GPS Test Successful From Outer Space

An anonymous reader writes: "AMSAT reports that the GPS experiment on the international amateur radio spacecraft AO-40 has undergone successful testing." A note on the site reads in part: "This experiment supplied and sponsored by NASA, is to determine if it is possible to get positional data outside of the GPS ring of satellites. There are two GPS receivers on AO-40, the A receiver for receiving signals around apogee and the B receiver for signal reception around perigee. ... A signal on the apogee receiver from about 52 Thousand Kilometres out with good signal levels has been received, further data is being gathered and those downloaded so far are being analysed. If this experiment goes the way I expect, it will revolutionise the way we use GPS in Space. Many future HEO spacecraft will be able to take advantage of GPS for autonomous navigation and stationkeeping." This is one of the most interesting applications of GPS technology I've heard about -- nice way to reuse what was intended as a terrestrial navigation aid.

Comments

Rename it?

[sessamoid]

Maybe it's time to rename the thing to the "Galactic Positioning System." Seriously, this thing seems to have the potential to make space probe control and navigation much easier and more accurate. It should be very interesting to see what applications come of this.

Nice....

[forsaken33]

This opens up so many possibilities! Like the article mentioned, satellite station keeping for one. Also, we would know exactly where they were (well, down to a few dozen meters at least) for avoidane and things like that.

Also, so much is said about the problems of space debris. GPS recievers can be small, small enough to attach to debris. Yes, placing it on every little thing could suck, but on the larger things that pose a real hazard. I know there is a project to map the sky's debris, forgot the link. Now, astronauts could know in real time where this stuff is.

Using this for navigation might not work now. As far out as you are, the satellites are really close together, and any errors you see now are going to be much larger. But, we could place GPS satellites orbiting other bodies to use for solar system navigation. LIke i said, lots of possibilites.

Re:Nice....

[rice_burners_suck]

"Also, so much is said about the problems of space debris. GPS recievers can be small, small enough to attach to debris. Yes, placing it on every little thing could suck, but on the larger things that pose a real hazard."

Several months ago, I listened to a radio show where they talked about space debris from all sorts of previous missions. As it turns out, they currently track objects that are quite large, as well as objects the size of a soda can. IIRC that's the smallest they can track. All space debris, even smaller than what they can track, poses a serious hazard to satellites and more so to larger vehicles. Imagine something the size of a golf ball hitting the space shuttle at the speed of a bullet and you've got an idea of the danger. Chances are, the shuttle is designed to get hit by all sorts of stuff, but it can still cause serious damage.

Destroying the space trash isn't the answer either, as it would simply smash larger pieces into smaller pieces, and that's an even bigger mess.

For some reason, I don't think a GPS receiver can be placed on all but the largest pieces of trash. It's like mice who wanted to place a bell around the cat's neck for advance warning. They all cheered about the great idea until an old, wise mouse came along and asked, "And who will put the bell on the cat?" Besides, to attach a receiver to a piece of space debris, you'd have to intercept the debris with a vehicle. If you're going to go through all that trouble, you may as well send a garbage truck^H^H^H^H^Hshuttle and collect all the pieces.

Debian played a part

[Bruce Perens]

The developer of the GPS experiment is Bdale Garbee, a long-time Debian developer, who is presently working on the Debian IA64 port at HP's Linux lab. Bdale uses Debian to host development, I'm not sure if he uses it to run ground-station software but it's likely.

Bruce

The future of Geo Caching

[Quizme2000]

My Cache is located at N 37 50.047 W 122 13.809 A 56,000 km. It contains a compass, a dollar bill and a 5kg nuclear core. Please sign the log.

Wild idea: How to deal with space debris.

[Bruce Perens]

I wonder if space debris could be deorbited by using laser light as a sort of retro-rocket? Light exerts pressure, and although this is a very small amount of pressure, it will accumulate if you keep pushing. So, put up a satellite with lasers, not powerful enough to melt debris but powerful enough to give it a little push. Push on the debris with the laser light from ahead of its orbit. The satellite gains some orbital energy, the debris loses some. Eventually, the debris deorbits.

Bruce

Re:Wild idea: How to deal with space debris.

[MarkusQ]

Bruce --

Great idea. One quibble though:

Push on the debris with the laser light from ahead of its orbit. The satellite gains some orbital energy, the debris loses some. Eventually, the debris deorbits.

If the goal is to deorbit the debris, we can take the fact that it loses energy as given. However, depending on the relative orbits, it isn't clear that the laser platform will gain energy. If they are appoching each other head on, for example, they both lose energy. In most cases, I suspect the effect on the platform would be a mild course correction with little change in total energy. One strategy might be:

Rule 1) Don't shoot at targets that would reduce our orbital energy (eliminating 1/2 the potential targets).

