Blog

A post-WRC-19 assessment of the spectrum policy for satellite

The satellite industry's worst fears did not materialise at WRC-19 and it declared itself pleased with the result. Existing services gained some protection against 5G in 26 GHz and 40 GHz but not in exactly the way the sector had hoped. There was good news for satellite in 28 GHz: HAPs was not given co-primary status and ESIMs (Earth stations in motion) were given access to provide higher speed broadband. Perhaps…
| Martin Sims
The satellite industry's worst fears did not materialise at WRC-19 and it declared itself pleased with the result. Existing services gained some protection against 5G in 26 GHz and 40 GHz but not in exactly the way the sector had hoped. There was good news for satellite in 28 GHz: HAPs was not given co-primary status and ESIMs (Earth stations in motion) were given access to provide higher speed broadband. Perhaps the most historic decision for the sector was amending the radio regulations to open up safety at sea satellite services to competition in the shape of Iridium, which plans to start offering services this year.  
Some important satellite issues were also put on the agenda for WRC-23, including additional spectrum; allowing some bands to be used by non-GSO services; and inter-satellite links in the Ka-band. The full overview is available as part of our Spectrum Research Service, as well as in-depth analysis of leading satellite players.

Blog

Bands:
28 GHz,  28 GHz
Location:
Global
Img Alt

Newsletter

Discover why hundreds of regulators and technology companies use our services

SUBSCRIBE
Comments
Telefónica criticises EU Orange/MásMóvil merger decision
The Spanish government approved the..." by Mirva Villa
Mar 13, 2024
Exclusive: Director of the ITU Radiocommunication Bureau on WRC-23 
Noted and amended. Many thanks Nikolai." by Laura Sear
Mar 13, 2024
Exclusive: Director of the ITU Radiocommunication Bureau on WRC-23 
Not everyone knows that NOW4WRC23..." by Nikolai Shienok
Mar 13, 2024
Regulators should prioritise social welfare, not infrastructure targets
Richard, thanks for amending the text...." by Nikolai Shienok
Feb 16, 2024
Regulators should prioritise social welfare, not infrastructure targets
Thanks for spotting this Nikolai. We've..." by Richard Haas
Feb 16, 2024