Europe's Galileo Program In Serious Trouble

elrous0 writes "Various news outlets are reporting that Europe's Galileo program is facing a serious financial and technical crisis and may be permanently stalled. The European program, designed to be a superior answer to the US's GPS — and, more critically, not controlled by the US — has faced numerous hurdles since its inception. To date the Galileo program has succeeded in launching only one of its 30 planned satellites and has been beset by delays and cost overruns. Apparently, squabbling between the eight companies in the consortium behind the project is responsible for many of the problems. The project is now threatened with an EU takeover. But some doubt that even an infusion of EU capital can save the flagging program."

Comments

I'm not surprised...

[jawtheshark]

I'm a EU citizen, and I applauded the Galileo program. Especially, because at least we would gain a bit independence to the US. (I was for a European Army too, provided that all national armied be disbanded... That idea was highly critisized by the US too). Anyway, this is typical EU technology stuff. Good idea in the beginning, bureaucracy kicks in, budgets get busted, scientists get frustrated and leave for the greener pastures in the US (or elsewhere), etc... etc... etc...

Eurofighter... same kind of mess. The only thing the EU is good at is creating papers and using my tax money. Okay, that and technically they are responsible for keeping peace (within EU members states) for over 50 years. A fucking long time in Europes history.... Well, it's a high price for peace, but it's the only reason I'm not against the EU.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, had NOTHING to do with numerous US bases stationed everywhere in europe to dissuade the USSR from invading. /sarcasm

I'm all for you guys being independant from us. Maybe we can stop spending money on bases over there.

Just remember who was nice to you many times in the past.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[R2.0]

"they are responsible for keeping peace (within EU members states) for over 50 years"

Huh? The EU started out as, and effectively remains, an economic organization. How did they "keep the peace".

If anything, I would credit the relative peacefulness of Europe in the last 50 years to cohesiveness against the external soviet threat, combined with the massive US subsidy of European defense budgets. With the mainly US funded NATO as their defense umbrella, Europe could divert funds that would otherwise have been spent on weapons to social programs. This has kept the level of internal and external strife to a minimum - why fight when everyone is fat and happy.

Don't worry - it won't last. Sooner or later, European countries will have to start footing their defense bill. This will start to impact their social services, already strained by demographics (aging population + low birthrate). This, combined with the civil unrest already brewing, and I predict we'll see open warfare between (soon-to-be) former EU nations within 20 years.

Like you said - Europe's been at peace for "a fucking long time", but 50 years isn't enouigh to change huma nature, and the nature of humans is to make war.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[JordanL]

There would be a lot of nice things about the EU fully federalizing... for the US and for Europe.

Particularly that countries like Germany and France would be force to give up their bullying of the rest of continent. The Euro would be a lot stronger if Germany and France didn't keep breaking the deficit rules that they force everyone else to abide by.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[DJCacophony]

Yeah, because we all know that no European nations have ever had any civil wars, or invaded other countries for their benefit. Ever.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[wfberg]

"they are responsible for keeping peace (within EU members states) for over 50 years"

Huh? The EU started out as, and effectively remains, an economic organization. How did they "keep the peace".

The EU started out as the European Coal and Steel Community, steel being the stuff you use to make bombs, trucks, tanks and other weaponry. One of the express purposes of regulation the steel and coal industries was to be able to prevent any country from suddenly starting a mass buildup of weaponry, like Germany's effort immediately preceding WWII.

I predict we'll see open warfare between (soon-to-be) former EU nations within 20 years.

Like you said - Europe's been at peace for "a fucking long time", but 50 years isn't enouigh to change huma nature, and the nature of humans is to make war.

I'm sure that like US states for the past 142 years, we'll see fit to take it out on nations outside the federation.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[dedazo]

Okay, that and technically they are responsible for keeping peace

You've been at peace for the first time in 60 years (I think that's the longest stretch so far?) thanks to the United States of America. Without the US, you'd be posting in Russian (or German. Or not at all). Wait a minute, that's not true if you consider the Yugoslavia debacle, which you had surprisingly little will to solve until the United States practically forced you to. And then essentially solved for you anyway.

You've been perfecting the art of killing each other (and everyone else) for the past thousand years or so. You've started, fought and alternatively won or lost by far the most violent, protracted and destructive conflicts in the history of humanity. And you wonder why the US complained about your idea of having a unified Army?

Nothing personal, but I'd rather ya'll sweat the petty stuff and let the US be the world's police. They don't do it all that well, but I'm pretty sure the alternatives would be worse.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[AlXtreme]

The EU is surprisingly un-democratic, actually. There is an elected EU-parliament, but they have no divisive say on anything. The EU-officials making the calls are pushed forward by the member-nations.

The main problem (if you can call it one) is that the EU isn't a country. You may take your share of blame for your NiC because your countrymen put him in power. Who should we blame for a failing EU? People from Poland, Romania or Malta? They don't speak my language, don't read or watch the same media, can't vote on the same parties. There is no such thing as a 'European'.

