Post Galileo

[ORAC]

The wierd thing is that the UK could launch a LEO GPS system within just a couple of years, based on the rapid advance in cubesat technology and U.K. expertise, along with the massive surge in cheap launch capability. The LEO GPS technology is there - and SpaceX alone intends to launch up to 20,000 cubesats by the middle 2020s. Galileo is becoming operational just as the era of large MEO orbit GPS satellites is becoming obsolete.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_(satellite_constellation)

Innovation: Navigation from LEO : GPS World (http://gpsworld.com/innovation-navigation-from-leo/)

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-will-launch-satellite-system-to-rival-eu-s-galileo-8l27sl8fc

UK will launch satellite system to rival EU’s Galileo

Theresa May is to order the development of a British satellite navigation system (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/we-d-be-lost-without-gps-says-head-of-royal-institute-of-navigation-mvq06x9vx)after losing patience with Brussels over threats to freeze the UK out of the EU’s new Galileo programme after Brexit.

The European Commission wants to limit Britain’s access to Galileo (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/may-fights-to-stay-in-range-of-10bn-eu-satellite-deal-thstqd8bx), intended to rival the US-controlled Global Positioning System, even though the UK has been a major backer of its development since 2003. Brussels insists the UK cannot be trusted (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/british-satellite-sector-feels-brexit-chill-f2rmdthrx)with sensitive data that provides a secure back-up for the new satellite system even though much of it has been developed in this country. A recent review suggested a failure of satellite systems and the millions of devices such as sat-navs that depend on them could cost the UK economy as much as £1 billion a day.

The dispute has even led to suggestions that the UK could sue for the return of the €1.4 billion so far invested in the €10 billion project. Downing Street stepped up the pressure yesterday, saying that Mrs May had reached the conclusion that the government should start work on a British system.

The UK Space Agency would lead a group to develop options for the new satellite system which would be a commercial rival to both Galileo and GPS, a No 10 source said. It would receive the same level of funding currently being spent on the UK contribution to the EU programme. It would use Britain’s overseas territories and crown dependencies to provide the necessary global terrestrial infrastructure — raising questions about where Galileo equipment, currently slated for the same locations, would be sited.

“The PM is clear our collective security is too important to haggle over,” the Downing Street source said. “We want full access to Galileo, including the crucial secure elements that will help guide British missiles should they be needed to keep us all safe. But if we don’t get access, we will find an alternative.”

[BEagle]

Brex****, the gift that keeps on giving....

[KenV]

....The UK Space Agency would lead a group to develop options for the new satellite system which would be a commercial rival to both Galileo and GPS, a No 10 source said. It would receive the same level of funding currently being spent on the UK contribution to the EU programme. It would use Britain’s overseas territories and crown dependencies to provide the necessary global terrestrial infrastructure — raising questions about where Galileo equipment, currently slated for the same locations, would be sited.Since the EU is dependent on using "British overseas territories and crown dependencies" for Galileo, could the UK not hold those locations hostage as bargaining chips to get Brussels to "play nice" with Galileo?

[Pontius Navigator]

Apart from giving the UK an independent referencing system should the US encrypt their system and lock others out, what does a 4th system bring to the party?

Are all current GPS similar to the original BBC TV - one channel and no ITV? Would new dual, tri, quad band devices be required for the millions of current users?

[ORAC]

I would imagine they would have to operate in the same band allocated by the ITU. In which case it should simply be a software update, in the same way your mobile phone receives updates to its carrier settings.

[BEagle]

Your ad hominem comment notwithstanding, Gilbert, it is the useless Davis, Fox, Gove, Johnson and the ridiculous Rees-Mogg who need to 'grow up' and listen to what the Upper House is telling them about this ridiculous plebiscite.

10 straight defeats over their absurd Bills should tell them something, except that they're too arrogant to listen.

[wiggy]

Since the EU is dependent on using "British overseas territories and crown dependencies" for Galileo, could the UK not hold those locations hostage as bargaining chips to get Brussels to "play nice" with Galileo?


The wording in the Times piece was “ It would use Britain’s overseas territories and crown dependencies to provide.. “ , not that these were the only plots of land on earth that were suitable or that the project falls apart without them .

I suspect If the U.K. drops out the EU will change plans (if they haven’t already) and use other territories (e.g.French ) as required, so no, the U.K. can’t use their own territories as sure fire bargaining chips.

[ImageGear]

10 straight defeats over their absurd Bills should tell them something, except that they're too arrogant to listen.

Might it be that their Lordships, not to mention members of the lower house, are no longer listening to the spoken will of the people. While the path to Brexit will be strewed with difficult decisions and compromises, it is nevertheless inexorable.
I did not vote for Brexit, however it was the decision of the people which, uninformed or informed, for better or worse, must be respected, else what is democracy.

IG

[pr00ne]

Er, isn’t the entire British space industry owned by EU companies? Airbus Space, Surrey Satellite etc?

[Melchett01]

Er, isn’t the entire British space industry owned by EU companies? Airbus Space, Surrey Satellite etc?




Probably - certainly at least a big chunk of it. I think Surrey Satellites actually sits within the Airbus family of companies. At that's part of the problem, as much as we might like to trumpet a UK space capability, I think the cost and infrastructure is simply too much to generate an entirely sovereign capability. We will always be reliant on partners for funding or payload delivery which presents a raft of issues complicating UK ambition. We put a Carbonite 2 based imaging system up into orbit recently for a trial, will be interesting to see how it goes, but knowing what is out there already, I think we've a long way to catch up.

[BEagle]

Perhaps Mother MayDay should visit the UK's 'National Space Centre'.....??

It's a museum just off the Leicester ring road :rolleyes:

EASA, ESA, Euratom - even Airbus D&S are pan-European organisations in which the UK is a major participant. As for trying to develop a commercial alternative to GPS, Galileo or GLONASS, whichever idiot thought that up needs to look further at the costs! It's taken a long time for EGNOS to get to its current state - and who would bother with some UK-specific BritNav system given the wide range of current GNSS SatNav receivers?

Another daft utterance from an increasingly desperate government...

[Heathrow Harry]

I think thePM has only asked for a study of feasibility and options TBF

no doubt it'll cost zillions and will be quietly forgotten...

[Pontius Navigator]

I would imagine they would have to operate in the same band allocated by the ITU. In which case it should simply be a software update, in the same way your mobile phone receives updates to its carrier settings.
ORAC, really? Have you ever known British industry to make something to an international standard that wasn't invented here? :O

[Aerials]

Back to satellite navigation systems, I wish the UK would put up their own system and make it "free to air".

It'll be a lot cheaper than coding everything so that the system operating company can screw different groups of users for ever more. Furthermore, it'll chop the legs off the Galileo operator, making their (and our, it is agreed) investment absolutely worthless.

I'd just like to see a bit of pushback to the 'user pays' philosophy and Government investment benefitting everyone who lives on our group of islands.

[Pontius Navigator]

Aerials, the only reason HMG would countenance free GPS would be from free competition. Late to the party, we would have no competitive advantage.

[ORAC]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ex-mi6-head-attacks-disloyal-civil-servants-in-satellites-row-7gc6pczzv

Ex-MI6 head attacks ‘disloyal’ civil servants in satellites row

Britain has been outwitted by the EU over the Galileo satellite system because ministers believed “incompetently ignorant or at worst disloyal” civil servants, according to the former head of MI6. Sir Richard Dearlove wants Theresa May to carry out her threat to leave the £8 billion programme and begin work on a UK-only system before becoming trapped in a Brussels “spider’s web”.

