Foreign acceptance of GPS.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: "como todo buen piloto... mujeriego y borracho"
Posts: 2,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Foreign acceptance of GPS.
I am non certain whether this is the correct forum to post my question on, but it seems to be the closest one that I can find.
After many years of the availability of "free" GPS coverage worldwide, and the proven successes of GPS approaches in a number of countries, I am puzzled on why the acceptance has not been more wide-spread in other countries, particularly poor countries, as a valuable tool to enhance air commerce and improve aviation safety.
In particular, I am talking about the rareness of GPS instrument approach procedures. While obviously not always the most prefered type of approach, the obvious benefactor would be the numerous airports which are not served by any type of an instrument approach at all. It seems to me that a Government-established procedure is still better than no procedure at all and also better than "home cooked" procedures.
Any thoughts on this?
After many years of the availability of "free" GPS coverage worldwide, and the proven successes of GPS approaches in a number of countries, I am puzzled on why the acceptance has not been more wide-spread in other countries, particularly poor countries, as a valuable tool to enhance air commerce and improve aviation safety.
In particular, I am talking about the rareness of GPS instrument approach procedures. While obviously not always the most prefered type of approach, the obvious benefactor would be the numerous airports which are not served by any type of an instrument approach at all. It seems to me that a Government-established procedure is still better than no procedure at all and also better than "home cooked" procedures.
Any thoughts on this?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Typos
Greetings
I dont agree with underdevelopped country theory, because even for classic approaches design, they had to bring in companies or consultants to do the job, and they will just do that again, when time will come, and when money will be available.
The not invented here neither, the biggest hurdle is coming from civil aviation authorities whom are reluctant to revolution, they like darwinian products, i.e., evolution.
Second you need to have Aircraft with Advanced FMS/FMC, which is not often the case for these countries.
Third They have already invested in Radio Aids or precision and non precision approaches and their money priority is not for GPS, but rather for other fields of developpement, or even to purchase food and medecine.
Fourth if you fly there your airline can desin a GPS approach, pay the flight checking of the approach, get it approved by their own authority, and the local authority and just fly it.
I dont agree with underdevelopped country theory, because even for classic approaches design, they had to bring in companies or consultants to do the job, and they will just do that again, when time will come, and when money will be available.
The not invented here neither, the biggest hurdle is coming from civil aviation authorities whom are reluctant to revolution, they like darwinian products, i.e., evolution.
Second you need to have Aircraft with Advanced FMS/FMC, which is not often the case for these countries.
Third They have already invested in Radio Aids or precision and non precision approaches and their money priority is not for GPS, but rather for other fields of developpement, or even to purchase food and medecine.
Fourth if you fly there your airline can desin a GPS approach, pay the flight checking of the approach, get it approved by their own authority, and the local authority and just fly it.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: It used to be an island...
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not Controlled Here, rather than Not Invented Here.
The GPS is not under the control of the civil aviation authorities, which may make them nervous about trusting it - especially when the entity in charge of the GPS has declared the ability and intention to degrade it regionally if it suits their requirements (the US DoD declared an intention not to use the global Selective Availability feature any more since they could degrade GPS regionally if they wished to).
One way to approach robust systems design is not to use anything you can't specify and control. VOR/DME, ILS, etc are under the control of a CAA, the GPS is not. I'm sure this mindset influences some certification requirements (in aviation and elsewhere). It is clearly a driving force behind GLONASS, Galileo and whatever the Chinese are working on (currently called Beidou I think).
One way to approach robust systems design is not to use anything you can't specify and control. VOR/DME, ILS, etc are under the control of a CAA, the GPS is not. I'm sure this mindset influences some certification requirements (in aviation and elsewhere). It is clearly a driving force behind GLONASS, Galileo and whatever the Chinese are working on (currently called Beidou I think).
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The GPS is not under the control of the civil aviation authorities, which may make them nervous about trusting it - especially when the entity in charge of the GPS has declared the ability and intention to degrade it regionally if it suits their requirements
I'm sure the current reality though is money as others have stated, I'm less convinced of the not invented here argument, few aviation technologies would not fall into that categorization.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: AEP
Age: 80
Posts: 1,420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, yes, George W might have decided to pull the plug on the GPS.
And maybe Barack would do too, to find more $ trillions...
One thing certain, Vladimir would never shut down Glonass, right...?
xxx
Happy contrails
And maybe Barack would do too, to find more $ trillions...