The only similarity is that we use the same currency, it ends at that. The EU was founded as an economic union, and became a very successful one. The problem is that it went on to other facets of life, and became a bludgeoning bureaucratic monstrosity with failures like the new Airbus and Galileo.

This is the main reason why we Dutchies, together with the French, voted against the EU 'constitution'. We're perfectly happy without the EU wanting to assimilate us into a 'federation'.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[Colin Smith]

Huh? The EU started out as, and effectively remains, an economic organization. How did they "keep the peace". What on earth do you think wars are about? They're about getting hold of resources that other countries hold. The EEC created a large free trade area which allows the money and resources to flow freely. There has been no need for war.

Sooner or later, European countries will have to start footing their defense bill. Actually no, they won't.

They'll be able to do what the US is doing right now, as the Euro replaces the US Dollar as the world reserve currency they'll be able to print Euros without producing inflation within the EU. The inflation will be externalised. Essentially, the rest of the world will finance the EU defence budget.

Europe's been at peace for "a fucking long time", but 50 years isn't enouigh to change huma nature, and the nature of humans is to make war. But of course, the war will be against whoever holds the resources which are needed within the EU. Like the massive oil fields in Saudi and Iraq...

Re:I'm not surprised...

[JordanL]

Why does everyone have to make any statement on economics a pissing match? I never said anything about the dollar. The Euro has performed weakly compared to its goals and backing, and it is primarily due to the deficits which France and Germany have been racking up, which rival those of the US for the only types of values that matter to economists: % GDP.

A weak dollar is actually a good way to fix outsourcing, as US goods become cheaper... in fact its the only way that the market by itself really has to fix outsourcing and trade deficits.

As for the Yuan... it has performed where it has because the Chinese government has been more or less subsidizing its own currency, which I suppose a more communist government is capable of. No matter how good the opportunity, China can't sustain a 9% growth rate forever, and when they slow down, their currency will have to come crashing to the floor, or we'll be mopping up Chinese bonds to fund their debt.

The global economy is a revolving door, and no one is spared, no matter how high and mighty they think they are. The state of the US dollar testifies to that.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[McDutchie]

Huh? The EU started out as, and effectively remains, an economic organization. How did they "keep the peace".

By being an economic organization. It's not in any country's interest to wage war with its closest trade partners.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[Citizen of Earth]

Europe's been at peace for "a fucking long time", but 50 years isn't enouigh to change huma nature, and the nature of humans is to make war.

No, it isn't. Europe has been at peace and will continue to be at peace because of international trade. War is caused by two factors: (1) a psychopath manages to become dictator, or (2) you can realize a significant material gain from invading your neighbour. We must be eternally vigilant against (1) (and strong democratic institutions are a good defense), but for (2), there is no sense in invading your neighbour for its resources if your neighbours are willing to harvest what you want and deliver it to your door for about the same price as if you had done it yourself.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[LWATCDR]

The EU hasn't been around for 50 years and has very little if nothing to do with those 50 years of peace.
The reasons that Europe has had 50 years of peace are.
1. Germany and France where both pretty well destroyed. So they spent a good number of hears rebuilding.
2. Germany was rebuilt with a constitution that enforces none aggression. That was enforced by the US and the the UK for many years.
3. The US rebuilt Europe both friend and foe alike with the Marshall Plan and continued Lend Lease.
4. The US help found NATO to build cooperation in Europe and then funded a large percentage of the the European nations defense budgets.
5. The USSR/WARSAW pact gave Western Europe a common fear and the US gave them protection.

I keep hoping that part of it is that the members of the EU are just sick of killing each other. However historically a large part of that stability clearly came from the rise of the US as a superpower and the US being actively involved with Europe.

Oh BTW a lot of people in Europe really don't share your wish for a European Army. I doubt that the UK would disband their Army and France would want to control the EU Army.

So if you are only for the EU because it kept the peace... It didn't.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[wfberg]

Probably not a prime purpose, though.

The preambles of the Treaty of Paris:

CONSIDERING that world peace may be safeguarded only by creative efforts equal to the dangers which menace it;

CONVINCED that the contribution which an organized and vital Europe can bring to civilization is indispensable to the maintenance of peaceful relations;

CONSCIOUS of the fact that Europe can be built only by concrete actions which create a real solidarity and by the establishment of common bases for economic development;

DESIROUS of assisting through the expansion of their basic production in raising the standard of living and in furthering the works of peace;

RESOLVED to substitute for historic rivalries a fusion of their essential interests; to establish, by creating an economic community, the foundation of a broad and independent community among peoples long divided by bloody conflicts; and to lay the bases of institutions capable of giving direction to their future common destiny;

HAVE DECIDED to create a European Coal and Steel Community[..]