Galileo is a satellite-based navigation system created by the EU which aims to free European nations from having to rely on Russian, Chinese or US GPS systems. It is intended to be accurate within a metre and is considered crucial to UK military and intelligence needs. The European Commission insists that the UK must be blocked from Galileo’s back-up system, needed by the military, as only EU members can have access to sensitive encrypted signal. That has infuriated Mrs May and senior ministers, even those such as Philip Hammond who support keeping the UK closely aligned with the EU. A Downing Street source said the so-called “war cabinet” was united in its determination to force Brussels to back down.

Britain has contributed about 12 per cent of the cost of Galileo, with overseas territories such as the Falklands providing some of the ground stations. The chancellor has now authorised the effective sabotage of Galileo’s development by seeking to disrupt the transfer of encryption technology from a firm in the UK to France.

However, Sir Richard and Professor Gwythian Prins, a former adviser to the chief of the defence staff, believe ministers were naive ever to believe they could force the EU to allow the UK full access to the critical system.

“The idea that the EU might agree to the UK participating on its own terms was always totally unrealistic. British civil servants who sold this idea to their ministers were at best incompetently ignorant or, at worst, disloyal,” they write in a paper to be published on the Briefings for Brexit website. “In the world of EU officials, there can be no deviation from the rulebook . . . So the EU was not ‘playing hardball’ on Galileo . . . It is merely operating within the strictures of its own vast and inflexible acquis of directives and treaties, just as it will do on all aspects of our ‘negotiations’. EU officials will already have assessed the impact of additional running costs, new tenders, recruiting new expertise, restarting work, new ground stations and the legal and technical issues of Galileo without the UK.

“They will have grasped that the UK’s departure means that a considerable chunk of finance, most of the expertise and several ground stations will be lost from the project . . . So they need to trap the UK fly in a spider’s web so that after Brexit we are powerless, but still contributing money and the essential skills the EU needs. Since so much of Galileo is British, the UK might do as the prime minister is reported to be considering seriously, namely develop its own global navigation network. We strongly encourage her to take this prudent step in the interests of our national security.”........

[VinRouge]

I think thePM has only asked for a study of feasibility and options TBF

no doubt it'll cost zillions and will be quietly forgotten...
plus the power output of a cube sat will mean it will be utterly useless in a contested environment.

[ORAC]

VinRouge.

Inverse square rule applies. Read the second link in my original post. LEO cubesat GPS will generate a received power between 300-2400 times that received by the current MEO GPS satellites.....

[ion_berkley]

VinRouge.

Inverse square rule applies. Read the second link in my original post. LEO cubesat GPS will generate a received power between 300-2400 times that received by the current MEO GPS satellites.....

Orac,
Just for the record since you keep quoting from this magazine article which is not exactly "neutral" in what it's selling....
Free Space Path Loss = -10 * log10((4*pi*distance/wavelength)^2)
Distance from GPS orbit to 0 degree elevation on Earth (assuming average earth diameter of 12,734,000m) = square root (20200000*(20200000+12734000)) = ~25792766m
Distance form Iridium Orbit to 0 degree elevation on Earth (assuming average earth diameter of 12,734,000m) = square root (781000*(20200000+781000)) = ~3248879m
L1 GPS frequency of 1575MHz

That gives path loss of -184.6dB for GPS and -166.6dB for Iridium, so a difference of ~18dB... or 63x in pprune layman terms.
And that's assuming all other things are equal....a "cubesat" and a Block III GPS satellite are most definitely *not* equal on more points than I'd care to enumerate on pprune.
I'll stop now before this becomes a rant about skewed math to support agenda's...wait, there's a perfect segue back to Brexit....

[VinRouge]

Orac,
Just for the record since you keep quoting from this magazine article which is not exactly "neutral" in what it's selling....
Free Space Path Loss = -10 * log10((4*pi*distance/wavelength)^2)
Distance from GPS orbit to 0 degree elevation on Earth (assuming average earth diameter of 12,734,000m) = square root (20200000*(20200000+12734000)) = ~25792766m
Distance form Iridium Orbit to 0 degree elevation on Earth (assuming average earth diameter of 12,734,000m) = square root (781000*(20200000+781000)) = ~3248879m
L1 GPS frequency of 1575MHz

That gives path loss of -184.6dB for GPS and -166.6dB for Iridium, so a difference of ~18dB... or 63x in pprune layman terms.
And that's assuming all other things are equal....a "cubesat" and a Block III GPS satellite are most definitely *not* equal on more points than I'd care to enumerate on pprune.
I'll stop now before this becomes a rant about skewed math to support agenda's...wait, there's a perfect segue back to Brexit....

I would love to see how they would squeeze the antennae in there for a start. One with a semi decent SNR. How you are supposed to fit a decent atomic clock, transponder, processor and the rest of the gubbins in something smaller than a packet of rice crispies, only the gubnermint can explain.

[ORAC]

ion-Berkeley
​​​​​​
Block III GPS May be the bees knees, though the program seems well behind schedule and over budget, but it’s not something the UK could ever afford. If there is an alternative it would seem to be LEO based.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/487e/24483f22b43d57da78772dac9d20a948ec23.pdf

Navigation from LEO: Current capability and future promise : GPS World (http://gpsworld.com/navigation-from-leo-current-capability-and-future-promise/)

Satelles shows improved PNT accuracy from LEO constellation : GPS World (http://gpsworld.com/satelles-shows-improved-pnt-accuracy-from-leo-constellation/)

VinRouge, who needs them all? The idea is to leverage the existence of the LEO constellation, not build mini GPS satellites each providing a service.

[Flugplatz]

Surely Britain's security relies on NATO which presumably relies on the US GPS? Is it planned to switch to Galileo or somehow incorporate it as as a substitute? If not, then I presume this is more about losing future work-share and the benefits of the what has already been invested?

Or are other there other 'security' concerns that most aren't generally aware of?

[ORAC]

The Times:

”......Britain is ready to go it alone or team up with another power to set up a competing military satellite system if the European Union excludes it from Galileo (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/brexit-dont-underestimate-the-gravity-of-galileo-0670vb95l), Philip Hammond said this morning.

The chancellor, who is due to meet other finance ministers in Brussels, said that Britain needed full military access to a satellite positioning system in the national interest.

“We need access to a satellite system of this kind. A plan has always been to work as a core member of the Galileo project, contributing financially and technically to the project,” he said. “If that proves impossible then Britain will have to go it alone, possibly with other partners outside Europe and the US, to build a third competing system. But for national security strategic reasons we need access to a system and will ensure that we get it.”......

[Heathrow Harry]

The EU, the entity that keeps on giving the UK ****!

Which we brought upon ourselves of course - people were warned what would happen but they preferred Blue Passports and £ 350 mm a week for the NHS - or maybe a new plane for Boris................

[VinRouge]

Plus an annual customs bill to business that is alone 4 billion more than the cost of membership.

[Icare9]

Is there really a need for more Sat Nav systems?
I can understand that some satellites may reach their life expectancy or orbit decay, but what we have now isn't instantly up to date for every new road, either in the UK, Europe or elsewhere....
as for in car systems, you usually pay through the nose for "updates" which aren't current, simply the latest possibly months old) updates.

