Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
All is well with GTE.
Regardless of what happens (delist or not) with GTE the bottom line is will they produce. Get signed contracts and grow the company. That is what they told they were trying to accomplish. If Tim and company take care of business the results will take care of the stock price. We haven't quite gotten there yet, however we are trying. As I stated before and I will say again as we move forward and become more successful the attacks will be worse from places we could never dream up. Our management picked this fight. They have been boasting how we are going to change the way we communicate. We have been basically telling certain business sectors that we are going to take away some (plenty) of your market. Do we expect these players to sit back and do nothing? We started the WAR and now we must fight to the finish.
Verizon Project Hitting Some Bumps
http://www.courant.com/business/hc-verizon0706.artjul06,0,5489047.story?coll=hc-headlines-business
Verizon Project Hitting Some Bumps
Upgrade Damaging Utility Pipes, Cables
BY STEPHANIE STOUGHTON
Associated Press
July 6 2006
RICHMOND, Va. -- In Pat Wilcox's yard, Verizon workers laying the groundwork for a revolution in communications quickly turned their efforts to a more pressing project: putting out a fire they sparked by crossing two electric wires.
By the time firefighters arrived, the wind-whipped flames had engulfed overhead utility lines and melted a chain-link fence.
"There wasn't much anybody could do till the fire department got there," said Wilcox, whose son's canoe was ruined in the March blaze in suburban Richmond. "It was burning so hot."
The damage bills won't be the last paid by Verizon Communications Inc. as it continues with its largest-ever construction project, which involves replacing a copper-wire network with fiber-optic cables.
New York-based Verizon is spending billions on the upgrade so its network can deliver video on demand and hundreds of channels of high-definition television, as well as Internet connections hundreds of times faster than most broadband lines.
So far, the path to the future has been marked by more than a few ruptured utility pipes, split cables and dug-up driveways.
Verizon officials acknowledge start-up problems with their FiOS project, but they also say they have seen a dramatic decline in the number of damage incidents since it began in 2004.
"It was definitely growing pains for us," said Chris Creager, Verizon senior vice president for operations in the Mid-Atlantic region.
Some officials and utilities agree that Verizon's performance has improved, but they add that this often came after stern warnings, halted jobs and stiff penalties.
Others say complaints, even if fewer in number, are to be expected wherever the project moves, and especially in communities with mostly underground pipes and cables.
"They want to do a lot of work quickly, and that's where the problems start," said Thomas Rawls, a professional engineer in the public works department of Hillsborough County, Fla., which ordered Verizon to temporarily stop work after a series of water line breaks in 2004.
Verizon's project has forced communities to hire people to monitor work and to protect their facilities - such as electric, gas and water lines.
Rawls, for instance, hired 10 temporary inspectors for about $500,000 a year and a consulting firm for $150,000.
In Anne Arundel County, Md., where Verizon hit hundreds of underground lines in its first few months of construction last year, three additional inspectors were hired, said Alex Baquie, a local public works official.
At one point, Verizon was striking 10 or 11 lines per 10,000 feet - a common industry measure.
To slow the company down, the county twice reduced the number of permits issued to Verizon to dig along municipal rights of way. It also began holding monthly performance meetings.
Those steps have helped, and Verizon's strike rate has declined to about 2 per 10,000 feet.
"It's a huge burden," Baquie said. "In addition to my normal work, I've had to become a project manager for Verizon's fiber-optic expansion."
In Virginia, damage to underground lines has declined dramatically from a peak of 247 incidents last August to 86 in May, according to figures Verizon gave the state.
Regulators learned that some of Verizon's contractors had started digging even when other utilities had not yet marked the locations of their underground lines.
In Virginia Beach, a crew had been plucked from the street and provided little or no training. Their supervisor was found sleeping in a hotel room.
Massoud Tahamtani, director of the State Corporation Commission's utility safety division, said the agency charged as much as $2,500 per violation, although some fines were reduced after contractors agreed to train workers and use less intrusive excavation methods.
Not all of the damage can be blamed on Verizon - or its contractors. Forty percent of gas-line damage in Virginia, for example, was caused by the phone company's contractors, who do almost all of the underground work.
But about 28 percent resulted from failures by utilities to properly locate their own lines. In the remaining cases, no one was assessed blame.
Thank you to all who reported on the events from the conference.
I seen the video and notice the many times Tim looked or asked for guidance when certain questions were asked. The before and after conversations you all shared was helpful to see a clearer picture of GTE's future. I do have a question. Was any update given on the military strat project? I'm still of the belief that Uncle Sam gotta have them.
Verizon Bets Big on Fiber Optic Overhaul
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20060611/D8I66KFO0.html
Jun 11, 3:07 PM (ET)
By PETER SVENSSON
MASSAPEQUA PARK, N.Y. (AP) - Lisa Donohue squats on the floor with her 2-year-old son Calum in front of their high-definition TV, watching a children's cartoon. "What kind of animal is Franklin?" she asks him. Calum is a little under the weather, and his eyes droop a bit, but they stay fixed on the turtle on the screen.
Calum probably doesn't know, but the image of Franklin's bright green skin is brought to him not by cable, satellite, or broadcast, but by pulses of light that go straight to his home here on suburban Long Island from a telephone-company building miles away, via optical fiber.
Optical fiber - strands of glass 15 times thinner than a human hair - have been used by telecommunications companies over long-haul routes since the 1980s.
Now, Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ), is making a big and expensive bet on replacing the network of copper wires that has provided phone service since the 19th century with fiber, giving it the capability to carry TV and super-fast Internet service in the bargain.
Investors have been skeptical of the plans, sending Verizon's stock down by about 20 percent since the rollout started last year, and other phone companies have not made the same gamble. Donohue, however, is happy with the service Verizon calls FiOS.
"With cable, the picture would stop. Or we'd have those digital things going," she says, gesturing to mimic the picture breaking up.
"We could get satellite, but our only tree in the garden is in the southwest corner, so we'd have to chop our only tree down" to get a clear line of sight to the satellite, she says.
The family pays about $220 a month for TV, phone, high-speed Internet service and two cell phones, which she says is cheaper than what they were paying before, when they had cable.
"It comes as one bill, which is nice because I don't have to remember to pay four times," Donohue says.
Factors like that have made Verizon's FiOS TV a success in the few areas where it's available, judging by Verizon's data. It has said that 6.5 percent of households in Massapequa Park signed up for TV in the first three months after its launch on Jan. 24. That figure is disputed by Cablevision Systems Corp. (CVC), the incumbent cable company, which said it had a net loss of less than 2 percent in the area.
Verizon has permission to sell TV service in about 80 communities in New York, Florida, Massachusetts, Maryland and Virginia. It has fiber available for phone and Internet service in many more - 3 million homes. Verizon doesn't say how many homes are connected, but analysis of a tally by research firm RVA LLC indicates that Verizon had about 400,000 homes connected as of April.
"This is a once-in-a-lifetime project," said Paul Lacouture, Verizon's vice president of engineering and technology.
Chief among fiber's advantages is its almost unlimited capacity to carry information, which Verizon only nibbles at with its current system: It lights fiber to the home with just three laser beams, though the fiber can carry many more.
The single beam that carries video (the others carry data and telephone calls to and from the home) has more capacity than an entire coaxial cable of the kind used by cable companies.
In practical terms, that means better image quality, because the digital TV channels don't need to be degraded to save bandwidth.
"If you're watching a program, you see the faces elongate, smear out" on digital cable, says Alex Fazi, who as owner of a videography studio in nearby Wantagh has a keen eye for video quality. He said he'll sign up for fiber TV as soon as it's available in his area.
In a similar way, fiber provides almost limitless Internet connection speeds. With current technology, Verizon could provide download speeds of 644 megabits per second, a bigger step up from DSL at 1.5 mbps than DSL is a step up from dial-up.
But for now, the maximum speed Verizon sells is 30 mbps for small businesses, or 20 mbps for homes.
"Right now there are not a lot of applications online that demand 100 megabits," Lacouture said. That's true, but probably in large part due to the lack of home connections at that speed - a chicken and egg situation.
Speeds may be going up soon, though: Verizon already raised them once (from 5 mbps to 10 mbps at the lowest tier) in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut - the three states where it competes with Cablevision, a technologically sophisticated company that provides downloads at up to 30 mbps.
Apart from capacity, fiber has the advantage of being immune to interference and crosstalk, and nearly immune to rain, which can cause problems on the phone network.
"Customer reports have dropped by a factor of four or five when we've replaced the copper with fiber," Lacouture said.
Verizon expects to cut costs for its outside equipment by 40 percent by switching to fiber. But to get there, it has to spend big.
Verizon's average cost of pulling fiber down a street was $1,400 per home at the beginning of last year, not including the cost of actually connecting the homes. The target cost this year is $890 per home, reflecting improvements in materials and techniques. If it reaches its target of laying fiber by another 3 million homes by the end of the year, that's a cost of $2.7 billion - about half of Verizon's annual earnings.
Verizon is in essence taking the lumps as it blazes a trail for large-scale fiber deployment in the United States across its 28-state territory - it's creating the demand for equipment that allows manufacturers like Motorola Inc. (MOT) and Tellabs Inc. (TLAB) to bring down costs.
"Every month that goes by we see another improvement," Lacouture said.
A large part of the cost, however, is labor, which doesn't get cheaper by the month. Drawing fiber along a street involves digging a trench to lay it, or putting up plastic tubes on the utility poles, then pulling the fiber through the tubes.
Paul McIlrary, Verizon's area manager for outside plant construction around Massapequa, says his teams of about three people lay fiber at a speed of 25 feet to 35 feet per day in the dense Long Island suburbs. That may sound slow, but McIlrary has 90-110 linemen working to lay fiber just in Freeport, which has 45,000 inhabitants.
"With fiber, it's a light source, and any bend can distort the signal," McIlrary says. "So we have to be careful that we don't bend or kink it."
Other than that, the actual placing operation isn't much different from copper, which Verizon's people have a lot of experience with.
Home installation is another cost: the target here is $715 this year, but Verizon has acknowledged that costs are running above that target. It's a big job, at least if TV service is involved. It took the installer all day to get the Donohues up and running, for instance.
Getting a "drop cable" with fiber to the home from the nearest utility pole is the small part. The installer then attaches a large box, called an Optical Networking Terminal, to the side of the house. On the other side of the wall, he installs a backup battery, which should keep the ONT running for six hours if there is a blackout.
Then he strings coaxial cable from the box to the TV sets (Verizon will use existing coax if it's not substandard), Ethernet cable to an Internet router, and a phone line to handsets. In addition, a small box called a Network Interface Module is installed inside that needs to connect both to the coaxial and Ethernet cables.
With costs like that, it's perhaps no mystery why the other big telephone companies, like AT&T Inc. (T) and BellSouth Corp. (BLS), are focusing on upgrading their copper DSL lines rather than bringing fiber to the home (though they do draw fiber in new subdivisions). But analysts believe the DSL upgrades are stopgaps, and that the other companies will eventually move to fiber in a few years. By that time, Verizon's efforts may have made the process simpler and cheaper.
"People talk about the risks of doing this," says Michael Render, who tracks fiber buildouts for RVA, the research firm. What they should be talking about, he says, is the risk of not building out fiber. "The world is changing very rapidly."
---
On the Net:
http://www.verizon.com
EchoStar, DirecTV to Resell Broadband
Jun 9, 9:18 PM (ET)
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20060610/D8I51S8G1.html
NEW YORK (AP) - Targeting rural homes, satellite-TV providers EchoStar Communications Corp. (DISH) and DirecTV Inc. will resell broadband Internet access via satellite from WildBlue Communications Inc., WildBlue said Friday.