Yeah, probably just a footnote in history.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[Grishnakh]

No, there's not going to be open warfare between EU nations. However, I do believe we're going to see some massive social upheavals and violence because of all the Muslim immigrants in Europe. They're already rioting in France and Sweden, assassinating people in the Netherlands, murdering bus drivers in Belgium, and it's just going to get worse.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[falcon5768]

You dont know much about American politics beyond what your news stations tell you do you? Thats the only way you could ever make a statement like that and think it was in any way true with our political situation.

We agreed to go to war in Afghanistan for legitimate reasons that where much graver than anything your own countries did to start WWI. Iraq is a sore subject and was only agreed to because people lied about intel. We are now coming to the agreement on how to best pull our troops out of the war, we are fighting, but I strongly expect a agreement to be hammered out before July. On top of this more bills pass through our government in a month, than the EU has passed in their existence, many with some manner of debate and disagreement over them. The difference is majority wins in the US. If 55% of our elected officials voted yes, and our president doesnt veto, then its yes even if you dont like it. Only when it comes to being a Veto (which would be the case of the recent war spending bill which was passed pretty much as a FU to the presedent to make him veto a bill giving money to our troops than it was a expectation the moron would actually suck it up and admit he fucked up royally) does it come down to a large majority vote to bypass the president and make it law. While the recent bill didnt, bills in the past have.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[Mr. Underbridge]

Nothing personal, but I'd rather ya'll sweat the petty stuff and let the US be the world's police. They don't do it all that well, but I'm pretty sure the alternatives would be worse.

Yeah, that whole US as global cop thing...the Euros bitch about the US doing everything unilaterally, but when you start doing stuff by committee nothing gets done (see current story). And it seems that for conflicts that the US doesn't get involved with for whatever reason, it seems that Europe doesn't really jump in with both feet.

Like now - for right or wrong, we have our hands full with Iraq and don't have the resources to solve Darfur. So where's Europe? Talking, telling the US to get involved. I'd say to Europe, with the US distracted, this is your chance to solve all those other problems your way, without the US stepping all over it. So let's see it.

As a US citizen, I'd rather my tax money weren't getting spent solving everyone else's problems, but it seems like the international will to do most of the dirty work just isn't there. Messy world problems can't be solved by parliamentary procedure at the UN.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[meringuoid]

Hmm .. let me see .. what do I have that originated in EU ... hmm... nothing, I guess.

I assume that means you use a BSD-based kernel?

Re:I'm not surprised...

[Kagura]

Maybe you have a point, maybe you don't, but unfortunately you couldn't eloquently place it, nor could you come up with any real arguments. Saying 'the US won WW2 is not true' does not make it that way in other people's minds. Rather, we need a more substantial argument.

the US didn't even join in until it firmly noticed the war was on its doorstep.

So, are you saying the US should have been involved in the war earlier? How much earlier? Should the US have persuaded the European states to not follow 'appeasement'? Failing that, should the US have invaded Germany without European support?

Re:I'm not surprised...

[NeutronCowboy]

Wow... what's with the moderation today? Maybe the American moderators should stick to moderating topics they have a clue about?

The EU has its roots in the Franco-German Steel and Coal agreements of the 50s, whose primary goal was peace in Europe. Everything else is just added bureaucracy. The rise of the US as a superpower had no impact on peace in Europe, unless you count conflict with Russia as part of a European conflict.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[Applekid]

I really don't know why the above was marked troll. And I walk in the minefield by trying to answer even in a neutral manner. So be it.

(Disclaimer: I am a US Citizen)

There's a lot of resentment over the power the US has held over the heads of other nations in the world. Gunboat negotiations and all.

US corporations spread globalism with an emphasis on profits over the benefit of humanity. The government repeatedly chooses not to reign them in because the politicians are lobbied by money instead of doing what's right for the nation.

Unfair trade agreements, a favor of capitalism over socialism, and other inequities just helps keep people angry. We try to police the world and are bad neighbors to the world community at the same time.

That said, (minefield time) I do agree that there's far more anti-American feelings than warranted. If Portugal (just for a random example) found itself in our position it would do the exact same thing. It's a Game Theory thing. A lot of old world countries did all sorts of horrible things within their spheres of influence. It just so happens that the rise of US power coincided with the time when one nation COULD have global reach.

But...
Until we get voter turnout rates that aren't pathetic compared to American Idol,
Until we have a culture that honors education instead of 50 Cent,
Until we can be colorblind in all racist matters,
Until we can humble ourselves as a member of the world instead of masters of it
We will continue to be hated.

