China Begins Using New Global Positioning Satellites

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

China Begins Using New Global Positioning Satellites

Posted by timothy on Tuesday December 27, 2011 @03:50AM from the seasonal-ferry-across-the-river-crab dept.

cswilly writes with the news that China's satellite navigation system, called Beidou, has been successfully activated. "With ten satellites now, 16 in 2012, and 35 in 2020, China is making damn sure they are independent of the U.S. military's lock on GPS. According to the article, 'Beidou, or 'Big Dipper,' would cover most parts of the Asia Pacific by next year and then the world by 2020.'" The BBC also has slightly more detailed coverage.

168 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 03:55 · Score: 0

Should read a bit more on this.
Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 03:56 · Score: 0

Have to have a legit purpose for the spy satellites somehow if they got discovered.
1. Re:Not surprising by InterestingFella · 2011-12-27 04:00 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  China has a huge amount of their own infrastructure, so this isn't really surprising. Unlike U.S., China likes to do everything themselves. This also means you're not dependent on other countries like the U.S. is. What you don't understand is that China thinks long term, and everything they've done will grant them the leading country status some day, probably even within 10-15 years, especially when considering how much U.S. and EU are struggling now after thinking only short term financial gains.
2. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:05 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  yup. and in the 80's Japan because of their superior thinking and forward looking abilities and all around betterness than anything and everything done by the US was going to take over the US, and the evil Americans and their god the dollar would be goffed down and forgotten. But that didnt happen either :)
3. Re:Not surprising by j-pimp · 2011-12-27 04:06 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  China does everything themselves because that makes sense to them at the moment. In fifty years they will probably be outsourcing and not maintaining their infrastructure.
  
  --
  --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
4. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:09 · Score: 0
  
  It's true. Sad thing is that the EU, US and the rest of the West and Asia don't want to bury the hatchet and work with China. They are basically here to stay, but the USA and EU don't want to let them into the club.
5. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:18 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Umm... you are aware of the differences between China and Japan, right?
  Such as, say, a massive difference in population? A massive difference in natural resources? The fact that China is now locking up energy and mineral resources around the world which will deny their use to the USA in 50 years?
  China and Japan are in no way comparable in this sense. You WILL be second fiddle to China. You can like this or not, but that's the simple reality. You almost are already. You will be passed within a few years, and continue your downward slide as the world aligns more and more to the number one world power of the future: China.
6. Re:Not surprising by equex · 2011-12-27 04:23 · Score: 0
  
  I'd say the dollar has taken a plunge halfway to death (dollar has fallen to half, sometimes a third of it's value in the 80's and 90's), and that governments around the world are re-structuring to be free from US-assets like bonds and other government-backed economic tools. And the Japanese are doing good. Has the most expensive properties in the world too.
  
  --
  Can I light a sig ?
7. Re:Not surprising by jimbolauski · 2011-12-27 04:27 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Satellites in geosynchronous orbit make poor spy satellites, for one they are stationary in relation to the ground so you have to look at an angle to see anything increasing the atmospheric distortion, they are also up much higher which also increases the distortion, and thirdly because they are stationary they are much easier targets for satellite weapons as height is their only protection. While permanently positioning a satellite over a test bed would seem like a great idea, either the test site is compromised or closed, the truth is that a high enough resolution can not be obtained with all the atmosphere to account for.
  
  --
  Knowledge = Power
  P= W/t
  t=Money
  Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
8. Re:Not surprising by jellomizer · 2011-12-27 04:35 · Score: 2
  
  It is also part of China's culture. The Chinese tend to prefer isolationism and doing things themselves. Where in the short term (The next 20-50 years) does have advantages however in the long term if it ends up cutting themselves from the rest of the world may bring them back to their third world status again.
  
  The United States has some of this in our culture, however the US culture tends to have a Duality in its culture which is often confused with being a nation of Hippocrates. So while we will openly work with others, we take great pride on what we can do ourselves.
  
