At the end of the day, it was ASTs clever beamforming technology from the largest phase arrays in space, which made Vodafone choose AST. Source: https://t.co/1NlILvsuqR

"Fat feeling of broadband in their hands, wherever they are". Vodafone wanted more than just IoT level speeds.

$VOD, $ASTS - Vodafone head of R&D, Luke Ibbetson, explains why their partnership with AST came about. Sharing quotes from the article: "Outrageously audacious vision" with regards to convincing Vodafone to form JV SatCo.

UNBELIEVABLE! CONGRATS TO THE BLUE ORIGIN TEAM!! @blueorigin

Whereas AST will be used specifically for Direct to Device services. Reminder: Vodacom is owned by Vodafone, so the agreement with AST is expected. However, reassurance is always nice for AST investors. https://t.co/lu7mQiO4qg

$ASTS, Starlink: Vodacom links up with Starlink on mobile backhaul, connecting their remote base stations to their core network via satellite. However, Vodacom CEO, confirms they are actively dealing with AST. It's likely Starlink and Amazon will be used for FSS and Backhaul.

Just to share my thought process. LTE defines bands to be used in 1.4, 3, 5, 10 and 20 MHz channels. When account Downlink and Uplink, it's x2. FirstNet has the full 10+10 channel. If I recall, b5 was 5+5 for certain scenarios. And for b12 it's either 1.4+1.4 or 3+3.

My best guess! I can't remember if Verizon Band 13 was on the SCS filings or not. Hard to find without access to government database.. If not, it's possible AST is giving AT&T b12 as 6 MHz instead. Other option: Ligado -> 45 MHz b14 -> 20 MHz b5 -> 10 MHz b12 -> 6 MHz = 81 MHz

I found the below quote interesting regarding the revenue generation for operators in providing B2B solutions. D2D and NTN will be a very powerful tool in the years to come for the off-premise element of private networks.

$ASTS - Nice article regarding Mobile Private Networks and how D2D plays into it. The article indicates low bandwidth operators such as Iridium or Globalstar are likely not a good option for MPN. However, they did indicate AST, Starlink and Lynk, esp AST. https://t.co/4FsklZWcQC

Will be interesting to keep an eye out on Jio. With ASTS already having a partnership with Vodafone Idea, it wouldn't be surprising if Starlink gets a partnership with one of Jio or Airtel, especially since they have existing partnerships for broadband.

JIO: On November 5th, in a response to India's regulatory group, TRAI, the company urged to auction S and L Band spectrum for D2D services. They cite both Starlink and Globalstar. Interestingly, neither have L-Band. https://t.co/5bEeEkPjMz Source: https://t.co/FHl9XuUq6u

Food for thought. Amazon has recently claimed a view on 6G NTN that all 6G UEs must support Satellite NTN Access upon inception. Fierce has opined that 6G may support up to 1 trillion UEs. So if both come true, NTN will support up to 1T devices. https://t.co/ecmgVaEm9m

and providing satellite assistance to the UE. The system only works if the UE and Satellites know exactly when and how to adapt to varying doppler and delay. A solution that adapts to the different geometries of a UE-Satellite connection.

4. Don't rely just on signal strength for handover decisions. It can be misleading and lead to wrong decisions. AST believes efforts made in 5G are a good step forward. But you can only do so much by extending timers, number of retransmission attempts (4/n)

How does AST propose to address this: 1. Predictive timing windows to ensure UE can properly synchronize with the satellite. 2. Do not waste effort on futile access attempts, saving battery life. 3. Rach-less Handovers and Sat Re-Sync when confident on synchronization. (3/n)

Why does performance fare worse at low elevations: 1. Larger Path Loss 2. Higher Doppler 3. Shorter Dwell Time 4. Obstructions from buildings and nature. 5. Uplink stability, even when Downlink appears fine. Source: AST SpaceMobile (2/n)

$ASTS proposes that the 3GPP 6G NTN design must consider worst-case scenario when judging the economic feasibility and robustness of an NTN network. The worst case scenario occurs when the satellites are at low elevation angles, compared to directly overhead the UE (1/n).

But if Starlink were to use the DL H-Block for MSS to be paired with 2180-2200 UL, then what is the purpose for the 1695-1710 spectrum purchase? Perhaps someone can help me understand the strategy behind the purchase.

it would be used either for broadcast-only or for supplementary downlink (CA). The other option is the DL H-Block can be contiguous with the n252 spectrum (2000-2020) to get an additional 5 MHz DL, but 3GPP likely needs to create a new band to do so. (2/n)