Talk:Ligado Networks/Archives/2017

Proposing more updates to improve this page

Hi there, I'm here with a new round of updates. I have prepared a new draft of this article and posted the whole thing to my user space. Due to the breadth of the rewrite I prepared, I will bring proposed changes to this Talk page section-by-section; that way each section can get a proper review from Wikipedia editors. However, editors can also look at a diff I created to show exactly how my full version differs from the existing entry.

It makes sense to start updating the Origins section. My draft changes the title of the section to History, includes independent, third-party sources and elaborates on the company's history. The current Origins section deals exclusively with the early stages of the company. My draft provides a History section showing the full evolution of the company over the years, including major milestones that are missing from the existing entry.

As noted here in the past, I have a conflict of interest as this request is made on behalf of Ligado Networks (via The Glover Park Group).

As always, I'm happy to answer any questions. Thanks in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 19:30, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

I have not reviewed the Origins section in detail, but I will lodge an objection against the Interference issues section as it currently stands in the draft, which waters down the GPS interference issue too far for my taste. The article explains in technical detail why GPS interference would occur; the draft cuts that all out. Ideally, there should be a less technical, but still detailed explanation of why GPS interference in the L-band would happen, and I'm also displeased that the Garmin study was cut out. I think your edit request for those sections will have a greater chance of being accepted if you address those issues. Thanks, Altamel (talk) 04:47, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks so much for taking a look, Altamel. With the Interference issues section, I was trying to make it less technical, but I'm happy to revisit the issues you noted and update my draft. Meantime, please let me know if you have questions on Origins. Thanks! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 18:44, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Pinging Dormskirk, Hangingonthetelephone and Altamel to see if there is any interest in reviewing my History draft? As I have noted here previously, the existing Origins section deals exclusively with the early years of the company and misses major milestones of the evolution of the company. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thanks! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 22:06, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

(PS: Altamel, I've been looking at how to adjust the Interference issues section draft and am hoping to update my user space draft soon, I just had to check some details with Ligado and am waiting on their reply. 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 22:06, 13 January 2017 (UTC))

Hi - I have imported your draft. The Interference issues section does look quite light now and I certainly would not have an issue if another editor wants to add back in some of the material in the previous version. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 22:37, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Dormskirk! And I appreciate your note re: Interference issues. I may be back here soon with some suggestions on content to integrate there. For now, I'm marking this request as complete. Thanks again, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 15:33, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Interference issues

Hi again! Pinging Dormskirk and Altamel to review a suggested revised version of Interference issues, below. Again, I'm trying to make this less technical than what was there before, but have updated to add more detail per your feedback. Specifically, this draft adds the Garmin study and a paragraph explaining the basis of the interference issues.

Interference issues

Interference issues

LightSquared's plan for standalone-terrestrial broadband services met resistance over potential interference issues with GPS systems.

In a January 12, 2011, letter to the FCC, National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) chief Lawrence Strickling said that LightSquared's hybrid mobile broadband services raise "significant interference concerns" and that several federal agencies wanted the FCC to defer action on LightSquared until the concerns were addressed.

On January 20, 2011, GPS industry representatives sent a letter to the FCC, sharing a study by Garmin International that said "widespread, severe GPS jamming will occur" if LightSquared's plans were approved. The study used two GPS models and simulated LightSquared transmitters.

Testing showed that LightSquared's proposed ground-based transmissions could "overpower" the fainter GPS signals from space-based satellites. With the band close to those GPS signals, "GPS devices could pick up the stronger LightSquared signals and become overloaded or saturated".

On February 17, 2011, former Deputy Secretary of Defense Bill Lynn, along with the head of the USAF Space Command, Gen. William L. Shelton, expressed concerns about potential GPS interference from the LightSquared network.

On April 5, 2011, with respect to concerns raised by the U.S. GPS Industry Council and NTIA about LightSquared’s proposed operations, the FCC stated that LightSquared could not commence offering a commercial terrestrial service until the agency concluded that the harmful interference concerns had been resolved.

References

Markup

===Interference issues===
LightSquared's plan for standalone-terrestrial broadband services met resistance over potential interference issues with GPS systems.

In a January 12, 2011, letter to the FCC, [[National Telecommunications and Information Administration]] (NTIA) chief Lawrence Strickling said that LightSquared's hybrid mobile broadband services raise "significant interference concerns" and that several federal agencies wanted the FCC to defer action on LightSquared until the concerns were addressed. <ref>{{cite web | url=http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=860737 |title=NTIA letter to FCC |date=January 12, 2011 |work=Federal Communications Commission |accessdate=April 14, 2011}}</ref>

On January 20, 2011, GPS industry representatives sent a letter to the FCC, sharing a study by Garmin International that said "widespread, severe GPS jamming will occur" if LightSquared's plans were approved.<ref name=Baruch11>{{cite web |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110209074513/http://www.gpsworld.com/gnss-system/signal-processing/lightsquared-jamming-report-11030 |title=Notice of Ex Parte presentation in LightSquared Subsidiary LLC application for modification of authority for ancillary terrestrial component, File No. SAT-MOD-20101118-00239 |date=20 January 2011 |publisher=GPS World |accessdate=28 December 2016}}</ref> The study used two GPS models and simulated LightSquared transmitters.<ref name=Baruch11/>

Testing showed that LightSquared's proposed ground-based transmissions could "overpower" the fainter GPS signals from space-based satellites. With the band close to those GPS signals, "GPS devices could pick up the stronger LightSquared signals and become overloaded or saturated".<ref name=GPSgov>{{cite web |url=http://www.gps.gov/spectrum/lightsquared/ |title=LightSquared and GPS |publisher=GPS.gov |accessdate=28 December 2016}}</ref>

On February 17, 2011, former Deputy Secretary of Defense [[William J. Lynn III|Bill Lynn]], along with the head of the [[USAF Space Command]], Gen. [[William L. Shelton]], expressed concerns about potential GPS interference from the LightSquared network.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/02/17/new-wireless-tech-jams-gps/|title=New Wireless Tech Jams GPS|date=17 February 2011|publisher=DoD Buzz|accessdate=18 February 2011}}</ref>

On April 5, 2011, with respect to concerns raised by the U.S. GPS Industry Council and NTIA about LightSquared’s proposed operations, the FCC stated that LightSquared could not commence offering a commercial terrestrial service until the agency concluded that the harmful interference concerns had been resolved.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-57A1.doc |title=FCC Order, Fixed and Mobile Services in the Mobile Satellite Service Bands at 1525-1559 MHz and 1626.5-1660.5 MHz, 1610-1626.5 MHz and 2483.5-2500 MHz, and 2000-2020 MHz and 2180-2200 MHz |date=April 5, 2011 |publisher=FCC.Gov | page=13}}</ref>

What do you both think of this suggested version? Does this help resolve the concerns you have about the level of detail in the section? Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks again, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 21:59, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Looks good - much better detail. Thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 22:53, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Great! I'm glad to hear that this version addresses that issue. Let me know if there are any other questions or concerns. Thanks again, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 16:04, 26 January 2017 (UTC)