Are we about to lose GPS - post this Br***t mess? Very worrying

[JumbleDuck]

I had heard somewhere that the Galileo system needed ground stations - and several of these are on UK territory in the South Atlantic (Falklands and Ascension)? How does that work if the EU wish to deny the UK access as we are not EU members? Will this only affect the South Atlantic area?

Lots of details about the ground stations at https://gssc.esa.int/navipedia/index.php/Galileo_Ground_Segment. Basically, they need some stations to tell the satellites where to go and others to update navigational information on the satellites. If UK territory is not used for these I imagine that French overseas territories will reasonably fill the gaps.

 

[Mark-1]

I had heard somewhere that the Galileo system needed ground stations

I suspect that's some kind of equivalent of WAAS/LAAS and just a "nice to have" in most applications.

EDIT: Although JD's assumption seems equally or more likely to be what you're thinking of.

 

[AndrewL]

I also recalled something about GPS receivers having a speed / altitude limit. Apparently it was required by an international treaty which ceased in 1994.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinating_Committee_for_Multilateral_Export_Controls

I wondered how this had been implemented so I did some googling. It seems that it was simply that the actual chip that does the GPS processing is designed to enforce the limit, it will not produce an output above the thresholds.

Another wired magazine article
https://www.wired.com/2013/09/bypassin-us-gps-limits-for-active-guided-rockets/

 

[Mark-1]

I also recalled something about GPS receivers having a speed / altitude limit. Apparently it was required by an international treaty which ceased in 1994.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinating_Committee_for_Multilateral_Export_Controls

I wondered how this had been implemented so I did some googling. It seems that it was simply that the actual chip that does the GPS processing is designed to enforce the limit, it will not produce an output above the thresholds.

Another wired magazine article
https://www.wired.com/2013/09/bypassin-us-gps-limits-for-active-guided-rockets/

Thanks, that's conclusive.

 

[CAPTAIN FANTASTIC]

There is a good article here that explains the details of Galileo and what the UK will lose after Brexit.
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/galileo-satellite-system-brexit-gps

It also explains why the recent announcements from the UK government that we will build our own system are bulls#*t.

The UK is spending multi multi £ millions at present on viability srtudies to understand and to substantiate the need for a satelite system to fill the gap the Galileo will create.

 

[capnsensible]

Yeah you might as well give up boat stuff altogether and mess about playing golf or something......

 

[Blue Sunray]

Sir,
I am somewhat bemused by the attack on my knowledge and understanding of the satellite positioning systems used by many, includingmyself, to navigate at sea; and how my post attracted harsh criticism of my political awareness. For the life of me, I fail to see the link between those two matters.
To help me, I would be grateful if you would kindly answer “yes”or “no” to the following questions so that I may understand the reason(s) for your criticism.
My questions may seem incongruous and vague, but please bear with me.
1. Do you read a Daily Newspaper (British orotherwise)?
2. Are you, or were you, a “man of the cloth”?
3. By your using “Fr” before your name, am I correctin assuming you are, or were, of the Catholic faith?
4. Do you know the extended method by which news is gleaned, reported, printed and distributed to your door up to seven days each and every week?
5. Do you rely for veracity on that which you read in your chosen newspaper, or do you make your own decision based on what you read – from one or more sources?
6. Do you accept the system of development overtime of various life-forms on earth?
Gratefully,
Robert Wilson

 

[st599]

The UK is spending multi multi £ millions at present on viability srtudies to understand and to substantiate the need for a satelite system to fill the gap the Galileo will create.

Does a return flight to Geneva cost that much? It won't take long at the ITU to find out if there's any frequency allocation after GPS, GLONAS, Beidou, Galileo, Navic, QVSS et. al.

 

[st599]

Lots of details about the ground stations at https://gssc.esa.int/navipedia/index.php/Galileo_Ground_Segment. Basically, they need some stations to tell the satellites where to go and others to update navigational information on the satellites. If UK territory is not used for these I imagine that French overseas territories will reasonably fill the gaps.

Already at the procurement stage I'm told. Williamson's threat was laughable. Question is, does the UK have enough overseas territories for the replacement system?

 

[JumbleDuck]

Question is, does the UK have enough overseas territories for the replacement system?

I am reliably informed - by the £350m per week for the NHS gang - that the many areas of the world which we kept under military subjugation for a century are eager to be our friends.

 

[grumpy_o_g]

There is a good article here that explains the details of Galileo and what the UK will lose after Brexit.
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/galileo-satellite-system-brexit-gps

It also explains why the recent announcements from the UK government that we will build our own system are bulls#*t.