The agreement is a big deal for WildBlue, a privately held company based in Greenwood Village, Colo. It has about 60,000 customers in the United States. EchoStar and DirecTV have 27 million customers combined, many of them in rural areas with access to few, if any, choices for broadband Internet.
In addition to this newest distribution agreement, WildBlue inked a pact with AT&T Inc. (T) last month.
As part of the latest agreement, EchoStar and DirecTV agreed not to team up with any other satellite-broadband provider for the next five years. Other satellite services include HughesNet, which was formerly a part of DirecTV, as well as Starband and Ground Control.
The value of the transactions was not disclosed.
The recent flurry of deals shows just how far satellite broadband has come since its early days. In its earlier versions, satellite broadband was far too expensive to be practical since equipment and subscription costs came to hundreds of dollars a month. Prices have since come down, making the product appealing to a broader range of customers. However, prices are higher than cable or DSL service and speeds are lower.
WildBlue charges between $50 and $80 a month for speeds up to 1.5 megabits per second. The satellite dish and other initial equipment costs $300. WildBlue spokeswoman LaRae Marsik said it will be up to EchoStar, DirecTV and AT&T to determine how to price their customer packages since WildBlue will be serving as a wholesale provider. The companies expect to offer service this fall.
For satellite-TV providers, the service is another way to offer a full line of products. Since undergoing a $100 billion makeover in the 1990s, cable companies have flaunted their ability to offer TV, Internet and phone service. Satellite TV, by contrast, has been more limited in its ability to expand beyond TV service.
Wildblue uses a satellite operated by BCE Inc. (BCE), Canada's largest phone company. BCE is also a major owner of WildBlue. Other investors include Intelsat Ltd., the National Rural Telecommunications Cooperative, venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers and Liberty Media Holding Corp. (LINTA)
In regards to the CIC post that I posted, it is not a pump but a "factual" humerous recollection of all the PRs with the government/military connection. No, the CIC don't exist. Sorry to those that was thinking that this was a real outfit. There is no pump here. Just facts and some speculation on the Uncle Sam procuring the STRAT in the near future. I speculate this because of years of experience working in the intelligence field for the US Air Force, I believe there is no way the Goverment is not going to procure Stratellites either from us or someone.
Didn't GTE had to release info the Russian Deal because it was a material event? The problem with the Russian Deal was no earnest money or good faith money up front. A similar situation happen in Connecticut a few years back. The owner of the New England Patriots played our then Governor John Rowland and the Legislature like a fiddle. He said he wanted to move the Patriots to Hartford, CT and a contract was signed and Hartford with the assistant of the State was going to build a new stadium. He did this because the folks up north (Foxboro, Mass) wouldn't build him one so he threaten to leave and signed the contract with Hartford with the hidden agenda to only motivate Foxboro which worked. Foxboro decided to build a stadium and the owner back out the Hartford contract. I don't think there was good faith money as part of the contract so CT Attorney General threaten to sue and CT got about 2 million from the owner. Did the Russians have a hidden agenda? There have been a few posts suggesting the possibility. It is my belief that GTE will be alright in the long run. Since the Stratellite has been on the scene, so has Uncle Sam and his name keep coming out in PRs and Huff's and Jones's mouths. I'm unable to attend the SHM so if you read this message and are attending please ask "who paid for the Strats built for the military? and Where are they now?". Thanks
"Speak softly and carry a BIG Stick" our former President Teddy Roosevelt said as an approach to Foreign Policy.
GTE has been screaming loudly about our technology and how cell towers will become a thing of the past. Check out what Dumas said in his letter to us Shareholders:
Sanswire— The Stratellite. The icing on the cake of the GlobeTel strategy (and admittedly, the butt of some unfounded jokes from the tabloid financial press) is our near-space digital platform, called the Stratelliteä. This rigid airship (not a blimp, not a balloon as the pundits remind us), when it becomes operational later this year, will produce what we believe will be the single greatest revolution in communications technology in the history of the world. Sure sounds like an outlandish statement, doesn’t it? And, I admit it is hard to make such a statement in an annual report to the Shareholders of a public company. But, if the regulators will allow me to get away with saying it, I have to say it, because I firmly believe it.
What makes the Stratelliteä so special is that it will provide (i) an incredibly cheap (ii) fully-recoverable (iii) high altitude (13 miles from the surface of the earth) (iv) stable, geo-synchronous digital equipment platform— that will flood more than 125,000 square miles beneath it with every conceivable flavor of digital radio spectrum. “The Highest Tower in the Sky” is the way we think about it, except that unlike ugly cell towers which blight our landscapes and whose signals are blocked, diverted or diminished by surface obstacles (hills, trees, buildings, etc.), our Stratelliteä will have a direct, vertical, line-of-sight shot immediately beneath it with no obstacles in the way of its signals— whether broadband signals, cellphone signals, IPTV signals, data signals, infra-red photography, high resolution photography, electromagnetic sensors, radar, etc.
I believe in GTE technology and can say with a great certainty that it will move forward. The Stratellite platform is sorely needed both militarily and commercially.
The point I'm trying to make is that we have been basically telling certain business sectors that we are going to take away some (plenty) of your market. Do we expect these players to sit back and do nothing? As I said in my previous post we haven't seen nothing yet. Had GTE spoked softly instead of SHOUTED, we may have remained under the radar screen and wouldn't have to put with so much garbage. We started the WAR and now we must fight to the finish.
Repost.....
Posted by: falon
In reply to: None Date:3/20/2006 11:43:13 PM
Post #of 26733
GTE Good Press/Bad Press
You haven't seen nothing yet. As GTE evolves the pro articles will get sweeter and the con articles will get nastier. If Tim and company take care of business the results will take care of the stock price. We haven't quite gotten there yet, however we are trying. When we do start to reach certain milestones some people will write good and honest articles about us (saying we are the best thing since viagra), while others will write articles twisting the truth much worse than we seen up to now and could have ever imagined.
P.S. Remember the Strats we built for the military for a demo and Tim said he couldn't update because of something to do with classified. We should ask ourselves something WHY would U.S. want to keep something secretive if he wasn't using it or plan on using it. Me thinks a lot is going on behind the close doors that we will know when at the proper time. IMHO it is not up to Tim to support the stock price but to run the company and as I said earlier the results (closing the deal, building networks, deploying Strats, selling debit cards)will do wonders for the stock price.
The Element of Surprise
In the evolution of GTE, the element of surprise has bode well for the company. The October surprise of a Stratellite (turned out to be 2) being built in secrecy for the military/government was a shock (I wonder who paid for them). One must ask himself why the government would classify something they are not using or going to use. Then came the December surprise of the “Russian Deal”, that was pure amazement. One has to ask “how will all of this play out?” Only time will tell how these surprises turns out. Does the company have any more surprises? Makes one wonder...
GTE management have shared much with us, however based on their promising forecast, they probably have some more surprises coming. COB Dumas statement “This rigid airship (not a blimp, not a balloon as the pundits remind us), when it becomes operational later this year, will produce what we believe will be the single greatest revolution in communications technology in the history of the world.” IMHO the Stratellite is a mere platform and not much different than a cell tower or a satellite. However, what makes it revolutionary versus a cell tower is that one Stratellite can replace many cell towers and versus a satellite is that it is recoverable. One other revolutionary item about the Stratellite is not the Stratellite itself but what communications gear is to be used. This is something we will probably never find out about other than it is proprietary in nature.
There are a lot of unanswered questions about GTE and I believe based on the confidence management have in executing the business plan, the answers will unfold through “elements of surprises”. As Gomer Pyle used to tell Sgt Carter “surprise surprise surprise”.
More Annual Reports Admit Slip-Ups
April 9, 2006
http://www.courant.com/business/hc-ymreports0409.artapr09,0,1605255.story?coll=hc-headlines-business
By ANDREW LECKEY "Nobody's perfect" is a theme running through many of the 2005 annual reports that companies are circulating.
Chief executive officers are acknowledging, if only in a sentence or two of their messages to shareholders, that their companies are not infallible:
ADVERTISEMENT
"Without question, 2005 was a difficult year for Pfizer and for our investors," CEO Hank McKinnell begins.
"I made a few tough calls in 2005 that may have had a short-term impact on the stock," General Electric Co.'s Jeffrey Immelt says.
"We have communicated our commitment to cooperate fully with all investigations of accounting, brokerage commissions, sales practices and other matters," American International Group Inc.'s Martin Sullivan explains.
Because annual reports traditionally are colorful puffery, any candor is an improvement. There's also greater financial disclosure and much plainer English this year, experts said. With CEOs no longer citing the aftermath of 9/11 as an underlying reason for less-than-stellar earnings, concern has shifted to issues such as energy prices, particularly among transportation firms.
"Airlines are under so much financial pressure that many of them haven't even filed their SEC documents yet, let alone their glossy annual reports," said Nancy Davis Kho, director of business development with Global Reports LLC (www.global-reports.com) in Kensington, Md., which has a library of annual reports. "The effect of higher gas and oil prices is a topic that many CEOs are talking about in their annual report letters this year."
Some companies are still complaining in their annual report messages about the complexity and expense of Sarbanes-Oxley financial reporting, which the government required after the Enron and WorldCom scandals.
In some instances photos and artwork still divert attention from more important financial data.
"I'm looking at the 2005 Walt Disney annual report, a work of art with Johnny Depp and `Pirates of the Caribbean' on the cover, with page after page about the magic of Disney," said Michelle Leder, editor of the Footnoted.org blog that closely tracks financial filings. "Except for a brief summary inside the cover, however, it isn't until Page 57 that financials start and you actually learn something about how the company is doing."
With the exception of Berkshire Hathaway boss Warren Buffett, famous for his detailed and comprehensive letter to shareholders, CEO letters are often fluff, Leder said. She skims a report's financial footnotes before anything else because they explain how results were derived and can tip off the investor to potentially damaging lawsuits.
"The proof of the pudding is still making sure what the company writes about actually has taken place," said Kenneth Janke, chairman of the National Association of Investors Corp., which works to educate investors and investment clubs, in Madison Heights, Mich. "Corporations now tell shareholders about the potential of the industry in which they operate and whether it is No. 1, 2 or 3 in it, which is helpful."
The 10-year compound growth rate of both sales and earnings is useful information, said Janke, whose group uses the BetterInvesting.org website. Providing such historical background is a priority of electronic device-maker Gentex Corp., a 2005 national winner in the BetterInvesting Nicholson Awards for quality annual reports.
"I've written the Gentex annual report since 1988, and while we don't invest a lot of money in it, we do receive high marks for being readable and providing more financial information than is required," said Connie Hamblin, vice president of investor relations for Gentex in Zeeland, Mich. "For example, we give a 15-year financial summary, and that's a lot of years to show."
The traditional annual report, which is frequently provided online, is the colorful face that the company wishes to present to shareholders, employees and the public. It has a definite public relations feel to it.
More to the point is the Form 10-K the company must file with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 60 days after the end of the firm's fiscal year. This document includes an overview of the business that includes its products, properties, legal proceedings and financial statements for the previous fiscal year. Some cost-conscious companies in recent years have released no conventional annual report, instead providing just the 10-K filing.
When you examine an annual report, it's fine to check out the pictures because they may help you better understand the firm's products and services. But more important, you should dissect its financial information. Besides footnotes, look at the auditor's report to see whether it qualifies its approval of the company's statements. The management discussion and analysis should be candid.
Scrutinize the report's financial statements that track sales, profits, spending on research and development, inventory and debt levels over time. Be sure that you grasp the company's brands and subsidiaries. Too many investors buy stock in companies they really don't understand, which was especially a problem in the tech boom.
The annual report's sales and marketing information should make it clear where the firm makes its money. The 10-year summary of financial figures, the list of directors and officers and the stock price history are other important reads in determining where the company has been and where it is headed.
