E.U. Agrees To Launch Galileo Satellite Location System
waimate writes "The European Union today decided to go ahead with Galileo, the constellation of 30 satellites which will compete with the U.S. GPS system.
The U.S. abolished selective availability three years ago partly to make GPS more useful for all mankind, but also to dissuade other countries from developing their own navigational satellite system, and thus be dependant on the U.S. for both peaceful and military purposes. Since the demise of the Russian GLONASS system, GPS is the only game in town. Evidently recent events make Europe feel less comfortable about such things, and so they're building their own. Good thing for commercialization of space, or bad thing for world peace?"
During Galileo's day, longitude was hard to determine. Ships at sea had no sufficiently good clocks to determine position. Galileo proposed a system using the moons of Jupiter, but it never worked well enough. John Harrison ultimately solved the problem, but I guess "Harrison" does not sound as good as "Galileo." Nova had a good program on the longitude problem. There was also a bestselling book about Harrison and his feat, but I have not read it.
Your example is stupid in the extreme. Runways are much bigger than airplanes. A difference of ten feet one way or the other isn't going to matter to anybody.
You haven't ever met an AW guy then? Believe me, these guys are so anally retentive it's unbelivable - they would consider 2 feet to be dangerously out of spec. This is one of the reasons why planes don't land on GPS, or INS, they do so with the Mk.1 eyeball or ILS - both of which are rather accurate and capable of landing a plane right on the centerline - which _is_ required to save your life should you have a tire go, especially in a 747 landing at a normal airport.
Beep beep.
Typical horizontal accuracy with a GPS is variable, generally it can be with 3 meters horizontal resolution with WAAS. However elevation is always more dubious with GPS and anything that improves it is a genuine advance. Not having the US militiary "dithering" it is no loss either. "Too accurate" is silly. Yeah, you care about where your antenna is, but an error of 15 meters in your vehicle could quite readily add up to increased insurance costs and hospital bills. An altitude error of 15 meters in an aircraft could mean the difference between an emergency manuever and a crater. Any navigational system can be programmed to account for antenna position and vehicle or vessel configuration. The accuracy of the system needs to be based on the greatest demand that can be placed on it. Right now that can be an accuracy requirement within a meter, or even within a cm. Survey grade GPS can require sub-centimeter accuracy that is only available with post-processing at present. There are a lot of us who would like to collect mapping data with a handheld or rod unit that didn't cost ten grand.
------ The only greater hazard to your liberty than n politicians is n+1 politicians.
That's the typical american attitude; "We're the biggest and the best, and country is not as good as us, and they know it."
In practice, American arrogance is altogether ridiculous, and given recent and past behaviour, the US is, I would say, more than likely to do things like break GPS leaving everyone else in the lurch.
Contrary to what you may believe, the interest in a common EU isn't in competing with the US. You never know, there's a danger it may be that it's the best for all of Europe, and Europe knows it, and that's why we're doing it.
We would all love to get together with the US, and provide various decent global systems... But the US simply keeps proving that it isn't trustworthy.
Flamebait, I'm sure. But The arrogance I've witnessed in the 8 months since I moved here is beyond anything I had ever been able to imagine it would be. And yes, I'm pissed and even embarrassed to be an American citizen.
Gary (-;
Europe roundly condcemned us for not joining WW I fast enough, even tho it was a purely European matter which the Europeans couldn't solve.
... and guess who told them to get out? Duhh ... the US! How about that?
... The US!
... and you'd think, this having been the very hotbed which started WW I, that the Europeans would have been a bit more eager to put a lid on it ... but wait a minute, I seem to remember France popping off their mouth that they wouldn't contribute any troops unless we contributed the lion's share.
... Datyton, Ohio, USA ... how about that!
... and who actually monitored it and enforced it? The US mostly. France and Germany even agreed to a UN resolution just a few months ago telling Saddam he had stalled long enough .. yet when it came time to back it up, they slid into a corner and made silly noises.
... why don't you damn fools get some spine and take care of yourselves?
Then Europe roundly condemned us for not joining in WW II fast enough, even tho that too was a purely European matter which was in fact jump started by the disastrous treaty, drafted by France, which ended WW I.
Not to mention that while Roosevelt was trying to help the Chinese, who Japan had invaded in 1931 and 1937, the Europeans couldn't be bothered with some trifle so far away.
Then the Suez canal fiasco, where Egypt nationalized that wonder of colonial days, Britain and France invaded to take it back
And who told the French that trying to recover Indochina after WW II ended was a mistake? Duhh
Then there's the Balkans again, 1990s, couple of purely European wars there
And where were the Dayton Accords signed? Hmmmm
Now I personally am not a big fan of Bush, or either gulf war. But by gum, the UN signed up in 1991 to cleanup Iraq, put in sanctions, rid it of the big nasty weapons
I personally am sick and tired of saving Eurpoe's ass. WW I, WW II, Suez, Balkans
Infuriate left and right
Well, it isn't just European bombs that could be guided by the European satellite system, but anyone's bombs
I somehow doubt that the ultimate motivation for the system is for guiding bombs. Yes, of course it's a factor, but Europeans seem to be culturally more opposed to war than the US.
So, if the U.S. is in the middle of combat, and turns off public GPS to thwart emeny guided bombs, I can imagine a bunch of European beaurocrats sitting in Brussels trying to decide whether or not they should do the same.
Well, perhaps this will make the US think twice before going off to wage war that most of the rest of the world opposes. If Europe should choose to go to war (not very likely), I think that the decision would be made easily (if it will be possible to achieve at all).
Is it somehow better to have absolute power in the hands of some kid trying to play dad?
I doubt, therefore I may be.