  But China really doesn't have that Duality in its culture. I would expect those are just as they say GPS system made by and controlled by China. Not so much because they have a problem with the US GPS but because it isn't theirs and their culture of We are China, we are the worlds largest country by population, and 3 or 4 by (Roughly the same as the United States, where if you add or remove disputed land) land mass. They feel that they really should have the rights to have their own. Without having to deal with the US and trust us. It is matter or pride for them.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
9. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:45 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Not this shit again. It looks like the shills from China are getting to the point where they even infect Slashdot.
  Want to know one thing China lacks? The ability to grow food for its people. As of now, they are an exporter. Give it 10 years, and that isn't going to be the case. If the US gives a middle finger to the world, the country can keep its population fed. May not have the variety, but people would survive. Other countries would have mass starvations if it wasn't for their imports.
  We have heard the second fiddle to China thing before. We were going to forever be second fiddle to Japan. We were going to be swallowed up by Communist countries because the USSR had so much land, puppet governments, and did not hesitate to use brutal force when called on. We were going to be swallowed up by every nation in the world going under Sharia law.
  Not to say China isn't doing their part. The one thing China is good at is sabotage. They are going ape-shit dumping solar panels for way below the cost of materials + labor in the US market in effort to kill that industry and take it over for themselves. Instead of innovation, this is how they go about doing things. Hopefully in the fall of next year, we get a Congress elected that actually abide their oath of office and actively stop this crap.
  The US has its faults. In fact, sometimes you wonder what the country does right, but like a NoSQL database where you wonder where the hell the consistency comes from but keeps its integrity over a period of time, the US keeps going.
10. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:48 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  you guys are too young to see my point I guess. It is not about numbers. There will always be a doomsday scenario about why Russia is better than the US or will nuke the US, Japan is better, South America, China, whoever. It's always the same crap. Don't quote numbers and population and land area to me. You embarass yourselves when you do it, and you don't even realize it. I am trying to save you the embarassment.
11. Re:Not surprising by Phil06 · 2011-12-27 04:51 · Score: 1
  
  The Chinese do not prefer isolationism, their totalitarian government demands it
  
  --
  "...and yet, I blame society" Duke - Repo Man
12. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:54 · Score: 0
  
  If you think GPS satellites are in geo orbit, you're mistaken.
13. Re:Not surprising by dgatwood · 2011-12-27 04:55 · Score: 2
  
  First, the word you're looking for is geostationary. Not all geosynchronous orbits are geostationary.
  Second GPS cannot be done with geostationary orbits. You have to have a minimum of three non-collinear points to triangulate a location on the surface of the Earth, and geostationary orbits are effectively collinear for all practical purposes. As such, geostationary orbits would only get you longitude (position along that orbital line), not latitude.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
14. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:58 · Score: 1
  
  You WILL be second fiddle to China
  
  Ahhhh, I've heard this. You need to check with your minister of demographics.
  How many people in China will be over 65 in the year 2025? How many people, as a percentage, will that be?
  The great Chinese economic expansion will be quickly followed by the great Chinese population implosion due to not enough young Chinese. In fact, you'll be able to watch as Russia goes through this implosion right before China so you have a taste of what's to come.
  Those mineral rights will be made irrelevant by what China fears most: A war that will annihilate the young Chinese. To use your phrase: You can like this or not, but that's the simple reality.
  The decade of 2020 will not be pretty.
15. Re:Not surprising by nedlohs · 2011-12-27 05:03 · Score: 1
  
  So what? GPS satellites aren't in geosynchronous orbit anyway making that a completely irrelevant point.
  GPS orbits are completely unsuitable for spy satellites sure, but not for that reason.
16. Re:Not surprising by joggle · 2011-12-27 05:06 · Score: 2
  
  Who does the US rely on for GPS? Only themselves of course, so this isn't exactly a good example.
  Within 10-15 years, China will be deeply effected by their housing bubble as Japan was in the 90s. Unlike Japan, the primary thing maintaining social stability in China is continued economic growth. Without this, China will be facing very serious internal problems.
  I recently read a Chinese article about how many celebrities in China have dual citizenship so that they can leave the country quickly. Many politically connected families send their girls overseas for college and the rich send both their boys and girls overseas. While this gives them an advantage for jobs within China, it also makes it easier for them to leave China in an emergency. They are very worried about social unrest, and I don't blame them.
17. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:22 · Score: 0
  
  Most of your points are valid. However, do note that the US food production is heavily dependent on fossil fuel technology. The US, as one of the top food producers, won't likely remain in its position as fossil fuels start running out.
18. Re:Not surprising by nomadic · 2011-12-27 05:25 · Score: 2
  
  "I'd say the dollar has taken a plunge halfway to death (dollar has fallen to half, sometimes a third of it's value in the 80's and 90's)"
  
  Helping American exports. Having a weak national currency is not necessarily a bad thing; if it were, why would the Chinese intentionally keep theirs devalued?
  