Rule 2) Only shoot at half the remaining targets, chosen so that we consistantly precess our orbit, bringing previously ignored targets onto our active list.

Another thought is that we get the delta-V even if we don't hit the target, so we can always shoot at nothing (after confirming that there is in fact nothing there) to adjust our course.

-- MarkusQ

Great

[Ezubaric]

Now maybe NASA can tell whether their probes are 100 meters or 100 feet away from smacking into Mars.

Today's word is Triangulation

[Alien54]

how is this helpful?.. unless the spacecraft are in orbit around the earth, the geosync gsp satelites are going to rotate with it, so any approaching spacecraft won't really be able to use it effectivley 'cept to find out their distance from the earth, which can be done by easier means :P

So how does GPS work on Earth? The Geometry of Triangles, be it distance, angles or whatever. In GPS, it is easier to use the differance in distance for multiple satellites. Note You need more than one.

Secondary neat important fact: The Satellites orbit around the earth, and do not stand still at all relative to the earth. They are NOT geosync at all.

The Question is one of elementary geometry.

Imagine the orbits as a circle on a piece of paper, and satellites as points on the circle. If you can use triangles to find the location of a point inside the circle using those points, you can also use triangle to find locations outside the circle.

In the case of GPS and the Earth the problem is mostly one of signal strength.

With slight modifications, the logic also works in 3D.

;-)

Some info on the first satellite GPS tests...

[morcheeba]

I had the pleasure of working on some of the first test satellites (circa 1991)... These worked at LEO orbits (LEO is below the GPS satellites, which is below geostationary), so they had the advantage that they operated in a manner relatively similar to earth-bound units.

Three major differences:
- speed and altitude limitations removed (the government doesn't want these guiding missles)
- satellite reacquisition time reduced. Going fast means that you'll have to change satellites used for the calculation much more often. Back in the day of single-channel receivers, this was a major concern.
- vehicle dynamics set to assume an orbit, not some low earth speed.

Here's a great page with some info & diagrams of what's going on. It also shows how a signal can be received from a higher orbit: it listens to satellites on the other side of the earth. This is refracted through the ionosphere, and a lot of math is probably used to compensate (actually the military version of gps uses two frequencies - the ionosphere modifies each one differently and, knowing this, can be corrected better).

The RADCAL satellite took measurements, but didn't use the GPS signal for navigation. REX-II actually used a closed loop system to stabilize the entire satellite. The attitude control system is an essential part of any satellite, since it points the antennas to the ground and the solar cells at the all-important sun. Usually, there are many different types of sensors (horizon sensors, magnetometers that compare the current field with a predetermied map of the earth, star sensors, and gyros), and typically none of these sensors alone provides a complete attitude. The fusion between all these sensors, with various levels of error and fault tolereance, is a really tough job! So, a small, light gps adds a lot of good information to the equation, and can serve as the primary sensor, or as a good backup.

We used a modified trimble gps unit with 4 antennas. This unit was originally designed to determine the attitude of fighter planes, but we used modified software to work in space. One antenna read the main GPS signal, while the other three measured the phase difference between themselves and the main signal to find the difference in distance to the satellites.

Side note about the fighter jet version of the software: The differential positions of the antennas were used to calculate the attitude. I know what you're thinking: why 4 antennas to solve 3 unknowns (pitch, yaw, roll)? It turns out that wing flex (since these were spread out as far as possible, which meant 2 were on the wings) had to be taken into account. Besides that, the extra antenna provided improved coverage in case the fuselage blocked an antenna.

We used these units sucessfully in many leo satellites...

Re:This IS useful

[phil reed]

This sounds like it would raise the issue of single point of failure; if someone managed to knock one of the GPS satellites out of orbit, a bunch of other satellites that were relying on it would then follow it out of the sky. That doesn't sound like such a great idea to me.

Unless, of course, there were multiple GPS satellites, and each satellite relyed on the positioning information returned by the majority of them. The odds of all of them being knocked out at once are much lower than just one being knocked out.

There are 24 (plus or minus 1 or 2) GPS satellites in orbit at any one time. In order for your GPS receiver to work at all, it has to receive signals from a minimum of three satellites, four if you want to get a fix that includes altitude. My commercial-grade Garmin 12XL generally shows signals from 7-8, and I've seen as many as 12 at one time.

Still, if someone were interested in knocking out communications in the united states, they would still only have to knock out the GPS ones in order to knock out the rest.

Not hardly. Satellite designers are exceedingly paranoid, and they would never rely on a single method of positioning information.