Slashdot Mirror


U.S. May Reduce Non-Military GPS Accuracy

ward99 writes "The U.S. government may be degrading GPS satellite signals, to cripple Iraqi forces' ability to use those systems during the war. This could potentially reduce accuracy from ~3 meters to over ~100 meters. Users depending on GPS systems may want to do sanity checks on any data returned by those systems during the war. The U.S. will do this by increasing the inaccuracies on the civilian C/A code, turning back on S/A (Selective Availability), by having the satellites deliberately and randomly return inaccurate information on where they are. S/A degrades GPS accuracy to only 100 meters 95 percent of the time and 300 meters the other 5 percent of the time. This will not effect the military P code."

34 of 654 comments (clear)

  1. This was *exactly* why we here in Europe... by Inf0phreak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    shouldn't have scratched our own satelite project (named Galileo, IIRC)

    --
    ________
    Entranced by anime since late summer 2001 and loving it ^_^
    1. Re:This was *exactly* why we here in Europe... by October_30th · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Wouldn't funding and improving an existing system such as Glonass be less expensive?

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    2. Re:This was *exactly* why we here in Europe... by f97tosc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      shouldn't have scratched our own satelite project (named Galileo, IIRC

      I am from Europe myself but I am not sure I agree. The reason Galileo is not going anywhere quick is that is enormously expensive (just as GPS was).

      Is it really worth the money and the effort to send up an entire system so that coverage can be ensured during the say 2% of time when the GPS signals are distorted for military reasons? I can see a any number of scientific/ infrastructure projects that are much more worthwhile. Of course, European taxpayers never were as stingy as the Americans.

      Tor

    3. Re:This was *exactly* why we here in Europe... by forgoil · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe the French has threathened to veto? ;)

      All dumbs jokes aside, EU really really needs to get a GPS system of our own. We should of course let the US use it, and use the original GPS when appropriate (for example extra accurcy or if one fail etc). It is fairly dumb to give away so much power to a foreign military.

    4. Re:This was *exactly* why we here in Europe... by sphealey · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This was *exactly* why we here in Europe shouldn't have scratched our own satelite project (named Galileo, IIRC)
      I would have a hard time seeing the EU not including exactly the same capability in Galileo, since control of precision targeting capability is critical for national defense. Of course, perhaps the EU is anticipating that it will have no concept of national defense by the time Galileo arrives.

      sPh

    5. Re:This was *exactly* why we here in Europe... by Hentai · · Score: 1, Insightful

      And you think for ONE SECOND the US military will allow this?

      Think about it - the whole reason they turn down accuracy is to keep their enemies from accessing the technology. If the US military doesn't CONTROL the technology, how will they keep their enemies from accessing it?

      At the point the enemy starts using an open GPS, it becomes, de facto, an enemy asset, and thus targetable. I give it six weeks into the first engagement after a EU GPS becomes reality before the US gives the EU an ultimatum: Shut them down or we'll blow them out of the sky.

      And don't think we won't.

      --
      -Hentai [in vita non pacem est]
    6. Re:This was *exactly* why we here in Europe... by pizpot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      French Fries--> Freedom Fries--> Democracy Fries--> Democracy but don't vote against us Fries--> Dictatorship Fries!

  2. Army's stuff by SlamMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't like it, but it's the army's stuff. They can degrade it that far if they want to. Don't like it? Send up your own GPS satalites.

    --
    Mod point free since 2001
    1. Re:Army's stuff by EzInKy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Army doesn't own it. People own it. The money spent on the satellites came from people's taxes.

      And the people (through their elected representives) gave the money to the Army for military use.

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
  3. Sanity checks.. by jkrise · · Score: 2, Insightful

    " Users depending on GPS systems may want to do sanity checks on any data "

    Which sane person would rely on GPS data for something even as trivial as navigation? Incidentally, how does one check GPS data? Against another GPS??

    --
    If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
    1. Re:Sanity checks.. by zCyl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Boy, it's a good thing Galileo, Magellan, and Columbus all had their trusty GPS systems available back then, isn't it?

      Columbus thought he landed in India.

  4. What about last time? by kEnder242 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Last time they turned off the S/A during the war, cheaper that way using off the shelf gps.

    You can always have a radio broadcasting the offsets from a known location to compensate.

