Sirius and XM merger?

[Blueskies]

What'll it do to satellite NEXRAD services?

[Matt Barrow[_3_]]

"Blueskies" > wrote in message
et...
> What'll it do to satellite NEXRAD services?
>
>

Nothing.

[Vaughn Simon]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
> "Blueskies" > wrote in message
> et...
>> What'll it do to satellite NEXRAD services?
>>
>>
>
> Nothing.

Except (in the long run) increase prices and worsen service because there
will be no chance of competation.

Vaughn


>

[Jay Honeck]

> What'll it do to satellite NEXRAD services?

More importantly...will I be able to listen to Packer games in the
plane now? (That's the only reason I miss my old ADF...)

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Doug[_1_]]

Commercials.

[Matt Barrow[_3_]]

"Vaughn Simon" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Blueskies" > wrote in message
>> et...
>>> What'll it do to satellite NEXRAD services?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Nothing.
>
> Except (in the long run) increase prices and worsen service because
> there will be no chance of competation.
>

Just like when IBM owned the computer industry in 1980.

[Matt Barrow[_3_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>> What'll it do to satellite NEXRAD services?
>
> More importantly...will I be able to listen to Packer games in the
> plane now? (That's the only reason I miss my old ADF...)
>
> :-)

Packers haven't been worth listening to since the Lombardi years. :~(

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Vaughn Simon wrote:
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Blueskies" > wrote in message
>> et...
>>> What'll it do to satellite NEXRAD services?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Nothing.
>
> Except (in the long run) increase prices and worsen service
> because there will be no chance of competation.
>
> Vaughn

I don't beleive Sirius had in their business plan to go into the aviation WX
market. But had they not merged neither would have been around in 4 or 5
years.

[Jay Honeck]

> Packers haven't been worth listening to since the Lombardi years. :~(

Oh, I don't know. The Holmgren years were pretty fun!

And any time you've got Favre as your quarterback, it's gonna be
interesting. Sometimes hair-pulling, gut-wrenching, and frustrating
-- but never, ever boring.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter R.]

On 2/21/2007 9:10:48 AM, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrote:

> I don't beleive Sirius had in their business plan to go into the aviation WX
> market.

Yes, they do/did. Sirius is (was?) going to be the carrier for WSI's
downlinked weather. We WSI customers have been waiting since last October to
begin swapping our existing receivers for ones that receive the Sirius
signal.

I am a bit concerned how this merger, if it indeed goes through, would impact
WSI's weather delivery. However, as an XM Radio customer, I am a bit excited
about the increased talk channels and more stations that don't play
commercials between music.

--
Peter

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Peter R. wrote:
> On 2/21/2007 9:10:48 AM, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrote:
>
>> I don't beleive Sirius had in their business plan to go into the
>> aviation WX market.
>
> Yes, they do/did. Sirius is (was?) going to be the carrier for WSI's
> downlinked weather. We WSI customers have been waiting since last
> October to begin swapping our existing receivers for ones that
> receive the Sirius signal.
>
> I am a bit concerned how this merger, if it indeed goes through,
> would impact WSI's weather delivery. However, as an XM Radio
> customer, I am a bit excited about the increased talk channels and
> more stations that don't play commercials between music.

I didn't realise that WSI were going to use the Sirius birds for their feed.
Seeing as how even the merged companies will still need as much income as
possible XM/S might just feed the stuff anyway.

[Danny Deger]

"Blueskies" > wrote in message
et...
> What'll it do to satellite NEXRAD services?
>
>

Can someone explain what this is? Is this a service that sends current
radar information to a plane while in flight? I googled for information,
but did find any. What is the monthly fee for this service, and is there a
portable/battery operated "box" that combines GPS position with the radar
image?

