Bush Prepares for Possible GPS Shutdown

Let the cat'n'mouse games continue. In previous centuries road signs
were moved around and fake maps made to confuse the enemy, I doubt that
has happened in a while. But the stakes are always getting higher, no
one died as a direct result of a sign movement (the guys with guns
lying in ambush on the other hand...)


Including the last one...

In the '80s I had a friend that was assigned to a recon unit of a USA Mech
Inf. batallion in Germany. According to him his squads primary duty if the
ballon went up what to destroy every highway, road and other such marker in
what I thought was a fairly large area of Germany.

wrote in message
ups.com...
There is a new system in the works by the europeans, Galileo. It is
supposed to be independent of military control so you won't see threats
of system shutdown. I'm sure the pentagon is working out how to jam it,
etc.

http://www.esa.int/export/esaNA/GGGM...C_index_0.html
http://www.eubusiness.com/press/EUPress.2003-12-22.1818


There's been noises in the past that the Chinese might want to be part of
that project, and also that the birds might carry hardware for encrypted
communication/datalink as well. That's the part that really got the DoD's
attention. A large part of our military advantage these days lies in the
incredible speed at which we can move information around securely from
bottom to top and back down again. It's safe to assume that strategic rivals
like China would get around to doing this on their own sooner or later, but
cooperating with the Europeans to do so would make a rather interesting
geopplitical statement.

-cwk.

In article . com,
says...

There is a new system in the works by the europeans, Galileo. It is
supposed to be independent of military control so you won't see threats
of system shutdown. I'm sure the pentagon is working out how to jam it,
etc.



Galileo has won some European funding approval this year, so it should move
forward to at least the next stage.It is a very clever initiative, because it
plays on the Europeans' pride (particularly the French) in not having to rely
on something developed and offered (even for free) from the Americans. If it
does come to pass, it will of course be offered at high cost to users (just as
IFR users are already heavily taxed on "airway use" fees) GPS receivers will
be mandated to be "Galileo compliant" (more market share for Europen equipment
manufacturers) and it will be geared toward commercial operations, offering
little of the flexibility and cost effectiveness required by private
operators. If Europeans could see past their pride, they should hope that
Galileo never gets past the next budget hurdles, and they should become
victims, once again of slavery to free, reliable, scalable US initiatives.

G Faris

G Farris wrote:

Galileo has won some European funding approval this year, so it should move
forward to at least the next stage.It is a very clever initiative, because it
plays on the Europeans' pride (particularly the French) in not having to rely
on something developed and offered (even for free) from the Americans.

Actually, it was't pride. If I recall correctly, the Europe didn't want
to re-invent the wheel but to cooperate with the USA. It was the USA who
declined to give guaranties, basically saying that GPS was crucial
military infrasturcture and that the US army would always reserve the
right to shut it down, jam it or whatever at its discretion. It was at
this point that Europe said no thanks, we're gonna develop our own
system, even if it's expensive.

Stefan

On 17 Dec 2004 08:17:09 -0800, wrote:

There is a new system in the works by the europeans, Galileo. It is
supposed to be independent of military control so you won't see threats
of system shutdown. I'm sure the pentagon is working out how to jam it,
etc.

The Wall Street Journal has covered both these issues in the past few
weeks.

With respect to Gallileo, indeed the Pentagon was upset that GPS would
slip outside its control, but in the end the Americans and the
Europeans agreed that either could locally either system in time of
military emergency.

With respect to the title of this thread, none other than Phil Boyer
of AOPA has pointed out that the current White House initiative on GPS
is actually an improvement over the status quo, and to be applauded by
pilots.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
the blog www.danford.net

"C Kingsbury" wrote in message
k.net...

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

So, you're saying there are no GPS approaches whose missed approach
procedures rely upon GPS?


Aren't you required to have means to execute a non-GPS approach at either
your destination or alternate to be legal?

Yes. However, if you are WAAS equipped then there is no such requirement.

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:32:25 GMT, "C Kingsbury"
wrote:

Aren't you required to have means to execute a non-GPS approach at either
your destination or alternate to be legal?

Not necessarily. Depends on the GPS.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Larry Dighera wrote:

So, you're saying there are no GPS approaches whose missed approach
procedures rely upon GPS?

Dunno about that, but according to an article in the most recent AOPA Pilot, you
can't shoot a WAAS approach without some other navigation system (like a VOR
glide slope receiver) in the plane.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

G.R. Patterson III wrote:



Larry Dighera wrote:

So, you're saying there are no GPS approaches whose missed approach
procedures rely upon GPS?

Dunno about that, but according to an article in the most recent AOPA
Pilot, you can't shoot a WAAS approach without some other navigation
system (like a VOR glide slope receiver) in the plane.

How does one get to the next approach w/o GPS if the missed approach on the
GPS approach requires a GPS?

This isn't just a "GPS shutdown" question, but a more generic "dealing with
failure" question. Still, one is legal with a single VOR and VOR
approaches can have VOR-based missed approaches.

- Andrew

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:35:49 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote:

Dunno about that, but according to an article in the most recent AOPA Pilot, you
can't shoot a WAAS approach without some other navigation system (like a VOR
glide slope receiver) in the plane.

I did not see that article, and cannot locate it just now. But I don't
understand the logic that would imply that for a TSO146 GPS unit.

Can you elaborate?


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)