Outernet 3.0: 30kbps now, 100kbps eventually - even smaller antenna


Can these antennas be cascaded eventually to increase speed? I realize hardware and software would also have to be developed as well.


Kind of. It would require two independent channels with a playout server that split the broadcast. The receiver would have two internal radios, but only one antenna would be needed. It’s definitely something we have talked about.


The day that you can pack a few radio live streams on outernet is the day that i will be dancing around for the project and i think that day is coming sooner than later too :slight_smile:


Nice info to hear. My chip died but count me as in line for the new hardware.

Hey nice call sign!


My Dreamcatcher 2.03 died in the rain. It’s a wall decoration in my shack now since the hardware is obsolete for Outernet.

I look forward to the new DreamCatcher 3.01 hardware too.

It’s really no surprise that there’s lots of hams here. Hopefully, there will be many more ham applications on Outernet beyond APRS.

–Konrad, WA4OSH


It is very gratifying to hear that outernet are returning to the Ku band

Do you know this antenna?

and I have many questions … ,. ,.
-The old outernet lighthouse will work with this new bet?
–Also the Tuner dvb-s2 hdstar geniatech?
–Any other STB linux dvb-s2 ???
-to South America which satellite have you contemplated? 113w?
-any new strategy for content on the network?

thank you very much for keeping and surviving with this exciting project for so long

as soon as the data flow is available south america I will be testing

-Dreamcatcher 3.01 only will have 512 MB RAM , why not 1gb or 2gb ?

  • which processor will you use for Dreamcatcher 3.01 version ? AllWinner A13 SoC ???


It’s an interesting flat antenna. It’s not clear if the LNB is DRO (dielectric resonator oscillator) or PLL (phase locked loop). It’s my understanding that DROs, while inexpensive, have very poor frequency stability and are suitable only for the reception of wide bandwidth carriers, such as satellite TV. From what I understand, the new Outernet will be a narrow-band SCPC signal. This will require the frequency stability that the PLL type LNB.

@Syed will have to answer the rest of your questions.

–Konrad, WA4OSH


I have taken that antenna apart. It’s a really unusual array of little single-turn helices. At that $35 it’s too expensive for us.

No, the old Lighthouse receivers won’t work, as we are not using DVB-S.

PLL LNBs are the cheapest route on the market, as the ICs are so highly integrated now.


Don’t forget, the Lighthouse can run a version of Wetek Play (http://kodi.wiki/view/WeTek_Play) that makes it a Kodi (kodi.tv) receiver when connected to the internet. Ken

  • i already use wetekplay 1 fot pirate satellite tv . . . . . .and pirate iptv on kodi. . . . . using https://libreelec.tv

  • so, not using dvb-s/s2/s2x or scpc on vsat ACM/VCM?. . . . .but you are looking for satellites of that class.
    Another mystery that only the reverse engineer could answer?

–the idea of the antenna is to see designs and explore one, more DIY, another type of approach . . . . .

-Dreamcatcher 3.01 only will have 512 MB RAM , why not 1gb or 2gb ?

  • which processor will you use for Dreamcatcher 3.01 version ? AllWinner A13 SoC ???

–any new strategy for content on the network?
(this is for me the reason why the first approach to the outernet Ku fault)


I’m looking forward to the DX Cluster being considered.



@kenbarbi @Konrad_Roeder As active and vocal community members, I’d like your feedback on EchoStar-9 vs Galaxy 28. By no means is this discussion limited to Konrad and Ken. Everyone is welcome to chime in.

The reality is that one beam is not going to be ideal for everyone in the country. Right off the bat, we are looking at 121W vs 89W. On the East Coast, we’re looking at an elevation of 21-degrees for ES9, whereas G28 is 21-degrees for the the Northwest.

EchoStar 9 at Satbeams.com

Galaxy 28 at Satbeams.com

ES9 has a 27 MHz transponder. That means that the power available, EIRP of 48.3 dBW, is spread across less bandwidth, which means we get more bang for the buck. You can also see that ES9 provides full coverage of Mexico, which could be useful for earthquake warning systems. Guatemala is also fully covered with a power level that is similar to the US.

G28 has 36-MHz transponders with most of the coverage area under 49 dBW EIRP. This difference in power and transponder bandwidth comes out to about 15kbps worth of SNR. That’s the difference between being able to provide streaming audio…or not.

No decision has been made yet, but I’d like to make one very soon. I can’t make everyone happy, but I will listen to all of the feedback. Looking forward to your thoughts.


First of all, is one contestant Echostar 9 or is it Galaxy 23? For the discussion that follows, the name should be clarified for all, Galaxy 28 of course is the other contestant.


EchoStar 9 and Galaxy 23 are the same spacecraft, but the C-band is operated by Intelsat and they call their side of the house G23.


Just curious: What Beam will be used for Europe? Astra?


Europe hasn’t been fully explored yet, but NSS-9 is a possibility.


This one?!


My mistake. I meant NSS-7


As you would expect, I prefer Galaxy 28 because it gives hi elevation angles within CONUS, and more coverage in Canada and Alaska. On Galaxy 28, Seattle would be about 26 degrees which too is low, however the East coast will be about 43 degrees. That said, these are not the areas of the world needing Outernet service, but they house the “hackers and hams” that are helping make Outernet what it is, and can best test new services and report back results to Chicago. I’m curious thou, why aren’t you going back to Galaxy 19 where you used to be? Is it too expensive?

The ultimate selection of Ku-band satellites for global coverage is going to involve many birds which should have beams aimed at the areas of the world where the internet disadvantaged reside. You can make the same argument (hi versus low elevation angles) for Forum members in Europe too, but when it comes to Africa and SE Asia/China/India, those satellites need to reach the people who would most benefit from the service. Ken


There is not a substantial cost difference between G-19 and G28. But there is a substantial difference in power level. You can see that most of the country is under a 46 dBW contour. That 3dB difference is substantial, as it directly impacts SNR and bitrate. G19 does have the best coverage , but the energy is spread across a wider area.