Danny Deger

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Danny Deger wrote:
> "Blueskies" > wrote in message
> et...
>> What'll it do to satellite NEXRAD services?
>>
>>
>
> Can someone explain what this is? Is this a service that sends
> current radar information to a plane while in flight? I googled for
> information, but did find any. What is the monthly fee for this
> service, and is there a portable/battery operated "box" that combines
> GPS position with the radar image?
>
> Danny Deger

Here's a portable http://www.garmin.com/products/gpsmap496/

And while there is probabaly a link in there somewhere to the serveice cost.
Here's one from XM.

http://www.xmradio.com/weather/av_service_pricing.xmc

and while I looked that up I found this for hardware other than the Garmin
mentioned above.

http://www.xmradio.com/weather/hardware_solutions_av.xmc

[JB]

On Feb 21, 12:24 pm, "Gig 601XL Builder"
<wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote:
> Danny Deger wrote:
> > "Blueskies" > wrote in message
> et...
> >> What'll it do to satellite NEXRAD services?
>
> > Can someone explain what this is? Is this a service that sends
> > current radar information to a plane while in flight? I googled for
> > information, but did find any. What is the monthly fee for this
> > service, and is there a portable/battery operated "box" that combines
> > GPS position with the radar image?
>
> > Danny Deger
>
> Here's a portablehttp://www.garmin.com/products/gpsmap496/
>
> And while there is probabaly a link in there somewhere to the serveice cost.
> Here's one from XM.
>
> http://www.xmradio.com/weather/av_service_pricing.xmc
>
> and while I looked that up I found this for hardware other than the Garmin
> mentioned above.
>
> http://www.xmradio.com/weather/hardware_solutions_av.xmc

Danny,

Not sure where you live or how often you fly x-country, but if its
often and someplace where you don't have severe clear 365 days/yr, you
oughta find a way to put XM Wx in your plane. A Garmin 396 or 496 is
often the cheapest way to go. Others may have their preferred
hardware solutions. The situational awareness and near real-time
weather is worth its weight in gold. NEXRAD, visual projection of
winds, AWOS and TAFs across the country, airmet and sigments....its
great. Knowing EXACTLY where the t-storms are and whether the clouds
I'm in are just clouds or something worse is fantastic. After having
it for 18 months, I wonder how I survived in the east coast soup for
all of these years without it. Even better than sliced bread.

And no....I don't work for Garmin or XM.

--Jeff

[Tuno]

The merger is great and my neighbor who works for Sirius says the XM
services should not be affected.

I've avoided subscribing to XM or Sirius for several years because I
wasn't sure which, if either, would survive. Now that I know there
will be a service provider, I plan on subscribing soon. I also became
a stock investor. And I think there are a lot of other people like me
who feel the same way.

And satellite radio DOES have competition, it's called terrestrial
radio and cable TV (mine has 100 digital music channels).

~ted/2NO

[Danny Deger]

"JB" > wrote in message
oups.com...

snip

Danny,
>
> Not sure where you live or how often you fly x-country, but if its
> often and someplace where you don't have severe clear 365 days/yr, you
> oughta find a way to put XM Wx in your plane. A Garmin 396 or 496 is
> often the cheapest way to go. Others may have their preferred
> hardware solutions. The situational awareness and near real-time
> weather is worth its weight in gold. NEXRAD, visual projection of
> winds, AWOS and TAFs across the country, airmet and sigments....its
> great. Knowing EXACTLY where the t-storms are and whether the clouds
> I'm in are just clouds or something worse is fantastic. After having
> it for 18 months, I wonder how I survived in the east coast soup for
> all of these years without it. Even better than sliced bread.
>
> And no....I don't work for Garmin or XM.
>
> --Jeff
>

I plan to go cross country a lot in an older Taylorcraft that has no
electrical system and radio. I have not flown in a while, but it sounds
like for a couple of grand and $29.99/month I can put what is equivalent to
what used to be INS and weather radar in my little putt-putt airplane. No.
It is even better. The display has a lot more that just an INS and weather
radar. I get terrain avoidance, actual weather, etc.

Danny Deger

[Blueskies]

"Blueskies" > wrote in message et...
: What'll it do to satellite NEXRAD services?

I just wonder why there is not some other source of datalinked information available. I mean, why does this have to come
in from satellites?

