TNAG-2857-FCO40-4110-Satellite-Licensing-and-Asia-Satellite-Telecommunications-Co-1993 — Page 53

ORION

CODE 18-77′′

TO:

MR MCMILLAN

FROM:

JIM DAVIES

TP2b

2nd Floor, BPR

215 1816

6 May 1993

ORION ASIA PACIFIC SATELLITES

Reference..

Copies

Mr Salvidge Mr Goddard

TP

RA1

Mr Temple

Mr Payne

TP7 BNSC1a

Mr Last

RA3

Mr Daniels

RA1

Ms Losty Mr Bailey

ESED FCO Sols C

1.

We discussed the request from Orion, on behalf of its subsidiary, Asia Pacific Space and Communications Ltd (APSC), that the UK join with the US and perhaps Canada in an Advance Notification for APSC's satellite system to the ITU to reserve orbital slots and frequencies. Orion has reached agreement with the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) that RMI will be the location for the control and operations centre for the satellite system and in return, RMI will "initiate" the notification to the IFRB. The US (which has something called a Compact of Free Association with the RMI) will act as the lead ITU administration for the filing. RA would act for the UK.

Wasting time anyNIR

beeting at forfand' 2. The design of the satellites would provide highly flexible coverage, using steerable spot beams to service the many "thin" routes in the area. Naturally, it would also cover major areas of population including Japan, Australia, Hong Kong and Korea. The most Easterly of the proposed slots at 217° East would cover the Western coasts of the United States and Mexico.

Implications for British Es

m Kama

3.

The UK's main reason for associating with this notification would undoubtedly be to support and show solidarity with British Aerospace. BAe is still closely involved with Orion as a current and possible future satellite supplier. Orion says that "British Aerospace .... is in a firm position to manufacture the communications satellites required." Secondary reasons would be the encouragement of competition in telecommunications worldwide and the improvement of communications for the thirteen Commonwealth countries (including Hong Kong) in the area to be served.

4. The secondary case is admittedly rather thin but in my view, given the British Aerospace interest, we should support unless there are over-riding reasons why we cannot. I have discussed this with Mike Goddard. His initial view is that RA would be happy to accept this line, as long as there is no technical clash with other satellite systems for which the UK has a responsibility. He will let me know when RA has examined the proposal for conflicts.