    --
    my associative arrays can kick your hash - TCL
    1. Re:What about last time? by Frodo420024 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Alternately, they could leave SA off alltogether, and just jam the GPS signal in the area that they are performing operations - the GPS signal is relatively weak and an ECM aircraft could easily block hundreds of miles of GPS reception while flying out of range of ground-based weaponry.

      No way would they jam the signal, they want to use GPS themselves.

      --
      I'm in a Unix state of mind.
  5. What about tankers, ships and harbors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do they really know how much a captain depends on GPS these days, especially when it comes to passing in and out of harbors? I hope this won't wreck another tanker somewhere.

  6. There is no evidence of the claim by MyNameIsFred · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let me understand this, the head of a German Autoclub says the U.S. military MAY, I repeat MAY, degrade GPS accuracy. No evidence. Just pure conjecture. Consider that GPS has woven itself into our lives. How, it arguably supports critical functions. I strongly doubt that they will do this. While I understand the world's fears concerning GPS because it is run by the military, I put this article in with all FUD.

  7. This hardly seems 'fair' by bushboy · · Score: 1, Insightful

    But then again, there's not much fairness in this whole debacle.

    I'm not about to argue with that kinda military force - only a madman would do that ;)

    --
    A slashdotting - you get the stick first and then the carrot !
  8. Alternatives by Bozovision · · Score: 5, Insightful
    And this is EXACTLY why the EU wants their own alternative civilian version of GPS, and why the US has argued against it. Suprise!

    Apparently the Pentagon sees no compelling reason for an alternative to GPS. Oops, that would be before they checked their GPS units round about now. Oh wait, I forgot, they have their fingers on the buttons, perhaps that why they can't see a compelling reason.

    Oops look; those pesky photons might interfere with each other

    On the other hand, to be fair, the US could have just degraded the signal without announcing it. At least now ships and planes probably won't be piloted into rocks.

  9. it *is* our stuff by g4dget · · Score: 1, Insightful
    The military isn't a private entity. The military, and anything they own, is paid for by your and my tax dollars, and it is owned by the US government. We, the voters, get to decide how it's going to be used ultimately, by electing and kicking out the executive and legislative branches of government.

    Incidentally, the many billions of dollars of equipment the military is about to blow up in Iraq don't come from nowhere either--they are coming from the check you and I are sending to Uncle Sam on April 15. The war may amount to somewhere between 10% and 20% of our taxes. I hope it's worth it because it sure is a lot of money.

    1. Re:it *is* our stuff by pebs · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Isn't that a bit like saying. It isn't your car - the money used to buy it was given to you by your employer.

      Well, no.. its more like you split the cost of your car and its maintainence with 200 million other people. And also you elected a driver and split the cost of this as well. You're not allowed to drive the car, but you can be one of the mechanics but you have to give up some of your rights as a passenger. You also have some input as to where the driver takes you, but this is split between all the people as well. This might have to be a larger vehicle, because 200 million people don't fit that easilly into a car; in which case everyone has to spend a little bit more.

      --
      #!/
  10. Still doesn't really matter with DGPS by Drunken_Jackass · · Score: 4, Insightful

    S/A has always been a bit of a farce. It can be circumnavigated (no pun intended) if you use Differential GPS.

    Basically, you set one GPS receiver up at a known, surveyed location and program that location into the unit. Then when the receiver trilaterates its position based on the information the satellites provide, it does on-the-fly corrections (You say i'm here, but i know i'm here). It can then use that correction algorithm to correct the positions of other receivers.

    Of course doing that part on-the-fly is a bit more difficult (read expensive) because now you have to invest in radio communications back and forth between the two or more receivers - but it's often done. There are even services that have base stations set up across the country that sell a subscription-based service for that purpose.

    Most times, survey firms just log the data and correct after-the-fact back in the office from the base station (the differentiator) located in the same area.

    All in all, S/A only imposes the error to systems that don't have the capability == money to do DGPS.

    --
    There are 01 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary, and me.
  11. At least its temporary, not a big deal. by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I guess we all just pospone that trip to the wilderness to get away from things..

    Take a MAP ( remember those things? ) on your next road trip...

    After the war the service will return to normal.

    Besides, who said we had a right to use GPS anyway?