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Blueskies" <wrote

> I just wonder why there is not some other source of datalinked information
> available. I mean, why does this have to come
> in from satellites?

If you have ground stations, there has to be a LOT of them across the
country, since radio range has a distance limit that can not be worked
around. Add to that, line of sight is necessary to receives signals, so if
you are very far away from the transmitter, you have to get up high to get
the signal, due to the curvature of the earth.
Add up some unfortunate hills in the way, and you have to go elsewhere, or
get high enough so the mountain or hill is not in the way of the signal.

Most pilots like to make a go/no-go decision before they take to the air.
If there is no signal where you are on the ground until you get up a
thousand or more feet, that idea is out the window.

There has to be a lot of stations, like I said, and that costs money for the
installation and upkeep. Lots of money.

There is a system, or a proposal for a system that is ground based. I can't
remember what it is called, but I think it works off of the transponder
frequencies.

Satellites are good, because it only takes a few to get complete coverage,
in any part of the country, on the ground, in the air, or in valleys.
Dependable. That's the ticket.
--
Jim in NC

[Peter R.]

On 2/22/2007 7:35:02 PM, "Blueskies" wrote:

> I just wonder why there is not some other source of datalinked information available. I mean, why does this
have to come
> in from satellites?

This type of signal offers 100% coverage within the satellite's broadcast
"footprint." What alternative did you have in mind?

--
Peter

[Blueskies]

"Peter R." > wrote in message ...
: On 2/22/2007 7:35:02 PM, "Blueskies" wrote:
:
: > I just wonder why there is not some other source of datalinked information available. I mean, why does this
: have to come
: > in from satellites?
:
: This type of signal offers 100% coverage within the satellite's broadcast
: "footprint." What alternative did you have in mind?
:
: --
: Peter

Like the SAS on the TV for instance, but it would be limited to the TV range. Maybe a sideband on the VOR or upload from
the radar...

[Mike Schumann]

ADS-B is suppose to provide weather radar. I'm not sure if this function is
implimented yet on the ADS-B systems deployed on the east coast. It's
unfortunate that the FAA is taking so long on a nation-wide rollout.

Mike Schumann

"Blueskies" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Blueskies" > wrote in message
> et...
> : What'll it do to satellite NEXRAD services?
>
> I just wonder why there is not some other source of datalinked information
> available. I mean, why does this have to come
> in from satellites?
>
>
>
>
>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[601XL Builder]

Blueskies wrote:
> "Peter R." > wrote in message ...
> : On 2/22/2007 7:35:02 PM, "Blueskies" wrote:
> :
> : > I just wonder why there is not some other source of datalinked information available. I mean, why does this
> : have to come
> : > in from satellites?
> :
> : This type of signal offers 100% coverage within the satellite's broadcast
> : "footprint." What alternative did you have in mind?
> :
> : --
> : Peter
>
> Like the SAS on the TV for instance, but it would be limited to the TV range. Maybe a sideband on the VOR or upload from
> the radar...
>
>
>


Cost of 2 sats < Cost of hundreds of ground based transmitters

[Bill Denton]

I guess nobody pays any attention to poor old Bendix-King any more...

Prior to the advent of XM, Bendix-King offered their own version of inflight
weather using ground-based stations.

From:
https://www3.bendixking.com/wingman/commoncwasso?customdata=sso.fis.page

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
General Aviation's first high-speed broadcast weather network makes flying
safer, easier and more enjoyable.
The nationwide system uses a network of Honeywell ground stations to uplink
a broad range of free and fee-based aeronautical data. As part of an FAA
program called Flight Information Services (FIS), Honeywell has been granted
use of two frequencies to broadcast weather throughout the United States.
Utilizing a newly designed, wholly-owned network of 150-plus ground
stations, pilots are able to receive high-resolution graphical weather
products that are updated automatically with no impact on pilot workload.

Weather is one of the leading factors cited in aviation accidents. National
aviation forums have repeatedly identified improved weather information in
the cockpit, especially in graphical form, as a key strategy for reducing
weather-related accidents.With Honeywell's Data Link Weather, General
Aviation pilots can experience a new level of situational awareness and
flight safety

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------

It has only been in the last year or so that Bendix-King introduced their
KDR 610 XM reveiver....