One thing certain, Vladimir would never shut down Glonass, right...?
xxx
Happy contrails
This thread reminds me of the behavior of the geman LBA some 10 or 15 years ago.
The LBA stated that GPS was not alowed for IFR enroute navigation.
At the same time the LBA operated a Beech 400 with a FMS that used GPS only as a navigational source.
Inbalance
The LBA stated that GPS was not alowed for IFR enroute navigation.
At the same time the LBA operated a Beech 400 with a FMS that used GPS only as a navigational source.
Inbalance
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The New Forest, UK
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GPS is a marvelous navigation resource and a freebee to the rest of the non-US world - but it is primarily a US military asset that could in principle be denied to TROTW thru selective availabity (SA), total denial of the CA code or high DOP due to repositioning of space vehicles ( leaving other areas without or very poor GPS coverage) to better serve a given conflict area for tactical purposes should things get politically hot as seen in 1991.
This is of course the main reason the wider civil community is hesitant to put all its huevos in one basket as a sole means navigation system. Nevertheless today GPS is indeed used by nearly all airlines as a complement to land based systems like DME/VOR/TACAN/NDB and ,of course, inertial. Aircraft FMS use a prioritised list for selection of navigation method based on its avilability and GPS heads the list for oceanic and other on-route phases. Also some FMS support EGI (embbeded GPS INS) for complementary navigation. GPS is even good for lateral 0.3 P-RNAV requirements.
When Galileo/EGNOS (together with GPS, even GLONAS) are fully established as truely civillian controlled infrastructures governed by a world agency then wider spread use down to CAT II (?)approaches will be a reality - this would necessitate a satellite navigation system that offers full integrity monitoring by an overlay system such as WAAS + EGNOS and psuedollites.
Currently non-differenctial GPS does not provide adequate integrity or accuracy in the vertical channel for vertical navigation meaning accurate trust worthy altitude remains an issue although under favourable DOP conditions it can better baro but not all the time and certainly not good enough for unaided precison approaches. Pseudollites are of course a local area augmentation that could remedy this but this solution will more likely find use as part and parcel of a widearea augmentation system. For approaches RADALT will contine to be essential as even augmented GPS will not provide height above ground accurately ( only height above Geoid) this can only be mitigated thru use of a data base holding surveyed terrain details held in the reciever - not necessarily a substitute for RADALT.
Until such time ILS and VOR/DME will continue to serve the needs of precision approaches ready to step in should GPS fail or be denied during onroute phases.
This is of course the main reason the wider civil community is hesitant to put all its huevos in one basket as a sole means navigation system. Nevertheless today GPS is indeed used by nearly all airlines as a complement to land based systems like DME/VOR/TACAN/NDB and ,of course, inertial. Aircraft FMS use a prioritised list for selection of navigation method based on its avilability and GPS heads the list for oceanic and other on-route phases. Also some FMS support EGI (embbeded GPS INS) for complementary navigation. GPS is even good for lateral 0.3 P-RNAV requirements.
When Galileo/EGNOS (together with GPS, even GLONAS) are fully established as truely civillian controlled infrastructures governed by a world agency then wider spread use down to CAT II (?)approaches will be a reality - this would necessitate a satellite navigation system that offers full integrity monitoring by an overlay system such as WAAS + EGNOS and psuedollites.
Currently non-differenctial GPS does not provide adequate integrity or accuracy in the vertical channel for vertical navigation meaning accurate trust worthy altitude remains an issue although under favourable DOP conditions it can better baro but not all the time and certainly not good enough for unaided precison approaches. Pseudollites are of course a local area augmentation that could remedy this but this solution will more likely find use as part and parcel of a widearea augmentation system. For approaches RADALT will contine to be essential as even augmented GPS will not provide height above ground accurately ( only height above Geoid) this can only be mitigated thru use of a data base holding surveyed terrain details held in the reciever - not necessarily a substitute for RADALT.
Until such time ILS and VOR/DME will continue to serve the needs of precision approaches ready to step in should GPS fail or be denied during onroute phases.
Last edited by b377; 17th Feb 2009 at 07:37.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The 'Bat Cave' @ HLP in the Big Durian Indo
Age: 61
Posts: 781
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The possibility of not being in control of a country's navaids would be the reason given ...
BUT also you can't get juicy under the table commissions with a free system as you can when building land based nav systems with Government money.
Hence in developing countries they would much rather build lot's of Navaids.
Cynical but true.
BUT also you can't get juicy under the table commissions with a free system as you can when building land based nav systems with Government money.
