multiple shuttle launches with in-orbit

assembly and/or fueling at the Space Station or GEO

servicing. The currently planned versions of OTVs

could be used as a transfer stage for all of the

scenarios.

Table 2 is a summary of the scenario configurations

showing the types of service, class of service,

coverage area and estimate of transition from a

single shuttle launch to larger payloads which

require assembly of platform or transfer stages in

space, or fueling at LEO.

Each of the five

in more detail.

scenarios is subsequently defined

-10-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Table 2 SUMMARY OF SCENARIO CONFIGURATIONS

DIRECT

BROADCAST

COMMUNICATIONS

C-BAND Ku-BAND

Ka-FIXED

Ka-SCAN

OTHER

SERVICES

II

MED # CHAN

MED POWER

CONUS CONUS CONUS

IV

HIGH # CHAN

HIGH POWER

CONUS

CONUS CONUS CONUS

TRANSITION TO

LARGE PLATFORMS

VI-A

VI-B

CONUS &

INT'L

REGION 2

NON-CONUS

CONUS

CONUS &

REGION 2

CONUS

CONUS

MARITIME PAYLOAD

WESTERN ATLANTIC

INTERSATELLITE LINKS

INTELSAT AOR

MARITIME PAYLOAD

EASTERN PACIFIC

INTERSATELLITE LINKS

INTELSAT POR

-11-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
3.2 Scenario II

Scenario II can be described as a transition satellite containing current conventional, two times

re-use C-band and three times re-use Ku-band

payloads. In addition, it provides a high capacity

Ka-band fixed and scanning beam payload and an

introductory level Ku-band DBS payload. The services provided are listed below:

24 channels, 36 MHz, standard

payload, 2 times re-use

24 channels, 54 MHz, standard

payload, 3 times re-use

C-band FSS

Ku-band FSS

20 beams, 38 channels, 500 MHz, Ka-band FSS

trunking payload, 7.6 times re-use

6 area scan beam, 18 channels - 240 MHz, and

14 channels - 500 MHz, Ka-band CPS/thin route

trunking, 5.76 times re-use

16 channels, 24 MHz, Ku-band, DBS payload, 2

beams, 8 channels each

The satellite is primarily intended as a Fixed

Satellite Service (FSS) satellite although it also

contains a Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS)

payload. The payload would require an 87% digital

traffic base to effectively utilize the Ka-band

capacity. Given the projected digital traffic in

the 60-70$ range this satellite would only be

usable for the transition phase to some subsequent

configuration presented in this study.

Even with the high capacity Ka-band, this is the

lowest capacity satellite considered in this study.

Figure 4 below presents a summary of the coverage

areas, capacities, weight and power of the DBS and

FSS payloads. This combination of payloads puts

severe limitations on its orbital location since

currently only 101° and 110°W longitude are compatible for all the payloads. This location constraint is primarily a regulatory one and could

possibly be changed if significant economic benefit

could be shown.

-12-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Figure 4 SCENARIO II - SERVICES ALLOCATION

DIRECT BROADCAST - 16 CHANNEL COMMUNICATIONS - 65 Gb/s

Ku: 100 W PER CHANNEL OF 24 MHz

MEDIUM POWER

C-BAND: 24 CHANNEL OF 36 MHz

(1.7 Gb/s)

Ka FIXED: 20 BEAM

38 CHANNEL OF 500 MHz

(38 Gb/s)

Ku: 24 CHANNEL OF 54 MHz

(2.6 GbA)

KaSCAN: 6 AREAS

18 CHANNELS OF 240 MHz

14 CHANNELS OF 500 MHz

(23 Gb/s)

POWER: 3.900 watts

MASS: 223 kg

COMMUNICATIONS PAYLOAD

OF ~ 2064kg

12714 watts

POWER: 8814 watts

MASS: 1,841 kg

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation

-13-
3.3 Scenario IV

Scenario IV can be described as a high capacity,

high power video distribution satellite containing

a current design replacement payload at the Ku-band

FSS and a new direct-to-home Ku-band DBS payload.

Each payload is broken down to 24 MHz bandwidth

channels to allow interconnectivity between bands

for on-board networking. The services provided are

listed below:

o 48 channels, medium power, Ku-band, FSS

payload

3 beams - 1 CONUS & 2 regional CONUS

16 channels per beam

3 times re-use

o 64 channels, high power, Ku-band, DBS payload

payload

4 beams - approx. time zone coverage

16 channels per beam

4 times re-use

o Interconnectivity for half the channels from

FSS to DBS.

The on-board interconnectivity for half of the

channels provides the networking necessary for a

broadcast mode, one uplink to all downlinks or one

uplink to each downlink. This flexibility

eliminates the switching for local identification

and advertising in national broadcasts, and also

allows ground users to have only one antenna for

both cable and direct-to-home distribution on only

one satellite.

