Why are space communication links moving to Ka-band (20–30 GHz)? Choose the primary technical advantage that motivates this migration (assume link design accounts for propagation impairments).

Introduction / Context:
Modern satellites increasingly exploit Ka-band to meet exploding capacity demands from broadband and video. This question probes the main technical driver behind choosing Ka-band despite its well-known propagation challenges.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Ka-band spans roughly 20–30 GHz for satellite services.
• Higher frequency bands provide more spectrum allocation opportunities.
• Propagation issues (rain fade, atmospheric absorption) can be mitigated with link design (power, coding, adaptive modulation).

Concept / Approach:

The primary motivation is access to larger contiguous bandwidth, enabling higher aggregate throughput. While smaller antennas are possible due to shorter wavelengths, that is a secondary practical benefit; crucially, statements claiming “no atmospheric or rain attenuation” are incorrect—Ka-band is more susceptible and needs mitigation.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Operator whitepapers and textbooks cite “more bandwidth at Ka-band” as the core reason for adoption, with engineering countermeasures to handle higher fades.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• “No atmospheric or rain attenuation” is factually wrong; Ka-band is more fade-prone.
• “Smaller antennas” can be true, but is not the primary capacity driver compared to bandwidth availability.

Common Pitfalls:

Assuming Ka-band is superior in every respect. It provides capacity, but needs robust fade mitigation techniques.

Final Answer:

It offers a much wider available bandwidth for services and carriers