That's ok, I was unpopular in high school, too. ;)

Re:I'm not surprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, because we all know that no European nations have ever had any civil wars, or invaded other countries for their benefit. Ever. Most of them don't pretend to be innocent of any of these charges nowadays. European history is full of civil wars, predatory wars of conquest, ethnic cleansing and the associated atrocities and denying that history would be pretty pointless. It usually takes a large group of especially clueless morons such as the Nazis, Fascists or Balkan ultra nationalists to achieve a critical mass of stupidity that is great enough to generate a wave of such denial. The USA just as prone to deluding it self that every war it starts for it's own selfish ends is really a humanitarian police actions aimed at spreading democracy and preventing the proliferation of (imaginary) weapons of mass destruction.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[kuldan]

I guess the parent meant you must be using BSD,'cause linux is european stuff :)

Re:I'm not surprised...

[fiannaFailMan]

became a bludgeoning bureaucratic monstrosity with failures like the new Airbus

The A300, the first Airbus, was a huge success in the earlier days of the widebody market. The A310, A320, A330, A340 were all pretty successful too AFAIK. It wasn't until the A380 that we started to see major problems. Anyway, didn't Boeing have problems and delays with sagging engine cowlings on the 747 before it was first delivered?

Re:I'm not surprised...

[germanbirdman]

I also like the fact that I can work in every other European country. In fact if you have lived in another European country for more than a certain amount of time (2 years?) You can also vote in that country in many places now - not all elections yet, but we're moving in that direction.

Apart from the same money, Europeans also now share the same driving license.

Regarding commonality: There's more than the Euro, but not much: we now also have the same driving license. But I can't really think of much else at the moment...

The problem with democracy in Europe is that people use the EU elections to voice their frustrations and vote all the radical parties to show their dissatisfaction with the currently ruling administration in their own member state because the parliament doesn't have much power anyway.. So all kinds of really radical parties get voted in which people would never dream of voting into their own parliaments.

People actually say that the EU parliament has a much greater voice now than it did a decade ago - I also agree with other postings that the only way to make it more democratic is to give it enough powers so that people actually start caring. Right now, people use the EU elections for nothing but to voice their frustrations at their own goverment. This includes I believe even the referendums for the constitution: Their government is for it? People vote against - their government is against it? The people would have voted for it.

I believe that once the economic growth has gone on for a while and people are not fearing losing their jobs anymore as was the case in most countries that voted against the election, maybe we have a chance to get the constitution through. Without it, the EU will become a group of states that cannot do anything because all decisions have to be unanimous.

I still think of myself as a European though rather than a German - that being mainly because I grew up in the UK, lived in Germany for most of my life, spent quite some years in the USA where I really saw that there was a difference between European (not just English/German) mentality. In my work, half of the people I work with in the office are Dutch/other half is German.

People in Europe are brought up to be a lot more critical about their government, in the US for quite some time after 9/11 it was unheard of to criticize the president - US news just wasn't worth watching because it was all so one sided. Thankfully that has gotten a lot better again (I left the US two months ago). In the US, the goverment says something, the people believe it with almost no questions asked. Not so here.
What's not so good here is that people here rely too much on the government - in the US people rely more on themselves. If you're out of a job or are earning too little money, Americans get another job - here in Europe people ask for unemployment pay.
US and gun laws - after the shootings at that school people saying that if everybody had a gun, it would not have been as bad... No thanks... But I have to admit US gun laws are similar to having a law to impose a speed limit on the Autobahn in Germany- no government would ever be elected or reelected if they did that. It is just something cultural.
In the US it seems that the government wants to only have a few educated people and a lot of not so educated people - Universities there are just so prohibitively expensive. This is one of the main reasons I came back actually because my gf wants to study. 500 Euros a semester, that's a joke comparing it to US prices.
Then, we have more taxes here, but you get a lot for them - you get good roads (I am always amazed when I come from the US how good they are here), you get the university education.

Getting back to the Galileo program - there needs to be an EU government which have something to say. And they should press through the Galileo system. It is vital. Right now, I fear that it is not strong enough yet and it will stay at the one 1 satellite. I hope I am wrong.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[miguelX]

How you've hold out so long without getting a nice '-1, troll' modding escapes my understanding:

Rapes aren't significantly higher amongst the muslim demographic, unless you take into account any other factors (like socio-economic class, unemployement rate, previous criminal history... and yes, Muslims are over-represented there for the same reason that Eastern-Europe nationals are: they constitute one of the main groups of immigrants in Europe).

I will attribute your misjudgement of muslim culture and religion to ignorance rather than malice. But know that accusing them of justifying rape is wrong in so many ways that I won't waste my time detailing them to you

Re:I'm not surprised...

[Grishnakh]

Here's an article about the epidemic of rape by Muslim men in France:
http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/2002/1202 /crime/bellil.htm

Obviously, rapes ARE significantly higher among the Muslim demographic; unemployment, previous criminal history, etc. are not excuses, and don't make them non-Muslim.

Read the article to see how they justify their rapes.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[Grishnakh]

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.a sp?ID=20552

Here's another one, about the rape epidemic in Sweden by Muslims. Apparently some teenage girls there even designed an "anti-rape belt" because the problem is so bad.

