Transcript 3rd SADC WRC-07 MEETING 04 – 06 JUNE 2007 INDABA …

Agenda Item: 1.12
Title: Extension of current worldwide
allocation to the Earth exploration–satellite
(active) service in the frequency band 9300–
9900 MHz
ITU-R Group: WP7C
RSA Rapporteur: Dr. Adrian Tiplady
Relevant
Resolution/s
RESOLUTION 651 (WRC-12)
Possible extension of the current worldwide
allocation to the Earth exploration-satellite (active)
service in the frequency band 9 300-9 900 MHz by
up to 600 MHz within the frequency bands 8 700-9
300 MHz and/or 9 900-10 500 MHz
Issues
 Growing demand for increased resolution of
global environmental mapping, achieved through
increased bandwidth (600 MHz) to achieve 1.2
GHz contiguous bandwidth
 Compatibility studies required to consider:
 EESS(active) and existing services in bands under
consideration, to ensure protection of existing services
 Unwanted OOB emissions affecting Space Research Service
in 8,400 – 8,500 MHz
 Unwanted OOB emissions affecting Space Research Service,
Radio Astronomy Service and EESS (passive) in 10,600 –
10,700 MHz
Frequency Bands
under consideration
• Current worldwide allocation:
– 9,300 MHz – 9,900 MHz
• Bands under consideration:
– 8,700 MHz – 9,300 MHz
– 9,900 MHz – 10,500 MHz
Summary of Relevant
ITU SG/WP Progress
 WP7C Meeting May 2014 (next in October 2014)
 Preliminary reports and studies
 DN ITU-R RS.[EESS-9GHz_OOBE] – Sharing between EESS (active)
and OOB emissions with the SRS in 8 400 8 500 MHz and RAS
and other passive services in 10.6-10.7 GHz.
 For protection of RAS and other passive services, further mitigation
measures discussed with WP 7B (SRS) and WP 7D (RAS). APPROVED
 PDN ITU-R RS.[EESS-9GHz_FS/MS/AS] – Sharing between EESS
(active) and the fixed service in bands 8 700 - 8 750 MHz and 10
000-10 500 MHz
 Completed, but further questions raised regarding protection margins
for FS. APPROVAL FOR NEXT MEETING
 PDN ITU-R RS.[EESS-9GHz_RDS] - Sharing of wideband EESS SAR
transmissions with stations in RDS in the bands 8 700-9 300
MHz and 9 900-10 500
 Liaison statement to WP5B, indicating 8,700 – 9,200 MHz no longer
under consideration. APPROVAL FOR NEXT MEETING
Summary of Relevant
ITU SG/WP Progress
 Proposed new Recommendations for Mitigation
 PDN ITU-R RS.[EESS9GHz-RAS-MITIGATION] - Protection of RAS
in band 10.6-10.7 GHz from unwanted OOB from synthetic
aperture radars operating in EESS (active) around 9 600 MHz
 Agreed at WP7C in close liaison with WP7D. Further discussion
required at next meeting, as various operational aspects to be
considered
 PDN ITU-R RS.[EESS9GHz-SRS-MITIGATION] - Protection of SRS
space-to-earth links in the 8 400 8 450 MHz and 8 450 8 500
MHz bands from unwanted OOB from synthetic aperture radars
operating in the EESS (active) around 9 600 MHz
 Agreed at WP7C in close liaison with WP7B. Further discussion
required at next meeting, due to various operational mitigation
measures and further engagement required.
Summary of Relevant
ITU SG/WP Progress
Study Highlights (Existing in-band
allocations)
 Sharing between EESS & RDS
 9,000 – 9,200 MHz not retained due to lack of guidance from ITU
on processing gain, and safety critical service of ARNS
 As a result, 8,700 MHz – 9,000 MHz no longer considered as it
would not provide a contiguous 1,200 MHz band
 9,300 MHz – 10,000 MHz already studied, indicating no
interference
 10,000 MHz – 10,500 MHz may result in interference 0.00001% *
N, where N = number of systems, of time over 11 days
 Sharing between EESS & FS/MS
 Feasible
 Sharing between EESS & Amateur RS / Amateur RSS
 Very limited interference (0.004% of the time)
Summary of Relevant
ITU SG/WP Progress
Study Highlights (OOB Emissions)
Space Research Service (SRS) – 8,400 – 8,450 MHz
(deep space), 8,450 – 8,500 MHz (near earth)
 For normal operations, 77dB attenuation required for deep space,
31dB attenuation required for near earth
 SRS Receiver damage by:
 71dB if 8,700 – 9,300 MHz
 9dB if 9,000 – 9,300 MHz and 9,900 – 10,200 MHz
 2dB if 9,900 – 10,500 MHz
 Operational mitigation strategies exist
 Radio Astronomy Service (RAS) – 10,600 – 10,700 MHz
 63dB attenuation required to reduce to 2% allowable data loss
 Operational mitigation strategies exist
 SRS (passive) & EESS (passive) – 10,600 – 10,700 MHz
 No interference expected
Method(s) to satisfy
the agenda Item
 Method A - Primary EESS (active) allocation in
the frequency band 9 900-10 500 MHz.
 Method A1 – Add primary allocation: Shall impose that EESS
shall not cause harmful interference to, nor claim protection
from, radio location service allocated in the frequency band 9
900-10 500 MHz. In addition, the extension band shall only be
used by EESS (active) systems requiring a bandwidth greater
than 600 MHz that cannot be accommodated in the frequency
band 9 300-9 900 MHz. The protection of radio astronomy
service in the frequency band 10.6-10.7 GHz will be ensured
through Recommendation incorporated by reference in the RR.
 Method A2 - Add primary allocation, subject to inclusion of
technical and regulatory constraints in the RR: As above, but
inclusions will ensure protection for radiolocation and fixed
services (ensured through footnote in RR with pfd-limit).
Method(s) to satisfy
the agenda Item
 Method B - Primary EESS (active) allocation in
the frequency bands 9 200-9 300 MHz and 9 900
10 400 MHz.
 Impose that EESS (active) shall not cause harmful
interference to, nor claim protection from the radio
determination services allocated in the frequency bands 9
200-9 300 MHz and 9 900-10 400 MHz. In addition, the
extension band shall only be used by EESS (active) systems
requiring a bandwidth greater than 600 MHz that cannot
be accommodated in the frequency band 9 300-9 900 MHz.
The protection of radio astronomy service in the frequency
band 10.6-10.7 GHz will be ensured through
Recommendation incorporated by reference in the RR.
Method(s) to satisfy
the agenda Item
Method A1
Advantages
 Achieves required 600 MHz for EESS
 Provides explicit protection of radiolocation service
Disadvantages
 None
Method A2
Advantages
 As above, but also specifies provisions for protection of FS
Disadvantages
 Depending on value of pfd limit, may place undue
constraints on EESS
Method(s) to satisfy
the agenda Item
Method B
Advantages
Achieves required 600 MHz for EESS
Provides an explicit requirement for protection of the
RLS and the RNS by footnote
Disadvantages
None
Preliminary SA
Position
Method A2 or B
A2 provides stronger protection
measures for radiolocation and fixed
services
B provides for explicit protection
requirement for radiolocation and
radionavigation services, whilst also
reducing potential impact as a result
of unwanted OOB emissions (larger
guard band)
Conclusion
No significant controversy
Discussions ongoing regarding
mitigation techniques
Responsibility of coordination
should be on EESS operators, not
SRS/RAS