Military Strats
If public money (government) was used, it has to be disclosed (no and, if or butts about it). The use of public money for any project has nothing to do with national security. If you were to ask the question to the company was public funds used to fund the military demos; They can give you a song and dance but if public funds was used, it must be disclosed and it will show up on a SEC report. It is the LAW. Also in my opinion the miitary proto may very well be in government use. The need for strat capability is huge and the fact that it is classified bodes well. Why would the military classify something they are not going to use.
GTE Good Press/Bad Press
You haven't seen nothing yet. As GTE evolves the pro articles will get sweeter and the con articles will get nastier. If Tim and company take care of business the results will take care of the stock price. We haven't quite gotten there yet, however we are trying. When we do start to reach certain milestones some people will write good and honest articles about us (saying we are the best thing since viagra), while others will write articles twisting the truth much worse than we seen up to now and could have ever imagined.
P.S. Remember the Strats we built for the military for a demo and Tim said he couldn't update because of something to do with classified. We should ask ourselves something WHY would U.S. want to keep something secretive if he wasn't using it or plan on using it. Me thinks a lot is going on behind the close doors that we will know when at the proper time. IMHO it is not up to Tim to support the stock price but to run the company and as I said earlier the results (closing the deal, building networks, deploying Strats, selling debit cards)will do wonders for the stock price.
GTE 27 month Build-Out
Something to considered
The 600 million dollar deal is on.
The 27 monthly payments without consideration for a down payment would equal $22,222,222.22222222222. If it was a daily rate, based on a 30 day-month the payment would equal $740740.740740740740740 per day. So what ever is going to hold up the deal I believe it won't be the payments.
GTE
Hi fellow investors, traders, bashers and whoever else may be lurking. I have never seen such a knowlegeable group of people on what is transpiring with a public company. Experts galore. Less than 3 months ago the Russian deal didnot exist to us. Tim Huff has his plate full with this and other interests. GTE prior to Sanwire and Hotzone was focused on Communications Wholesale Traffic primarily and debit cards secondarily. When we acquired Sanwire and Hotzone, the focus changed and it will take time for the business to materialize. It is interesting that the U.S. military is highly interested in the STRAT to the point they want to keep it hush, hush. Question for your keen minds. If we built and tested 2 STRATS for Uncle Sam, who paid for them. Hopefully the answer will come out in the annual report. Sometimes things don't work out as we feel they should, however they eventually work out. One last question. Where or better yet what type of company would GTE be without the STRAT and Hotzone?
QUOTE / HISTORICAL QUOTES
GLOBETEL COMMUNICATIONS CORP COM NEW (AMEX:GTE)
Intraday PricesDate Time High Low Close Volume
01/06/06 08:32:48 3.700 3.700 3.700 1,000
01/06/06 08:50:48 3.780 3.780 3.780 1,000
01/06/06 08:56:48 3.760 3.760 3.760 3,000
01/06/06 09:34:17 3.740 3.740 3.740 100
01/06/06 09:35:47 3.780 3.720 3.740 21,300
01/06/06 09:38:47 3.740 3.730 3.730 9,500
01/06/06 09:40:17 3.770 3.750 3.750 3,600
01/06/06 09:41:47 3.740 3.730 3.740 2,400
01/06/06 09:43:17 3.750 3.730 3.740 4,800
01/06/06 09:44:47 3.750 3.740 3.750 3,700
01/06/06 09:46:17 3.750 3.740 3.740 5,400
01/06/06 09:47:47 3.760 3.740 3.750 21,500
01/06/06 09:49:17 3.790 3.740 3.740 30,500
01/06/06 09:50:47 3.800 3.790 3.790 16,800
01/06/06 09:52:17 3.800 3.781 3.781 11,200
01/06/06 09:53:46 3.790 3.790 3.790 1,000
01/06/06 09:55:16 3.800 3.780 3.780 17,400
01/06/06 09:56:46 3.790 3.790 3.790 1,100
01/06/06 09:58:16 3.790 3.780 3.790 11,200
01/06/06 09:59:46 3.780 3.760 3.770 4,200
01/06/06 10:01:16 3.760 3.750 3.760 18,400
01/06/06 10:02:46 3.741 3.730 3.741 3,300
01/06/06 10:04:16 3.730 3.730 3.730 1,300
01/06/06 10:05:46 3.740 3.720 3.730 38,400
01/06/06 10:07:16 3.720 3.720 3.720 800
01/06/06 10:08:46 3.729 3.710 3.710 4,700
01/06/06 10:10:16 3.729 3.720 3.720 5,800
01/06/06 10:11:46 3.720 3.710 3.720 1,800
01/06/06 10:13:16 3.700 3.690 3.700 29,100
01/06/06 10:14:46 3.690 3.650 3.690 25,500
01/06/06 10:16:16 3.680 3.660 3.660 19,800
01/06/06 10:17:46 3.700 3.660 3.690 34,300
01/06/06 10:19:16 3.710 3.690 3.690 14,600
01/06/06 10:20:46 3.719 3.700 3.711 14,400
01/06/06 10:22:16 3.700 3.670 3.680 8,100
01/06/06 10:23:46 3.690 3.670 3.670 4,100
01/06/06 10:25:16 3.700 3.670 3.670 3,300
01/06/06 10:26:46 3.710 3.690 3.700 32,100
01/06/06 10:28:16 3.710 3.690 3.710 5,600
01/06/06 10:29:46 3.700 3.690 3.700 13,500
01/06/06 10:31:16 3.700 3.690 3.690 28,200
01/06/06 10:32:46 3.700 3.680 3.700 1,300
01/06/06 10:34:16 3.701 3.700 3.700 2,500
01/06/06 10:35:46 3.700 3.700 3.700 3,600
01/06/06 10:37:16 3.700 3.690 3.700 5,500
01/06/06 10:38:46 3.698 3.690 3.690 4,500
01/06/06 10:40:15 3.690 3.690 3.690 3,500
01/06/06 10:41:45 3.690 3.660 3.690 51,700
01/06/06 10:43:15 3.680 3.650 3.660 8,100
01/06/06 10:44:45 3.690 3.660 3.660 14,000
01/06/06 10:46:15 3.660 3.650 3.660 55,600
01/06/06 10:47:45 3.690 3.650 3.660 22,900
01/06/06 10:49:15 3.650 3.640 3.650 28,000
01/06/06 10:50:45 3.650 3.640 3.650 800
01/06/06 10:52:15 3.670 3.650 3.650 6,700
01/06/06 10:53:45 3.680 3.650 3.680 4,800
01/06/06 10:55:15 3.670 3.650 3.650 1,400
01/06/06 10:58:15 3.660 3.660 3.660 500
01/06/06 10:59:45 3.660 3.650 3.660 8,400
01/06/06 11:01:15 3.660 3.650 3.660 16,600
01/06/06 11:02:45 3.650 3.650 3.650 3,800
01/06/06 11:04:15 3.660 3.650 3.660 6,600
01/06/06 11:05:45 3.650 3.650 3.650 100
01/06/06 11:07:15 3.650 3.640 3.650 12,300
01/06/06 11:08:45 3.660 3.650 3.650 6,300
01/06/06 11:10:15 3.660 3.650 3.660 2,100
01/06/06 11:11:45 3.650 3.650 3.650 1,600
01/06/06 11:13:15 3.660 3.650 3.660 17,000
01/06/06 11:14:45 3.661 3.660 3.661 300
01/06/06 11:16:15 3.660 3.650 3.660 27,400
01/06/06 11:17:45 3.660 3.650 3.660 58,200
01/06/06 11:19:15 3.650 3.650 3.650 400
01/06/06 11:20:45 3.660 3.650 3.650 2,100
01/06/06 11:22:15 3.650 3.650 3.650 17,700
01/06/06 11:23:45 3.650 3.650 3.650 6,100
01/06/06 11:26:45 3.660 3.641 3.660 7,300
01/06/06 11:28:14 3.660 3.640 3.650 34,800
01/06/06 11:29:44 3.660 3.650 3.660 2,000
01/06/06 11:31:14 3.650 3.640 3.650 1,000
01/06/06 11:32:44 3.650 3.649 3.649 5,400
01/06/06 11:34:14 3.670 3.640 3.650 12,400
01/06/06 11:35:44 3.680 3.670 3.670 13,100
01/06/06 11:37:14 3.680 3.660 3.680 2,700
01/06/06 11:38:44 3.670 3.660 3.660 2,200
01/06/06 11:40:14 3.679 3.670 3.670 1,900
01/06/06 11:41:44 3.660 3.660 3.660 19,000
01/06/06 11:44:44 3.650 3.650 3.650 900
01/06/06 11:46:14 3.650 3.650 3.650 500
01/06/06 11:47:44 3.670 3.660 3.669 7,800
01/06/06 11:49:14 3.670 3.650 3.670 8,400
01/06/06 11:50:44 3.650 3.650 3.650 1,500
01/06/06 11:52:14 3.660 3.650 3.660 2,700
01/06/06 11:53:44 3.669 3.669 3.669 1,000
01/06/06 11:55:14 3.670 3.670 3.670 5,200
01/06/06 11:56:44 3.680 3.660 3.660 27,700
01/06/06 11:58:14 3.670 3.670 3.670 3,000
01/06/06 11:59:44 3.680 3.670 3.670 3,800
01/06/06 12:01:14 3.671 3.671 3.671 300
01/06/06 12:02:44 3.690 3.680 3.680 15,200
01/06/06 12:04:14 3.700 3.689 3.690 8,300
01/06/06 12:05:44 3.690 3.680 3.680 9,100
01/06/06 12:07:14 3.690 3.690 3.690 200
01/06/06 12:08:44 3.690 3.680 3.690 6,800
01/06/06 12:10:14 3.690 3.680 3.690 1,800
01/06/06 12:11:44 3.680 3.680 3.680 1,600
01/06/06 12:13:14 3.670 3.660 3.670 5,500
01/06/06 12:14:43 3.670 3.660 3.660 1,100
01/06/06 12:17:43 3.670 3.660 3.670 200
01/06/06 12:20:43 3.660 3.660 3.660 500
01/06/06 12:22:13 3.670 3.670 3.670 100
01/06/06 12:23:43 3.670 3.660 3.660 200
01/06/06 12:26:43 3.670 3.670 3.670 400
01/06/06 12:28:13 3.670 3.661 3.670 6,300
01/06/06 12:29:43 3.670 3.670 3.670 800
01/06/06 12:31:13 3.670 3.670 3.670 600
01/06/06 12:32:43 3.670 3.670 3.670 2,000
01/06/06 12:34:13 3.670 3.670 3.670 4,800
01/06/06 12:35:43 3.671 3.671 3.671 100
01/06/06 12:37:13 3.680 3.680 3.680 900
01/06/06 12:38:43 3.680 3.680 3.680 400
01/06/06 12:40:13 3.679 3.670 3.679 10,600
01/06/06 12:41:43 3.680 3.660 3.660 3,400
01/06/06 12:43:13 3.680 3.670 3.680 1,000
01/06/06 12:44:43 3.670 3.670 3.670 1,400
01/06/06 12:46:13 3.670 3.670 3.670 1,100
01/06/06 12:47:43 3.680 3.670 3.680 3,400
01/06/06 12:49:13 3.680 3.670 3.670 5,700
01/06/06 12:50:43 3.680 3.680 3.680 100
01/06/06 12:52:13 3.680 3.680 3.680 100
01/06/06 12:53:43 3.680 3.660 3.679 5,700
01/06/06 12:55:13 3.670 3.660 3.670 13,100
01/06/06 12:58:13 3.671 3.671 3.671 800
01/06/06 12:59:43 3.670 3.670 3.670 2,900
01/06/06 13:01:12 3.670 3.670 3.670 300
01/06/06 13:02:42 3.680 3.660 3.660 2,200
01/06/06 13:04:12 3.680 3.680 3.680 100
