If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
PRN133 ranging now useable for SoL, at non precision approachlevel
On 2011-11-01 17:47 , HIPAR wrote:
On Nov 1, 9:25 am, Alan wrote: ... L5 isn't exactly usable yet with all of 2 sats in orbit. Will be a long wait before any advance with any system. For simplicity sake (a good thing in avionics) mixing GPS with EGNOS in a system won't be seen in avionics for quite a while yet. -- I couldn't agree more that we need simplicity .. too many constellations transmitting signals that are compatible only by the definition of not interfering with each other. My head would be spinning if I were tasked to perform a trade study defining the next generation of avionics. But the GNSS community thinks this kind of diversity is great so those geniuses like Marcelo (just joking) can sort it out. Would it have been nice if Galileo L5 and NAVSTAR L5 shared a common ICD? Would it have been nice if there were a common L1 modernized signal. That would be 'bound' the problem. That wouldn't fly far - there are only so many viable gold codes - though possibly many more on L5 with its longer code length. Regarding WDGPS, I really don't understand who actually controls access to the system. If NASA operates the core system, what kind of agreement does the US government have with Deere allowing them exclusive commercial marketing rights under the Starfire trademark? NASA/JPL doesn't say much about that. No idea. But with the network of ground stations collecting the data for GDGPS that data can be "sold" to J-D for further use. In that sense JD depend on the network, but they package the data for Starfire (and to finer resolution and accuracy than WAAS). I looked over a few of the easier to read references concerning the JPL system. This one addresses the expected performance for a GDGPS corrected C/A code system: http://www.gdgps.net/system-desc/pap...leFreqCorr.pdf Receiving L1 only, I'd say it might provide WAAS grade performance. Getting back to simplicity, the need to receive the corrections from another satellite system would complicate the actual operations. Along with the other issues discussed, WAAS remains a more practical system for airplanes. But EGNOS provides SBAS for both GPS and GLONASS... -- gmail originated posts filtered due to spam. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Galaxy XV / PRN 135 geo arrives at 133.1W, WAAS ranging back to 7.5meter UDRE | macpacheco | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | April 6th 11 07:17 PM |
Precision Airmotive LLC | Jerry Springer | Home Built | 53 | November 11th 07 08:41 PM |
Some IFR GPS's no longer useable | kevmor | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | May 28th 07 02:27 AM |
Non-precision approach without a published MAP? | Peter R. | Instrument Flight Rules | 20 | August 1st 06 08:09 AM |
Completing the Non-precision approach as a Visual Approach | John Clonts | Instrument Flight Rules | 45 | November 20th 03 05:20 AM |