And this isn't just some hoodlums committing crimes which authorities would disapprove of. What do top Muslim clerics think of it? "An Islamic Mufti in Copenhagen sparked a political outcry after publicly declaring that women who refuse to wear headscarves are 'asking for rape.'" It's actually the view of Islamic authorities that it's ok to rape women.

If these aren't clear-cut signs that Muslims (especially men) have no place in western society, I don't know what is. There is no "misjudgement" of muslim culture and religion on my part, only on yours as you have turned a blind eye towards the atrocities condoned by top Muslim religious authorities.

Re:I'm not surprised...

[Moridineas]

I didn't talk about the US contributions during WW2 (which are also far smaller than Americans like to think). Your revisionism is peeping through again. Conservatively speaking, the US lost 200,000 people in Europe. My grandfather fought in Europe. I think it's entirely fair to say that WW2 would not have ended as it did had the US not entered the European front. But I guess that doesn't really matter anymore.. The Hitler/Stalin reference was referring to who would most likely had controlled most of Europe had things turned out differently..

The rise of the US as a superpower had no impact on peace in Europe, unless you count conflict with Russia as part of a European conflict. That sounds to me like you're saying the economic power of the US had no impact on WW2. Had no impact on rebuilding post-war Europe. Had no impact on the formation of NATO. Had no impact on stopping the spread of Russia (which you say doesn't count for some reason--I think the former East Germans might disagree with you..). Had no part on supporting Europe militarily when the European militaries were depleted and worn out. Had no part in the keeping of the peace..

In addition, you may not remember it, but it was less than 20 years ago that the Soviet Union included parts of Western Europe--there wasn't even a unified Germany. This is hard to fathom now, but not 20 years ago a large portion of the EU was much less accessible than it is now. Certainly during the last 50 years there were times when western Europe's relations with the Soviets was .. less than good. Berlin WAS a split city until 17 years ago! I don't know about you, but that's an amazingly hard image to reconcile with the images of Europe today. Anyway, my point is merely that the US played a large role in Europe from WW2 for many years. The price tag was in the hundreds of thousands of lives, and billions of dollars. Hell, US superpower had nothing to do with European peace? Heard anything about the Balkans? The US had to send troops there recently (nato)... so I guess, we're STILL helping out. Actually that's an interesting point--I have a number of Bosnian friends--I lived in an area where a very large number of Bosnian refugees were settled--and I've RARELY met anyone as pro-American and pro-American military. Especially for Europeans (those from the Balkans DO count as Europeans, right?). One of my friends lived in Sarajevo through most of the war..has some amazing stories and pictures.. pretty horrifying.

I know anti-Americanism is the fashionable thing now, but come on, I just can't imagine why you would try to minimize hundreds of thousands of dead.. I just don't know what the motivation for that is.

(incidentally, I'm not disputing the fact that the precursor France, Germany, Benelux, Italy union was intended to peace, though I would dispute that it was the biggest factor, or even a big one. Something about millions and millions of people dying tends to kinda suck the desire to fight from people.. it helps when there are soldiers around keeping the peace too !!)

Piggyback US

[jshriverWVU]

The US GPS system is available worldwide, and with the increased amount of definition now I wonder why they want to invest so much money creating their own. Perhaps a joint US / Europe project to utilize one system, would be cost efficient.

Re:Piggyback US

[falcon5768]

It's US. They dont like the idea that we can turn out the lights or degrade service if say they get it in their mind to come over and invade us. Or us them.

Its a very silly argument though not without merit since I would be a fool to looking back 60 years now. But still I think there are much more pressing matters at hand than to worry about the US taking care of your navigational needs.

Re:Piggyback US

[Dogtanian]

The US GPS system is available worldwide, and with the increased amount of definition now I wonder why they want to invest so much money creating their own. Perhaps a joint US / Europe project to utilize one system, would be cost efficient. Because the US system is under the control of the US. In reality, "friendship" between countries does not exist; countries have allies, not friends.

Beneath the PR gloss the US government has always acted in its own interest to a large extent (don't take that as a criticism, any government in its position would the same). However, in recent years this has become significantly more pronounced with the hawkish arrogance of Bush and co. In particular, Tony Blair's conceit that he has any real influence over the Bush administration is laughable, and has been for some time now. Bush will only do what Blair wants if he was going to do it anyway; out of the PR highlight, U.S. government staff have admitted as much.

I'm sure you'll excuse me if I say that I don't trust the Bush-led government one fucking bit. When push came to shove, if they were forced to choose, they'd act in their own self-interest. Even if the US Democrats won the next election, there's no guarantee that they'd be significantly better, or how long it would be before the Bush-types regain power.

As I said, I personally think it's undesirable to rely on the US-controlled system. You can take this as an anti-U.S. rant or not; what it comes down to IMHO is that we need a system under our own control, not something that can be yanked from under our feet if it proves inconvenient to our allies.