01/06/06 13:05:42 3.680 3.680 3.680 900
01/06/06 13:07:12 3.680 3.670 3.670 300
01/06/06 13:08:42 3.671 3.650 3.670 30,200
01/06/06 13:10:12 3.660 3.650 3.660 4,400
01/06/06 13:11:42 3.650 3.650 3.650 2,900
01/06/06 13:14:42 3.670 3.659 3.660 7,900
01/06/06 13:16:12 3.660 3.660 3.660 200
01/06/06 13:17:42 3.650 3.640 3.650 5,200
01/06/06 13:19:12 3.660 3.650 3.650 5,000
01/06/06 13:20:42 3.660 3.640 3.660 1,900
01/06/06 13:22:12 3.650 3.641 3.650 3,800
01/06/06 13:23:42 3.650 3.650 3.650 6,000
01/06/06 13:25:12 3.660 3.640 3.640 2,400
01/06/06 13:26:42 3.680 3.650 3.650 39,400
01/06/06 13:28:12 3.650 3.640 3.650 10,000
01/06/06 13:29:42 3.650 3.650 3.650 5,000
01/06/06 13:32:42 3.677 3.677 3.677 200
01/06/06 13:34:12 3.680 3.680 3.680 15,000
01/06/06 13:35:42 3.670 3.670 3.670 200
01/06/06 13:38:42 3.670 3.670 3.670 200
01/06/06 13:40:12 3.670 3.660 3.670 2,600
01/06/06 13:41:42 3.670 3.660 3.660 2,100
01/06/06 13:43:12 3.670 3.669 3.669 300
01/06/06 13:46:12 3.670 3.670 3.670 3,000
01/06/06 13:49:11 3.670 3.660 3.670 600
01/06/06 13:50:41 3.670 3.670 3.670 2,100
01/06/06 13:52:11 3.670 3.670 3.670 300
01/06/06 13:53:41 3.680 3.670 3.670 2,000
01/06/06 13:55:11 3.680 3.680 3.680 3,200
01/06/06 13:56:41 3.680 3.680 3.680 13,400
01/06/06 13:58:11 3.690 3.680 3.680 3,100
01/06/06 13:59:41 3.690 3.690 3.690 2,300
01/06/06 14:01:11 3.690 3.680 3.690 7,200
01/06/06 14:02:41 3.680 3.660 3.670 2,000
01/06/06 14:05:41 3.680 3.660 3.670 14,600
01/06/06 14:08:41 3.670 3.670 3.670 1,100
01/06/06 14:10:11 3.670 3.670 3.670 2,100
01/06/06 14:11:41 3.670 3.670 3.670 300
01/06/06 14:13:11 3.680 3.651 3.660 2,700
01/06/06 14:14:41 3.680 3.680 3.680 2,000
01/06/06 14:16:11 3.670 3.670 3.670 1,000
01/06/06 14:17:41 3.680 3.680 3.680 1,100
01/06/06 14:19:11 3.680 3.670 3.670 1,700
01/06/06 14:20:41 3.680 3.670 3.680 2,700
01/06/06 14:22:11 3.680 3.680 3.680 500
01/06/06 14:23:41 3.680 3.670 3.680 900
01/06/06 14:25:11 3.670 3.660 3.670 11,000
01/06/06 14:28:11 3.670 3.660 3.669 1,700
01/06/06 14:29:41 3.670 3.660 3.669 3,300
01/06/06 14:31:11 3.670 3.670 3.670 100
01/06/06 14:32:41 3.670 3.650 3.660 4,100
01/06/06 14:34:10 3.650 3.650 3.650 1,900
01/06/06 14:35:40 3.660 3.650 3.660 9,000
01/06/06 14:37:10 3.660 3.660 3.660 1,000
01/06/06 14:38:40 3.660 3.650 3.660 8,300
01/06/06 14:40:10 3.680 3.660 3.660 5,300
01/06/06 14:41:40 3.670 3.670 3.670 100
01/06/06 14:44:40 3.670 3.650 3.660 5,200
01/06/06 14:46:10 3.670 3.661 3.670 1,800
01/06/06 14:47:40 3.670 3.660 3.660 1,700
01/06/06 14:49:10 3.670 3.670 3.670 1,100
01/06/06 14:50:40 3.680 3.670 3.670 6,000
01/06/06 14:52:10 3.670 3.660 3.670 17,600
01/06/06 14:53:40 3.680 3.670 3.680 11,700
01/06/06 14:55:10 3.670 3.670 3.670 5,000
01/06/06 14:56:40 3.680 3.670 3.670 2,400
01/06/06 14:58:10 3.680 3.670 3.680 1,100
01/06/06 14:59:40 3.680 3.670 3.680 700
01/06/06 15:01:10 3.680 3.660 3.670 1,300
01/06/06 15:04:10 3.680 3.670 3.680 1,200
01/06/06 15:05:40 3.680 3.670 3.670 3,300
01/06/06 15:07:10 3.680 3.660 3.660 11,800
01/06/06 15:08:40 3.680 3.660 3.660 7,500
01/06/06 15:10:10 3.670 3.660 3.670 12,600
01/06/06 15:11:40 3.670 3.670 3.670 700
01/06/06 15:13:10 3.670 3.670 3.670 2,300
01/06/06 15:14:40 3.670 3.670 3.670 300
01/06/06 15:16:10 3.670 3.660 3.660 13,900
01/06/06 15:17:40 3.670 3.670 3.670 2,000
01/06/06 15:19:10 3.680 3.660 3.670 7,700
01/06/06 15:20:40 3.680 3.670 3.680 2,900
01/06/06 15:22:09 3.660 3.660 3.660 15,700
01/06/06 15:23:39 3.670 3.660 3.660 3,300
01/06/06 15:25:09 3.670 3.670 3.670 300
01/06/06 15:26:39 3.670 3.670 3.670 200
01/06/06 15:28:09 3.660 3.660 3.660 13,000
01/06/06 15:29:39 3.650 3.650 3.650 14,000
01/06/06 15:31:09 3.650 3.640 3.640 8,700
01/06/06 15:32:39 3.650 3.650 3.650 5,800
01/06/06 15:34:09 3.650 3.640 3.640 39,500
01/06/06 15:35:39 3.680 3.630 3.650 37,500
01/06/06 15:37:09 3.630 3.630 3.630 17,800
01/06/06 15:38:39 3.630 3.620 3.630 28,900
01/06/06 15:40:09 3.630 3.620 3.620 16,700
01/06/06 15:41:39 3.620 3.570 3.610 85,900
01/06/06 15:43:09 3.610 3.550 3.570 38,200
01/06/06 15:44:39 3.591 3.560 3.570 21,700
01/06/06 15:46:09 3.600 3.580 3.600 12,500
01/06/06 15:47:39 3.600 3.550 3.580 31,700
01/06/06 15:49:09 3.588 3.560 3.570 10,200
01/06/06 15:50:39 3.590 3.570 3.590 8,900
01/06/06 15:52:09 3.600 3.570 3.580 22,100
01/06/06 15:53:39 3.590 3.580 3.580 14,000
01/06/06 15:55:09 3.590 3.580 3.590 11,400
01/06/06 15:56:39 3.580 3.560 3.580 17,600
01/06/06 15:58:09 3.580 3.560 3.570 20,000
01/06/06 15:59:39 3.580 3.560 3.570 36,800
01/06/06 16:01:09 3.590 3.570 3.570 20,500
01/06/06 16:02:39 3.580 3.540 3.570 57,800
01/06/06 16:04:09 3.560 3.530 3.550 41,300
01/06/06 16:05:39 3.540 3.540 3.540 400
01/06/06 16:08:38 3.510 3.510 3.510 800
01/06/06 16:11:38 3.500 3.440 3.500 1,100
01/06/06 16:13:08 3.410 3.410 3.410 800
01/06/06 16:16:08 3.450 3.450 3.450 6,400
01/06/06 16:20:38 3.450 3.430 3.450 1,900
01/06/06 16:22:08 3.430 3.410 3.430 900
01/06/06 16:23:38 3.410 3.400 3.410 8,300
01/06/06 16:25:08 3.250 3.240 3.250 2,200
01/06/06 16:26:38 3.350 3.250 3.350 3,200
01/06/06 16:28:08 3.350 3.250 3.350 4,400
01/06/06 16:29:38 3.250 3.240 3.250 15,500
01/06/06 16:31:08 3.250 3.250 3.250 2,000
01/06/06 16:32:38 3.260 3.250 3.260 2,000
01/06/06 16:34:08 3.230 3.220 3.230 200
01/06/06 16:35:38 3.170 3.120 3.150 3,000
01/06/06 16:37:08 3.170 3.000 3.170 27,000
01/06/06 16:38:38 3.140 3.010 3.020 10,100
01/06/06 16:40:08 3.050 2.750 2.950 2,300
01/06/06 16:41:38 3.150 3.050 3.050 17,200
01/06/06 16:43:08 3.170 3.100 3.110 8,500
01/06/06 16:44:38 3.100 3.100 3.100 12,300
01/06/06 16:46:08 3.150 3.150 3.150 11,000
01/06/06 16:47:38 3.150 3.140 3.150 6,600
01/06/06 16:49:08 3.490 3.110 3.160 13,800
01/06/06 16:50:38 3.190 3.170 3.190 10,200
01/06/06 16:53:38 3.200 3.150 3.200 15,500
01/06/06 16:55:07 3.200 3.200 3.200 1,000
01/06/06 16:56:37 3.250 3.250 3.250 900
01/06/06 16:58:07 3.220 3.050 3.220 28,500
01/06/06 16:59:37 3.200 3.200 3.200 200
01/06/06 17:01:07 3.200 3.200 3.200 1,000
01/06/06 17:02:37 3.200 3.200 3.200 1,900
01/06/06 17:04:07 3.240 3.210 3.240 500
01/06/06 17:07:07 3.240 3.210 3.210 4,000
01/06/06 17:08:37 3.240 3.240 3.240 1,000
01/06/06 17:10:07 3.240 3.200 3.200 6,200
01/06/06 17:11:37 3.250 3.240 3.240 20,900
01/06/06 17:13:07 3.250 3.200 3.250 26,100
01/06/06 17:17:37 3.240 3.210 3.230 3,300
01/06/06 17:19:07 3.210 3.200 3.210 11,200
01/06/06 17:20:37 3.200 3.200 3.200 5,400
01/06/06 17:22:07 3.350 3.200 3.200 800
01/06/06 17:25:07 3.330 3.240 3.240 3,500
01/06/06 17:26:37 3.260 3.250 3.250 4,300
01/06/06 17:28:07 3.250 3.200 3.250 3,000
01/06/06 17:29:37 3.210 3.200 3.200 10,900
01/06/06 17:32:37 3.210 3.200 3.210 1,700
01/06/06 17:34:07 3.200 3.200 3.200 400
01/06/06 17:37:07 3.200 3.150 3.200 2,400
01/06/06 17:38:37 3.200 3.180 3.200 500
01/06/06 17:40:07 3.200 3.160 3.180 1,400
01/06/06 17:41:36 3.200 3.180 3.200 3,400
01/06/06 17:43:06 3.190 3.190 3.190 500
01/06/06 17:44:36 3.180 3.180 3.180 2,900
01/06/06 17:46:06 3.200 3.190 3.200 1,600
01/06/06 17:47:36 3.180 3.170 3.170 2,400
01/06/06 17:49:06 3.220 3.180 3.220 3,900
01/06/06 17:52:06 3.160 3.160 3.160 500
01/06/06 17:53:36 3.200 3.200 3.200 1,000
01/06/06 17:55:06 3.200 3.200 3.200 4,300
01/06/06 17:58:06 3.280 3.250 3.250 3,000
01/06/06 17:59:36 3.290 3.290 3.290 100
01/06/06 18:01:06 3.350 3.300 3.300 3,700
01/06/06 18:02:36 3.450 3.350 3.350 8,800
01/06/06 18:05:36 3.400 3.390 3.390 4,400
01/06/06 18:07:06 3.400 3.400 3.400 2,400
01/06/06 18:08:36 3.410 3.400 3.400 1,400
01/06/06 18:10:06 3.400 3.400 3.400 1,100
01/06/06 18:11:36 3.380 3.300 3.380 3,100
01/06/06 18:13:06 3.300 3.300 3.300 1,000
01/06/06 18:14:36 3.300 3.250 3.300 2,100
01/06/06 18:16:06 3.300 3.300 3.300 500
01/06/06 18:17:36 3.300 3.300 3.300 300
01/06/06 18:20:36 3.380 3.350 3.350 2,000
01/06/06 18:25:06 3.380 3.370 3.370 500
01/06/06 18:28:06 3.380 3.350 3.380 2,500
01/06/06 18:31:05 3.450 3.380 3.380 6,900
01/06/06 18:32:35 3.350 3.350 3.350 3,000
01/06/06 18:34:05 3.350 3.310 3.310 3,000
01/06/06 18:40:05 3.350 3.350 3.350 400
01/06/06 18:43:05 3.400 3.400 3.400 300
01/06/06 18:46:05 3.350 3.350 3.350 4,600
01/06/06 18:49:05 3.350 3.350 3.350 3,300
01/06/06 18:52:05 3.350 3.350 3.350 200
01/06/06 18:53:35 3.350 3.350 3.350 1,300
01/06/06 19:07:05 3.300 3.300 3.300 1,000
01/06/06 19:17:34 3.300 3.300 3.300 1,000
01/06/06 19:19:04 3.300 3.300 3.300 1,000
01/06/06 19:32:34 3.300 3.300 3.300 500
01/06/06 19:35:34 3.350 3.350 3.350 300
01/06/06 19:40:04 3.300 3.300 3.300 1,900
Each line is the combination of trades for a 90 sec period
15-20 min Quote Delay
No Threat against the Stratellite
Aircraft can take it out and possibly a SAM, however, where we would deploy them based on our current on-going operations
neither aircraft or SAM would be a threat. The U-2 that was shot down was no easy feat. The Russians had be trying for sometime to shoot one down. I don't know if we have ever determine exactly how it happen. I believe one of the strongest theories is that a modified SA-2 took it down.