  "that governments around the world are re-structuring to be free from US-assets like bonds and other government-backed economic tools"
  
  Wrong. There has been a lot of demand for US treasury bonds because of the global economic downturn; they're considered "safe" investments.
  
  And the Japanese are doing good
  
  Absolutely wrong. Japan's economy is in terrible shape and it's only gotten worse in recent years.
19. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:30 · Score: 1
  
  I'm old enough to have seen all the reports of Japan and Latin America rising to topple the United States as dominant power. I agree with you that China will likely fail (most of their books are cooked, the next generation is all but completely sterile due to God knows what pollution).
  But that just leads to another question: WHEN will the United States implode? I can think of at least a dozen opportunities for it to simply fail and fail hard. Many other nations have failed due to less.
  We understand full well why Japan, Latin America have failed. We have a good understanding on China's inevitable failure. What we don't understand is why the United States doesn't fail.
20. Re:Not surprising by LWATCDR · 2011-12-27 05:36 · Score: 1
  
  Okay where to start.
  1. Navigation satellites are not in geosynchronous orbit to start with so what does that have to do with anything?
  2. There are more than one type of "spy" satellite. Imaging is only type. Elint and Sigint satellites are often in geosynchronous orbit. They site over a country hovering up all the radio transmissions that it can including things like radar.
  So would these make good spy satellites? That depends on what you mean by spying? For some missions they may have a use. Even a relatively small camera could spot a large warship or tanker at sea. A pretty simple receiver could pick up strong radar transmissions as well. The US puts radiation sensors on the GPS satellites to monitor the nuclear test band treaty.
  I wonder if the Iridium constellation is being used for Sigint. You have a world wide coverage with satellites with really big antennas. Using doppler shift and the different spots they should have little trouble picking up many types of radars.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
21. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:42 · Score: 1
  
  The Americans reading are definitely not up on maths. They're up on math.
22. Re:Not surprising by Rockoon · 2011-12-27 05:49 · Score: 2
  
  Umm... you are aware of the differences between China and Japan, right?
  Population really isnt the determining factor that people are making it out to be. Economic freedom is what its all about and countries with lots of it end up with similar purchasing powers and standards of living. E.U. with its $30K/person, South Korea and Israel with their $31K/person, Japan and Taiwan with their $34K/person, Canada with its $40K/person, U.S.A with its $48K/person.
  
  China is at $8K/person and there is nothing that they can do about it without becoming just like the rest of us. Does it matter that China will end up with the highest GDP if that doesnt translate into a higher standard of living for its people? Seems to me like the western economies are doing very well vs China. Did you think that the Japanese cares that their GDP is only a fraction of the E.U. or U.S? People want a better life.. thats all.
  
  --
  "His name was James Damore."
23. Re:Not surprising by Maxo-Texas · 2011-12-27 05:49 · Score: 1
  
  And neither is the rest of the world...
  That's one of the human race's doomsday scenarios and it's 50 to 150 years out. We'll probably solve it somehow tho.
  Overpopulation is the one that won't be solved.
  
  --
  She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
24. Re:Not surprising by Maxo-Texas · 2011-12-27 05:56 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  China owns a trillion dollars worth of US debt.
  With the dollar dropping by half in value, they've lost 500 billion dollars in purchasing power.
  They do this to keep products cheap enough to sell to the US so they population has work and won't get antsy. They build empty cities for similar reasons (well actually I can't comprehend exactly why they build empty cities and empty buildings- it seems goofy).
  China being a huge country is not an asset, it's a liability.
  They do have a good legal lock on assets- but many of those assets are only rare at the current prices. As soon as rare earth prices go up 50%, millions of tons of rare earth can come on line- including a huge mine in the US.
  About the time they stop building empty cities, the demand for copper and other building materials is going to drop through the floor.
  --
  The US leadership class appears to have lost it and descended into greed.
  --
  The true threat to the work is not china or the US but the corporations and the top 1%. And it's almost certainly two decades too late to do anything about it.
  
