Slashdot Mirror
Doubts About Future GPS Reliability
loped_index writes "IT Week reports that the U.S. GPS system is in a delicate state, and that full coverage could be lost if older satellites fail faster than the current rate. From the article: 'The system relies on a network of satellites, which cannot be repaired once launched and have a limited lifespan. Sixteen of the present 28 satellites were built to last seven and a half years, but are now between eight and 14 years old. Twenty-four satellites are required for full coverage.'"
When enough people have them, it'll be just as helpful to have the devices communicate with each other and work out amongst themselves where you're trying to go. Especially when you figure in the possibility of triangulating with cell towers.
Except when there is no cell coverage (which is far from "full coverage") or where there aren't very many other people (tramping/geocaching through remote areas or national parks). Not to mention that would require all those devices to transmit as well as receive, increasing their power requirements significantly.
No thanks.
Can't use the north star. It's obviously a pagan artifact, with a Latin name and everything.
That's "Mr. Soulless Automaton" to you, Bub.
I was wondering how long it would take before we'd hear these stories. The military just sucessfully launched the first of the new autonomous (self-navigating) GPS satellites. The problem is, it is only autonmous if it can talk to a large number of similar new-style satellites. Since there is only one of thse in orbit, things must be pretty lonely. Some hot-shot in Space Command must just be itching to try out his new toy and is bummed that he'll have to wait another 15 years till the constellation is replaced with these. What is funny, in 15 years there will be a newer and better GPS satellite. If they sit back and be mellow there will always be a few of the latest and greatest in orbit. If they accellerate the schedule too much they'll be sticking future Space Command jocks with their old and decepit junk. The key truly seems to be to meter out the launch rate such that we launch 2 per year and have a constellation of ~30 satellites between 0 and 15 years old in orbit.
So maybe the US will stop its attemps to prevent the European Galileo...
Actually, it looks like this whole thing may be just misinformation to drum up support for Galileo.
The satellites are lasting LONGER than expected, and we have plenty of spares. It appears the article may also have the number of necessary satellites wrong.
As someone else has pointed out:
Bonnor said launches of new satellites are "only just keeping up" with current losses of around two satellites per year.
So we HAVE SPARES and we're REPLACING THE SPARES AS WE USE THEM. Sounds like it's working just dandy.
Life is too short to proofread.
The implication is that the failure rate is going to accelerate beyond the replacement rate real soon now.
So if that *actually* happens they'll increase the replacement rate. Are we now also worried that the US is suddenly only going to be capable of two satellite launches per year?
My point is that this is all silly sensationalism. If the failure rate doubles, no big deal, we send up a few more. The system would still have 100% uptime.
For the GPS system to actually become "unreliable", failure rates would have to increase by orders of magnitude. There is no data presented to suggest such an abrupt change might take place.
Life is too short to proofread.
But don't think that because you do and can that the US government is worse than some other half-baked government out there.
Sorry, but I think this speaks of lack of real world experience in international settings on your part. The US winner take all election system can produce some really nasty outliers when it comes to the quality of your government. BTW I mean the whole selection process - just imagine McCaine winning the 2000 primaries.
In the EU all member nations need to compromise to get anything done. This process certainly squashes all brilliance but it also quite reliably squashes complete and utter idiocy. And guess what, because the EU only moves by compromise the government that yells the loudest hardly ever wins. It is the ones that can moderate compromises the best that end up with the most influence.
Let me get this straight. You nearly praise the European nations and call the US incompetent, despite the EU-related solution is over 4 years off, not to mention have questionable delivery systems themselves.
Nope. You don't get this straight. I didn't praise the EU, but I wouldn't be ashamed of it if I did.
I didn't call the US incompetent. I called the Administration conduct of US diplomacy incomptent.
You take the word of a UK individual who, like folks anywhere in the world, gives talks to promote their opinion
I'm not taking anybody poster's word on the relevant facts, I'm going by the stories that have been reported in the press. Granted that's not perfect, but better than dredging opinions up out of my predjudices.
You overlook the fact that many satellite systems are overbuilt and typically do last well beyond their expected lifetimes.
Never mentioned this at all. My position is that if the EU wants to build their own system, that's they have every right to do so. If we don't want them to build one, we have to persuade them not to.
I'm not a bible thumper. And yet even I know the problems with the proverb you quote and at the very least, it points to lack of real world experience on your part.
Or perhaps experience that doesn't match yours.
Anytime I've spoken softly, the other person being receptive listened, but they weren't, I've watched people get pushed around and one person punched. Anytime I've yelled at someone, they overwhelmingly back down or at the very least snap from the focus, if temporarily, from the object of their violence.
Yes, people do want to humour somebody who is acting like a nut. But then what happens?
You attack the right, making no distinction between it and the religious right, just to be critical of the US, meanwhile the EU (multiple nations too) kisses the ass of some of the most suppressive fascist and religious states in the world.
I did not attack the right. I called the Administration a bunch of Bible Thumpers. I do not as a rule call religious people or conservative religious people bible thumpers. I've had many an enjoyable and civil discussion with conservative religious people, such as my friend the pastor of the evangelical church in my town. "Bible Thumper" carries with it the implied hypocrisy, I never made the connection to relgious conservatives at all. That was you.
Anytime the Old World gets involved in diplomacy, nothing of substance positive comes about to improve the world order
Any time the Old World gets involved in diplomacy, it's to futher their various national interests. Just like us.
You want to doubt and disagree with the US government? Good. I'm with you. But don't think that because you do and can that the US government is worse than some other half-baked government out there; that's a totally different set of standards and questions which you certainly have not addressed yourself.
I think the mania for comparing governments on the scale of stupidity, or atrocities on the scale of wickedness is a waste of time. In any case, it wasn't my point that I disagree with the US government, although I do. It's just that US government doesn't know how to get what it wants.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.