The satellite would have to be considered as a

national resource for video distribution and would

take a consortium of major networks, cable

companies, and other operators to utilize the total

capacity of the satellite.

Figure 5 below presents a summary of the coverage

areas, capacities, weight and power of the DBS and

FSS payloads. This combination of payloads puts

limitations on its orbital positioning since currently only 101° and 110°W longitude are compatible

locations for both the payloads..

The beam designs for this satellite attempt to

provide uniform flux densities over the coverage

areas.

Because of the high power direct-to-home DBS

payload, the overall power requirements for this

platform are significantly higher than for any of

the other platform scenarios of comparable weight.

This characteristic makes this platform unique

compared to the other platform scenarios.

-14-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Figure 5 SCENARIO IV - SERVICES ALLOCATION

DIRECT BROADCAST- 64 CHANNELS COMMUNICATIONS - 48 CHANNELS

INTERCONNECTIVITY

Ku: 200 WATT PER CHANNELS OF 24 MHz

HIGH POWER

POWER: 30,000 watts

MASS: 1.012 kg

COMMUNICATIONS

PAYLOAD ~ 1.617kg

35,100 watts

Ku: 48 CHANNELS OF 24 MHz

POWER: 5,100 watts

MASS: 605 kg

-15-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
3.4 Scenario V

This scenario has many features in common with

Scenario II ~ in fact the Ka-band payload is

identical. The frequency reuse of Ku-band FSS and

C-band payloads has been significantly increased.

Scenario II provided a poor balance between serving

analog vs. digital users. The vast majority of

the bandwidth is at Ka-band, which requires the

terminal to use digital modulation because of the

SS/TDMA switches and scan beams. Approximately 90%

of the traffic would have to be digital in an

optimal constellation of Scenario II platforms,

whereas Scenario V requires only about 68% digital.

An optimal constellation is assumed to replicate

the same payload to serve all of the projected

traffic in the year 2008.

The following table summarizes this scenario:

o High capacity CONUS FSS

o Reuse factors

C-band 4 times 500 MHz

Ku-band 9 times 500 MHz

Ka-band 12.2 times 2500 MHz

o Optimized to 68% digital traffic

o Seven satellites accommodate .100? of year

2008 projected CONUS traffic

o Design addresses the distributional characteristics of traffic

o All antennas .fit STS envelope as rigid

reflectors

Subsequent discussion will only

payloads not previously discussed.

cover those

-16-

A decision was made that this scenario would be

limited to rigid reflectors with a diameter of 15

feet in order to fit in the shuttle bay. This

limited the Ku-band beamwidths to about 0.45°and

C-band to about 1.25 . As discussed previously,

the traffic distribution is such that it is important to obtain as much reuse as possible in the

Northeast and Midwest areas. This was done in the

Ku-band payload by a North-South as well as an

East-West split of the coverage. Figure 6

illustrates the coverages and it can be seen there

are four beams in the north and three in the south

in the eastern part of the U.S. Some areas could

not be covered in order to provide beam to beam

isolation. It should be noted that the uncovered

areas are low traffic density areas. It was

assumed that this traffic could overflow to the

C-band payload.

Ku-band transponder bandwidths are 36 MHz; two

channels were further divided into 2 or 3

subchannels. With 9 beams, the use of 54 MHz

channels, as in Scenario II, would have precluded

complete connectivity between beams. Most of the

traffic carried by this payload is analog, so

static switching must be used. All channels are

connected with 9X9 switches.

Four beams are provided at C-band, as shown in

Figure 6. Subchannelization was provided in

exactly the same manner as at Ku-band to improve,

fill factors. Each channel may be interconnected

among the four beams by means of 4X4 switches.

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Figure 6 SCENARIO V - SERVICES ALLOCATION

COMMUNICATIONS - 72 Gb/s

C-BAND: 48 CHANNELS OF 36 MHz

(3.5 Gb/s)

KU-BAND: 108 CHANNELS OF 36 MHz

(7.8 Gb/s)

KA FIXED: 20 BEAM

38 CHANNELS OF 500 MHz

(38 Gb/s)

i'ASCAN 6 AREAS

18 CHANNELS OF 240 MHz

14 CHANNELS OF 500 MHz

(23 Gb/s)

COMMUNICATIONS PAYLOAD

OF-2.261 kg

7,426 watts

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation

-17-
3.5 Non-U.S. Coverage

Before describing the next two scenarios in detail,

an overall view of the concepts is presented. The

two scenarios are really a complementary pair of

platforms which use inter-satellite links between

themselves and European and Asian platforms. A

summary of the traffic types served is as follows:

A. SCENARIO VI-A

1. United States

a. Domestic

b. Regional

c. International

2. Latin America-Caribbean

a. Regional

b. International

3. Inter-satellite Links

a. European Platform

b. Scenario VI-B

14. Other

a. Western Atlantic Maritime

B. SCENARIO VI-B

1. United States

a. Domestic

2. Canada

a. Domestic

b. Regional

c. International

3. Latin America-Caribbean

a. Domestic

4. Inter-satellite Links

a. Asian Platform

b. Scenario VI-A

5. Other

a. Eastern Pacific Maritime

The primary reason for separating regional and

international coverage from domestic is the existence of a problem equivalent to the one faced in

the Ka-band designs: in overlaying a broad

coverage over small spot beams, it is very difficult to allocate the capacity in a manner which

meets the traffic distributions one is likely to

encounter. In the non-U.S. applications, it was

desirable to cover Intelsat gateways with small

beams to obtain high reuse. At the same time, it

was also necessary to provide domestic capacity

over the entire country.

The necessary routing between the various coverages

and inter-satellite links is provided by on-board

processing as described in Figure 7. For example,

a circuit from Canada to Brazil would be uplinked

on Scenario VI-B, routed to Scenario VI-A via the

ISL, and downlinked on the beam covering Brazil's

gateway stations.

-18-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Figure 7 TRAFFIC FLOW FOR SCENARIOS VI-A AND VI-B

CANADA

DOMESTIC + REGIONAL + INTL

C + Ku

UNITED STATES LATIN AM/CARIBBEAN

DOMESTIC DOMESTIC

(KiH-Ka) (C + Ku)

UNITED STATES

DOMESTIC + REGIONAL + INTL

C + Ku + Ka

VI-B

TO/FROM

ASIAN

PLATFORM

UDOM 1

POR ^A

-* +

'

OR

RFR

|

nwAi"*"

DOM DOM

n n

X X, VI- A

USPOR/

"^ ^^

Df^ H ^^.

t^J t\ ^^_

CANADA\

i

i

usLA/C

A

1

U

DOM

\ US-

\AOR

ORXx~-»-

/ INTRA

LA/C

n

TO/FROM

EUROPEAIS

PLATFORIV

LATIN AMERICA/CARIBBEAN

REGIONAL + INTERNATIONAL

(C + Ku)

-19-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
3.5.1 Scenario VI-A - This scenario consists of

the entire Scenario V U.S. payloads, a C-band Latin

America-Caribbean package, and a maritime payload.

Two ISLs provide Atlantic Ocean Region (AOR) and

Scenario . VI-B connectivity. Since connectivity

between the U.S. and either the ISLs or Latin

America-Caribbean region is via the BBP, gateway

stations are not required for this traffic; a

customer could uplink both domestic and international circuits together. The following table

summarizes the characteristics of this scenario.

o High capacity CONUS FSS, Region 2 international FSS, ISL to Scenario VI-B and European

platform, plus Western Atlantic Maritime

o Reuse factors

C-Band Dom. 4 times

C-band Intl. 9 times

Ku-band Dom. 9 times

Ka-band Dom. 12.2 times

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

Maritime 1 time

traffic

500 MHz

500 MHz

500 MHz

2500 MHz

35 MHz

CONUS international (nongateway

station) on Ka-band

Maritime payload and

Intelsat traffic

On board processing of FDMA signals

All Intelsat traffic

(except Canada)

Major institutional

problems

Requires assembly in orbit and candidate

GEO servicing

Highest capacity scenario considered

ISLs for Region

projected to 2008

issues and regulatory

for

The C-band regional-international payload provides

a total of nine beams which cover all of the

Intelsat gateway stations for Central America,

South America, and the Caribbean. Figure 7 shows

the coverages provided from 85°W longitude.

The distinguishing feature of this payload is the

inclusion of baseband processing, in particular A/D

and D/A conversion. It is assumed that the modulation used by most of the countries involved would

be analog. There are two primary reasons why

conversion to digital format on board was

necessary.

1. Circuits are routed to/from ISLs> which are

assumed to be digital, or the U.S. Ka-band

BBP.

2. Many of the traffic requirements between the

9 beams are very low; with analog access,

very low fills would have resulted.

Each FDMA FM uplink access is converted to a digital stream which can be buffered; on-board control

would then perform framing and synchronization to

interface with the BBP. Of the 108 channels

provided in the nine beams, only 27 are processed;

the remainder are switched in the usual manner.

The remaining package, providing Western Atlantic

maritime service, consists of 125 L/C-band circuits

equivalent to an Inmarsat second generation system.