"601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiacona@suddenlinkDOTnet> wrote in message
...
> Blueskies wrote:
> > "Peter R." > wrote in message
...
> > : On 2/22/2007 7:35:02 PM, "Blueskies" wrote:
> > :
> > : > I just wonder why there is not some other source of datalinked
information available. I mean, why does this
> > : have to come
> > : > in from satellites?
> > :
> > : This type of signal offers 100% coverage within the satellite's
broadcast
> > : "footprint." What alternative did you have in mind?
> > :
> > : --
> > : Peter
> >
> > Like the SAS on the TV for instance, but it would be limited to the TV
range. Maybe a sideband on the VOR or upload from
> > the radar...
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Cost of 2 sats < Cost of hundreds of ground based transmitters

[Blueskies]

"Bill Denton" > wrote in message . ..
:I guess nobody pays any attention to poor old Bendix-King any more...
:
: Prior to the advent of XM, Bendix-King offered their own version of inflight
: weather using ground-based stations.
:
: From:
: https://www3.bendixking.com/wingman/commoncwasso?customdata=sso.fis.page
-----------------------------------------------
: General Aviation's first high-speed broadcast weather network makes flying
: safer, easier and more enjoyable.
: The nationwide system uses a network of Honeywell ground stations to uplink
: a broad range of free and fee-based aeronautical data. As part of an FAA
: program called Flight Information Services (FIS), Honeywell has been granted
: use of two frequencies to broadcast weather throughout the United States.
: Utilizing a newly designed, wholly-owned network of 150-plus ground
: stations, pilots are able to receive high-resolution graphical weather
: products that are updated automatically with no impact on pilot workload.
:
: Weather is one of the leading factors cited in aviation accidents. National
: aviation forums have repeatedly identified improved weather information in
: the cockpit, especially in graphical form, as a key strategy for reducing
: weather-related accidents.With Honeywell's Data Link Weather, General
: Aviation pilots can experience a new level of situational awareness and
: flight safety
:
: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
: It has only been in the last year or so that Bendix-King introduced their
: KDR 610 XM reveiver....
:
:

That is exactly what I had in mind. Odd that is does not get the press that Garmin and XM get...

[601XL Builder]

Blueskies wrote:
> "Bill Denton" > wrote in message . ..
> :I guess nobody pays any attention to poor old Bendix-King any more...
> :
> : Prior to the advent of XM, Bendix-King offered their own version of inflight
> : weather using ground-based stations.
> :
> : From:
> : https://www3.bendixking.com/wingman/commoncwasso?customdata=sso.fis.page
> -----------------------------------------------
> : General Aviation's first high-speed broadcast weather network makes flying
> : safer, easier and more enjoyable.
> : The nationwide system uses a network of Honeywell ground stations to uplink
> : a broad range of free and fee-based aeronautical data. As part of an FAA
> : program called Flight Information Services (FIS), Honeywell has been granted
> : use of two frequencies to broadcast weather throughout the United States.
> : Utilizing a newly designed, wholly-owned network of 150-plus ground
> : stations, pilots are able to receive high-resolution graphical weather
> : products that are updated automatically with no impact on pilot workload.
> :
> : Weather is one of the leading factors cited in aviation accidents. National
> : aviation forums have repeatedly identified improved weather information in
> : the cockpit, especially in graphical form, as a key strategy for reducing
> : weather-related accidents.With Honeywell's Data Link Weather, General
> : Aviation pilots can experience a new level of situational awareness and
> : flight safety
> :
> : ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> : It has only been in the last year or so that Bendix-King introduced their
> : KDR 610 XM reveiver....
> :
> :
>
> That is exactly what I had in mind. Odd that is does not get the press that Garmin and XM get...
>
>


It's not odd at all. It's not an open service meaning you have to use
their expensive hardware.