  --
  She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
25. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:58 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I'd say it's already started, but the decline is a slow process. Empires don't so much fall as decay. It took longer for the Roman Empire to completely fall than the United States has even existed. If you want to put a timeline on it, I'd say the decline started post-WW2. We had a good run shortly after as the sole manufacturing powerhouse of the world, but that wasn't going to last forever.
  Bear in mind we are *still* one of the biggest centers of industry in the entire world though. We're just having to adjust to not being #1 by giant margins in every sector imaginable.
26. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 06:10 · Score: 1
  
  Freedom. Individual Americans have the freedom to discuss and try things, even unpopular or politically- or economically-incorrect alternatives to the current paradigm. Flexibility. When that which is popular or politically ascendant or otherwise "approved" turns out to be wrong, the alternatives are eventually tried. Unfree societies stamp out "error" and inflexible ones don't accept change.
27. Re:Not surprising by Gideon+Wells · 2011-12-27 06:24 · Score: 1
  
  I think part of the problem is that the world is recovering.
  Post-WW2? China was a piddling country recovering from being ravaged by Japan and colonial powers. Total war had left Europe in pieces. And so forth. The U.S. and Russia were the big players as the U.S. was untouched by war on its lands and Russia had been (mostly) shielded by its Winter. The rest of the world has either recovered or has begun rising to the standards of everyone else, thus exaggerating the "fall" of the U.S.
  However, I am not so nationalistic to deny that there isn't a fall. Heck, when you have two men stealing an entire bridge to sell as scrap the stories you used to think of a third world only become worrying.
  
  --
  by Anonymous Coward: I, for one, welcome the shift from car analogies to pizza analogies. um.. overlords?
28. Re:Not surprising by Calibax · 2011-12-27 06:28 · Score: 2
  
  Just as important, 8 of the 9 members of the PolitBuro Standing Committee (the highest and most powerful decision-making body in China) are engineers by profession. The most popular profession in the US Congress is lawyer.
  I know which I would expect to get things right over the long haul.
29. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 06:42 · Score: 0
  
  >> China likes to do everything themselves
  With the exception of China actually coming up with an original idea, this statement is true.
30. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 07:06 · Score: 0
  
  What they want is obvious:A GPS system independent of the U.S. system, so they can jam ours (and perhaps surreptitiously shoot down ours) and still have theirs available for their military to use, and (as pointed out in a previous comment) a platform for them to have more spy satellites, except these are out in the open and we don't have much we can say about them. No matter, I'm sure we've already got the ability to jam their GPS system (which I'm sure doesn't work as well anyway).
31. Re:Not surprising by InterestingFella · 2011-12-27 07:10 · Score: 1
  
  Freedom. Individual Americans have the freedom to discuss and try things, even unpopular or politically- or economically-incorrect alternatives to the current paradigm. Flexibility. When that which is popular or politically ascendant or otherwise "approved" turns out to be wrong, the alternatives are eventually tried. Unfree societies stamp out "error" and inflexible ones don't accept change.
  Are you sure you want to make that statement? There are tons of things you cannot do in the U.S., restricted by either laws or socially. There are things that are completely frowned upon by U.S. but that are lawful, ok and even normal things elsewhere. Hell, U.S. even thinks there's something wrong with nudity while at the same time promotes violence. There are also countless amount of things that are restricted by laws, and discussing and promoting certain views are also limited. For example, U.S. tries very hard to shut down Taliban and Al Qaeda websites (which only promote their speech and ideals).
  
  Of course, you probably think it's fully ok for U.S. government to limit these things. But guess what, so does Chinese nationals about the laws in their country. They do not want an unrest, so they think government trying to avoid that is fine. At the same time they're also laughing at some of the views of U.S. people, just like you do about Chinese views.
32. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 07:12 · Score: 0
  
  That is a major strength the US has had over China.
  