-20-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Figure 8 SCENARIO VI-A SERVICES ALLOCATION

INTER SATELLITE LINKS COMMUNICATIONS - 80 Gb/s

• TO/FROM EUROPEAN PLATFORM

• TO/FROM WESTERN PLATFORM

POWER: 160 wam

MASS: 110 kg

MARITIME PAYLOAD

C/L - BAND: 125 VOICE CIRCUITS

POWER: 650 watts

MASS: 80 kg

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation

C-BAND: 48 CHAN OF 36 MHz

(3.5 Gb/s> Ka FIXED: 20 BEAM

38 CHAN OF 500 MHz

(38 Gb/s)

Ku-BAND: 108 CHAN OF 36 MHz

(7.8 Gb/s)

Ka-SCAN6 AREAS

18 CHAN of 240MHz

14 CHANNELS of 500 MHz

(23 Gb/s)

!POWER: 9,600 watts

MASS: 3,010 kg

COMMUNICATIONS PAYLOAD

OF ~ 3,200 kg

10,400 watts

C-BAND: 108 CHAN OF 36 MHz

(7.8 Gb/s)

-21-
3.5.2 Scenario VI-B '- This scenario also has the

Scenario V payloads, except C-band, plus domestic

coverage for Canada, Latin America and the

Caribbean, and a maritime payload. Ku-band

coverage is provided in Canada, Mexico (optional)

and Brazil. Adequate spatial and/or frequency

separation exists between the U.S. Ku coverages.

Ku-band coverage was required in Canada and Brazil

to meet year 2008 requirements. The two ISLs

provide Pacific Ocean Region and Scenario VI-A

connectivity. The following table summarizes the

characteristics of the payloads assigned to

Scenario VI-B:

o High capacity CONUS FSS, Region 2 non-CONUS

domestic FSS, ISLs to Scenario 3 and Asian

platform, plus Eastern Pacific maritime

o Reuse factors

C-band

Ku-band

Ku-band

Ka-band

Non-US

Dom.

Non-US

Dom.

Intl.

12.

500 MHz

500 MHz

500 MHz

2500 MHz

35 MHz

domestic

9 times

9 times

3.2 times

2 times

Maritime Intl. 1 time

o All projected year 2008 non-CONUS

traffic at C- or Ku-band

o Canadian Intelsat traffic (nongateway) on Cor Ku-band

o Maritime payload and ISLs for Region 2

Intelsat traffic

o On board processing for Canadian and ISL

traffic

o Major institutional issues regarding operation and ownership

o Requires assembly in orbit and is a candidate

for GEO servicing

o Coverages for all services are shown in

Figure 9.

Canada faces the same problem of traffic skewness

to an even greater extent than the U.S. The

Toronto-Montreal area is the obvious problem. A

single Ku-band spot beam was placed near the two

major cities. This spot beam is polarized to match

the Scenario V beams 1 and 5, and utilizes spatial

separation to obtain a full 500 MHz of reuse.

Ku-band coverage for Mexico is provided because the

Morales satellite has Ku-band capacity. Finally,

Brazil has Ku-band coverage with a full two times

(polarization) reuse.

Canada has three C-band beams, with an intentional

overlap of the Central and Eastern beams in the

Toronto area. Mexico coverage consists of two

beams, again with an overlap in the high density

areas of Mexico City and Guadalajara. A Central

America-Caribbean beam has also been provided. The

remaining three beams provide the South American

coverage.

In the Canadian systemj three channels in each beam

are processed for routing to the ISLs. As with the

U.S., no gateway stations are required for regional

or international traffic. The networking is onboard the payload.

The Eastern Pacific Maritime payload is identical

to the Scenario VI-A. maritime package, except for

the beam shape.

-22-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Figure 9 SCENARIO VI-B - SERVICES ALLOCATION

INTER SATELLITE LINKS

• TO/FROM ASIAN PLATFORM

• TO/FROM EASTERN PLATFORM

POWER: 130 WATTS

MASS: 106 g

MARITIME PAYLOAD

C/L-BAND: 125 VOICE CIRCUITS

POWER: 650 watts

MASS: 44 kg

COMMUNICATIONS - 80 Gb/s

C-BAND: 108 CHAN OF 36 MHz

(7.8 Gb/s)

"?*^

w^s\'v- ^:WV

Ku-BAND: 38 CHAN OF 36 MHz POWER: 10,400 watts

(2.7 Gb/s)

MASS: 2,775kg

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation

COMMUNICATIONS PAYLOAD

OF 2,925 kg and 11,200 watts

Ka FIXED: 20 BEAM

38 CHAN OF 500 MHz

(38 Gb/s)

Ka-SCAN 6 AREAS

18 CHAN OF 240 MHz

14 CHAN OF 500 MHz

(23 Gb/s)

Ku-BAND: 108 CHAN OF 36 MHz

(7.8 Gb/s)

-23-
4.0 COMPARISON OF CONCEPTS

4.1 Comparison of Payload Physical

Characteristics and Cost

The payload bandwidth, mass, power, additional

features, and estimated recurring costs are compared in Table 3. The bandwidth capacity of each

of the payloads is determined by actual channel

bandwidth times the number of channels. Thus, the

500 MHz bandwidth at C-band is only 12 times 36 MHz

or 432 MHz of utilized bandwidth for a payload that

uses 36 MHz channels.