Currently, there are several manufacturers each with a range of models, some with better clarity, size of screen or specialised for HGV's motor bikes etc....

Do they get their mapping from different satellites?

As for the Brexit comments, I'll just say that I believe democracy to be the will of the majority. We can all speculate but it ought to be concomitant that a majority decision should then be supported by the minority to make it work in the easiest way possible for the good of the Country, not snipe and obfuscate every step of the way.. 'nuff said.

[drustsonoferp]

The referendum was subsequently ratified by an overwhelming majority in the House of Commons in a vote by MPs
More or less my point: the urge to forge ahead, and above all not to be painted as somehow undemocratic has prevented any meaningful debate of either what the meaning of the referendum result was, or what our future options are.

I cannot imagine history treating this period of British politics kindly.

However, if this results in a long overdue wake up call to the UK government of the importance of preserving domestic strengths, and capabilities which have been allowed to wither because apparently the market will always be infallible in knowing best, then maybe something good might come of it.

[Heathrow Harry]

This whole shambles makes losing the American Colonies look like a master stroke IMHO - as for cutting off your nose to spite your face you'd have to go back to Troy I think for as bad an example of lunacy..................

[[email protected]]

drustsonorerp - agreed - most MPs knew it was a crap result but felt they had to honour their less well informed constituents views. Lack of moral courage.

[Top West 50]

There is a good appraisal of the issues in the current Aerospace

[KenV]

As for the Brexit comments, I'll just say that I believe democracy to be the will of the majority..It depends a LOT on the nature of the "democracy". What you say is true of a pure democracy. The majority rules. But that can be very very bad if the majority decide to do something stupid or something evil. In the US we have a Constitutional Republic, with the people's representatives democratically elected and bound/limited by the Constitution. There's a vast difference.

[Mil-26Man]

As for the Brexit comments, I'll just say that I believe democracy to be the will of the majority. We can all speculate but it ought to be concomitant that a majority decision should then be supported by the minority to make it work in the easiest way possible for the good of the Country, not snipe and obfuscate every step of the way.. 'nuff said.

I agree, as evidenced by the way in which everyone, in particular reactionary Tories and the right-wing media, got behind the democratic will of the people to join the precursor to the European Union in 1975, and how since then they have all worked together in a selfless spirit of national unity for the good of the country. Oh, wait...

[Top West 50]

Parliament voted for a referendum and agreed to be bound by the result. Parliament voted, overwhelmingly, to send the article 50 letter.
Now, can we please resume the GPS discussion?

[Brat]

Which we brought upon ourselves of course - people were warned what would happen but they preferred Blue Passports and £ 350 mm a week for the NHS - or maybe a new plane for Boris................
What a load of bollocks.

[glad rag]

Indeed <insert Mel Gibson meme here> the fallout for NOT following the majority vote will make Brexit look like a piece of cake....

[FlightlessParrot]

Is there really a need for more Sat Nav systems?
I can understand that some satellites may reach their life expectancy or orbit decay, but what we have now isn't instantly up to date for every new road, either in the UK, Europe or elsewhere....
as for in car systems, you usually pay through the nose for "updates" which aren't current, simply the latest possibly months old) updates.

Currently, there are several manufacturers each with a range of models, some with better clarity, size of screen or specialised for HGV's motor bikes etc....

Do they get their mapping from different satellites?



The mapping does NOT come from the satellites. The satellites, and the local receiver, give a position in space--latitude and longitude, and height above some calculated datum. The maps that translate that into a position on the road, or wherever, are held on the device, and the frequency of their updating (and their accuracy) depends on the map supplier. This is why, on the whole, Google maps wins, because you download a map pretty much every time you use it, and they keep their maps up to date.

Another set of satellites won't affect this situation, nor is it being proposed for the convenience of motorists.

[rlsbutler]

ORAC talks of Galileo becoming obsolete.

We hear a lot of the Russians and Chinese developing anti-satellite weaponry. Is this what really makes Galileo obsolete and are all three current GPSs equally vulnerable ?

Can our successor system be designed to defeat or avoid this threat ? – or must off-the-shelf technology and low orbit leave our proposed system as vulnerable as the others ?

[Lascaille]

We hear a lot of the Russians and Chinese developing anti-satellite weaponry.

We do? Sorry I didn't realise it was 1969 again. Russian ASAT program dates back at least that far. The Americans have one which launches off a F-15 following a zoom climb, the Russian one launches from a site like an ICBM.

This thing about these cubesats replacing Galileo or dedicated satellites is just BS.

(Listen in now sis 'cos I like you, we've got a lot in common.)

To pick up a signal on the ground using a nondirectional antenna mandates a directional antenna on the satellite _or_ a very very porky transmitter. The current GPS signals go out at 25w and a directional antenna is used. The antenna gain gives a directed power equivalence of about 300w. (That means, if you had no directional antenna you'd need to transmit with 300w to achieve the same signal strength at any given receiver.) A cubesat can generate about 20w max. So the generated power budget doesn't even cover the required transmit power, let alone the much greater input power needed into the transmitter and then the power for all the other electronics, computer, clock, stabilisation etc.

There's also a very real question as to whether all the required components would physically fit into a cubesat.

The altitude of a cubesat is also very low which results in an orbital period of only a couple of hours. Assuming a 45 degree orbital inclination and an observer on the equator any cubesat will be visible for approximately 10 minutes per orbit. The current system results in a Doppler shift at the receiver of +/- 10KHz changing over a ~6h satellite visibility window. Cubesat altitudes make that +/- 80KHz over 8 minutes. So compared with 'standard GPS' the signal must be found in a frequency range 8x the size and within 1.25% of the time (= 80x faster). For a modern receiver that's trivial but it's just one example of how changing the satellite configuration can make a problem 8x80 = 640x harder.

In addition, cubesat LEO orbits are unstable - air drag is significant. Altitude losses of up to 10m per orbit have been measured. A 2m satellite altitude loss between entering and leaving a ground receiver's field of view is feasible. The ephemeris would have a usable lifespan of minutes. You would need a ground tracking/control facility in each sector where people would be using the system - because ephemeris data for a satellite that's just come over the horizon would almost certainly be outdated. With the satellites being so low the ground visibility radius would be ~1700km - so your ground station would have to be at least that close to your forces in order to be able to update at least 50% of the satellites they'd have in sight with one good ephemeris value.

The only thing that makes it objectively impossible is the power requirement. If we handwave that away - nuclear cubesats! - okay so then our GPScubes dont need orientation (a prereq for directional antennas) as they'll just belt out 10kw in all directions. The satellite's working parts then have to fit... And not melt... And the receivers have to be full of Xilinx's FPGA wonderfulness and able to apply a 500hz bin FFT to a 160khz range in five microseconds... And it's still all for nothing because the satellites themselves have unstable orbits. And our best case location is the sum of the best case orbital variance for each satellite we're using, factored for receiver aspect.... So each satellite could lose up to 10m alt per period, which of course means a reduced orbital speed... Starting at 450.01km altitude a 10m drop to 450.00 would mean the orbital speed would decrease by 0.559 cm/sec... Final orbital period would be 01h33m35.2s. Assume the ephemeris was updated one period before we gain sight of it, then during that period say it'll lose 10m alt and 0.559cm/sec orbital speed... so our average speed variance during that period will be half that so it'll have not-travelled 5615.2s x 0.2795cm/sec = 15.7m retrograde mean anomaly position error... then 10m altitude position error... So worst case pseudorange error...Satellite rises coming basically straight at you fudge the cosine error to zero for both terms so 15.7m error. You need 4 for a location so worst case = 4 satellites coming straight at you = position uncertainty a circle radius 15.7m = 31.4m. Then add all the errors that affect GPS. Splendid system. Solid gold.