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  12. GPS jamming by g4dget · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I suspect the Iraqis have little need of GPS--their military probably knows their country pretty well and they don't have much in the way of smart weapons.

    GPS is much more important to the US military, which does not have on-the-ground knowledge there. The US should be more worried about the Iraqis jamming GPS signals and other communications.

    Of course, so far, it looks like Iraq is pretty feeble militarily. I suspect the war will be over very quickly. Which brings up the question again: why are we going?

    1. Re:GPS jamming by sql*kitten · · Score: 2, Insightful

      GPS is much more important to the US military, which does not have on-the-ground knowledge there. The US should be more worried about the Iraqis jamming GPS signals and other communications.

      Actually, given the satellite photos, reconaissance aircraft and special forces, the US/UK probably know Iraq better than most of Iraq's Generals by now. Look at who's in charge on either side: the Allies have professional soldiers with decades of experience on the ground in wars, peacekeeping, exercises etc all over the world. The Iraqis have various relatives and cronies of Saddam Hussein who probably never leave their palaces unless they have to.

      Of course, so far, it looks like Iraq is pretty feeble militarily. I suspect the war will be over very quickly. Which brings up the question again: why are we going?

      There are many factors to consider when evaluating military strength. One is power-projection, which is the ability to move your forces to where they're needed. The UK has a relatively small army (110,000 soldiers) but can partake in these sorts of adventures because it has the air/sea capability to move them around. Iraq (like North Korea, China and a few others) has a large military, but is unable to project them any further than neighboring countries. And while Iraq is militarily weak on a "global scale", it never intended to fight a global war - it was easily strong enough to take Kuwait, for example, and were it not for Allied garrisons, it could have taken Saudi Arabia, Oman and UAE without too much trouble.

      Even if you overlook the appalling human rights abuses Iraq's government is responsible for (including nerve gassing ethnic minorities), even if you ignore his sponsorship of Hamas (who admittedly aren't anything to do with al-Queda, but they're still terrorists), Saddam must not be permitted to invade his neighbors again. And yes, one reason for that is because if he gets control of all the oil, he can starve the West into submission.

  13. Re:doubt if it will make any real difference by guybarr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the USian Army we required 100m accuracy for Armor, 10m accuracy for Infantry/dismounted folks. All of the instruction had these tolerances.

    Yes, but did you need these tolerences ? For infantry navigation, you usually don't (Except for some extremely bad terrain types, an infantry officer/noncom who loses himself in an 100mX100m sized square won't do any good anyhow ...).

    For precise indirect fire, you do, but then again, my guess is that the Iraqi artillery (both light and heavy) positions are already very well measured.

    The US army doctrine probably requires these accuracies simply because they can get it relatively cheaply. Nothing wrong with that; in fact that's the correct thing to do. But that does not mean an army can't fight well with less accurate equipment.

    --
    Working for necessity's mother.
  14. Like Galileo? by gotan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, it seems the US government isn't too comfortable with that and tries (german link) to make (german link) the EU abandon that project. Naturally the EU doesn't like depending on a US-monopoly for such an important system.

    --
    "By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
  15. Skew the France! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Since localizing skewed GPS signals is possible... Can the US Military please make it appear to the Iraqi's, that in fact, coordinates of advancing US Forces actually appear to be coming from a country slightly to the North and to the West?

    Then, the Iraqi's can send those missiles that they "don't have" straight to their bestest pal...Jacquey-boy.

  16. Not new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This was already note here (close to Serbia/Kosovo etc) in the previous US military intervention. Some friends of mine do sailing and had already noted that their GPS devices had gone "crazy". At least this time they issued a warning (then again maybe they had warned back then, but I don't remember).

  17. Here's what the military says on this topic by north.coaster · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Here's what the US military has to say about this.

    The reality is that in the time period since S/A was turned off many businesses have become dependent on the GPS. If S/A were to be turned back on worldwide, then that would provide one more reason to oppose the war. COnsidering the current political climate, both in the US and worldwide, I can't see this happening.

  18. Re:Gosh..,. by dick+johnson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh Yeah. I forgot. The Europeans have always done such a good job cleaning up.

    Kosovo. Thousands of innocents murdered in their own backyard, but they're incapable of bringing themselves to do the right thing, until the U.S. steps in.

