Have Dish Will Telecommunicate (? with expert sidekick)

Your going to press the send button on the old receiver?

Be very careful if your aim is off and you cut into someone else signal like a firedepartment of the Federal Government you could face huge fines and jail time.

Both TV (other than ordinary antenna reception) and Internet connections must be purchased from providers. Current satellites are much more powerful than previous ones, so large dishes are no longer required. Since the providers have standard assemblies, I doubt if any of them will be willing (or even able) to use your old dish. If they will (or can) adapt to your old dish, I suspect that there would be a significant extra charge to do so.

It sound like you are attempting to get these services without paying for them. This is also known as stealing, and CR4 can not condone that.

Here I will respond to dadw5boys in addition to Guest#2 (CR4) in the order that they posted.

Daddyw5boys commented facetiously about transmitting, and cautioned about possible problems with other airwave users:

"Your going to press the send button on the old receiver?

"Be very careful if your aim is off and you cut into someone else signal like a firedepartment of the Federal Government you could face huge fines and jail time."

Response:

Dadwith..., I only described what I have—a 7-ft round parabolic dish and receiver with dish-steering remote—not what I don't have, and ultimately will need for uplink. What I am envisioning is to acquire a much smaller dish, transmitter, and modem for the uplink. But, before that, I'd like to ascertain the feasibility of using my present equipment in its proper capacity; if what I have is not, or can't be made, usable for receiving Internet downlink, then purchase of uplink equipment makes not sense; I would have to be content with continued reception solely of television.

It's not clear to me what you mean by "cut into someone else's signal." The uplink dish as well as downlink dish would be aimed and locked on satellite parking orbit on the celestial equator. Local and federal (presumably aviation) agencies would occupy their own allocated bands different (at least as of now) from TV or Internet SATCOMM bands, so I can't see interference as a potential problem, if that's what you mean. Anyway, I would think that the burden would lie with the ISP (or SATTV programming provider) as licensee, not with a customer tuned to the provider's signal. Please let me know, if and how I might have mistaken what you said.
***********************************
Next, Guest#2 (CR4) discusses what he sees as restrictions on hardware procurement and use; and offers counsel regarding what he sees as a dishonest motive . . .

"Both TV (other than ordinary antenna reception) and Internet connections must be purchased from providers. Current satellites are much more powerful than previous ones, so large dishes are no longer required. Since the providers have standard assemblies, I doubt if any of them will be willing (or even able) to use your old dish. If they will (or can) adapt to your old dish, I suspect that there would be a significant extra charge to do so.

"It sound like you are attempting to get these services without paying for them. This is also known as stealing, and CR4 can not condone that."

Response:

Dear CR4 (guest#2),

I think—maybe—you mean well, but it appears you have read things into my OP questions that were never stated. Let's start with your last comment:

• I stated that I want to connect to a SATCOMM ISP. So, since a subscription would be needed, and connection to the Internet is not otherwise available, it escapes me how this amounts to stealing, or wanting to steal, anything.
• As to my secondary (expressly stated as subordinate) inquiry regarding (HD) SATTV, I am not aware of any law or precedent that makes it a crime to receive, either, unscrambled or scrambled TV program signals. I looked at my OP again and could find nothing that remotely suggests that I'm seeking a stolen, subscription SATTV (i.e., DirectTV or DishNetwork) receiver or descrambler; or any other kind of "black box" descrambler. So, with thanks all the same, it appears the way it "sounds" to you might reflect an impulse or instinct of someone other than myself?
• Your comment regarding dish size viz-a-viz "more powerful" satellites suggests that the signal power would somehow restrict the size of the dish, rather than that a smaller dish is sufficient in most cases (but not exclusivly so) to capture and focus the down signal. What makes more sense to me would be that a larger dish would always surpass the signal capture of a smaller dish, but that the smaller dishes used nowadays are sufficient to capture and focus down signals such that, with amplification, the TV image will be of sufficient quality to satisfy most customers most of the time.
• As I am given to understand—and correct my if I err—the reason (apart from being more [marketwise] compatible with a much larger potential SATTV customer base) that small dishes have proven sufficiently effective in place of large dishes is that they receive simultaneous downlink signals from, not one but, three different, simulcasting satellites located at three, widely divergent parking locations in orbit. Hence the dishes currently used for SATTV reception are elliptical rather than circular, and mount three rather than just one LNA units at three separate points of signal focus above the dish. It is the reception of overapping signals from different directions which, possibly more that power, makes reliable reception possible. And it bears mention, also, that increases in satellite power entails significant growth in satellite size and weight; along with concurrent increase of costs for launching, maintenance, and replacement.
• Your statement to the effect that SATTV programming providers will (or even have the power to) assert control over the customer's hardware sourcing does not "ring true" for me, for numerous reasons:
• SATTV companies are in the primary business of selling programming; that alone, and not the selling of hardware. It is only in support of selling programming that the companies will (but are not compelled to, and have no imperative to) make hardware available (typically by lease) to customers who might not otherwise be able to fund, or have knowledge or desire to make the effort to set up their own satellite reception systems. In other words, SAT companies see it as an ancillary business necessity to provide and set up hardware (or contract with affiliates to do so) in order to facilitate the selling of programming.
• SATTV programming providers do not manufacture the hardware which they lease (or sell) to customers largely as a matter of convenience and business necessity. For example, the satellite dish manufactured by Terk for DirectTV can be leased from DirectTV, or can be purchase directly from a Terk vendor.
• Any suggestion that a SATTV programming provider, such as DirectTV, can (or would) refuse to serve a customer using suitable customer owned equipment from any source, also suggests that the SAT provider is asserting ownership of the air waves; in fact, SATTV companies use the airwaves to provide pay programming only as a result of being licensed to use the airwaves; they do not own the air waves (or even their transmitted signals) any more that you and I or anyone else. Thus, I can receive and view both unscrambled TV programming as well as scrambled programming, say from Direct TV, at any time without violating any law, or anyone's rights, proprietary or otherwise. It is only if a scrambled program is de-scrambled and viewed that I owe the provider, not for the signal, but for the viewable (the consumed) programming content.
• So it would seem, that if a SATTV company has ownership prerogatives over any hardware, it would be solely over the hardware needed to descramble its own signals. But I'm not certain as to whether even descramblers cannot be purchased and owned by customers.

So what might be the advantages of using one's own equipment, in particular, for Satellite Internet connection? Two come to mind:

1. To maximize return on investment and gain greatest utility from the equipment one already owns.
2. To avoid the prohibitive price charged for installation and set up (at last inquiry, around $350 and up) of SAT-ISP provided equipment, and the equally onerous, monthly equipment lease rates thereafter.

Guest said:

So what might be the advantages of using one's own equipment, in particular, for Satellite Internet connection? Two come to mind:

1. To maximize return on investment and gain greatest utility from the equipment one already owns.
2. To avoid the prohibitive price charged for installation and set up (at last inquiry, around $350 and up) of SAT-ISP provided equipment, and the equally onerous, monthly equipment lease rates thereafter.

I am definitely not an expert here, but I am a SAT-ISP customer. I am curious as to what type of equipment that you would use for the uplink portion of your homebrew system and modem? Those technical hurdles aside, you have the FCC regulations on transmitters: the installation of said transmitter requires an FCC-licensed contractor.

With my SAT-ISP provider, there was an upfront purchase of the system, which consists of the dish/LNB/transmitter and a satellite modem. There is no associated monthly lease...