A very jam-resistant satellite signal that isn't a tight beam? Resistant to strawberry jam maybe - the rest of the article seems reasonable though.

 

[lw395]

I can't fault any of that logic, and yet I'm only aware of it because I encountered the issue when I was working on a GPS stack - and we hadn't added that limitation. Also what would be the point in relying on designers to add the limitation because someone building a missile in an hollowed out volcano would just ignore it. So either my memory is wrong or the clever
folk who designed GPS have done something clever that you and I haven't thought of. Neither would surprise me.

The U-blox ZOE-M8 is good for 50km of altitude and 500m/s, so probably capable of terminal guidance of a fair range of weapons.
I'm not going check the specs of all the other off the shelf GPS modules.
Fundamentally, making GPS work on the CA code at higher speeds is not difficult. What looked like cutting edge DSP 30 years ago is easy to do with versatile logic ICs these days. Complete DIY GPS receivers have been done.

 

[{151760}]

Presumably, we won't be given the key to the military encrypted part of the Galileo data. But won't NATO have something to say about that?

 

[Blue Sunray]

Presumably, we won't be given the key to the military encrypted part of the Galileo data. But won't NATO have something to say about that?

Why would they any more that they would with respect to other non-EU NATO members (including the US) who are in the same position (no pun intended)?

 

[Mark-1]

Why would they any more that they would with respect to other non-EU NATO members (including the US) who are in the same position (no pun intended)?

Is there a military encrypted component to Galileo? Looks to me like it has two levels of service, free to everyone and 'professional' which has to be paid for. Full precision is available to both civil and military users.

Or do you mean Galileo Public Regulated Service? If so do non-EU Galileo partners like China, Israel or Morocco not get access to Galileo Public Regulated Service?

Found a definitive answer to one of the more interesting questions in this thread, turns out SA will be history soon:

"Though Selective Availability capability still exists, on 19 September 2007 the US Department of Defense announced that newer GPS satellites would not be capable of implementing Selective Availability;[25] the wave of Block IIF satellites launched in 2009, and all subsequent GPS satellites, are stated not to support SA. As old satellites are replaced in the GPS Block IIIA program, SA will cease to be an option."

 

[lw395]

Presumably, we won't be given the key to the military encrypted part of the Galileo data. But won't NATO have something to say about that?

I suspect NATO will say 'who cares?, we have the NATO system and don't have much use for the EU's vanity project'.

 

[Motor_Sailor]

I suspect NATO will say 'who cares?, we have the NATO system and don't have much use for the EU's vanity project'.

Doubt it. Nato is really concerned about the antiquated and rickety state of GPS. It needs a major updating and the US seems reluctant to prioritise the work.

The contingency must be for them to buy access to Galileo and the EU won't refuse military use by NATO. The bit that we won't get access to as a non-EU country is the high grade signal for commercial applications.

 

[NormanS]

USA controls Galileo and apparently Europe is getting a system of its own - but both may be denied to GB boats.

This I heard from a neighbour last evening, one who seems to know what he is talking about - but I don't in this case.

So, post Br***t, might Europe deny this vital facility to GB sailors/fishermen/CG/commercial vessels etc etc ?
Or at least might we have to "pay through the nose" by way of licence fees, usage tariffs etc?

What a horrifying thought, if true.

Anybody any advice, thoughts, knowledge on this?

I was sailing long before GPS was even thought about, and the sky stayed where it should be.

The loss of GPS wouldn't make navigation or pilotage any more difficult than it used to be, just a bit more challenging. So horrifying? Definitely not with a reasonable level of competence.

 

[Blue Sunray]

Doubt it. Nato is really concerned about the antiquated and rickety state of GPS. It needs a major updating and the US seems reluctant to prioritise the work.

The contingency must be for them to buy access to Galileo and the EU won't refuse military use by NATO. The bit that we won't get access to as a non-EU country is the high grade signal for commercial applications.

Err, no.

 

[Mark-1]

The bit that we won't get access to as a non-EU country is the high grade signal for commercial applications.

I think the bit we won't get access to is Galileo Public Regulated Service, but I'm guessing if we chose to invest in the same way that other non-EU countries choose to invest we'd get that. The high grade commercial you buy, companies in EU nations don't get that for free anyway.

I think the real loss is the loss of jobs in Portsmouth, rather than loss of access, but that's nothing to do with GNSS, so a topic for the lounge rather than Scuttlebut.