Dunno why you can't figure this stuff out for yourself really it's not rocket science, just a bit of trig and some light reading.

[rlsbutler]

Sorry I asked

[ORAC]

LascIlle, I refer you to the first link in my post #22.

It isn’t necessary to duplicate GPS/GLONASS/Galileo; simply leverage their existence to support a more robust LEO constellation to provide the equivalent of their precision service.

[KenV]

It isn’t necessary to duplicate GPS/GLONASS/Galileo; simply leverage their existence to support a more robust LEO constellation to provide the equivalent of their precision service.
Wait, let me get this straight. The point of a separate, sovereign satnav system is to be independent of GPS/GLONASS/Galileo, but the system being proposed is completely dependent on GPS/GLONASS/Galileo. What's wrong with this picture?

[ORAC]

None of them are going to turn off their public signal - certainly never all three, they are all used to widely. The problem, as being mooted with Galileo, as access to their precision mode - which can be circumvented as described.

[KenV]

None of them are going to turn off their public signal - certainly never all three, they are all used to widely. The problem, as being mooted with Galileo, as access to their precision mode - which can be circumvented as described.Really? One can create a high precision signal cheaply and easily be scabbing off the low precision signals of GPS/GLONASS/Galileo? And put it in LEO? And use low power omni directional transmitters? And not have to create a separate ground system all over the globe to update this system continually in real time? If you say so. But let's just say I'm skeptical.

[JG54]

There's been much talk recently of the resurgence of new generation stellar - inertial systems, along with emerging tech, such as the quantum compass.

Seems the very real potential for denial (by means various) of the GPS signal in a contested environment is suddenly on the agenda of many agencies.

Just sayin'...

[ORAC]

KenV - Speak to the Japanese - they have one in service......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-Zenith_Satellite_System

QZSS (Quasi-Zenith Satellite System) - Cabinet Office (Japan) (http://qzss.go.jp/en/index.html)

Centimeter Level Augmentation Service (CLAS)?Service Overview?QZSS (Quasi-Zenith Satellite System) - Cabinet Office (Japan) (http://qzss.go.jp/en/overview/services/sv06_clas.html)

[Lascaille]

KenV - Speak to the Japanese - they have one in service......

You're being fairly disingenuous here. I read back on post 22, it's interesting. It matches some of what I said in my rantpost, that with an altitude of 400km you basically have a 10 minute window during which the satellite will be visible and the ephemeris value will be valid.

You want to piggyback off the existing GPS constellation and use codeless p(y) dual frequency receivers on the cubesats so they can self-update their ephemeris. That works just fine. Many satellites in orbit today have GPS receivers.

Your derived system's error will be its own 'native' error (from the cubesats to the ground receiver) multiplied by the cubesats own GPS position error from when they self-located. The improved accuracies shown in the post 22 links can only be achieved when the cubesat ephemeris data is updated directly with reference to known fixed points i.e. using ground stations, the same way the GPS ephemeris is updated.

You are in reality totally dependent on the navigation message provided by the other system.

You gain only a perceived immunity from jamming which lasts only until your adversaries work out what frequency your cubesats are using and jam it.

[Lascaille]

KenV - Speak to the Japanese - they have one in service......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-Zenith_Satellite_System

QZSS (Quasi-Zenith Satellite System) - Cabinet Office (Japan) (http://qzss.go.jp/en/index.html)

Centimeter Level Augmentation Service (CLAS)?Service Overview?QZSS (Quasi-Zenith Satellite System) - Cabinet Office (Japan) (http://qzss.go.jp/en/overview/services/sv06_clas.html)

ORAC these are ground-reliant systems.

The QZSS satellites do act like 'special' GPS satellites located optimally for Japan but the attached enhancement services (CLAS, SLAS) rely on many many ground stations uploading their known vs measured position errors to the system.

An 'error map' is then calculated and capable receivers can obtain it from the satellite and then determine the system error that applies in their locality. That provides the sub-meter and centimeter level accuracy. No nearby ground stations = no improved accuracy.

[rjtjrt]

ORAC these are ground-reliant systems.

The QZSS satellites do act like 'special' GPS satellites located optimally for Japan but the attached enhancement services (CLAS, SLAS) rely on many many ground stations uploading their known vs measured position errors to the system.

An 'error map' is then calculated and capable receivers can obtain it from the satellite and then determine the system error that applies in their locality. That provides the sub-meter and centimeter level accuracy. No nearby ground stations = no improved accuracy.

To use that system, you say you need receivers “capable” of using it.
Do you know if receivers such as WAAS capable equipment?
Just trying to work out if in Japan the commonly available GPS navigation units are able to use the QZSS.
Hope I made myself clear??

[Lascaille]

To use that system, you say you need receivers “capable” of using it.
Do you know if receivers such as WAAS capable equipment?
Just trying to work out if in Japan the commonly available GPS navigation units are able to use the QZSS.
Hope I made myself clear??

http://qzss.go.jp/en/usage/products/list.html

Check this out.

[ORAC]

The Times: Brussels starts countdown to sideline Britain from Galileo

The European Union has taken the first step to creating its own space agency that would sideline Britain after Brexit and seal the control of Brussels over civil and military satellite systems such as Galileo. The power grab comes as the European Commission uses Brexit to push Britain to the margins of Europe’s satellite industry, which is increasingly significant for military and commercial uses.

David Davis, the Brexit secretary, yesterday accused the EU of putting dogma before security by pushing Britain out of the Galileo satellite programme, with military capabilities Britain had helped pay for and design. “The commission’s position seems to be shooting itself in the foot just to prove the gun works,” he said.......

Jan Wörner, director-general of the European Space Agency (ESA), a non-EU inter-governmental organisation that includes the UK as well as Canada and Norway, has protested that the commission’s proposals would be costly, divisive and bureaucratic. “Europe, this is to say at least the EU, ESA and their respective member states together, must join forces,” Dr Wörner wrote on his blog. “There is no need to develop a new space agency in parallel in Europe, the ramp-up of which would take decades and cost billions and would therefore in itself be a major risk to the programmes it manages. We need to streamline, not double administrative layers.”

Under proposals published yesterday, the EU would directly control the civil-military Galileo and Copernicus satellite projects after 2020, potentially relegating the ESA to a technical and advisory role. The EU has rejected a British demand for access to Galileo’s heavily encrypted Public Regulated Service signal, used for military purposes, on grounds of security. The plan envisages control of the satellite projects becoming an “EU agency for the space programme” with powers to “ensure the security of all the components of the programme” by ensuring key contracts are only issued to EU member states.

Commission officials dismissed Dr Wörner’s comments as “unfounded”. “The security component is increasingly important,” a commission official said in reference to Britain’s exclusion from the military elements of Galileo.

Bleddyn Bowen, a space policy researcher at Leicester University, said: “Brexit seems to be accelerating the process of dovetailing ESA into EU space policy. This institutional action and its name shows that having a big member [the UK] in the ESA that is able to threaten to complicate the governance of EU-funded space projects seems to have increased the desire of the EU to increase its governing muscle in European space policy.”.......

[BEagle]

David Davis, the Brexit secretary, yesterday accused the EU of putting dogma before security...