The mass of each payload is determined based on

estimates of the 1994 technology base for each of

the components. The quantities were determined

from the detail block diagrams on a component-bycomponent basis.

The power required for each of the payloads is also

based on estimates of the 1994 technology. The

radiated power required is based on the feasibility

link calculation performed for each of the modulation and access types by frequency band. The power

requirements are then summed on a component-bycomponent basis.

The recurring cost of each payload was then

estimated using the PRICE-H computer model (Ref. 6)

and correlation to current day component costs.

The PRICE-H output was correlated to three current

spacecraft programs, at Ford Aerospace to establish

operating factors and then used to prepare

projected costs for each of the elements of the

payloads on a component-by-component basis. In

addition, the PRICE-H outputs were evaluated

against engineering estimates for reasonableness.

The Ka-band payload element is the highest uncertainty area. However, estimates were made based on

extrapolations of engineering estimates for the RF

equipment and for the antenna and baseband processor were based on information obtained from the

NASA LeRC work for the 30/20 GHz program.

It should be reiterated that the payload cost is

"recurring" cost only. It does not include any

recovery of allocated non-recurring effort nor does

it include any profit on the work effort.

-24-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Table 3 COMPARISON OF SERVICES

B.W. Capacity

Scenario (GHz) Mass (kg)

II

IV

V

VI-A

VI-B

32.5

36

44.5*

42.5*

2063

2925

Broadcast

Video/

Power (kW) Other

12.7

1617

2260

3200

35.1

7.5

10.4

11.2

16 channels

112 channels

125 Voice

Cir. Maritime

125 Voice

Cir. Maritime

Recurring

Payload

Cost ($M)

81

67

90

126

132

includes ISLs

-25-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
4.2 Space Segment Cost Comparisons

In order to compare the aggregated platform

payloads with individual smaller satellites with

separate payloads, it was necessary to determine

the space segment cost of each scenario. In order

to extend these costs to a total (recurring) cost

to place the platform into geosynchronous orbit,

the following assumptions were made:

at beginning

31*

47*

22%

o No development costs included

o Spacecraft weight allocation

of life (BOL)

Payload

Bus

Stationkeeping fuel (10 yrs)

o Bus costs

For Scenarios II & V: $40M recurring +

$20M integration and launch operations

For Scenarios VI-A and VI-B: $60M

recurring + $30M integration and LEO

operations

o Perigee and apogee stage costs included in

launch costs

o Use of Rockwell results (Ref. 7) for

estimating launch costs

Table 4 provides the resulting total costs (DBS

costs in Scenario II excluded), and also a cost per

transponder-year based on a 10 year life. Even

doubling these numbers for operating costs and

profit show favorable results against the $200K to

$300K annual lease rates of today.

A second approach was also taken for comparison

purposes. Comparing the platforms cost to the cost

of providing services equal to the bandwidth

capacity provided, using current generation

satellites. The costs of current satellites

assumed are as follows:

Satellite Cost ($M) Launch ($M) Total ($M)

RCA Satcom 40

GTE Ku-band 50

Galaxy Ka-band 90

The comparison results for

payloads are tabulated:

35

35

75

75

85

165

Scenario

II

V

VI-A

VI-B

Platform

Cost ($M)

237

287

370

372

the four communications

Equiv. Satellite Cost ($M)

1185

1531

1881

1901

From both of the above comparisons it appears there

is a factor of 4 or 5 to 1 cost advantage of the

aggregated platform. The saving of the platform

comes from reduced launch costs - approximately

40/£, reduced bus costs - approximately 30% and

reduced payload costs - approximately 30%. The

launch and bus costs are what was anticipated but

the reduced payload cost was derived from the

re-use of the same antennas and was larger than

anticipated.

-26-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Table 4 TRANSPONDER COSTS PER YEAR

COMMUNICATIONS

COST/SATELLITE ($M)

EFFB/W(GHz)

COST/36 MHz/YEAR ($K)*2

VIDEO CHANNELS

COST/SATELLITE ($M)

NO. CHANNELS

COST/24 MHz/YEAR ($K)

 2

II

SCENARIO

V VI-A VI-B

237*1

32.5

26

287

35.9

29

II

38*1

16

238

370

44.3

30

IV

250

112

223

372

42.4

32

*1 BUS AND LAUNCH COSTS PRORATED BASED ON PAYLOAD

COSTS FOR DBS AND COMMUNICATIONS

*2 10 YEAR LIFE

-27-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
5.0 IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES

5-1 Barriers Counter to Implementation

There are several institutional and regulatory

issues involved in large platforms. There is

intense competition for long-distance traffic from

terrestrial systems. There is also competition for

orbital positions. By the time a platform owner is

ready to apply to the FCC for construction permits,

the available orbital slots in the C and Ku bands

will undoubtedly be assigned. The Ka-band slots

may also be assigned.