Re:Piggyback US

[digitig]

Its a very silly argument Well, when the US DoD publicly announced that in a conflict any GPS differential station would be considered to be a valid military target, even if it were on friendly soil, it didn't look so silly. And if GPS gets a virtual monopoly on navigation then the DoD could start charging pretty much whatever they like (even more credible with Block III satellites), which is a little worrying.

Re:Piggyback US

[joggle]

I still think it is a fairly low-priority issue. If the US were to disable or degrade service over Europe then it would directly affect American companies too, specifically airlines and shipping companies. Also, the US manufactures a significant portion (perhaps even most) of the consumer and almost all of the professional level GPS units used around the world. If GPS couldn't be relied upon then the sale of GPS equipment would surely be aversely affected.

If you would want to be fully independent of the US then you would also need to address these issues:

• Securing shipping lanes. The US is especially the world police when it comes to international waters, having a navy that is significantly larger than any other nation.
• Rerouting the internet backbone. A significant amount of traffic still goes through US-controlled nodes in US territory.

If you think the Galileo project is expensive you should see how expensive it would be for the EU to build and maintain a fleet large enough to patrol all of the shipping lanes in the world. Frankly I'm a bit disappointed in the EU. The US screws up (especially lately) with international affairs but it also provides a good amount of free services that the rest of the world benefits from (such as the above mentioned items). Why doesn't the EU spend its billions on something that will help the rest of us out for once. The Galileo project will (theoretically) improve accuracy of positioning but not nearly enough given the amount of money being spent on the project. Surely the money could be better spent on medical research/lowering unemployment/etc.

Re:Piggyback US

[weg]

The US GPS system is mainly intended for military application. It might be shutdown or degraded whenever the US deem such an action appropriate. Just consider that something like the recent terrorist attacks happens again - do you think that US military would make a call to Europe before they encrypt GPS (temporarily)?

Galileo is supposed to be a public, non-minilary service. There will be legal guarantees that it can't be turned off just because some military commander thinks it'd be a great idea. Combined with GPS, it can even bring more accuracy (GNSS).

Another reason is of course that the project generates lots of jobs and revives research in Europe (trying to prevent at least some of the researches and engineers to emmigrate to the US ;-)).

Re:Piggyback US

[rayvd]

The reasons you list initially are sound ones. Alternatives are always better, and certainly should help spur some healthy competition. Rarely is monopoly beneficial for everyone.

However, the rest of your post is pure and simple off-topic Bush bashing that really has no bearing on the discussion at hand, nor on any decision making made by current EU leadership. In fact, both the US and the EU came to an agreement in 2004 on GPS and Galileo frequencies helping to preserve a military advantage for both sides and also making both systems compatible with each other.

You may hate Bush, but while he certainly looks out for his own country's interests first and foremost (as he should), it can't be said that he and his administration have not been working with the EU on this one.

Re:Piggyback US

[elgatozorbas]

...If GPS couldn't be relied upon then the sale of GPS equipment would surely be aversely affected.

Do you think this would be America's biggest concern in times of war?

...Rerouting the internet backbone. A significant amount of traffic still goes through US-controlled nodes in US territory.

Do you think Europeans are happy about that either?

Would you personally be happy to be relying on another country's goodwill for daily needs? Well, Europeans are no different and they don't like it either.

Well, just use GLONASS

[Cyberax]

Well, you can always use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLONASS

Oh wait...

Sounds Familiar

[TheWoozle]

For those of us old enough to remember, this sounds very familiar

Re:Sounds Familiar

[rlp]

For those not old enough to remember, it still sounds very familiar.

Reinventing the wheel. For SPITE!

[Chas]

This is what happens when you dive into a program like this motivated by little more than spite.

Emotions wax and wane. If you project is based off little more than the sentiment of "Fscking Americans...", so too will the ability of the project to function.

Is a re-implementation of a GPS-like system a laudable goal? SURE!

Is the "Fscking Americans..." sentiment a good basis for such a goal? NO EFFING WAY!

And, if the simple goal of having a product like this outside of American control remains the primary goal, it's just doomed to fail. All you'll do is spur the people working on the GPS system to out-innovate you and out-compete you.

"Gailileo offers X resolution"

"GPS offers variable resolutions up to 3X+1, is time-tested and stable, has thousands of apps in-place already, yadda yadda, oh and did we mention yadda? Oh, and our licensing terms will cost you less than half what any competitors can offer you. Do the math..."

Obvious

[blhack]

The original GPS program was built by the DOD, meaning nearly unlimited funds. Since GPS doesn't require subscription, i can't really imagine much of a business model for something like this. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for new tech, but really why is this needed? Does anybody really need anything better than CM accuracy (which is possible with today's tech). I suppose that i can see maybe construction crews and such benefiting from a system with extreme accuracy, but a site-based positioning system seems to be a better approach for something like that.

Re:Obvious

[Kadin2048]

The DOD get a little cash for *every* GPS reciver sold. You can't just build these things. You need to get a "licence". Also there is a thing called selective avaliblity.

