|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > GPS > July 2007 > Galileo and GPS will work together
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Galileo and GPS will work together
|
|
| nickw7coc@gmail.com 2007-07-17, 4:33 am |
| THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and the European Union are to sign an
agreement to allow their satellite navigation systems to work
together.
Under the deal, both EU and US satellites would send information on
the same radio frequency, enabling receivers to get signals from both
systems and combine the data.
According to Reuters benefits of the agreement will depend on makers
of receivers wanting to accept both systems which the Americans are
certain will happen.
More at http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=41033 where
there's the link to the Reuters story
| |
| Happy Trails 2007-07-17, 4:33 am |
| On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 01:00:36 -0700, "nickw7coc@gmail.com"
<nickw7coc@gmail.com> wrote:
>THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and the European Union are to sign an
>agreement to allow their satellite navigation systems to work
>together.
>
>Under the deal, both EU and US satellites would send information on
>the same radio frequency, enabling receivers to get signals from both
>systems and combine the data.
>
>According to Reuters benefits of the agreement will depend on makers
>of receivers wanting to accept both systems which the Americans are
>certain will happen.
>
>More at http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=41033 where
>there's the link to the Reuters story
Why go round in circles - link to Reuters:
http://www.reuters.com/article/tech...2007071
6
| |
|
|
| Happy Trails 2007-07-17, 7:33 am |
| On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 04:04:44 -0700, "nickw7coc@gmail.com"
<nickw7coc@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>And then there's how Newscientist sees it
>GPS-Galileo pact will create more accurate satnav - tech - 17 July
>2007 - New Scientist Tech
>Much more at http://www.newscientisttech.com/article.ns?id=dn12278
Which adds nothing at all to the Reuters article.
| |
| Berend 2007-07-17, 10:33 am |
| nickw7coc@gmail.com wrote:
> THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and the European Union are to sign an
> agreement to allow their satellite navigation systems to work
> together.
>
> Under the deal, both EU and US satellites would send information on
> the same radio frequency, enabling receivers to get signals from both
> systems and combine the data.
>
> According to Reuters benefits of the agreement will depend on makers
> of receivers wanting to accept both systems which the Americans are
> certain will happen.
>
> More at http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=41033 where
> there's the link to the Reuters story
>
That's great news! This would mean I probably only have to upgrade the
firmware to use both systems.
| |
| Dominic Sexton 2007-07-17, 10:33 am |
| In article < 469cc2f6$0$331$e4fe5
14c@news.xs4all.nl>, Berend <a@b.c>
writes
>nickw7coc@gmail.com wrote:
>
>That's great news! This would mean I probably only have to upgrade the
>firmware to use both systems.
Apart from
the likelihood of Galileo ever getting off the ground is very
small
and
the way the project is making slow, if any, progress means that
you will most likely have upgraded your current receiver long
before Galileo is operational...
Galileo is a nice idea but has little founding in terms of business or
practical needs. It is no coincidence that nobody wants to invest the
sums required to get it started.
--
Dominic Sexton
| |
| Berend 2007-07-18, 4:33 am |
| Dominic Sexton wrote:
> In article < 469cc2f6$0$331$e4fe5
14c@news.xs4all.nl>, Berend <a@b.c>
> writes
>
> Apart from
>
> the likelihood of Galileo ever getting off the ground is very
> small
>
> and
>
> the way the project is making slow, if any, progress means that
> you will most likely have upgraded your current receiver long
> before Galileo is operational...
>
> Galileo is a nice idea but has little founding in terms of business or
> practical needs. It is no coincidence that nobody wants to invest the
> sums required to get it started.
>
I agree that I have probably replaced my current GPS receiver by then,
but now I can safely buy a new receiver before Galileo gets fully
operational.
Many businesses rely on GPS for their commercial success, and since the
US can pull the plug out of GPS, or alter output, anytime they want
(which they have done in the past), launching Galileo makes it most
definately worth while. They can't mess with Galileo, which insures
accurate positioning information.
| |
| Happy Trails 2007-07-18, 4:33 am |
| On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 10:01:50 +0200, Berend <a@b.c> wrote:
>Many businesses rely on GPS for their commercial success, and since the
>US can pull the plug out of GPS, or alter output, anytime they want
>(which they have done in the past), launching Galileo makes it most
>definately worth while. They can't mess with Galileo, which insures
>accurate positioning information.
If you really, really think that any European organization would ever
be more socially transparent and responsible than the operation and
management of the GPS has been over the years, then you deserve to get
taxed to death by your own government to pay for the creation and
operation of a totally unnecessary Galileo, should it ever come to
pass.
The ONLY thing that gives Galileo any glimmer of hope to come into
existence is this agreement they are about to sign with the USA, and
even that leaves Galileo as nothing more than a frilly add-on to the
main system.