Falon
Here comes Uncle Sam
About a year ago I posted a message about the military need for the stratellite. Certainly it was IMHO however, I based my beliefs on over 20 years experience serving in the USAF 15 of which was intelligence collection and reporting. If I was to collect intelligence against GTE and their relationship with Uncle Sam over the past year, I would report the following:
Uncle Sam has a very high interest in GTE and their Stratellite platform. So much so they built and tested 2 platforms in secrecy. We saw one of the platform and not the other. According to open source information "the design of the military version airship is of a unique and proprietary nature and has been designed to meet specific requirements of certain military and government needs." It is my belief the military have in their possesion and possibly "in service" workable stratellites. Due to need for force protection and the ability to run covert intelligence operations against known or suspected enemies there will be limited information available on the GTE/Military Stratellite relationship as stated by the CEO " because of the military nature of the system, this event is not open to the public, and we will not be able to update the public on certain aspects of the airship program."
The military wants and need the Stratellite. Whatever LMT is building for Uncle Sam is no way going to stop the military desire to have what GTE can deliver in the near future if they haven't already. The bottom line is IMHO Uncle Sam is in deep with GTE. They can keep it a big secret and very well should, however the money will show up eventually in the filings. As another poster says follow the money. soon come, soon come...
msg# 3146
Stratellite/Military
The military need the stratellite platform to fill a surveillance gap since we have now live in an era of unconventional warfare. Although the Predator can be deployed
anywhere, it is are limited in time on station and payload not to mention the cost. Also they can and have been shot down. Although the Stratellite and similar platforms can be taken down, it would take an aircraft (air-to-air missile) or surface-to-air missile to do so once it is on station. There is already developmental contracts with defense contrators, so we know they want it. How bad do they want it. IMO like yesterday. When the launch takes place IMO the pentagon, the White House, NSA, CIA, DIA and of course the rest of the world will be watching. What the CEO said sometime ago "this technology will change the face of telecommunications" has much truth to it. It is not as cut and dry as it appears and the CEO has his work cut out. Dealing with the government can be nerve wracking and the need for sharp lawyers is absolutely a must. I once lived in a walled city (Berlin) for a few years and now that city is no longer walled. Remember a few years back how big cell phones were. Times have changed and will continue to change. I enjoyed my intell running days and this GTEL has me spinning and grinning like the good old days.
Peace
and
Merry Christmas
"In God We Trust All Others We Monitor"
Update to post 4651 based on yesterday's PR.
1. Military likely has already invested funds into GTEL. If so, this will eventually come in SEC filings.
2. The military prototype was built in secrecy suggesting the DOD has some control over the project.
3. The classified reference is very important piece of info. It is my belief that the stratellite itself is not classified, but the package (comms, cameras, and other sensors) the military have on board.
4. Also, GTE don't classified anything the government does. This is IMHO has become a tightly held, government funded project.
5. Now the question I have where is the test going to be????
6. Number by number update of post #4651
#1 Done,
#2 still when?
#3 Who?
#4 on-going fight, with the military invovlement, we have the upper hand
#5 I can dream can't I
#6 n/a
#7 I guess we can say we had a birth in April of a little sickly bird that evovled with some very "sensitive" nurturing into a highly loved and protected species.
#8 n/a
#9 n/a
10 We have began the building process....stay tuned
Posted by: falon
In reply to: None Date:2/3/2005 11:59:37 AM
Post #4651 of 15902
Estimate of Where Stratellite is headed (IMO)
Here are some thoughts to considered:
1. Uncle Sam wants the Stratellite so that should help in getting it fully developed as a platform for government use and ease the development for commercial use.
2. Commercial use is going to happen and although it may not happen first in the U.S. it is going to happen.
3. The major players (Non-government) who are able to help us achieve our goals will be a part of this evolution.
4. There will be those who think this isn’t needed because they are biased, especially the satellite industry. This technology will put a hamper on the satellite industry (private/government) were billions of dollars are spent. The Stratellite is bringing forth a technology that we spent billions on that could be done for millions. It is GOING to happen.
5. Imaginary case scenario: Major cell phone company, owner of many cell towers in the U.S. signed a 10-year lease agreement with cell phone company #2 in 1997 and cell phone company #3 in 1998. In 2006 the Major cell phone company contacts cell phone company #2 and cell phone company #3 to renew agreements. Cell phone company #2 and cell phone company #3 declines to renew as they will have their own network up and running fully by fourth quarter 2006. However what they did do was sign a reciprocal agreement with major cell phone company to back up their cell towers and for major cell phone company to back up their newly leased Stratellites.
6. Cell phone towers aren't going anywhere no time soon, however as the Stratellites evolve and prove their worthiness, then the transition to use them as primary platform in the U.S. for commercial communications will take place. Overseas is another scenario.
7. No matter how good a product is, there usually is evoloution, transition, incubation etc...
Every company had a birth somewhere. Somebody posted somewhere that Nokia used to sell paper or something. Do you remember WorldCom/MCI. It started as a small company in Mississippi called LDDS or something. I brought shares in the ealry 90s and sold in the late 90s before they bought/merged with MCI. I watched emerge from a baby to a worldwide powerhouse. I onced own a stock called Metricom (MCOM) bought as an IPO in early 90s. Its' plan was to built a wireless gateway for the internet in The bay area of San Francisco, CA, Wash D.C. and some other places.
They spent millions trying to accomplish this. Too many antennae to hang (on telephnoe poles). They finally went belly up. GTEL has a great plan and it will succeed in time.
8. Look at the evolution of cell phones they used to be big and expensive, now they are small and cheap. My last 2 were free. Now if we could just get the prices of the plans down.:)
9. One of the most outrageous prices is cable TV. A few months ago I got rid of my cable ($60/month) and got DISH TV($45/Month), changed cell phone companies, already had DSL, and kept my local phone company (SBC). I get one bill from SBC for all services with multiple discounts. SBC is company that thinks out of the box. They are buying AT&T and I believe own part of Cingular. I hope they think enough out of the box to take a good look at the Stratellite potential.
10. Bottom line is ROME wasn't built in a day. Stay tuned
A -- High Altitude Airship (HAA) Prototype Vehicle Build and Flight Demonstration
There appear to be a crack in the door for GTE to submit a capability statement. (see bold below). They may however already have a solid connection to provide Uncle Sam with Strats once they are field tested. I'm sure with the proven capability of the Strats, Uncle Sam would have to have some. As I stated ealier this year the need for the Strats capabilty is to great and is needed now.
From RB
By: coop05170
27 Jul 2005, 12:46 PM EDT
Msg. 49797 of 49930
Jump to msg. #
This makes it sound like the gov't does not think GTEL has anything- any thoughts?
http://www.fbo.gov/spg/ODA/MDA/WASHDC1/Reference%2DNumber%2DHQ0006%2D05%2DC%2D0037/SynopsisP.html
General Information
Document Type: Presolicitation Notice
Solicitation Number: Reference-Number-HQ0006-05-C-0037
Posted Date: Jul 26, 2005
Original Response Date: Aug 09, 2005
Current Response Date: Aug 09, 2005
Original Archive Date: Aug 24, 2005
Current Archive Date: Aug 24, 2005
Classification Code: A -- Research & Development
Naics Code: 541710 -- Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
Contracting Office Address
Other Defense Agencies, Missile Defense Agency, MDA Deputy for Contracting (MDA/CT), 7100 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC, 20301-7100
Description
The Missile Defense Agency intends to award a follow-on sole source contract to Lockheed Martin Maritime Sensors and Systems for the High Altitude Airship (HAA) Prototype Vehicle Build and Flight Demonstration. The purpose of the award is to change contract type from Other Transaction Agreement to Cost-reimbursable FAR contract for the build and flight demo phase of the program. Lockheed Martin was the selected awardee under a competitive procurement for the HAA Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (HAA ACTD). The first two phases of that project, Concept Definition (Phase 1) and Design and Risk Reduction (Phase 2) are complete. This contract is a follow-on to the efforts completed under the HAA ACTD Phase 1 and Phase 2. Under the follow-on contract Lockheed Martin will demonstrate the technical feasibility of the high altitude airship by conducting key risk reduction activities culminating in the build and flight demonstration of a prototype high altitude airship while also maturing technologies required for future operational airships.
No other source has access to the proprietary data, resident expertise and insight to the previous work performed under the HAA ACTD Concept Definition and Design and Risk Reduction Phases, which are as a basis for the follow-on requirement. This expertise cannot be attained by any other contractor within the anticipated four-year period of performance without substantial duplication of costs. The estimated value of the contract is $180 million, inclusive of Contractor cost contributions. The anticipated date of contract award is October 15, 2005. See Note 22.
*****Note 22: The proposed contract action is for airship expertise for which the Government intends to solicit and negotiate with only one source under the authority of FAR 6.302. Interested parties may identify their interest and capability to respond to the requirement in writing to the Contracting Officer at the address stated below. This notice of intent is not a request for competitive proposals. However, all capability statements received within fifteen days after date of publication of this synopsis will be considered by the Government.