Perhaps in the U.S. (although I've never heard of any license fees for building GPS receivers); I doubt that those license agreements would be enforceable outside the U.S. anyway, and I'm pretty certain that it wouldn't be hard to go to Taiwan or China and have a bunch of receivers made without paying. It's not like the DoD is going to degrade service for that.

Now, if you start using your bootlegged GPS receivers to pilot cruise missiles with, and you happen to not be in good odor with the U.S. at the moment, I can see how that might get you on the Selective Availability shitlist, but even then you'd have to be pretty egregious. The U.S. has more to lose by disabling parts of the GPS system than anyone else -- there are a lot of U.S. business interests that depend on GPS in various ways, and would be pretty pissed if something happened to it.

Even during the height of the war in Iraq, the DoD never degraded or interrupted civilian GPS service, because the U.S. had more to lose by interrupting service than the Iraqis did (due to the unavailability of military GPS receivers, a lot of soldiers were using civilian ones; more than one person has said that the modern U.S. Army runs almost as much on AA batteries as it does on diesel or food).

Selective Availability is a "nuclear option." Most of the scenarios that would invoke its use, would probably also invoke the use of anti-satellite weapons to disable a competing navigational system. It's not something that just gets tossed around at random, because the consequences for using it on U.S. assets (both military and civilian) would be dire. You'd have planes crashing, tankers running aground, farms not being harvested -- it would be a mess. (Sure, all planes and ships are supposed to have backup navigational systems, but I'm not sure I'd trust anyone to know how to use them for normal operations anymore; things would still get FUBAR pretty fast.)

The Russian Alternative...

[leather_helmet]

Russia's space agency is preparing to launch eight satellites that will nearly complete a system designed to compete directly, by 2009, with the existing global positioning system technology of the United States. GLONASS (Global Navigation Satellite System), is expected to begin operations over Russian territory later this year, followed by coverage of adjacent parts of Europe and Asia. By controlling the only fully operational satellite navigation system in existence today, the United States holds a strategic advantage in times of conflict, according to Russian military officials. In theory, the United States could deny GPS navigation signals to countries with which it has a dispute. Such actions could affect industries as diverse as agriculture, oil production and banking, to say nothing of military operations. For the most part, the Russian system promises to be functionally equivalent to the existing GPS system, however it could be more accurate than GPS in regions where Russia has better access to terrestrial navigation aids. Some companies are already designing dual-chip navigation devices that support both systems.

While Russia attempts its own GPS alternative, China has already launched satellites for its own Baidu system. The European Union's Galileo positioning system is still in the planning stages, having hit a snag with its private contractors over potential profits. The European Galileo Global Navigation Satellite System is scheduled to come online in 2011 with higher precision than the existing GPS and GLONASS networks. However, delays put the Galileo project more than four years off schedule and still counting.

link to story

I'm looking forward to it, maybe it will lower the cost of aerial & satellite imagery in general - relying on IKONOS, SPOT is expensive

Oh, don't be dense

[Colin Smith]

This is what happens when you dive into a program like this motivated by little more than spite. Frankly I expected better from someone with a 4 digit ID.

Anyway, it has fuck all to do with spite and everything to do with military independence. It's geopolitics. Whether you like it or not, the EU is gradually unifying into what will become a direct competitor to the US for world resources. Where there are trade rivalries today we will have wars tomorrow, and to conduct a war against a country who controls vital information systems like GPS would be stupidest folly.

Oh, you don't think the EU would ever go to war against the US? Just wait till the oil and water start running out.

Re:Oh, don't be dense

[Colin Smith]

But the EU? Remember, they've got the French - I think I'll sleep comfortably against that threat! :) Hmmm, yes, but they'll also have the Germans and the British on the same side.

Re:Oh, don't be dense

[jo7hs2]

Oh please. China, India, and Russia will be the immediate geopolitical threats to both the US and the EU. I find it unlikely that the US and the EU (should it exist in some form in 25-50 years) will come to blows with those other threats to fend off. The simple truth is, both sides of the Atlantic have too much in common, culturally, intellectually, and even in political systemic functions, to find themselves enemies. Both Europe and North America have significant water resources, so I doubt that will be the issue that divides us. Hopefully, 50 years from now, we will have weaned ourselves off of oil enough that it too will not be an major problem. That's assuming the EU doesn't simply collapse, which is what my money is on.

Re:Oh, don't be dense

[Colin Smith]

The simple truth is, both sides of the Atlantic have too much in common, culturally, intellectually, and even in political systemic functions, to find themselves enemies. Lol. Sorry, this is just naive.

Both Europe and North America have significant water resources, so I doubt that will be the issue that divides us. Potable water is an energy issue. The supply of sweet water for drinking and particularly irrigation is not unlimited, then it becomes an energy issue, expending energy for desalination. And with ready and cheap sources of energy becoming more scarce...