It has been amply explained many times in this and other forums that
the USA would never disable the use of GPS in any way - their own
businesses and economy would be by far the biggest loser in such a
move, and as soon as they get George Bush out of the White House
(hahaha) they will no longer make major world-effect decisions out of
spite!
| |
| Dominic Sexton 2007-07-18, 4:33 am |
| In article < 469dc8ee$0$326$e4fe5
14c@news.xs4all.nl>, Berend <a@b.c>
writes
>Dominic Sexton wrote:
>
>I agree that I have probably replaced my current GPS receiver by then,
>but now I can safely buy a new receiver before Galileo gets fully
>operational.
>
>Many businesses rely on GPS for their commercial success, and since the
>US can pull the plug out of GPS, or alter output, anytime they want
>(which they have done in the past), launching Galileo makes it most
>definately worth while. They can't mess with Galileo, which insures
>accurate positioning information.
As you say many businesses rely on GPS. With the popularity of Sat-Nav
systems many members of the general public also use GPS these days.
Because of the many and varied uses the US government will not interfere
with GPS unless they have a pressing need to.
If they have a pressing need to interfere with GPS they will also
interfere with Galileo should it ever become operational. Certainly they
will not have direct operational control of the system but they will be
able to exert diplomatic pressure on the EU to intervene or, if that
will not achieve the desired effect, they will be able to jam or spoof
the signals.
Therefore Galileo will at best be a costly additional system when there
is already a perfectly adequate system available. When GPS is
unavailable there is a very high probability that Galileo will also be
unavailable.
The independent system justification for Galileo is a red herring used
by politicians to attempt to get backing for the project. In reality the
motivation is a perceived economic benefit but that benefit is based on
flawed assumptions. Hence the lack of organisations willing to invest in
the system.
--
Dominic Sexton
| |
| Berend 2007-07-18, 7:33 am |
| Dominic Sexton wrote:
> In article < 469dc8ee$0$326$e4fe5
14c@news.xs4all.nl>, Berend <a@b.c> writes
>
> As you say many businesses rely on GPS. With the popularity of Sat-Nav
> systems many members of the general public also use GPS these days.
> Because of the many and varied uses the US government will not interfere
> with GPS unless they have a pressing need to.
>
> If they have a pressing need to interfere with GPS they will also
> interfere with Galileo should it ever become operational. Certainly they
> will not have direct operational control of the system but they will be
> able to exert diplomatic pressure on the EU to intervene or, if that
> will not achieve the desired effect, they will be able to jam or spoof
> the signals.
>
> Therefore Galileo will at best be a costly additional system when there
> is already a perfectly adequate system available. When GPS is
> unavailable there is a very high probability that Galileo will also be
> unavailable.
>
> The independent system justification for Galileo is a red herring used
> by politicians to attempt to get backing for the project. In reality the
> motivation is a perceived economic benefit but that benefit is based on
> flawed assumptions. Hence the lack of organisations willing to invest in
> the system.
>
And what about the argument, Galileo will be more accurate than GPS?
Is that a red herring too?
To put it in a scope:
Our company pays big money for correction data to achieve a >10cm
accuracy on positioning equipment.
| |
| Dominic Sexton 2007-07-18, 7:33 am |
| In article < 469dfa34$0$334$e4fe5
14c@news.xs4all.nl>, Berend <a@b.c>
writes
>
>And what about the argument, Galileo will be more accurate than GPS?
>Is that a red herring too?
It is planned to offer a commercial service with greater accuracy than
the current GPS for a fee. The open service (free) is planned to be of a
similar accuracy to the current GPS. They conveniently do not mention
the fact that planned improvements to the GPS will improve accuracy for
all at no cost to the user.
>To put it in a scope:
>Our company pays big money for correction data to achieve a >10cm
>accuracy on positioning equipment.
To achieve that level of accuracy even with Galileo you will still need
locally acquired reference data. In many applications that will still
mean big money for equipment / software / data / processing.
--
Dominic Sexton
| |
| Stichting ST 2007-07-18, 10:33 am |
| On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:32:05 +0200, Berend <a@b.c> wrote:
>Dominic Sexton wrote:
>
>And what about the argument, Galileo will be more accurate than GPS?
>Is that a red herring too?
>
>To put it in a scope:
>Our company pays big money for correction data to achieve a >10cm
>accuracy on positioning equipment.
There were stories in press releases about 1 meter but that was never
explained.
As a simple civilian user the more important error sources are:
stratosphere, faze measurement by your electronics and your clock.
Should you be able to get 2-frequency recievers then the biggest error
(stratosphere) can be corrected. So yes, 1 meter sand-alone could be done. But
not cheap. Trible has some handhelds that can do this.
Further Galileo will have a second signal with higher frequency and higher
chiprate (just like we have now with USA GPS) for surveyers.
And plans were to make that a payservice.
The only difference will be that nowadays surveyers have to use the military
signal and do some tricks to make it a bit useable.