    Or, perhaps that failure was just a lack of European intestinal fortitude.

    It's so typically European. They'd rather have stable despots than the liberation of millions of people. This isn't only a recent development.

    The cowardly response to the above will be that stability is better than chaos where millions may starve.

    But that's a position that is could only be held by people who've been protected for the last 50 years by the American Taxpayer. A people, I might add, that have for several decades now not known what it's like to live in fear of tyranny.

    How many hundreds of trillions of dollars have Americans spent to maintain the current European lifestyle? This is money that was spent on European defense, but ultimately, allowed the Europeans to neglect their own defense spending and focus on domestic needs.

    The only reason western Europe has the luxuary of looking down its nose at the U.S. today is that they've essentially been a collection of welfare states of the United States for the last half century.

    I for one hope we bring an end to that situation very, very soon. Let the Germans and French worry about their own security. And if the Russian experiment with democracy fails, let's see how critical these same people will be of America then.

    Britain aside, NATO has become nothing more than a Welfare program for Western Europe. We stand by them when the Russians are at the door. But where are these folks when we tell them we need them? It's a one-way relationship. One that the American people need to reexamine.

    The very threat of military retaliation by the United States allowed western Europe to remain free during the cold war.

    Let's see how the European economies do when they have to increase their portion of defense spending, to offset the end of American subsidies. (The only reason European countries have been able to spend so little of their Gross Domestic Product on defense these past five or six decades)

    Europeans complain of "The American Empire," as a previous post put it. But I for one would love to see a time arise when my country could go back to being an isolationist one. But ultimately, the same spineless folks who complain about the U.S. today, will be the same ones clamoring for our help tomorrow.

    It reminds me of something the comedian David Letterman said after the fall of the Berlin Wall. He had a list of the top 10 things the French were doing to prepare for German reunification.

    Number one was "Practicing Blowing kisses while marching backwards."

    -dj

    --
    - dj
  19. Simply does not matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    1) Unless you're using GPS for something like surveying (you aren't. admit it.), this doesn't matter. If you can't navigate while hiking/biking/driving/flying/boating with 300 feet of accuracty, then you suck, and you shouldn't be doing it anyway.

    2) Are you telling me Iraq needs more than ~100 meters of accuracy to make their attempt at defense? "hmm...I know that gasoline-filled trench was around here somewhere...hmm...where should i drop my torch...duh...."

    Come on.

  20. Re:Let's cut off our noses by Oswald · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I don't understand. How is it paranoid to think that your enemy in war may want to kill you? How is it idiotic to deprive them of a useful tool?

    This article says that the DOD has better ways to achieve this end, so you can stop crying. But, if degrading the signal worldwide were the only way to degrade it for the Iraqi military, they would be correct to do so.

  21. So, what you're saying is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "Don't create competing products, because the USA already has made them". What happened to the capitalist ideals about competition in the market?

  22. Checking the official resources... by jvaigl · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It's an interesting discussion, but doesn't look like it's going to happen. The article they're referring to is just some German auto club that says the thing maybe it could happen when the war starts. Hardly authoritative.

    The official sites to monitor if you're worried:

    www.igeb.gov: The IGEB is a senior-level policy making body chaired jointly by the Departments of Defense and Transportation. Its membership includes the Departments of State, Commerce, Interior, Agriculture, and Justice, as well as NASA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    Right after 9/11/01, they posted (still there) this: "GPS Selective Availability (SA) has not been used since its deactivation by the President on May 1, 2000. At that time, the United States Government stated that it has no intent to ever use SA again. There has been no change in this policy."

    http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/default.htm is the official source for notices to civilian GPS users about schedule satellite outages, etc. They have nothing related to S/A being turned back on, and they certainly would if it were going to happen.

    We can jam or dither the civilian code over the theater if we need to.

  23. This would really hose us at my job by plopez · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The comapny I am currently working for (an Env. Engr. firm) requires 15m accurracy for field work. We work with a number of large energy companies, state and federal regulatory bodies and we even are working with DOD and Army Corps of Engineers. If we cannot get good readings, we (and our clients) are out of compliance. Also, doing groundwater studies with 100m to 300m accurracy is also unreasonable.

    GPS has become so embedded in our society, that this move just isn't viable anymore, IMO.

    Is anyone else in this same situation?

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+