Satellite Phone Forum

[Klaus Daerr]

Hi,
the INMARSAT "IsatPhone" was not for sale in Europe, because it is not RoHS compliant.
Mid June 2010 the new model, the "IsatPhone-Pro", is coming on the market.
The price for the device itself is said to be around 700 US$, the price for the airtime around 1 US$/minute.
The most interesting footprint (please see attached pdf) is "worldwide without polar regions"
Kind regards
Klaus Därr

[jsf]

With the new phone, there will be an alternative to the Iridium 9555. To compare the phones/systems, I'm interested in any opinions on the following assumptions.

1) The IsatPhone Pro is roughly half the cost of the 9555.

2) The IsatPhone Pro some better features, such as bluetooth and a better form factor.

3) Voice quality on the IsatPro is better, compared to the more mechanical sound on the 9555 due to compression.

4) Except for the Poles where the Pro will be only marginally usable, both systems will provide complete coverage.

5) Voice rates will be comparable, depending on the plan and if pre-paid or post-paid.

6) After the Pro gets the firmware upgrade to support data (using phone as a modem) the data rates between the Pro and 9555 will be comparable, limited to 2400 bps.

7) There will be a lag using the Pro because of the geostationary Inmarsat satellite orbits.

8) On land, the Pro will be more susceptible to obstructions interfering with the satellite view, whereas the 9555 will almost always be in sight of an Iridium satellite.

Interested in any opinions on these assumptions, specifically if items 7) and 8) will represent a significant drawback to using the Pro.

Questions:

1) I understand there is a higher rate calling from an Inmarsat phone/terminal to another if different technologies are used, e.g. costs more to call between Inmarsat B and M versus between two Inmarsat B terminals. Is this true, and which technology will the Pro use?

2) Related, compared to the cost in calling a landline from the Pro, will there be a higher cost to call a ship via Inmarsat B?

Thanks for any feedback,

John