[Blueskies]

"601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiacona@suddenlinkDOTnet> wrote in message ...
: Blueskies wrote:
> :
: >
: > That is exactly what I had in mind. Odd that is does not get the press that Garmin and XM get...
: >
: >
:
:
: It's not odd at all. It's not an open service meaning you have to use
: their expensive hardware.

Sirius and XM are both closed systems that require their expensive hardware. I was just reading in Avweek that XM has
over 800 ground stations to supplement their signals, and Sirius, because of their three '24 hour' satellites, only has
a few hundred ground stations. Neither of these systems has ever made any money, and the are making very bad business
decisions ($500 million for Stern?!).

I think it is odd that they get all this press...

[Bill Denton]

I'm afraid I have to take issue with most of your statements here...

First consider XM Radio and Sirius, both of which are audio-only services.

In order to receive the satellite signal, you must have an unobstructed line
of sight between the satellite and the receiving antenna. That's not much of
a problem if you live out in the middle of Kansas or Arizona someplace.

But if you live in someplace like Chicago, when you go downtown in your car
you are almost guaranteed not to have that line of sight, because it's
blocked by all the buildings. There are also numerous places where you might
be stuck under an overpass or in a tunnel for a few minutes. Again, no line
of site.

So, the satellite radio providers install low power repeaters to handle
these dead spots. You're trucking along listening to satellite radio and you
get stuck in a tunnel waiting for the light to change. No more satellite
signal. So your radio just grabs the signal from the repeater which has been
installed to provide coverage in the tunnel. When you come out of the
tunnel, it goes back to satellite reception. NOTE: I know that there is some
buffering and other tricks that are used, but they aren't really germane to
this discussion.

That's why you have the repeaters.

Now for the equipment. I just went to www.bestbuy.com, and they offer both
XM and Sirius receivers for under $60.00. Since I spent nearly $200.00 on my
MP3 player I don't consider $60.00 to be expensive.

While both XM and Sirius offer receivers, you don't have to buy the
equipment from them. If you don't want to buy your receiver from them you
can go to Best Buy or Ace's Radio Ranch or wherever and buy equipment that
will work with their system.

Now let's get back to aviation...

Sirius doesn't offer weather, so we have to look at XM only. They don't sell
any equipment that I can find. On their "equipment" web page all they have
is links to companies such as Garmin and Avidyne and folks like that. Once
again, you can buy your equipment wherever you want to.

For a total store-bought solution you can get XM Weather and XM Radio on the
Garmin GPSMAP 496 for about $2,500.00. And that comes with a free GPS. If
you're willing to roll your own you can get it even cheaper.

I will agree with you that both XM Radio and Sirius are paying way too much
for their "talent"...



"Blueskies" > wrote in message
t...
>
> "601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiacona@suddenlinkDOTnet> wrote in message
...
> : Blueskies wrote:
> > :
> : >
> : > That is exactly what I had in mind. Odd that is does not get the press
that Garmin and XM get...
> : >
> : >
> :
> :
> : It's not odd at all. It's not an open service meaning you have to use
> : their expensive hardware.
>
> Sirius and XM are both closed systems that require their expensive
hardware. I was just reading in Avweek that XM has
> over 800 ground stations to supplement their signals, and Sirius, because
of their three '24 hour' satellites, only has
> a few hundred ground stations. Neither of these systems has ever made any
money, and the are making very bad business
> decisions ($500 million for Stern?!).
>
> I think it is odd that they get all this press...
>
>
>
>
>

[Blueskies]

Both XM and Sirius use their own proprietary methods; that is one of the problems they will have if/when the merge. All
receivers are licensed by them. It is interesting that the US gov't has recently required that they build receivers that
can receive signals from either system.