"Pot calling kettle....."

The gift that keeps on giving.

[ShotOne]

..au contraire, Mr Davis has made clear all along his desire for a deal based on pragmatism rather than dogma. By contrast it's hard to view spending 7billion Euros to largely duplicate the role of an existing agency as anything other than dogmatic.

[melmothtw]

David Davis, the Brexit secretary, yesterday accused the EU of putting dogma before security...

Sorry, I had to stop reading there as I was laughing so hard.

..au contraire, Mr Davis has made clear all along his desire for a deal based on pragmatism rather than dogma.

Brexit IS dogma!

By contrast it's hard to view spending 7billion Euros to largely duplicate the role of an existing agency as anything other than dogmatic.

How much are we going to have to spend to create our own system, ShotOne? Is that dogma to you?

[ShotOne]

I'm sorry to hear you disagree with the referendum result.

[melmothtw]

I didn't agree with the last general election result either, so what?

[ShotOne]

Exactly. (FWIW I didn’t vote for Brexit either but, as you say, so what?)

[rlsbutler]

I'm sorry to hear you disagree with the referendum result.

I am sorry to hear the referendum result discussed here. It is a most contentious topic and has absolutely nothing to do with a professional pilots' rumour network. This talk is as distracting as the sentimental complaints made when we discuss fatal accidents.

Beagle is a respected veteran of this site. He has more than once unnecessarily imposed on us his views on the referendum and on what follows. He sets a very bad example and spoils his previously admirable record.

[Mil-26Man]

It keeps coming up in this and other threads rlsbutler because it pervades every facet of life in this country right now, and is likely to do so for years to come. Military aviation is no exception.

I get that Brexiteers don't want to hear about it (with good reason), and believe me Remainers wish we didn't to have to be talking about it. But that's democracy, eh?

[Blacksheep]

As usual the argument has been twisted arse-about-face by the European Commission. The reality is that an independent United Kingdom cannot entrust its security to the European Union. When it comes to security we need our own military system that is not reliant upon a political-economic entity that includes former Warsaw Pact nations that are only in it for the money.

Need I remind anyone on here that it has traditionally been Britain that has come to the aid of Europe ever since the days of the thirty years war and not the other way round?

[Mil-26Man]

an independent United Kingdom

The United Kingdom was and is independent!! All talk of 'no control over our own borders' is tosh - the government could deport any EU citizen who had not found gainful employment within 3 months of arriving, but CHOSE/CHOOSES not to do so. And the rules that the EU sets - we AGREED to them all!

When it comes to security we need our own military system that is not reliant upon a political-economic entity that includes former Warsaw Pact nations that are only in it for the money.

Like Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia? Go read up on the Battle of Britain. Also, all of these 'former Warsaw Pact nations' are now part of NATO - should we leave that?

Need I remind anyone on here that it has traditionally been Britain that has come to the aid of Europe ever since the days of the thirty years war and not the other way round? And it is largely because of the EU that we haven't had to do so since 1945!!

[Fitter2]

And it is largely because of the EU that we haven't had to do so since 1945!!

The usual EU canard. The EU was formed after the Soviet Union collapsed (Maastricht Treaty, 1993). You could argue an effective date of 1986 (Single European Act).

If you substitute NATO for the EU in your statement, it might make sense, but NATO has many non-EU members, including the most powerful member by far.

But enough of Brexit intrusion.....

[Mil-26Man]

If you substitute NATO for the EU in your statement, it might make sense, but NATO has many non-EU members, including the most powerful member by far.

You forget that NATO includes Turkey which invaded Cyprus, which at that time was under the effective control of NATO member Greece.

No EU (or its pre-1993 or 1986 iterations) member state has ever gone to war with another EU member state. Fact.

No worries on the Brexit intrusion, it's important stuff.

[glad rag]

Fact.

Love that little witticism when the FACTS are presented.

Ref. A Compendium of Witticisms (http://highered.mheducation.com/sites/0073407321/student_view0/part3/chapter7/a_compendium_of_witticisms.html)

[Lascaille]

When it comes to security we need our own military system that is not reliant upon a political-economic entity that includes former Warsaw Pact nations that are only in it for the money.

We do? Why? GPS has been operational since 1990, any particular hurry?

Also a fully independent navigation system will require about 24 satellites. How many operational frontline aircraft are there again? Just to compare one thing against the other...

[BEagle]

Lascaille wrote: Also a fully independent navigation system will require about 24 satellites.

Not forgetting all the GNSS receiver modificaton needed to receive such an absurd BritNav folly.... As well as the command and control infrastructure, launch sites etc. etc.

[air pig]

You forget that NATO includes Turkey which invaded Cyprus, which at that time was under the effective control of NATO member Greece.

No EU (or its pre-1993 or 1986 iterations) member state has ever gone to war with another EU member state. Fact.

No worries on the Brexit intrusion, it's important stuff.

They dn't spend enough on their armed forces to go to war with each other.

[Mil-26Man]

They dn't spend enough on their armed forces to go to war with each other.

They dn't need to spend enough on their armed forces to go to war with each other - fixed it for you.

And that's largely because of the EU.

[ORAC]

That’s it - the UK is out of Galileo.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jun/13/eu-member-states-block-uks-access-to-galileo-satellite-programme-after-brexit

[Onceapilot]

That’s it - the UK is out of Galileo.


An interesting situation.
Due to the high-pitched UK Political stance on this, I suspect that the implications for UK Mil / UK tech are somewhat extreme. The reality of "going it alone" costs are considerable. My guess is UK will have to suck it up and crawl on knees to POTUS. UK tech will take a hit.
The further implications for NATO cohesion are grave. The Donald is intent on ruling the roost and putting Europe back in it's box. :ooh:

OAP

[Heathrow Harry]

The usual EU canard. The EU was formed after the Soviet Union collapsed (Maastricht Treaty, 1993). You could argue an effective date of 1986 (Single European Act).

If you substitute NATO for the EU in your statement, it might make sense, but NATO has many non-EU members, including the most powerful member by far.

But enough of Brexit intrusion.....
iron & steel community 1951
treaty of rome 1956
we applied to join in 1962

I dont know where you get 1986 from as its the same organisation,staffed by the same people and located in the same place for 67 years........

[Just This Once...]

It gives us a fair inkling of how the UK military, security and intelligence organisations will be treated post-exit. It seems absurd that any EU NATO member would vote-out another NATO member on the basis of operational security, let alone pocketing a quick £Billion.

I think the French desire for a strategic military partnership with the UK is utterly DOA. No doubt one Brussel's based organisation is rather pleased with the broken furniture today but I doubt the other Brussel's based organisation will see it in the same way - especially with the dwindling support in the current US administration for all things NATO. Still, Stu Peach is know for his political correctness, superficial analysis and light-touch style of leadership so I am sure he will play nice.

Anybody else now view the eastern fringe of NATO as sacrificial buffer states rather than a trip-wire?

[Mil-26Man]

It seems absurd that any EU NATO member would vote-out another NATO member on the basis of operational security, let alone pocketing a quick £Billion.

What's absurd is the UK being surprised that the rules that it helped write up and which it fully agreed to are being enforced. Leaving the EU means the UK is making itself a third-country, and so is excluding itself in accordance with the rules and regulations that it helped draft and implement.

Brexit means Brexit, folks. Own it.