In order to obtain a suitable orbital position, a

current licensee, or a number of current licensees,

of these slot assignments will have to agree to use

their geostationary orbit slot or slots for a

platform. An alternative is to persuade the FCC to

identify an orbital slot for future platform use,

and to make no permanent assignments for this slot.

If the case for the platform could be made strong

enough, the FCC could refuse to renew the current

slot assignments and re-assign a slot to the

Platform.

The platform operator would be expected to take the

lead in the following activities:

o Obtaining the financing.

o Obtaining the regulatory approvals.

o Enlisting the participation and support

of other carriers,

o Procuring the spacecraft,

o Integrating the payloads.

o Arranging for launch services,

o Obtaining launch, commissioning, and

on-6rbit insurance.

o Arranging for tracking, telemetry, and

command services.

o Operating a master control center,

o Arranging for terrestrial networking,

o Marketing the communications services.

In addition to the above issues, scenarios VI-A and

VI-B face other barriers. The participants to be

coordinated include INTELSAT and rival satellite

systems, the international cable companies and the

INTELSAT signatories (who are usually the

government-controlled PTTs). The Department of

State and its counterparts abroad are also

involved. The FCC authorizations are needed for

the ground terminals to be located in the U.S., and

for the satellite if it is to be a U.S. registered

satellite. Authorizations are needed from the PTTs

for the foreign-based ground terminals. The

International Telecommunications Union is involved

in the assignment of the orbital slots, and the

coordination with other administrations that might

be affected. Finally, if ISLs are used to European

and Asian platforms, the interfaces would have to

be coordinated with the owners of those platforms.

A major factor in today's environment would be the

ability to insure a large asset for launch and

checkout, given the insurance community's recent

losses on spacecraft.

The above factors are listed in Table 5.

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation

-28-
Table 5 OTHER IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES

- Institutional Issues

- Regulatory Issues

- Insurance Issues

-29-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
5.2 Technology Development

A data base of projected 1994 technology was established early in the contract. This data base was

bounded by application of emerging technology, as

low risk up to high risk, which is development of

currently envisioned projections to 1994. For most

of the elements of the payload, a nominal projection or expected development was assumed. While

there are many areas of assumed improvements in

weight, power, and performance, a few of the most

critical items that provide potential high economic

payoff are listed in Table 6.

The highest economic payoff item is full polarization re-use at Ka-band. The ability to re-use the

2.5 GHz of bandwidth at the saturating nodes allows

a 1.8 to 1 reduction in the number of satellites

required to service the CONUS distribution

characteristics. If a polarization tracking method

is developed, the reuse factor for a given platform

can be increased 1.8 times.

The next most desireable technology item -is high

speed, high efficiency baseband processors.

Increasing the link capacity for a given bandwidth

using 8 PSK or 16 PSK modulation has a similar

effect as the Ka-band polarization tracking. High

efficiency modulators and demodulators with high

speed, lightweight, on-board routing increase link

capacity, on-board flexibility to improve fill

factors and thus lower equivalent cost per circuit.

In addition to the conventional baseband switching,

an approach using a high speed programmable frequency source to shift frequencies between different frequency channels or bands was utilized.

This allows a second tier of switching, increases

the intercpnnectivity and provides a more cost

effective routing mechanism. This approach can be

utilized to route down to the T1 level, (1.54U

mb/s).

The next major technology item utilized in the

study payloads is the Intersatellite Links (ISLs).

There are a number of current developments underway

for RF links. However, RF links are limited to

about 5 GHz bandwidth and the payloads in this

study nearly saturate these links. Development of

optical links for the trans-Atlantic ISL is

required for any growth of the study payloads.

A number of other items of lesser impact are also

identified that increase , flexibility and reduce

cost. Included is an analog-to-digital (or A/D)

on-board format conversion to accept analog uplink

and perform digital conversion on-board for digital

routing. The complement of that function is also

required for the return link. Another item is a

method of using large reflectors, ie. greater than

5 meters in diameter, for both receive and transmit

functions at both polarizations.