Hence in developing countries they would much rather build lot's of Navaids.
Cynical but true.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: "como todo buen piloto... mujeriego y borracho"
Posts: 2,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some great responses, thanks guys.
b377, I am curious to know what the timeframe is for Galileo/EGNOS to be fully operational and available to civilian use?
The "cynical but true" about under the table money is also a good answer and one that I had not thought of previously.
b377, I am curious to know what the timeframe is for Galileo/EGNOS to be fully operational and available to civilian use?
The "cynical but true" about under the table money is also a good answer and one that I had not thought of previously.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The New Forest, UK
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hola Panama .. borracho, is fine as long as you're not flying !
I think the Galileo Consortium would also like to know what's going on. Too many political issues.
Do you read GNSS Mag ? Jan/Feb issue has an update relevant to an integrated future system comprising of Galileo,GPS GlONAS etc. An on-line version is available I'll post link tomorrow.
I think the Galileo Consortium would also like to know what's going on. Too many political issues.
Do you read GNSS Mag ? Jan/Feb issue has an update relevant to an integrated future system comprising of Galileo,GPS GlONAS etc. An on-line version is available I'll post link tomorrow.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The New Forest, UK
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.qmags.com/2FE1161B163137D9111611B9DA131437AB2FF14C3C2.htm
http://www.qmags.com/2FE1171B163137D9111611B9DA131437AB2FF144DC1.htm
" In addition to our print and web versions of Inside GNSS, we will soon offer a full-fledged digital version of our magazine. We are offering some of our current readers an advance view of the digital version and welcome your comments in a brief on-line survey. .. "
http://www.qmags.com/2FE1171B163137D9111611B9DA131437AB2FF144DC1.htm
" In addition to our print and web versions of Inside GNSS, we will soon offer a full-fledged digital version of our magazine. We are offering some of our current readers an advance view of the digital version and welcome your comments in a brief on-line survey. .. "
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When Galileo/EGNOS (together with GPS, even GLONAS) are fully established as truly civilian controlled infrastructures
....I mean they had no say or input into the design process..Its pure "Made in Europe"......I think you know where I'm going with this.....Interestingly enough if some mad group of god knows who, decided to wage some GPS enabled mayhem on US soil it would pose quite the dilemma with much of the entire countries communications infrastructure now utterly dependent on C/A code derived timing.
For the paranoid wishing for the ultimate diversity there are very practical ways to obtain very good GPS compatible positioning solutions from other rather more mundane and ubiquitous signals also. For example TV signals Rosum Corporation. Rosum - Reliable Location. Inside and Out. (Fair disclosure: I worked on this one). Would I want to build one to the necessary aerospace standards...hmm, the jury's out on that one.
Last edited by ion_berkley; 20th Feb 2009 at 09:41.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The New Forest, UK
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if some mad group of god knows who, decided to wage some GPS enabled mayhem on US soil
Remember the Y2K concerns, GPS calender roleover etc ? Such is the worlds dependence on software and GPS time.
On this basis it is easy to undersatnd other country's reticence to placing critical aviation requirements on GPS only.
Last edited by b377; 20th Feb 2009 at 13:25.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You need someone who can sign contracts for provision of services, with guaranteed minimum availability and quality of service (and charge service fees for that). Someone you can sue for damages if things stop working. You would then get this someone certified, audited, insured, issue them a whole bunch of "recommendations" and then everyone is on familiar territory. Obviously it doesn't quite work with GPS / GLONASS but the whole Galileo business model (if such a thing ever existed) was built around it.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mars
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew jets (727's and A310's) in a South American, very third world country for 25 years doing high density airport operations, NDB and step down VOR approaches at high elevation airports with very poorly designed CAA approach charts that left me with nothing but grey hair and an bad attitude, but when GPS came out of the blue sky, I was involved in the design of GPS approach charts for all those runways along with this foreing US company that provided us with company taylored charts. My company invested heavily on cockpit CMA900 GPS/FMS equipment to be used with this new technology. Thinking that this would really improve the safety record in my airline and that all those white knuckle approaches were over....guess what? WRONG!!!! like you guys mention, I had to struggle with the local system, first to approve the WGS84 Datum system which my beloved country did not approve until recently, why? because the military Geodesic Institute was in charge and they wanted a big piece of the action (Money), then the authorities (DGAC) formed the most outrageous bureaucratic process imaginable where every one wanted money. "Corruption" is the only reason I can imagine why those poor third world countries don't come out ahead, no matter what you give them, even if its free!