[Onceapilot]

Depending upon circumstances, there could conceivably be security advantages of going solidly with the USA. I suspect that the USA have far better policing capabilities in space for a start. It would also not surprise me if the EU did some other weird political contortion with the Galileo system in the future.

OAP

[esa-aardvark]

Somewhere on my computer at home (I am in Spain for a while), I have a copy of a book written
by Jean Monnet, K Adenaur & others outlining the path to European Unification. Published about 1933, I think.
"Change things a little at a time until there is no going back" comes to mind.
Their plans were interrupted a bit by WW2.

[Mil-26Man]

We could have access to any system we want, including Galileo. The point is, that as a third-country to any of them we will have to pay. Do you think that the current US administration is minded to give us mates rates?

[esa-aardvark]

Read up a bit on Galileo (and argued with some former mates). Galileo seems to be a bit of a vanity
project aimed at cycling taxpayers money around EU Aerospace companies. Some satellite hardware problems,
so costs will go up. PRS service is full of could/should/might statements. Is the present spat just a storm in a teacup ?

[VinRouge]

Time to give the Airbus space asset exclusivity contract a firm fisting up the backside, fingers spread!

[Daysleeper]

Time to give the Airbus space asset exclusivity contract a firm fisting up the backside, fingers spread!

the one they got cos they build the satellites in the UK and employ about 3,000 people in the space sector in England... talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face.

[VinRouge]

Read up a bit on Galileo (and argued with some former mates). Galileo seems to be a bit of a vanity
project aimed at cycling taxpayers money around EU Aerospace companies. Some satellite hardware problems,
so costs will go up. PRS service is full of could/should/might statements.k Is the present spat just a storm in a teacup ?

Public level accuracy <1m and PRS accuracy allegedly at 1cm. It has a lot of applications. Now unavailable, thanks to Brexit, for a whole host of game changing technologies.

As someone said, for those that wanted Brexit, the whole country try is now enjoying the benefit.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone is talking about the UK being unable to access the Galileo signal, at either level of service? I think the issue is sovereign access to the encryption algorithms, the ability to "see inside" the black boxes and to build our own kit rather than buy from the EU. 3rd party access will cost, and obviously it won't be a sovereign capability, so if they decide to cut us off, we're out. But the service will still be available.

Might have the wrong end of the stick on that, but fairly sure I don't!

[melmothtw]

You're not wrong. Norway and Switzerland have third-party access and the UK can too. The issue is that the UK does not want third-party access as it means no access to the encrypted PRS system and no industrial participation in the military aspects of the system.

The whole notion that we can just use GPS instead is a red herring, as no one is saying we can't use Galileo

[VinRouge]

the one they got cos they build the satellites in the UK and employ about 3,000 people in the space sector in England... talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face.
Now moving back to the continent and still ripping off mod.

[Onceapilot]

Read up a bit on Galileo (and argued with some former mates). PRS service is full of could/should/might statements. Is the present spat just a storm in a teacup ?

I doubt that it is just a storm in a teacup. I suspect that the UK Mil hopes for the Galileo system were that it would (in future) provide greater levels of accuracy and security of operation for UK developed weapons and systems, in an EW environment. It would seem very strange for the UK Gov to propose spending £???Billions on a go-it-alone space based nav system for domestic peacetime Sat navs when there is no issue with getting that. No Sir! I think we are talking some serious future capabilities that are now placed in jeopardy without access to our "own" system . :oh:

OAP

[esa-aardvark]

Sold some land once, in good old New Zealand. I had to pay for a DGPS boundary survey
of high accuracy (Centimetre level).what more does Galileo bring to the party ?

[VinRouge]

Sold some land once, in good old New Zealand. I had to pay for a DGPS boundary survey
of high accuracy (Centimetre level).what more does Galileo bring to the party ?
That level of accuracy without the expense of a surveyed DGPS and associated equipment?

DGPS adds a layer of complexity not required by a system having innate accuracy. Probably a lot quicker too. Not sure even DGPS can return centimetre level accuracy without averaging a lot of data points.

[KenV]

Not sure even DGPS can return centimetre level accuracy without averaging a lot of data points.
It's quite common here in the US. The surveyors here use a receiver on top of a pole and hold the pole steady for about 15 seconds while pressing a button. Averaging all those steady state signals for 15 seconds gives sub centimeter precision and accuracy. Quick and cheap.

[Just This Once...]

That method still puts an atmospheric model between the receiver and the satellites, so the stationary accuracy is only as good as that provided by the model vs real conditions at that very moment. Access to both signals removes that guesswork. If you remove the standing-still-for-ages-at-a-set-altitude bit, say for a GPS bomb in flight, the accuracy of the survey pole becomes rather rubbish rather quickly.

[ORAC]

Sunday Telegraph reporting Galileo replacement system has been given the government go ahead, signed off by both PM and Chancellor. First £100m in funding for contracts has already been signed off by the treasury.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/25/theresa-may-orders-space-race-brexit-sat-nav-system-rival-eus/

[glad rag]

Sunday Telegraph reporting Galileo replacement system has been given the government go ahead, signed off by both PM and Chancellor. First £100m in funding for contracts has already been signed off by the treasury.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/25/theresa-may-orders-space-race-brexit-sat-nav-system-rival-eus/


No doubt that pair have also included road usage tracking as well...

[esa-aardvark]

One vanity project following another

[Rosevidney1]

Well the EU lot are petulant about it. We offered to be part of it, they didn't want us. Who can be surprised at that?

[ORAC]

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/11/11/brit_boffins_quantum_compass/

Brit boffins build quantum compass, say goodbye to GPS

British boffins have developed a self-contained and tamper-proof compass that doesn't rely on GPS signals to provide a highly accurate measure of where it is in the world. The compass is a quantum accelerometer that is capable of measuring tiny shifts in supercooled atoms and so calculate how far and how fast the device has moved. Stuck on a boat, it would mean that the captain knows exactly where his ship was without having to rely on orbiting satellites.

The system has been designed by boffins (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/188973/quantum-compass-could-allow-navigation-without/) at Imperial College, London – who developed a laser system for cooling atoms down – and at photonics and quantum technology specialist M Squared (http://www.m2lasers.com/quantum_compass_could_allow_navigation_without_relying_on_sa tellites.html) - which developed another laser system to act as an "optical ruler." Their work has been funded by the UK's Ministry of Defence.

Although GPS satellites are a modern marvel and are used by just about everyone to identify their precise location the fact is that the system is not perfect. A phone's GPS is accurate to roughly 15 feet, although military GPS devices can be accurate to centimeters......

But that's not why the Ministry of Defence is interested in a quantum compass: its concern is that the GPS system is vulnerable to attack or deliberate disruption. A GPS signal could be spoofed or blocked for instance. When you're thinking about nuclear submarines, it's usually best to consider the worst.

"Pirates are now sophisticated enough to cause disruptions to ships, and lure them to rocks or take over and board them, by disrupting GPS," said Graeme Malcolm, the CEO of M Squared. “They can be an even bigger issue in areas of defense and security, where the resilience and security of cities, countries are impacted. This new device is an absolute reference that goes down to the level of atoms.".....

The system could be of particular benefit to the UK's military after Europe made it clear that following Brexit, the UK would no longer gain secure access to Europe's new Galileo GPS system despite years of assisting in the system's development and deployment......