Point of Contact
Joy Smith, Contract Specialist, Phone 703-882-6180, Email joy.smith@mda.mil - Shirlee Madeloff, Contract Specialist, Phone (703) 882-6152, Email shirlee.madeloff@mda.mil
Pentagon pushes on with near-space craft
Air Force considers spending $15 million on spy balloons
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8473871/
Updated: 9:31 p.m. ET July 5, 2005
WASHINGTON - The Air Force is eyeing a seldom-used region of Earth’s atmosphere called “near space” for communications and intelligence-gathering with one of the oldest types of aircraft — balloons.
The air at 65,000 feet and higher is too thin for most traditional airplanes, so military officials are testing unmanned helium balloons at those altitudes. This frigid part of the atmosphere is above most weather but well below low Earth orbit, where the far costlier space station and satellites operate.
“It’s a region of the atmosphere that historically has really not been exploited,” said Lt. Col. Toby Volz, who oversees near-space programs at Air Force Space Command at Peterson Air Force Base, Colo.
A key advantage of balloons and blimps is they may be able to stay aloft much longer than an airplane, providing a communications or surveillance platform that can last days or even weeks. They are also much cheaper than satellites, and could let ground forces communicate over far greater ranges than the line-of-sight radios they often carry.
“I’ve been intrigued by near space’s potential for persistent space-like effects on the battlefield ever since I first heard about it,” the Air Force’s chief of staff, Gen. John Jumper, wrote earlier this year in a forward to a paper on the subject. “Near-space has been a cultural blind spot — too high up for aircraft, but too low for satellites.”
One simple prototype, dubbed “Combat SkySat,” was tested in the skies over Arizona in January through March with a series of 12 test launches. Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M., is also involved in testing near-space craft.
The Air Force is considering seeking up to $15 million on near-space operations and research in its 2007 budget, officials said. Volz said he hopes to see operational near-space systems during the next five years.
Potential problems
For the idea to work, the Air Force will have to overcome a series of potential problems.
Winds are relatively low between 65,000 and 80,000 feet, usually less than 20 miles per hour. But levels of corrosive ozone and ultraviolet radiation are much higher than at the Earth’s surface.
Another downside is that balloons take many hours to fill with helium and launch, and sometimes require hangars to steady them while they are being filled.
In addition, the Air Force regards near-space altitudes a part of a country’s sovereign air space, unlike orbital space that is open to all, according to officials at Air Force Space Command. So the military would be violating internationally accepted practices and law if it sent an intelligence-gathering balloon over another country without permission — except, of course, if the United States was at war with that nation.
Hundreds to millions of dollars
Proposals for near-space craft vary in complexity. Some free-floating balloons would cost only a few hundred dollars and be expendable if lost to the winds.
Others would launch a glider to carry a payload down to Earth. Still others would have some capability to maneuver and be able to stay over their target longer.
More expensive proposals, such as a massive blimp called the High Altitude Airship, move beyond the realm of expendable balloons. These would cost tens of millions of dollars and stay aloft for years. Such a design could also carry bombs or other weapons to drop on ground targets, according to Lt. Col. Edward B. Tomme of the Air Force Space Command’s Space Warfare Center.
Air Force officers pushing near-space systems for intelligence gathering aren’t advocating replacing satellites, just freeing them up for other tasks.
Intelligence satellites, because they are so few and expensive, are generally controlled by national authorities and targeted on matters of interest to top military, intelligence and executive branch officials. Balloons could be launched and recovered by commanders on a battlefield, giving them more flexibility to gather information they need quickly.
Close, but not too close
As spies, near-space craft will take better pictures than satellites because they are 10 to 20 times closer than a camera in orbit, Tomme wrote earlier this year. If outfitted to eavesdrop on communications, a near-space craft would be likelier to pick up low-power transmissions that satellites cannot hear, he wrote.
At the altitudes being studied by the Air Force, the balloons are out of reach of many interceptor aircraft and missiles.
They are hard to destroy even if they are in range. According to Tomme, in August 1998 an out-of-control Canadian weather balloon survived multiple strafing runs from jet fighters as it flew across Canada, the North Atlantic, Norway, Russia and the Arctic Ocean. Because the pressure inside these balloons is close to that of the surrounding air, they resist deflating quickly when punctured.
Some commercial concerns already use balloons for similar purposes. Oil and gas producers in west Texas and Oklahoma receive data from wells transmitted through high-altitude communications balloons, which are much more cost-effective than trying to establish a cellular network in such sparsely populated regions, according to Tomme.
This probably have been posted and I missed it. We had our April 14th PR posted to the access5 website.
http://www.access5.aero/site_content/news/pdf/14apr05_globeltel_airship.pdf
New Picture of SANWIRE 1
From RB post 345109 by splashx
AP had a story that is being picked up by the following including a new redition of the Strat:
Yahoo News Top Stories Photos - AP:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050411/480/la10504112324
San Jose Mercury News:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/states/california/northern_california/11368500...
San Diego Union-Tribune:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/computing/20050411-1514-ca-stratellite.html
KESQ News:
http://www.kesq.com/Global/story.asp?S=3195996
Salaries for the New Hires
IMO based on their background and experience they will be in the range $75,000-100,000+ minimum. Uncle Sam wants this capability badly. Looking at the flow and tone of recent PRs, IMO some high-level government officials are watching very closely. It will be interesting to see how the flight to Edwards play out.
Very Informative post from RB
http://www.ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=GTEL&read=262563
By: gacman57
05 Feb 2005, 08:15 PM EST
Msg. 262563 of 262586
Jump to msg. #
Here are my two cents as an emerging technologies consultant (my real job) and an optimistic investor (my emotional struggle)...
GTEL's core products should begin to drive substantially higher revenues fairly quickly. The caveat is that this business will be at very low margins (GTEL must carefully manage overhead costs). In my mind, the Stratellite is highly speculative, but that speculation alone could drive a significant increase in share price with appropriately released news of "real" progress (a traders dream). If the Stratellite is truly commercially viable and uniquely available (minimum or no competition), then I know for a fact that GTEL would be the target for a takeover by a substantial player.
There has been some previous mention of "franchising" the Stratellite deployment. "Franchising" the Stratellite would be similar to the way Sprint PCS has expanded their reach to affiliates like Alamosa PCS (APCS - I own this too!). The only reason to do that would be to extend coverage and conserve capital. In a world where broadband access is everything, then ubiquitous broadband coverage (anytime, anywhere) is king. Given the quickly emerging 802.16 Wi-Max wireless broadband standard for metropolitan area deployments GTEL would, simply put, have to have a robust differentiated offering. That differentiator will have to be reliable, larger coverage at the same or lower cost (perhaps at a slight premium) As a bonus, GTEL could offer converged network access that includes both voice and data. With all that said, GTEL could "franchise" as much as they needed to in order to conserve capital and to drive growth and coverage. They would still retain an ongoing "annuity" style licensing fee that would be significantly smaller than owning the whole network. But remember, they would eliminate their financial risk and exposure while driving shareholder value.
These type of pervasive wireless businesses will grow significantly over the next several years and the three most promising areas are emerging broadband services (802.16, WLAN, WWAN), VoIP and RFID. As with anything else in emerging technology, expect consolidation and elimination of the weakest (read: undercapitalized). If one could find a "sleeper", then Katie bar the bank vault door. Is GTEL a sleeper? Stay tuned!
Posted by Arxedi on RB phone call with Mr Huff
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=GTEL&read=261059
Just spoke to Mr. Huff briefly this morning. He is very busy the last few days. I get the impression that major news out of China or Japan next week? Mr. Huff is a very professional man and would never give me any company info., but when I asked about interest from China and Japan on joint $$$ into the Stratellites- He chuckeled!
All he said was that in the next few weeks, there will be some of the most important news and changes to ever effect our company in years! What this means is interesting! Was he talking about AMEX, China investors with money to invest in Stratellites? Or is there something in the works that we are all in for a big surprise?
This should be fun!!!!!!!!!!!
Estimate of Where Stratellite is headed (IMO)
Here are some thoughts to considered:
1. Uncle Sam wants the Stratellite so that should help in getting it fully developed as a platform for government use and ease the development for commercial use.
2. Commercial use is going to happen and although it may not happen first in the U.S. it is going to happen.
3. The major players (Non-government) who are able to help us achieve our goals will be a part of this evolution.
4. There will be those who think this isn’t needed because they are biased, especially the satellite industry. This technology will put a hamper on the satellite industry (private/government) were billions of dollars are spent. The Stratellite is bringing forth a technology that we spent billions on that could be done for millions. It is GOING to happen.
5. Imaginary case scenario: Major cell phone company, owner of many cell towers in the U.S. signed a 10-year lease agreement with cell phone company #2 in 1997 and cell phone company #3 in 1998. In 2006 the Major cell phone company contacts cell phone company #2 and cell phone company #3 to renew agreements. Cell phone company #2 and cell phone company #3 declines to renew as they will have their own network up and running fully by fourth quarter 2006. However what they did do was sign a reciprocal agreement with major cell phone company to back up their cell towers and for major cell phone company to back up their newly leased Stratellites.
6. Cell phone towers aren't going anywhere no time soon, however as the Stratellites evolve and prove their worthiness, then the transition to use them as primary platform in the U.S. for commercial communications will take place. Overseas is another scenario.
7. No matter how good a product is, there usually is evoloution, transition, incubation etc...
Every company had a birth somewhere. Somebody posted somewhere that Nokia used to sell paper or something. Do you remember WorldCom/MCI. It started as a small company in Mississippi called LDDS or something. I brought shares in the ealry 90s and sold in the late 90s before they bought/merged with MCI. I watched emerge from a baby to a worldwide powerhouse. I onced own a stock called Metricom (MCOM) bought as an IPO in early 90s. Its' plan was to built a wireless gateway for the internet in The bay area of San Francisco, CA, Wash D.C. and some other places.
They spent millions trying to accomplish this. Too many antennae to hang (on telephnoe poles). They finally went belly up. GTEL has a great plan and it will succeed in time.
8. Look at the evolution of cell phones they used to be big and expensive, now they are small and cheap. My last 2 were free. Now if we could just get the prices of the plans down.:)
9. One of the most outrageous prices is cable TV. A few months ago I got rid of my cable ($60/month) and got DISH TV($45/Month), changed cell phone companies, already had DSL, and kept my local phone company (SBC). I get one bill from SBC for all services with multiple discounts. SBC is company that thinks out of the box. They are buying AT&T and I believe own part of Cingular. I hope they think enough out of the box to take a good look at the Stratellite potential.
10. Bottom line is ROME wasn't built in a day. Stay tuned
It doesn't takes a year to build a Stratellite.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=5285068
The message said it will be delivered (not built) within a year after the intial launch and testing. We must remember there are organizations ahead of "the Peru Delegation" in line to get a Stratellite.
Delivery of the first stratellite is expected to take place
about 12 months after the inaugural launch of the demonstration stratelite.
What Verizon spent on networks over a 3-year period.
http://www.mountainwireless.com/vzwnews.htm
LOTS OF NEW CELL SITES IN TEXAS:
AUSTIN, TX, January 30, 2004— To enhance network quality and wireless coverage across Texas, Verizon Wireless, the nation’s largest wireless service provider, activated new cell towers in the fourth quarter of 2003. The new towers will provide customers with improved wireless coverage and capacity, faster data transfer rates, and fewer dropped calls when using a Verizon Wireless handset or data device.
In 2003, the company invested $194 million and activated a total of 217 new towers in Texas, providing customers with access to the most extensive wireless voice and data network in the United States. Over the past three years, Verizon Wireless has invested $12 billion nationwide in network improvements.
The money the Stratellite will save is atronomical!
The stratellite is not icing on the cake. The stratellite is a
cake by itself. IMO
We have a lot to look forward to with many challenges to conquer.