  One of China's biggest challenges is overcoming centuries of a compliant populace run by a few powerful people who gained their positions by force, not by the will of the populace -- and the inherent corruption endemic to such forms of government. If they can move to an open society where anything can be questioned without fear of government retaliation, China will be a stunning persistent success and outstrip the US easily. The road to this is however somewhat difficult. There is horrible poverty in some of (esp. rural) China and once "the masses" take over, things could get ugly - because the "have nots" will likely demand to take, by force, what the "haves" have and the resulting civil/government unrest unsettles the country.
  
  China also has another issue that will take a few decades (at least) to work out -- the imbalance of males and females. This might be good if the males just become /.ers living in their parents' basement and actually invent stuff because they are trying to impress their geek male friends rather than trying to pick up women who are all, no matter how ugly, out of their reach. This might be bad if, as frustrated males tend to do, the unmatched males turn to violence, crime, and warlike behaviors and destabilize the country.
  
  However, the good news for China is that the US is their major competitor and the US is clearly in decline with little hope of pulling out of their nosedive. For decades the US has relied on their position as "the place to go" to attract foreign talent to their universities and STEM industries rather than developing such talent internally. As the US is clearly losing this status, bright young folks in India and China will just stay in their native countries to pursue their careers. The US's "native" culture of individual responsibility and drive to succeed through education or hard work is pretty much extinguished and will be difficult to rekindle - there may be enough Indian and Chinese families who have immigrated to the US to keep it alive a bit longer, but they won't have enough power to do anything but create a few "super school districts" of achieving kids. Thank you "Great" Society and related misguided mentalities.
33. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 07:23 · Score: 0
  
  We won't fail because despite everything else we still have the best and the brightest the world has to offer. We do have to stamp out the corruption in our political system, though, and teach the rich their proper place in society, but the people are rising up to say "no more!" to all of this. The next 10 to 20 years will see some serious changes in the way things are done in this country.
34. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 07:24 · Score: 0
  
  The US has its faults. In fact, sometimes you wonder what the country does right, but like a NoSQL database where you wonder where the hell the consistency comes from but keeps its integrity over a period of time, the US keeps going.
  For some definitions of "integrity". Who would have thought the SQL/NoSQL battle would work its way into a discussion of China's GPS system - /. is truly a wonderful thing to behold. I look forward to the Apple/MS debate that is likely lurking somewhere else in this thread.
35. Re:Not surprising by BlackPignouf · 2011-12-27 07:32 · Score: 1
  
  Too bad the GDP per capita isn't a measure of "a better life".
  The percentage of obese people, social inequalities, illiteracy, life expectation and pollution should probably be taken into account, among others.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index
  GDP and growths are pretty arbitrary "measurements" and aren't really linked to anything physical.
36. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 07:34 · Score: 1
  
  USSR was so well shielded by its winter that it suffered more casualties than any other country, the greatest number of civilian casualties (far more than died in the Holocaust), and the total annihilation of several of its largest cities? It seems the only thing the US lost in comparable quantity was the ability to teach history...
37. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 07:44 · Score: 0
  
  Hell, we are giving China our fresh water, while we are drinking recycled piss.. Sum 10 wong here.
38. Re:Not surprising by R3d+M3rcury · 2011-12-27 07:50 · Score: 1
  
  Want to know one thing China lacks? The ability to grow food for its people. As of now, they are an exporter. Give it 10 years, and that isn't going to be the case.
  Why not? You could have said the same thing about the US, but somehow we've managed to improve productivity. This is impossible for the Chinese?
  
  If the US gives a middle finger to the world, the country can keep its population fed.
  Assuming that the US continues to have a good climate for doing so. Of course, that assumes that the climate doesn't change. Changing climate would be inconvenient...
39. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 07:59 · Score: 0
  
  Umm... you are aware of the differences between China and Japan, right?
  Population really isnt the determining factor that people are making it out to be.
  And you complete prove that you don't know the difference.
40. Re:Not surprising by Rockoon · 2011-12-27 08:47 · Score: 1
  
  You hear you claim that HDI isnt linked with GDP/Capita.
  
  Please explain why the correlation is so strong.
  
  (may require Java?)
  