The prototype system shown off this week in London is about three-feet wide and high and it is incredibly expensive. Plus it can currently only measure in one plane. The boffins say they will soon be able to take measurements in three planes - making it an entirely independent super compass that can tell you where exactly it is at any point. But what is does represent is the first practical prototype of a theoretical piece of physics.........

"This commercially viable quantum device, the accelerometer, will put the UK at the heart of the coming quantum age," said M Squared's Malcolm.....

[MPN11]

Sounds awesome ... and big and expensive, as noted. Not something to stick on the average dashboard!

[denachtenmai]

Not something to stick on the average dashboard!

Yet, give it a few years.

[ORAC]

First generation INAS system

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/440x295/nasm2013_00298_b416233f8b571f35a00389bcb75bdd7640ae390d.jpg

Modern INAS system.....

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1000x742/ellipse_n_gnss_inertial_navigation_system_86086460a221820180 e4ac4ec8a4457dc3de7bac.jpg

[jmelson]

Is there really a need for more Sat Nav systems?

Do they get their mapping from different satellites?


The MAPS do not come from the satellites, ONLY the position. Some other scheme (built-in maps, CDROM downloads, cell phone-internet, whatever) provides the maps.

Jon

[ORAC]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/30/brexit-uk-may-never-recover-12bn-invested-in-eu-galileo-satellite-system

.......On Friday, May officially announced that the UK would be pulling out of the system and made no mention of any attempt to recoup the UK’s investment.

“The commission decided that we would be barred from having full aspects of the Galileo programme and so it is right for us to look for alternatives because it would be wrong to put our [armed] services relying on a system on which they couldn’t be sure of,” May told reporters in Buenos Aires while attending the G20 summit. “That would not be in our national interest.”

She added: “So what is in our national interest is to say no, you haven’t allowed us full access, so we will develop an alternative, we will look at alternative options, we are doing that work but we will work with other international partners to do so as well.”

Whitehall sources said the issue of the £1.2bn was yet to be finally resolved because the UK could still choose to be involved in commercial aspects of the system.

“We will be discussing our past contributions to the financing of Galileo in the upcoming talks,” a senior UK official said.

Downing Street said the UK would explore options to build its own Global Navigation Satellite system to help guide military drones, run energy networks and other commercial uses. May said the UK had “world-class engineers and steadfast allies around the world. We are not short of options.”

Gavin Williamson, the defence secretary, said the development of a new system would be an opportunity to draw on British skills and expertise in satellite technology. “Space poses a new and increasingly dangerous front for warfare and it is crucial to push ahead with plans for our own world-class, independent satellite system,” he said.......

[pr00ne]

Totally ignoring the fact that the entire UK satellite design, engineering and manufacturing industry is foreign owned, mainly by EU nations.

[langleybaston]

Very difficult to miniaturise supercooling ..................

[Phantom Driver]

“Space poses a new and increasingly dangerous front for warfare and it is crucial to push ahead with plans for our own world-class, independent satellite system,” he said.......
I recall a discussion on this forum about proposals for a UK "spaceport" . Initial start up budget of £3 million to get the ball rolling . Could be a while then before the British GPS system is up and running.......

[ORAC]

The planned UK spaceport is sited to launch cubesats into polar orbit. There are an increasing number of commercial options for launching any GPS system such Falcon/Falcon Heavy at reasonable cost.

[VinRouge]

The planned UK spaceport is sited to launch cubesats into polar orbit. There are an increasing number of commercial options for launching any GPS system such Falcon/Falcon Heavy at reasonable cost.

Shame spectrum management means we wont have any usable frequencies. and im still bermused to see how microsat will have an accurate enough and strong enough signal to provide jam resistance, whilst hosted on a transmission platform whose orbit is changing by metres per day.

I call b*llsh*t. If the Europeans could have developed a system that is as equally capable for a fraction of the price, why didnt they do that? or is this just a case of us wanting our cake and eating it and are too embarrassed to point out to brexiteers there are very real consequenses of leaving the EU that brexit voters didnt have the intellect to figure out?

[ORAC]

I was making the point the UK spaceport would be used to launch any such system and is a red herring.

I recall that the quantum compass/INAS, funded by the MOD and demonstrated last month was described as “commercially ready” and, perhaps, may indicate why the government felt confident enough to withdraw from Galileo.

[Phantom Driver]

I recall that the quantum compass/INAS, funded by the MOD and demonstrated last month was described as “commercially ready” and, perhaps, may indicate why the government felt confident enough to withdraw from Galileo.

Always good to be optimistic , but not holding my breath here ; Still ongoing arguments in the MOD about which variant of the F 35 to fund. Meanwhile , at a more mundane level , news reports of married quarters being left empty / vandalised / burnt down ( RAFManby Officers Mess) at a cost of quite a few millions to the taxpayer doesn't exactly inspire confidence . As I said , could be a while before any decisions are made regarding any UK funded satellite constellations .. Our grand kids may see it .

I guess the writing was on the wall when we gave up launching stuff from Woomera .. Meanwhile , it's full steam ahead for ESA at Kourou.

[pr00ne]

Phantom Driver,

"RAF" Manby has not been an MoD asset for over 44 years, what on earth does it's burning down have to do with the taxpayer?

[Phantom Driver]

pr00ne,

You are certainly right about Manby ( incidentally will always be fondly remembered as "RAF Manby" by those who had the pleasure of attending courses there ) . Sadly , the Officers Mess remained derelict for most of those 44 years till it's fiery demise ( discussed on an earlier thread ) . It came to mind after a report aired last week on army married quarters left empty and in states of disrepair/vandalism . The (apparent) explanation from MoD was---they were on standby for possible reoccupation by service personnel in the future . The hope is they don't end up like O/M Manby . (Meanwhile , there is the ongoing debate about housing shortage ) .

Back to topic ; my main point is--I don't envy the decision makers at the moment , but those who believe a UK funded version of Galileo will be in orbit any time soon could be in for a long wait . Hopefully , MoD have a Plan B......

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/space-symposium/2019/04/05/what-does-britain-have-in-the-works-for-its-upcoming-space-strategy/

What does Britain have in the works for its upcoming space strategy?

WASHINGTON — For months, analysts and industry have been waiting on the release of a new space strategy for the United Kingdom, one that would lay out steps forward for the U.K.’s future in the increasingly important (https://www.defensenews.com/space/2019/03/01/space-force-to-cost-2-billion-include-15000-personnel-in-first-five-years/) war-fighting domain. But the report has yet to materialize, even after Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson pledged it would (https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/farnborough/2018/07/19/money-is-the-elephant-in-the-room-hindering-progress-for-uk-defense-program/) be out before the end of 2018. So when might the document roll out?

According to Gen. Gordon Messenger, the U.K.’s vice chief of the Defence Staff, the government expects to release an interim report in the spring/summer time frame, with the final report coming later in the year, following the government’s conclusion of the comprehensive spending review, which will set London’s budget for several years. As to why the document was delayed: “The reason is because we want it to have some substance,” Messenger told Defense News during a recent visit to Washington.

“We just wanted to signpost a little bit more substance to industry and to our partners on where we sit in terms of space capability. And [so we paused] just to reflect a little when we were at risk of producing a very broad policy statement rather than something that might have a little bit more substance to it. I’m guilty of delaying it, and I think it would be difficult for us to push out anything of substance before the spending review now, to be honest,” he added, opining that industry should feel more confident the document will have money attached, as it will be released after the spending review.