Hopefully, 50 years from now, we will have weaned ourselves off of oil enough that it too will not be an major problem. Yes... on to what? There isn't anything out there with the energy density and extraordinarily low cost. There will almost certainly be wars over the oil as it becomes more scarce. Hell, they've already started.

That's assuming the EU doesn't simply collapse, which is what my money is on. It began in 1957 and is now the single largest market in the world, any country which leaves the EU will find itself locked outside that free market, enduring huge financial hardship. Not going to happen.

Why there's nobody fighting:

[Kadin2048]

Well, actually, I think the EU is really just the Germans and the French finally figuring out how to do jointly what they've been trying unsuccessfully to do independently for the last 300-odd years -- conquer the rest of Europe.

Seriously: they have a waiting list to get in. How slick is that? You've got countries falling over themselves, remaking themselves in your image, in order to be part of your empire. Not too shabby.

Re:Why there's nobody fighting:

[ThousandStars]

Well, actually, I think the EU is really just the Germans and the French finally figuring out how to do jointly what they've been trying unsuccessfully to do independently for the last 300-odd years -- conquer the rest of Europe.

Are Germany and France conquering the rest of Europe, or is the rest of Europe conquering Germany and France? I ask because I read -- chiefly in The Economist and The New York Times, granted -- about the angst in both countries over the rising tide of English as a language and the difficulty both have had with economic growth over the last 20 years. The language aspect is particularly important: the best way to kill or submerge a culture is to destroy its language. Look at what the English did to the Welsh, Scottish, and Irish; to most of the world, people who are from all four geographic region would seem one and the same. Not many people know Welsh, and few writers work with it any longer. The same happened to American Indian cultures.

It seems like the rest of Europe is changing the cultures of those two countries moreso than the other way around.

EU management prowess

[kbob88]

Concorde, Airbus, Galileo - great job, guys.

Can't wait until you all get fed up with US control of the Internet, and decide to make your own internet. Good luck with that one too.

Read about the founding of the EU

[hotsauce]

The BBC has a great article with the EU founders about why it was created. A quick search instead brought this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6483585.stm

As another reply to your "Huh?" comment said, the EU had nothing to do with economics, and everything to do with preventing another war. If you've been to Europe recently and noticed how citizens see themselves as European first and nationals second, you will see they've done very well on their goals.

Re:Read about the founding of the EU

[NeutronCowboy]

"If you've been to Europe recently and noticed how citizens see themselves as European first and nationals second, you will see they've done very well on their goals"

What the hell are you smoking??? Go to France, and be astounded at the Frenchness of the French. Go to Germany, and be astounded at their Germanness. Go to Sweden.... you get the point. Not only are all the countries resolutely individual, they are proud to be something specific. Finally, a couple of countries voted against the EU constitution, some never really joined (they are only part of the EU market), and you'll realize that Europe is a long way from become a nation.

Whoever modded this informative hasn't been to Europe.

Re:Read about the founding of the EU

[hotsauce]

I've been to all those countries of course.

I've also been to New Mexico, and been "astounded" at their "New Mexican-ness", been to Texas, and been "astounded" at their "Texan-ness", and been to Kansas, and been "astounded" at their "Kansan-ness". However, they all still identify themselves as Americans. Europeans never did this before the EU, and they definitely do now.

Whoever modded your comment informative can't get beyond American notions of nations. (Not that I ever claimed Europe was one.)

Re:*Cough* Bu11sh1t!

[AK Marc]

CM accuracy is available from GPS??? I wish the receiver in my car knew that!

Well, pay a few thousand for a surveyor's GPS and let us know what accuracy you get. It'll be a little better than the systems found in cars and $100 GPS receivers. Just because you haven't heard of it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Run a couple searches on GPS accuracy and check on it, include the word "centimeter" and see how many results you get and what they are about. Don't worry, we'll be here when you get back.

Shock and Surprise

[Ngarrang]

So, a project designed by a committee with no real purpose other than to say "this is my toy" failed. I am completely shocked and surprised.

*rolling of eyes*

GPS is a privilege, not a right. The US Government was kind enough to say, "okay, citizens, you can use it, too, but with a tad less accuracy." Well, a few years later, it seems some people get a stick up their butt and suddenly think that GPS is their God-given right. Well, like the internet, it isn't. And just like the internet, just because the rest of the world found a use for it and came to depend on it, doesn't justify complaints of US control.

MOD parent up. An actual reference

[fantomas]

Well referenced sir. An actual reference rather than a vaguely remembered comic strip version of history.

Long live the EU. I'm much happier with the current set up than how my grandfather or his father had to relate to folk from other European countries. Dying in a muddy trench shooting at somebody who's got no more grudge against me than I have against him because some rich bloke will make some money out of it or because some hereditary fool has some bizarre sense of honour to protect seems a bloody pointless exercise. I have no wish to do it.