The government/military may add to our bottom-line,however the real money is the commercialization.
The government/military may buy muliply Stratellites. These will probably be cut and dry, easy to do contracts and depending how many they buy, worth several hundred million dollars.
I believe The biggest challenge we face is how to market our last mile solution.
I believe we will probably do so through partnerships with an already well established company or companies with a customer base.
I was once told that Verizon owns a lot of the cell towers
in this country and rent space to the other cell phone companies. Hopefully we will work something like that.
At some point, our management team will have to decide who (establish companies) will work best with us to achieve our goals.
Some will be able work with us, and others willnot due to money, long term contracts and many other things that is beyond
my business knowledge.
This all will take some time,a lot of number crunching and hopefully some good legal finesse.
With commercialization comes a cut from every customer thats recurring month after month after month...and you know the rest of story
Regarding today's PR....
I believe it also may allow "GTEL" to have someone represent the company that have the proper security clearances or could get them soon that may be needed now or in the future to conduct company business. Colonel Searfoss would have had
some type of clearances when he was active duty and probably when he worked for NASA. He left Dryden a couple of years ago so it shouldn't take much to get his clearances reactivated if
they already weren't from his private industry work.
Altair / Predator B (The Stratellite has much more to offer)
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-073-DFRC.html
An Earth Science Aircraft for the 21st Century
NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center has partnered with General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc., (GA-ASI) to demonstrate technologies that will expand the capabilities of remotely operated, uninhabited aircraft to perform high-altitude earth science missions. To accomplish the task, GA-ASI is developing an enlarged version of its Predator reconnaissance aircraft, the Predator B®, including an extended-wingspan Altair version for NASA, to meet these requirements.
GA-ASI's task under NASA's Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology (ERAST) Joint Sponsored Research Agreement calls for the San Diego firm to develop and demonstrate technical performance and operational capabilities that will meet the needs of the science community. As joint partners in the project, which covers flight validation as well as development of the aircraft, NASA's Office of Aerospace Technology is investing approximately $10 million, while GA-ASI is contributing additional funds, with about $8 million earmarked for the Altair project.
NASA's Office of Earth Science established a stringent set of requirements for the conventionally powered, remotely or autonomously operated aircraft. Among these requirements were a mission endurance of 24 to 48 hours at a primary altitude range of 40,000 to 65,000 feet with a payload of at least 660 lb. (300 kg). Another key requirement is to develop the capability and operational procedures to allow operations from conventional airports without conflict with piloted aircraft. In addition, the Altair will have to demonstrate "over-the-horizon" command and control beyond line-of-sight radio capability via a satellite link, "see-and-avoid" operation in unrestricted airspace and the ability to communicate with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) controllers. The aircraft will also have to meet all FAA airworthiness and maintenance standards.
The first Predator B prototype uninhabited air vehicle (UAV) is powered by a Honeywell TPE-331-10T turboprop engine, derated to 700 shaft horsepower, driving a rear-mounted three-blade controllable-pitch propeller. The Predator B is 36 feet long and has a wingspan of 64 feet, about 16 feet longer than the Predator. It is distinguished from its smaller cousin by its Y-shaped tail, with a ventral vertical fin. It is designed for a maximum gross takeoff weight of 6,400 lbs. The first turbine-powered aircraft built by GA-ASI, the Predator B is designed to fly as long as 25 hours at up to 200 knots indicated airspeed at altitudes as high as 45,000 feet, while carrying payloads of up to 750 lbs. The aircraft are designed to meet Federal Air Regulations Part 23 requirements.
Tail Numbers 001-003
The first Predator B prototype—aircraft 001—logged its first flight Feb. 2, 2001 from the General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) flight operations facility at El Mirage, Calif. After an initial series of airworthiness test flights and downtime for various software and systems upgrades, the Predator B 001 flew a second series of flight tests in mid-summer, 2001, aimed at expansion of its flight envelope and validation of its autonomous flight capabilities. The prototype reached a maximum sustainable altitude of 48,300 feet during one of those flights over the Edwards Air Force Base test range.
The Altair technology-demonstration variant for NASA is designed to carry an equivalent payload for as long as 32 hours at up to 52,000 feet. Eleven-foot extensions will be added to each wingtip, giving the Altair an overall wingspan of 86 feet with an aspect ratio of 23.5. It also will be powered by the TPE-331-10 turboprop engine, and is also expected to begin flight tests in the spring of 2002.
Earth Science Missions
The Altair is being designed to perform a variety of Earth science missions specified by NASA's Earth Science Enterprise. To demonstrate its ability to meet those standards, GA-ASI will be required to conduct a multi-flight demonstration of the Altair representative of a scientific data-gathering mission, including all the necessary integrated logistical support that would be needed when operating from a remote location. The demonstration mission will include three long-duration, high-altitude flights with a payload of imaging and atmospheric sampling instruments, and is tentatively scheduled for late summer 2002.
Many potential science missions are being considered for the demonstration flights. These missions may take place over a wide variety of geographic locations, capitalizing on the aircraft's extreme range and duration. Volcanic observation over Hawaii, forest fire monitoring over the western states and atmospheric sampling over Alaska are among the science demonstration mission possibilities.
Advanced subsystems on the Altair include over-the-horizon satellite communication-based command and control, a redundant flight control system to improve operational reliability, "see and avoid" capability, voice relay so air traffic controllers can communicate directly with the ground-based pilot at extreme ranges, and fault-tolerant avionics, considered essential to meeting NASA's science mission requirements. It will also be capable of transmitting research data via a satellite link in real time to scientists on the ground.
Begun as a company-funded effort in 1999, the Predator B development program became a jointly-funded effort by GA-ASI and NASA in January, 2000, after NASA selected the Altair variant from several competing proposals for development to meet the agency's Earth Science Enterprise UAV requirements.
GA-ASI is no stranger to the ERAST project—its Altus II® had been involved in ERAST as a technology demonstrator of aerodynamic, propulsion and control system technologies for future high-altitude, long-endurance UAVs designed for civil scientific and commercial uses. The Altus II has also been utilized for several earth resources missions, most notably a high-altitude atmospheric cloud radiation study conducted over Hawaii in the spring of 1999.
The ERAST project is managed for NASA by the Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, Calif.
Operational Requirements for ERAST Earth Science Platform Aircraft
NASA's Earth Science Enterprise has established a stringent set of requirements for the Altair / Predator B to demonstrate its capability to serve as a high-altitude remotely or autonomously operated airborne platform for Earth Science missions. The requirements include:
Flight demonstrate a primary altitude range of 40,000 to 65,000 feet
Flight demonstrate a mission endurance of 24 to 48 hours with a minimum 660 lb. (300kg) payload at the primary altitude range
Demonstrate ease of ground handling so that the vehicle is capable of operating from general aviation airports and can integrate with conventional aircraft operations
Demonstrate a flight environment envelope that is consistent with the weather and operating maneuverability necessary to support a broad range of science missions
Demonstrate UAV compliance with current applicable FAA requirements or guidelines on UAV operations in civil airspace including, but not limited to:
See & Avoid compliance criteria
Airworthiness/maintenance standards criteria
Demonstrate Over the Horizon / See & Avoid Operations (in unrestricted FAA airspace, beyond line-of-sight) including,, but not limited to:
Communication with FAA Centers (SATCOM relay of switchable UHF)
Communication of See & Avoid information
Demonstrate logistics capability of the integrated system (UAV, GSE, GCS, etc.) to be deployable and/or transportable to remote locations
Perform a successful multi-flight demonstration of a mission representative of those typically used for gathering science data
Altair / Predator B Specifications
Profile: Low-wing monoplane with narrow fuselage and high aspect-ratio wing, large V-shaped tail with ventral fin, rear-mounted turboprop or turbofan engine. Enlarged fuselage nose to accommodate various payloads. Retractable tricycle landing gear.
Dual-redundant flight controls.
Wingspan: Predator B 001/002 — 64 feet; Altair — 86 feet with wingtip extensions.
Length: 34 feet.
Wing Aspect Ratio: Predator B — 17.5; Altair — 23.5
Gross weight: Predator B — 6,400 lbs; Altair — 7,000 lbs.
Payload: Up to 750 lbs. of sensors, radar, communications and imaging equipment
Airspeed: Predator B 001 & Altair (003) — 210 KIAS; Predator B 002 — 270 KIAS
Altitude (maximum): Predator B 001 — 45,000 ft., Predator B 002 — 60,000 ft., Altair (003) — 52,000 ft.
Propulsion: Predator B 001 and Altair (003) — Allied-Signal TPE-331-10T turboprop, flat rated at 700 shp, driving a three-blade constant-speed propeller; Predator B 002 — Williams FJ44-2A turbofan, rated at about 2,300 lbs. thrust at sea level
Fuel system/capacity: Six tanks in fuselage and wings, 3,000 lb. capacity, JP-8, Jet-A or similar fuels
Endurance: Predator B 001 — 24 hrs; Predator B 002 — 12 hrs; Altair (003) — 32 hrs.
Manufacturer: General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc., San Diego, Calif.
Primary materials: Molded lightweight uni- and bi-directional graphite composites with Nomex honeycomb stiffening panels.
NASA Advocates Awards in Commercialization
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/about/Organizations/Technology/space_award.html
NASA Space Act Board Awards
This award is given for scientific and technical contributions that have helped to achieve NASA's aeronautical, space and commercialization goals including:
Cost savings
Increased efficiency
Quality of life improvement
Economic development
NASA civil servants, contractors and partners are eligible to receive this award.
You can apply for the award by filling out NASA Form 1329 (NF 1329) anytime during the year.
Point of Contact
Please contact the ITTP Office for information at technology@dfrc.nasa.gov.
NASA Partnering Options
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/about/Organizations/Technology/space_act.html
Space Act Agreements
NASA Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) / Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
A MOU/MOA is a statement of policy, practice or intention affecting a matter of concern to both NASA and another entity. Some of the characteristics of a MOU include:
Transfer of funds or resources is not permitted
Terms of the agreement are not legally enforceable
Signatories at the discretion of interested parties
Goods and services of any kind are not permitted to NASA
Nonreimbursable
This is a collaborative R&D agreement in which NASA and the other party contributes personnel, use of NASA facilities, expertise, equipment, technology, etc., but no transfer of funds. The transfer of funds or other financial obligation between NASA and the private entity is not permitted. Each party agrees to fund its own participation under this agreement.
Reimbursable
This is an agreement for the reimbursable use of NASA facilities, personnel or equipment by a public or private entity wanting to advance R&D efforts. The agreement involves a transfer of funds or other financial obligations from the private entity to NASA. The terms, conditions and schedules are negotiable, but NASA must be paid in advance for each stage of the effort. No goods or services are provided to NASA. Instead, NASA provides data, facilities and services to the paying entity.
Point of Contact
Please contact the ITTP Office for information at technology@dfrc.nasa.gov.
Sanswire Stratellite
http://www.askmen.com/tech_info/2005_jan/jan_13_stratellite.html
January 13th, 2005
AskMen.com Rates This Gadget: 10/10
WHAT IS IT?
The solar-powered stratellite positions itself 65,000 feet in the air and acts as a wireless satellite. It can provide coverage for an area up to 300,000 square miles. That means that it can turn the entire state of Texas into one giant hot spot.
WHAT WE THINK?
This archaic-looking invention goes to show that not all cool technology has to look like it's from the future.
WHEN IS IT AVAILABLE?
Sanswire Networks plans to launch its first stratellite in January of 2005.
"Stratellite" Broadband
http://www.hardavenue.com/reviews/futurebroadband4.shtml
Just when you think you've heard of every possible way to get your broadband Internet, someone comes out with a concept labeled "Stratellite". Like Satellite technology, the concept of Stratellite Internet evolves around a broadband station in the sky with huge coverage capabilities, however unlike a Satellite, which is placed in orbit, a Stratellite in placed in the earth's Stratosphere, 13 miles above ground.