"The companies, under a mandate from the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC), already are working together on
development of a radio that could receive signals from both satellite constellations. "



"Bill Denton" > wrote in message t...
: I'm afraid I have to take issue with most of your statements here...
:
: First consider XM Radio and Sirius, both of which are audio-only services.
:
: In order to receive the satellite signal, you must have an unobstructed line
: of sight between the satellite and the receiving antenna. That's not much of
: a problem if you live out in the middle of Kansas or Arizona someplace.
:
: But if you live in someplace like Chicago, when you go downtown in your car
: you are almost guaranteed not to have that line of sight, because it's
: blocked by all the buildings. There are also numerous places where you might
: be stuck under an overpass or in a tunnel for a few minutes. Again, no line
: of site.
:
: So, the satellite radio providers install low power repeaters to handle
: these dead spots. You're trucking along listening to satellite radio and you
: get stuck in a tunnel waiting for the light to change. No more satellite
: signal. So your radio just grabs the signal from the repeater which has been
: installed to provide coverage in the tunnel. When you come out of the
: tunnel, it goes back to satellite reception. NOTE: I know that there is some
: buffering and other tricks that are used, but they aren't really germane to
: this discussion.
:
: That's why you have the repeaters.
:
: Now for the equipment. I just went to www.bestbuy.com, and they offer both
: XM and Sirius receivers for under $60.00. Since I spent nearly $200.00 on my
: MP3 player I don't consider $60.00 to be expensive.
:
: While both XM and Sirius offer receivers, you don't have to buy the
: equipment from them. If you don't want to buy your receiver from them you
: can go to Best Buy or Ace's Radio Ranch or wherever and buy equipment that
: will work with their system.
:
: Now let's get back to aviation...
:
: Sirius doesn't offer weather, so we have to look at XM only. They don't sell
: any equipment that I can find. On their "equipment" web page all they have
: is links to companies such as Garmin and Avidyne and folks like that. Once
: again, you can buy your equipment wherever you want to.
:
: For a total store-bought solution you can get XM Weather and XM Radio on the
: Garmin GPSMAP 496 for about $2,500.00. And that comes with a free GPS. If
: you're willing to roll your own you can get it even cheaper.
:
: I will agree with you that both XM Radio and Sirius are paying way too much
: for their "talent"...
:
:
:
: "Blueskies" > wrote in message
: t...
: >
: > "601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiacona@suddenlinkDOTnet> wrote in message
: ...
: > : Blueskies wrote:
: > > :
: > : >
: > : > That is exactly what I had in mind. Odd that is does not get the press
: that Garmin and XM get...
: > : >
: > : >
: > :
: > :
: > : It's not odd at all. It's not an open service meaning you have to use
: > : their expensive hardware.
: >
: > Sirius and XM are both closed systems that require their expensive
: hardware. I was just reading in Avweek that XM has
: > over 800 ground stations to supplement their signals, and Sirius, because
: of their three '24 hour' satellites, only has
: > a few hundred ground stations. Neither of these systems has ever made any
: money, and the are making very bad business
: > decisions ($500 million for Stern?!).
: >
: > I think it is odd that they get all this press...
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
:
:

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Blueskies wrote:
> "601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiacona@suddenlinkDOTnet> wrote in message
> ...
>> Blueskies wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> That is exactly what I had in mind. Odd that is does not get the
>>> press that Garmin and XM get...
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> It's not odd at all. It's not an open service meaning you have to use
>> their expensive hardware.
>
> Sirius and XM are both closed systems that require their expensive
> hardware. I was just reading in Avweek that XM has over 800 ground
> stations to supplement their signals, and Sirius, because of their
> three '24 hour' satellites, only has a few hundred ground stations.
> Neither of these systems has ever made any money, and the are making
> very bad business decisions ($500 million for Stern?!).
>
> I think it is odd that they get all this press...

I couldn't agree more about Stern or the business decisions but they are
open as compared to the other system we were talking about because there are
several makers of the hardware and that lowers the price of the hardware.

As far as the 800 ground stations are concerned that is more for the radio
end of the business than the weather end. People just insist on driving
there cars on streets that happen to be between tall buildings.

I haven't done any research on Sirius and don't know what you mean by "24
hour" satellites but XM's two birds, "Rock" and "Roll" have given me 1000's
of hours of listening enjoyment and are worth every dime of the subscription
fees I've paid. When my plane is finished it will have my 3rd XM receiver in
it and it will be part of a Garmin 496. I had always planned to install an
XM receiver in the plane for the audio. It was just a nice surprise when
they added the WX service.