-30-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Table 6 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT

TECHNOLOGY

BASEBAND PROCESSING

- HIGH EFFICIENCY

MOD/DEMOD

- A TO D FORMAT

CONVERSION

ANTENNAS

- POLARIZATION TRACKING

OF Ka-BAND FOR H AND V

REUSE

- DUAL POLARIZER FOR

RECEIVE AND TRANSMIT BANDS

TRANSPONDERS

- HIGH SPEED PROGRAMMABLE

FREQUENCY SOURCE

SCENARIO

II V VI-A VI-B

ISL

- RF OR OPTICAL

X X

X X

X X

X X

X

X X

X X

X X

X X

-31-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
5.3 STS and Space Station Support

It was determined early in the study that extensive

servicing of payloads at .GEO was not likely for

platforms in the year 2000 to 2010. However,

services of the STS and Space Station at LEO, as

well as a space-based transfer vehicle system for

transfer from LEO to GEO are desired and/or

required for implementation of the platforms conceptualized in this study. The use of STS for

launch services accommodates the size and weight of

the payloads with varying configurations of single

orbiter launches and increments of platform fueling

and transfer vehicle types.

The platforms described in this study also provide

a logical application of the Space Station in

performing a series of services for payloads. The

simplest of these could be on-orbit assisted

deployments to simplify ground test and minimize

design of complex deploymen-ts. A logical extension

of this would be the capability to perform an

alignment check of deployed reflectors in the

zero-G environment, and subsequently adjust the

alignment.

For the larger payloads in the study, as a minimum,

the Space Station would have to provide "mating"

assembly services for major modules. Once the

modules were assembled, some minimum amount of

checkout would be required prior to committing the

payload to transportation to GEO. If a defect were

discovered during the assembly, deployment,

alignment, or checkout sequence, the Space Station

could provide servicing or repair/replacement of

the defective item. Once the checkout validated

that the platform was in working order, it would be

transported to GEO by a low-thrust, potentially

re-useable transfer vehicle.

Large GEO platforms can be a logical application of

Space Station attributes and may provide a commercially viable benefit in providing communications

services at reduced cost over the conventional

satellites of today.

The above tasks are summarized in Table 7.

-32-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Table 7 STS AND SPACE STATION SUPPORT

- Deployment

- Assembly

- Alignment

- Servicing

- Checkout at LEO

- Transportation to GEO

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
6.0 CONCLUSIONS

6.1 Overall Ranking of Scenarios

Established as part of the data base for the study

was a set of evaluation criteria and the method of

ranking scenarios. Using the criteria, the

scenarios ranked as follows: Scenario V ranked

significantly higher than the other payloads and

intuitively should be the highest ranking given the

optimized to CONUS distribution characteristics of

the payload. The scenario used all rigid reflectors that minimized cost. It also seemed a good

balance of digital to.analog capacity based on the

ratio of digital to analog demand projected to the

year 2008. Since this scenario serves only CONUS

it has the minimum barriers to implementation and

offers significant cost advantages over current day

separate payloads. It is also the most commercially viable scenario since It only requires a

large domestic carrier to implement the system.

Scenario IV was the next most viable and provides a

couple of unique advantages. First, it simplifies

other communications satellites by removing the

video distribution from them. Second, it provides

a particular class of users a common location in

orbit such that the number of ground stations can

be minimized. Third, the payload design can be

optimized for the video function.

Scenario II as a-transition payload ranked third,

but because of the high capacity digital Ka-band

payload, could not be duplicated as a constellation

to satisfy the total traffic demand without essentially eliminating the current analog systems.

Also, the constraints of orbital location due to

the DBS payload limits the number of platforms that

could be accommodated.

The remaining two scenarios are very large payloads

that technologically service all of the WARC Region

2 international, regional and domestic demands

through the year 2008.. The institutional barriers

to implementation are extremely high given the

political implications related to providing domestic services from a platform not controlled by the

user. Also, the platform would be in competition

with the current INTELSAT structure or would be

operated by INTELSAT to make it viable. While

these payloads are more ambitious and offer a more

significant technical challenge than the prior

scenarios, the overall economic viability is more

questionable. The economies of scale do exist but

the cost of implementation may be exorbitant.

The overall ranking

in Table 8.

of the scenarios is presented

-34-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Table 8 OVERALL RANKING OF SCENARIOS

1 Scenario V (High Capacity CONUS)

2 Scenario IV (High Capacity DBS)

3 Scenario II (Medium Capacity CONUS)

4+ Scenario VI-A (International Traffic)

4- Scenario VI-B (Non-CONUS Domestic)

Ford Aerospace &

or Communications Corporation
6.2 Epilogue

Although the results of this study must be considered preliminary, certain conclusions can be

drawn:

o Large platforms may provide significant

economies of scale.

o Scenarios VI-A and VI-B can serve all Region

2 non-U.S. year 2008 traffic with one platform of each type

o A constellation of seven Scenario V — or

combinations of Scenarios V, VI-A and VI-B

— could serve all U.S. satellite traffic,

with the exception of broadcast video, in the

year 2008.

o Major institutional, regulatory and insurance

issues exist, especially for Scenarios VI-A

and VI-B.