To put the potential of Stratellite in perspective, imagine if Satellite Internet was somehow, defying the laws of physics, incredibly responsive, in the range of 20-50ms in latency. Obviously, you'd have the ultimate broadband solution on your hands - fast, responsive and as close to complete coverage as you'll ever get. Well, unfortunately Satellite will never become this, but something else might, and that something else is Stratellite.
Since the "air ship" as it is called is only located 13 miles above ground, the distance for the data to travel is much shorter than with Satellite, so in theory the latency is comparable to existing ground level broadband solutions. On top of this, whilst the coverage is obviously not at the same level as Satellite's due to its much lower altitude, it has been suggested that only 12 Stratellite air ships could one day be needed to cover the entire United States - metro, rural, heck even remote. This means that everyone who can see the sky above them could have complete access; the pipe dream of the broadband industry?
Like FTTH, a Stratellite is anticipated to be able to deliver a variety of services including broadband Internet, HDTV, telephone as well as 3G/4G mobile phone services. The actual technology used to deliver much of this however is a mystery, with even WiMax only being able to deliver 70Mbps in total bandwidth, one has to wonder just how, exactly, it is planned a Stratellite will be able to give potentially millions of people high speed broadband and high bandwidth HDTV at the same time, not to mention how it plans on connecting to existing networks such as an Internet backbone or a mobile phone network with a fast enough link. Nevertheless, this is a serious technology that could prove to be the sleeper out of the draft class.
Once again the lack of concrete information is the only problem stopping the Stratellite concept from becoming the clear leader for tomorrow's broadband. It is hard to tell at this point how economical it will be maintaining such a hard to reach beast. Sanswire, who are the leading force behind Stratellite's, suggest each air ship is designed to stay in its exact location for 12 months, after which it will then be replaced by another air ship. Whilst it is true this may be more of a hassle than Satellites, which typically last in orbit much longer, the ability to directly manage a Stratellite gives it a huge advantage for upgrades and repairs, but only time will tell just how viable it is having such a small life span. At this point in time, the cost of each air ship is also uncertain, but one could only presume its costs will far outweigh that of a wireless base station, which could one day deliver the same services and coverage.
The final word on Stratellite: Probably the most "far out there" concept in this roundup, Stratellite is actually much closer to reality than what you may think, Sanswire insist they will extensively trial a real air ship in January 2005 after a successful demonstration of the technology already completed in 2004. This is a promising technology that could combine the best of Satellite and wired Internet - fast, low latency and hugely widespread, atleast in theory. Whilst it is still unclear how exactly a floating broadband hub could haul its data back down to earth wirelessly with acceptable bandwidth keeping in mind its potential ability to serve millions of people at a time, rest assured this is a prime candidate for tomorrow's broadband world. Whether or not it will get the industry support required however is yet to be seen.
The removal of the Amex listing while bothersome is trivial compare to the spin on the Jan 11 newsletter to shareholders. The numerous references and emphasis on the military and government confirms just how important this capability is to them. I believe I stated earlier that the military wanted a stratellite or similar like device now...no yesterday!!!
I believe the military/government will assist all they can to make the stratellite successful because it is so much needed. This next statement is very speculative "they are already involved in assisting". How doesn't matter. It is for there own means and good purpose.
Expect A Big Jump In UFO Sightings Next Month
http://timmack.journalspace.com/?entryid=246
posted 12/15/04 (edited Wednesday, Dec 15, 2004 15:37)
No, they really wont be UFO's but a lot of people may think that they're seeing UFO's. What people will really be seeing is what is called a Stratallite. Its a communication device that stays in the earths orbit but looks a lot like a UFO.
According to The Economist a company named Sanswire Networks is planning on launching the Stratallite next month. I did some checking and found out that Strattelite is a subsidiary of a company called GlobeTel. Yahoo Finance has its ticker symbol listed as GTEL.OB and its currently trading at twelve cents a share. Don't know why its trading so cheap but maybe investors are worried that the Air Force may shoot down the Stratallite confusing it with a UFO.
Anyway if the Stratallite works and the Air Force doesn't shoot it down you may see cell phone rates come down. I think that cell phone rates are way too high and I welcome any new technolgy that may bring those rates down.
High Altitude Airship
http://www.spyflight.co.uk/HAA.HTM
The capabilities of airships to provide a very effective radar platform have long been recognised, but only now, as enabling technologies have been developed, is this programme beginning to mature. One use that the airships are particularly suited for is in providing a long-endurance high-altitude platform for radar and other surveillance systems. This capability has come into particular focus in the USA following the events of 9/11 and have caused all departments tasked with securing the countries borders to consider how a more effective system can be deployed.
North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD) have plans to deploy 11 high altitude airships to provide overlapping radar coverage of all maritime and southern border approaches to the CONUS. The unmanned airship, known as the Stratospheric Platform System (SPS), would be capable of maintaining an almost geostationary position at around 70,000ft, well above the jet stream and other weather features. The prototype SPS will need to be capable of lifting a payload of 2 tons to 70,000ft be able to be controlled from a ground station and provide an unobstructed view for the onboard sensors – future developments may eventually see an SPS developed with 5 or 6 times greater payload capability.
Filled with helium to provide lift, the SPS would need to be capable of generating a considerable amount of energy and converting this into sufficient thrust to remain on station. It would clearly be impractical and inefficient to carry large amounts of fuel internally and so the SPS will be have to be capable of generating most of its thrust requirements on station. The power requirements will be met by a combination of thin-film photovoltaic (PV) cells, capable of generating voltage from sunlight, mounted on the external surface of the SPS, together with internal fuel cells to provide power during periods of darkness. In theory, the SPS should be capable of remaining on station for up to six months at a time, provided helium loss is kept to a minimum and sufficient electrical power can be generated.
On 29 September 2003 the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), which oversees the High Altitude Airship (HAA) programme, selected Lockheed Martin's Maritime Systems & Sensors sector based in Akron, Ohio, to build the unmanned lighter-than-air vehicle over competing bids by Aeros and Boeing. Lockheed Martin's highly autonomous, helium-filled design is 152.4m long, 48.7m in diameter, with a volume of 1.5 million m3, said Ronald Browning, the company's director of surveillance systems business development. It carries four electric motors with vectorable large twin-bladed propellers, two on each side of the vehicle. Barber characterised the airship as "a great marriage" of old lighter-than-air technologies and new innovations. The latter include high strength-to-weight ratio materials for the airship's skin and thin-film photovoltaic cells to generate power from sunlight for the vehicle's propulsion and the additional 10 kilowatts necessary to operate the airship's payload. The company is now under a $40 million contract to mature its airship design through a critical design review in mid-2004. Much will hinge on the success of this programme, provided the airship performs as planned it will probably usher in a platform that could be used for many other applications.
Project Alpha
http://www.jfcom.mil/about/fact_alpha.htmProject
Alpha fosters accelerated discovery, development and application of fresh ideas to issues of defense and national security.By quickly identifying and examining promising innovations, Project Alpha analysts:
• Evaluate potential technologies, concepts and capabilities• Propose practical, near and long-term solutions to the defense and military communities
• Identify and assess ideas in order to accelerate joint military transformation. Working in three-to-four-person teams, Project Alpha typically moves from idea identification to action in as little as four months. Project Alpha analysts appraise multiple topics during a given calendar year.Working with a large, diverse community of experts and leading institutions and organizations, Project Alpha produces actionable recommendations and encourages relevant, lasting dialogue among the military, industry and academia. Project Alpha seeks to build networks among the military, government agencies, academia and the private sector to promote the discovery and implementation of innovation to support national defense. Project Alpha reports are known by the acronym RAP, for Rapid Assessment Process. RAP reports
• Rapidly deliver knowledge to decision makers
• Streamline the vetting process to accelerate innovation
• Link the usefulness of new ideas to joint operations and emerging concepts• Reinvigorate ideas that may not have been initially recognized as relevant to military transformation
• Produce actionable recommendations for consideration by the defense community.
• Lead to follow-on conferences, collaborations, workshops and small-scale experiments Ongoing Projects• Near Space or Sub-Orbital Applications - The future warfighter will need unique wide-area surveillance and communications capabilities. Project Alpha is investigating inexpensive, unmanned systems capable of sustained operation over large distances, hovering in the Earth's stratosphere as high as 60-plus miles above ground level and providing continuous surveillance and in-theater communications support for areas several hundred miles wide.
• Confrontation Analysis - With multiple factions and non-state actors competing for power, resources, and control in the world's conflicted regions, the military must be capable of negotiating consensus and encouraging collaboration among diverse players during sustained operations. A Project Alpha team is examining the best means of achieving those ends.
• Effects Assessment - Policymakers and commanders need accurate ways to measure the overall impact of military effects and whether they meet intended goals. Project Alpha is investigating how best to create such a framework that would blend modeling, simulation and human role-playing into effects assessment.
• Enabling Technologies for Effects-Based Operations - To accurately understand and engage adversaries, commanders need an expansive view of battle conditions. Project Alpha is looking to ways to vastly improve this operational net assessment --- known as ONA --- by integrating and visualizing data and information to make it immediately and clearly available.Completed Project Alpha Reports include
• Swarming Entities -- Using lessons learned from bees and ants, swarms of unmanned, autonomous airborne vehicles collaborate to converge from dispersed locations to strike and disable targets. Humans monitor progress and intervene if necessary.
• Pattern Recognition For Time-Critical Targeting -- New software detects patterns in the sensor-tracking data of enemy missiles and air-defense capabilities in order to determine location of bases and loading facilities, weapons type and enemy intent.
• Compressive Receivers: Hard to Get Signals -- To improve air superiority and assure access to enemy resources, troops must be able to detect, identify and locate “threat emitters”: missiles, radars, attack aircraft and the like. Elimination of such threats establishes operational superiority, significantly reducing adversary strength and ability to campaign coherently.
• Alternative Space Access -- Access to Earth orbit remains expensive, averaging upwards of $10,000 per pound of payload. Current launch systems cannot accommodate space deployments on demand nor multi-mission capabilities. This RAP report discusses alternative payload-delivery systems, including a new generation of launch technologies being developed to replace costly and often cumbersome chemical-propulsion approaches.
• Unmanned Effects: Taking Humans Out of the Loop -- Robots have the potential to reduce injuries and deaths from military actions while providing certain capabilities superior to those of humans. Relatively inexpensive autonomous systems can be deployed that augment or, in some cases, replace altogether conventional forces while providing up-to-the-minute intelligence on battlefield conditions. Toxins, mines and other lethal threats can likewise be neutralized by robotic agents.
• National Knowledge Advantage Capability -- A single centralized analysis center is not necessary if joint force commanders have access to multiple sources of data and information that are virtually networked and immediately available for decision and action.
• Communications Implications of Distributed Operations - Future warfighting concepts frequently advocate the distribution of forces across wide geographic areas, self organizing as necessary to conduct missions. Such operations play out in a very information-rich environment. Because robust communications are required to support this vision, this report addresses the feasibility of providing the communications capabilities needed to support widely distributed operations.
• Synchronization, Adaptation, Coordination and Assessment (SACA) Tool - Millennium Challenge 2002 pointed out the need for decision support tools to enable effects-based planning. Project Alpha developed a prototype software tool to support the generation and selection of courses of action that are feasible and adaptable, which synchronize and coordinate across services, multinational partners and interagency partners.
• Knowledge Workers - This RAP report raises concern about identifying and retaining those who will be effective and efficient operating in an information-rich, collaborative command-and-control environment.
For more information about Project Alpha, request a RAP report or to submit an idea, please click here to send us an email.