Piet
Piet
| |
| Alan White 2007-07-18, 10:33 am |
| On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:58:56 +0200, Stichting ST <atarist@xs4all.nl>
wrote:
>stratosphere
ionosphere :-)
--
Alan White
Mozilla Firefox and Forte Agent.
Twenty-eight miles NW of Glasgow, overlooking Lochs Long and Goil in Argyll, Scotland.
Webcam and weather:- http://windycroft.gt-britain.co.uk/weather
| |
| claudegps 2007-07-18, 10:33 am |
| On 17 Lug, 15:24, Berend <a...@b.c> wrote:
> nickw7...@gmail.com wrote:
& #91;cut]
> That's great news! This would mean I probably only have to upgrade the
> firmware to use both systems.- Nascondi testo tra virgolette -
I think that by the time Galileo will be operational (if ever...),
your actual GPS receiver will be more than obsolete... :-)
claude
| |
| utilsea@aol.com 2007-07-19, 7:33 am |
| I had a dream,
a dream where GPS and GALILEO was working together for user benefits.
a dream where they merge the two system and technology for an unic
constellation with more satellites and costless.
a dream where the saved money for both community (US & EU) will be
used for social things.
A dream, for a perfect world ...
I don't think we need two or three constellations, one constellation
with more satellites and a better coverage for hight latitude (ask to
novergian why they want GPS/GLONASS receivers) should be perfect. We
have to forgot GLONASS who is old and managed like everythings in
russia...
But to concretise this dream, US gvt have to accept loosing some
pivileges and EU to forgot somes vanity...
In fact we are very far from this perfect world and nothing seems on
the way...
http://utilsea.free.fr
| |
| Happy Trails 2007-07-19, 10:33 am |
| On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 05:20:46 -0700, utilsea@aol.com wrote:
>novergian why they want GPS/GLONASS receivers) should be perfect. We
>have to forgot GLONASS who is old and managed like everythings in
>russia...
>But to concretise this dream, US gvt have to accept loosing some
>pivileges and EU to forgot somes vanity...
>In fact we are very far from this perfect world and nothing seems on
>the way...
Not as long as Eurowienies like yourself continue behaving this way.
You say you have to lose some vanity, after just having unjustly
criticized Glonass which is a million kilometers ahead of you with
your silly ideas about Galileo.
The Russians have a working system - you have only a dream, and that
doesn't even work!
| |
| utilsea@aol.com 2007-07-20, 7:33 am |
|
If you have a GPS/GLONASS receiver, just disable GPS and try to get a
point.
If for you it is a working system, keep me inform.
FYI, I do it without success.
I never criticized GLONASS system, I'm just pointing the difficulty of
russian gvt to keep the system operational even with the money from EU
and now India.
I don't think that the world need two, three or more satellites
navigation system.
And today, we are on the way to get at least 4 (GPS, GLONASS, BEIDOU
and GALILEO...).
A little bit too much and too much money spend when some other
projects requested to improve the daily life of million poeple are not
finding budget. When also, we must find ASAP a solution to reduce CO2
emissions and the budget in accordance to this ambitious project, or
our childrens don't need any GNSS system because the life on our small
planet will be ended.
But in the same time I understand that for some country getting the
technology of a space based navigation system can be important and
that the best way to get it is to build they own system (China and EU
today, India tomorrow).
BR
http://utilsea.free.fr
| |
| Happy Trails 2007-07-20, 3:33 pm |
| On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 03:19:47 -0700, utilsea@aol.com wrote:
>If you have a GPS/GLONASS receiver, just disable GPS and try to get a
>point.
>If for you it is a working system, keep me inform.
>FYI, I do it without success.
>I never criticized GLONASS system, I'm just pointing the difficulty of
>russian gvt to keep the system operational even with the money from EU
>and now India.
>I don't think that the world need two, three or more satellites
>navigation system.
>And today, we are on the way to get at least 4 (GPS, GLONASS, BEIDOU
>and GALILEO...).
>A little bit too much and too much money spend when some other
>projects requested to improve the daily life of million poeple are not
>finding budget. When also, we must find ASAP a solution to reduce CO2
>emissions and the budget in accordance to this ambitious project, or
>our childrens don't need any GNSS system because the life on our small
>planet will be ended.
>But in the same time I understand that for some country getting the
>technology of a space based navigation system can be important and
>that the best way to get it is to build they own system (China and EU
>today, India tomorrow).
Next time I have access to a dual system receiver I'll give it a try
and let you know. The Russians do, however, have a plan.
I agree with you about CO2 emissions, and I will state that to expect
Russia, China or India to do anything at all about that problem is
ludicrous. So why doesn't Europe stop XXXXing around with unnecessary
satellite navigation systems and concentrate even more on scientific
research and pressuring other nations, including the USA, into
reducing greenhouse gas emission?
The hot air expended from Galileo alone is probably having a
measureable detrimental effect!
|
|
|
|
|