[Blueskies]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message ...
: I couldn't agree more about Stern or the business decisions but they are
: open as compared to the other system we were talking about because there are
: several makers of the hardware and that lowers the price of the hardware.
:
: As far as the 800 ground stations are concerned that is more for the radio
: end of the business than the weather end. People just insist on driving
: there cars on streets that happen to be between tall buildings.
:
: I haven't done any research on Sirius and don't know what you mean by "24
: hour" satellites but XM's two birds, "Rock" and "Roll" have given me 1000's
: of hours of listening enjoyment and are worth every dime of the subscription
: fees I've paid. When my plane is finished it will have my 3rd XM receiver in
: it and it will be part of a Garmin 496. I had always planned to install an
: XM receiver in the plane for the audio. It was just a nice surprise when
: they added the WX service.
:
:

Sirius has three birds circling the globe on 24 hour orbits, two of them 'visible' in the sky over the US at any time.
This gives them a more northern position and therefore better coverage and less repeaters required.

I wonder how many 'repeaters' you would need to cover the whole USA without using any satellites?

[601XL Builder]

Blueskies wrote:
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message ...
> : I couldn't agree more about Stern or the business decisions but they are
> : open as compared to the other system we were talking about because there are
> : several makers of the hardware and that lowers the price of the hardware.
> :
> : As far as the 800 ground stations are concerned that is more for the radio
> : end of the business than the weather end. People just insist on driving
> : there cars on streets that happen to be between tall buildings.
> :
> : I haven't done any research on Sirius and don't know what you mean by "24
> : hour" satellites but XM's two birds, "Rock" and "Roll" have given me 1000's
> : of hours of listening enjoyment and are worth every dime of the subscription
> : fees I've paid. When my plane is finished it will have my 3rd XM receiver in
> : it and it will be part of a Garmin 496. I had always planned to install an
> : XM receiver in the plane for the audio. It was just a nice surprise when
> : they added the WX service.
> :
> :
>
> Sirius has three birds circling the globe on 24 hour orbits, two of them 'visible' in the sky over the US at any time.
> This gives them a more northern position and therefore better coverage and less repeaters required.
>
> I wonder how many 'repeaters' you would need to cover the whole USA without using any satellites?
>
>
>

Well I did a little research now and can see that Sirius doesn't use
Geostationary orbit which I found very surprising. According to
Wikipedia they at least had plans to ad an additional Sat that is in
Geostationary orbit. This might change with the merger.

I also learned that XM has added a 3rd Sat "Rhythm" at 85* west. Both
Rock & Roll are located at 115* west.

To answer you question about how many ground transmitters you would need
to cover the US well if you were to drive to every place in the US how
many radio stations would you have to tune in to have coverage everyplace?

The ground repeaters XM uses have nothing to do with the Aviation Wx we
are using. They might not even me retransmitting that data. Oh and those
800 repeaters are serve only 60 cities. They are very low powered. I
don't see what you think might be gained by either Aviation or regular
users by just using ground stations.

[Blueskies]

"601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiacona@suddenlinkDOTnet> wrote in message ...
: The ground repeaters XM uses have nothing to do with the Aviation Wx we
: are using. They might not even me retransmitting that data. Oh and those
: 800 repeaters are serve only 60 cities. They are very low powered. I
: don't see what you think might be gained by either Aviation or regular
: users by just using ground stations.
:


Seems it would be cheaper to deploy and maintain ground stations...don't know.

[601XL Builder]

Blueskies wrote:
> "601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiacona@suddenlinkDOTnet> wrote in message ...
> : The ground repeaters XM uses have nothing to do with the Aviation Wx we
> : are using. They might not even me retransmitting that data. Oh and those
> : 800 repeaters are serve only 60 cities. They are very low powered. I
> : don't see what you think might be gained by either Aviation or regular
> : users by just using ground stations.
> :
>
>
> Seems it would be cheaper to deploy and maintain ground stations...don't know.
>
>


It's not.