Given the apparent economies of reduction in percircuit cost the platform warrants further effort

even given the significant barriers to be

addressed. The demand for efficient utilization of

the geostationary arc and ultimately the formation

of a Region 2 communications organization could

lead to implementation of these large platforms.

The results of the study provide NASA the following

guidance in answering the questions raised at the

outset of the study:

o Economically and technologically a constellation of large geostationary facilities is

desireable in the mid to late 1990's.

However, institutional and other factors may

be insurmountable barriers to implementation.

o The most commercially viable payload would be

similar to Scenario V payload. This payload

can be replicated as many times as necessary

to satisfy the total demand.

o The major payload technological risks are

dual polarization re-use at Ka-band, high

efficiency modulators and demodulators, high

speed programmable frequency shifters, large

rigid reflectors for high frequency dual

polarization, lightweight on-board baseband

processors and RF equipment, and spacecraft

bus technologies to support the large

platforms.

-36-

Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation
Ford Aerospace &

Communications Corporation

References

1. "Demand For Satellite-Provided Domestic Communications Services to the

Year 2000", S. Stevenson, et al, NASA TM 86894, November 1984.

2. Kratochvil, D., et al.: "Satellite Provide Fixed Communications Services

- A Forecast of Potential Domestic Demand Through the Year 2000." The

Western Union Telegraph Co., McLean, Virginia, 1983. Volume I -

Executive Summary (NASA CR 168145); Volume II - Main Text (NASA CR

168146); Volume III - Appendices (NASA CR 168147).

3. Kratochvil, D., et al,: "Satellite Provided Customer Premises Services A

Forecast of Potential Domestic Demand Through the Year 2000." The

Western Union Telegraph Company, McLean, Virginia, 1983. Volume I -

Executive Summary (NASA CR 168142); Volume II - Main Text (NASA CR

168143); Volume III - Appendices (NASA CR 168144).

4. Gamble, R. B. Saporta, L., and Heidenrich, G.: "Customer Premises

Services Market Demand Assessment 1980 - 2000." U.S. Telephone and

Telegraph Corp. - ITT, Secaucus, New Jersey, 1983. Volume I - Executive

Summary (NASA CR 168150); Volume II - Final Report (NASA CR 168151).

5. "The Intelsat Traffic Data Base Resulting From the 1984 Global Traffic

Meeting." Intelsat, 13 August, 1984.

6. "PRICE H Reference Manual", Edition 3, The RCA Corporatiohn, July 1984.

7. "Space Platform Expendables Resupply Concept Definition Study", Volumes I

& II, Rockwell International, NASA STS 85-0174, March - December 1984.
1. Report No.

CR174928

2. Oomaimanl Oooaealon No. J. HtKlpMnf* Catalog No.

WDL TR-10631

4. Title and Buotltie

Corimunlcatlon Platform Pay load Definltion(CPPD) Study

Final Report Volume I Executive Surrmary

6. Rapon Data

March 1986

6. Partorrnlng Organization Coda

7. Authon:*)

E. M. Hunter

8. Performing Organization Report No.

10. Work Unit No.

8. Performing Organization Name and AddreM

Fbrd Aerospace & Communications Corporation

3939 Fabian Way

Palo Alto, California 9^303 o-V

11. Contract or Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Agency Nam* and Addraaa

NASA Lewis Research Center

21000 Brookpark Road

Cleveland, Ohio

13. Type ot Report ana Period Covered

Final

June 1984 - July 1985

14. Sponsoring Agency Cod*

IS.

Manager: William A. Poley

Two other Volumes were also prepared: Volume II-Technical Report, Volume IllAddendum

16.

This is^tne Ford Aerospace & uonnnunica"tTO-rrs~'"Gorporation Final Report for the

Communication Platform Payload Definition (CPPD) Study program conducted for

NASA Lewis Research Center under contract No. NAS3-24235.

Crhis report presents the results of the study effort leading to five potential

platform payloads to service CONUS and WARC Region 2 traffic demand as projected

to the year 2008. The report addresses establishing the data bases, developing

service aggregation scenarios, selecting and developing 5 payload concepts,

performing detailed definition of the 5 payloads, costing them, identifying

critical technology, and finally comparing the payloads with each other and

also with non-aggregated equivalent services.

17. Kay Word* (SugoMl«d by Ai

Communications Platform

Geostationary Platform

Satellite Communications

Telecommunication Forecast

Fixed Satellite Services

10. Btcuriiy CI«Mii. (ol ini* report)

Unclassified

20. Security ClaMll. (ol Ihl* (MO»)

Unclassified

ai.

'For tale by the National Technical Inlormation Service. Springfield. Virginia 22161