During the interview, Messenger outlined a few priorities for that document: first, the development of a geostationary orbit for communications to bolster the U.K.’s Skynet constellation (https://www.defensenews.com/space/2017/07/31/airbus-scores-uk-militarys-satellite-deal-without-competition/); and second, a replacement for the capability gap that now exists after the European Union pushed Britain out of the Galileo program (https://www.defensenews.com/space/2018/08/29/uk-eyes-alternative-to-galileo-satellite-system-as-brexit-row-widens/). “We are examining a number of options, not all of them space-based, to look at the gap that Galileo was designed to deliver, now that we are almost certainly no longer in the Galileo program,” he said. “That’s quite a complex debate, but certainly has a space dimension to it.”

Finally, he noted that the U.K. is looking at the “merits” of a low-Earth orbit constellation for a “variety of potential uses.” That is notable, as the U.S. Defense Department is prioritizing the creation and launch of a low-Earth orbit constellation (https://www.defensenews.com/space/2019/03/13/in-memo-air-force-head-hits-space-development-agency-as-not-ready-for-prime-time/). Given close ties between the U.S. and the U.K. on defense matters, including intelligence sharing and strategic weapons, it is possible the two could find common ground on such a system.

Messenger confirmed he talked about that program while meeting with Pentagon research head Mike Griffin, the driving force behind that constellation.

[melmothtw]

...after the European Union pushed Britain out of the Galileo program (https://www.defensenews.com/space/2018/08/29/uk-eyes-alternative-to-galileo-satellite-system-as-brexit-row-widens/)...

...after Britain intentionally placed itself outside the programme, according to the rules that it had helped pen as a member of the EU and which it had signed up to....

[pr00ne]

“We are examining a number of options, not all of them space-based, to look at the gap that Galileo was designed to deliver..."

Could this maybe mean the possibility of a further extension for Sentinel?

[ORAC]

More likely quantum compass, see post #92.

[ORAC]

https://www.politico.eu/article/eus-satellite-navigation-system-fully-offline/EU’s satellite navigation system fully offline
The EU's satellite navigation system, developed as an alternative to the United States' GPS, is fully offline due to "a technical incident related to its ground infrastructure," the bloc's space agency said (https://www.gsc-europa.eu/news/update-on-the-availability-of-some-galileo-initial-services) Sunday.

"The incident has led to a temporary interruption of the Galileo initial navigation and timing services," the Prague-based European Global Navigation Satellite Systems Agency said, adding that Galileo's search and rescue system used to locate distress signals at sea or in mountainous regions was still operational.

Galileo is the world's fourth geo-location satellite system, after ones created by the U.S, Russia and China, and has been pitched by the EU as a more accurate alternative to GPS. The EU has poured some €10 billion into the system, which has operated on a trial basis since late 2016 and is set to be fully operational by the mid-2020s with 30 satellites in orbit.

The current problems with the nascent system were first reported on Thursday, but by Saturday evening, all 22 satellites in orbit were listed as offline. On Sunday, a public notice was posted and GNSS has so far given no timeline for fixing the issue.

Currently, only a limited number of consumer mobile phones are equipped to pick up Galileo's signal. In the meantime, GPS is used to augment Galileo and spot problems with the new system, GNSS said.

[weemonkey]

Another massive EU debacle "in the making" ?

TBH one isn't surprised;.. perhaps the growing economic uncertainty within the "Union" has led to a reduction in funding....:}


..or perhaps the migrant bill has spiralled somewhat upwards..







Muhahahahahahaha.....

[ORAC]

“ (A) source told InsideGNSS.com that the problem may be related to faults with the Italy-based Precise Timing Facility ground station. The facility is equipped with Cesium clocks and a Hydrogen Maser clock, and uploads its data to the orbiting satellites to provide accurate time reference and make user localization possible.”......

[KiloB]

Nice to know that the designers of such a safety critical System designed in a good level of redundancy!!!

[Harley Quinn]

Nice to know that the designers of such a safety critical System designed in a good level of redundancy!!!

Probably expecting the good ol' US of A to dig 'em out of a hole again for free

[steamchicken]

My, my, aren't some people being pleased with themselves.

https://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-620419.html

also here's a list of historical GPS outages:

GPS Historical Outages (http://navigationservices.agi.com/SatelliteOutageCalendar/GPSHistoricalOutages.aspx)

[Just This Once...]

Steamy, your link just points at individual PRNs going out, measured in hours. Do you have one for the entire constellation, preferably measured in days?

[ORAC]

I note the proposed UK system made into the speech from Boris outside No10.

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2021/09/27/new-uk-space-strategy-sets-the-stage-for-defense-investments/

New UK space strategy sets the stage for defense investments

LONDON – Britain gave a broad view of where the country is heading in the defense space sector as it launched a national space strategy Sept. 27, but details about London’s military ambitions were largely absent from the document.

For a while, the government’s plan had been to release the national space strategy and an associated defense space strategy in tandem, but publication of the two documents has now drifted apart.

One space industry executive, who asked not to be named while discussing internal deliberations, said industry had been told a more defense-specific strategy was still incomplete and would have to wait until sometime next month for publication.….

Among the key developments include the first space launch from a UK spaceport, planned for next year, building a military-civil National Space Operations Centre, and creating the ministry’s new Space Command, which went operational earlier this year.….

Developing independent space domain awareness capabilities to protect UK satellites, advancing the Skynet (https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/07/20/airbus-gets-630-million-deal-under-uk-militarys-skynet-6-push/) 6 communications satellite program and building a small constellation of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance satellites with supporting architectures are part of the investment ambitions outlined by the strategy.….

Among the capabilities name-checked by the strategy document as being of interest were the dual-use applications of free-space optical communications systems…..

The government is also continuing to evaluate the case for investing in resilient Position, Navigation and Timing (PNT) capabilities through a mix of innovative new terrestrial and space-based technologies……

[ORAC]

https://aviationweek.com/shows-events/space-symposium/new-uk-defense-satellite-pave-way-toward-isr-constellation

New UK Defense Satellite To Pave Way Toward ISR Constellation

LONDON—The UK Ministry of Defense has ordered the first satellite to support the development of its Minerva constellation, the communications backbone for a family of synthetic aperture radar (SAR) satellites.

The UK will spend £22 million ($29 million) on the 150-kg (330-lb.) Carbonite+ to be developed by Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd (SSTL), the manufacturer and defense ministry announced April 4.

Carbonite+ will support Project Tyche, which is described by SSTL as a “key enabler” for the development of Minerva, which will provide a broadband link from the planned £970 million ISTARI SAR constellation back to commanders on the ground.

Developing the ISTARI constellation is one of the main ambitions of the UK’s Defense Space Strategy published in February.

“The Minerva program provides the route to use space to be fully interoperable and able to share data with our close allies,” UK Defense Procurement minister Jeremy Quin said. “This is the crucial first step in delivering this capability and I’m delighted that we’re working together with UK companies to remain at the forefront of innovation in space.”

The Tyche project aims to provide the UK’s Space Command with an “understanding and analysis of the integration activities, test environments and interfaces required to establish and maintain UK MOD rights to freely operate a space-based Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) capability,” SSTL states.

The project also will help the UK defense ministry better understand security requirements and risks, and to identify further activities that may be required to mature the planned ISTARI ISR capability.

According to SSTL, the Carbonite+ satellite will be delivered through a three-year build program and will be suitable for either horizontal or vertical launch.

The satellite will be operated from SSTL’s facilities in Guildford, England.