  --
  "His name was James Damore."
41. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 09:10 · Score: 0
  
  That would be called the "second front," lad.
42. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 09:29 · Score: 0
  
  Combine some of the engineering knowhow already applied with center-pivot or similar irrigation systems, use that to feed out a power cord (reduces dependency on batteries), and energy is supplied via local sources like wind turbines... There's no rule that really says that you can't run your tractors with electric motors to make effective use of local energy resources. Windpower is readily available in the midwest and I'm sure engineering students at U of I or Iowa State or some such could easily make such system go from plausible to usable in about a decade. Just need to get International Harvester or John Deere on the path away from fossil fuel power, and the rest would happen fairly quick.
  Now whether or not such method is effective enough to support an export market is unknown, but it seems such a system would keep ourselves well enough fed if fossil fuels hit a hard enough plateau or started running out.
43. Re:Not surprising by Rockoon · 2011-12-27 09:38 · Score: 1
  
  Here is a non-interactive version of the graph.
  
  wikipedia PNG file
  
  There isnt even a single country in the world that has a high GDP/Capita but a low HDI. We can conclude that a high GDP/Capita by necessity means a high HDI.
  
  Struck down another one ma'!
  
  --
  "His name was James Damore."
44. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 09:40 · Score: 0
  
  There's water crisis everywhere around the world; farmers, miners, and residents have all been fighting over water right in the south and the north-west for years. If scientists were correct with their climate projection, then we can all expect to see a much wider food shortages around the globe - very inconvenient.....
  a nony coward:
  One of the main reasons that China is the no. 1 rare earth exporting nation is because "modern" environmental law there isn't as established and well regulated as most (possibily all) developed nations. Now they've experienced and understood how much mining pollutant can contribute to the detriment of land & the health of citizens, they're shutting some of them down, but slowly (corruption). If the U.S govt decides to deregulate mining operations in the mainland, do expect some people to sacrifice their quality of life. But I'd guess the U.S and other countries would probably just mine in Afghanistan or exploit Sth America instead; protecting their own strategic reserves and prey on others (c'mon the U.S, Japan, and many industralised nations have been doing it for decades). Funny how accusation usually works isn't it, coward?
45. Re:Not surprising by findoutmoretoday · 2011-12-27 10:11 · Score: 1
  
  <quote><p>Freedom. Individual Americans have the freedom to discuss and try things, even unpopular or politically- or economically-incorrect alternatives to the current paradigm. </p></quote> Where Texas earned the freedom to hold slaves in the 1845, thirty years later that freedom was already gone.
46. Re:Not surprising by timeOday · 2011-12-27 10:32 · Score: 1
  
  Well, sort of. The top GDP nation in that graph, at $58K, has the same HDI as some other nation with a GDP of under $20K! That is really striking. Above $30K, I see no overal trend of increased HDI at all.
47. Re:Not surprising by equex · 2011-12-27 10:38 · Score: 1
  
  And the US' biggest export is...? Entertainment ? Grain ? Seems to me they mostly import from China, paying with money that don't exist yet.
  
  --
  Can I light a sig ?
48. Re:Not surprising by Rockoon · 2011-12-27 11:41 · Score: 1
  
  With GapMinder you can set the scale for GDP/Capita axis to logarithmic, which is really what such a metric should be (economic growth is exponential.)
  
  Instead of the regression curve that levels off, its a straight line from one corner to the opposite. This cannot be explained by any other means other than that GDP/Capita is really a very good proxy for HDI.
  
  You also wont have the same argument about those two countries with a logarithmic GDP/Capita, but you might then notice that Equatorial Guinea is a country with a relatively high GDP/Capita but still has a really crappy HDI index. This is easily explained as a complete lack of economic freedom. Almost their entire GDP is based on oil exports that the government controls.
  
  --
  "His name was James Damore."
49. Re:Not surprising by thej1nx · 2011-12-27 11:45 · Score: 2
  
  >>There will always be a doomsday scenario about why Russia is better than the US or will nuke the US, Japan is better, South America, China, whoever. It's always the same crap.
  
  Are you old enough to have been around the Cuban missile crisis? Just wondering...
50. Re:Not surprising by Rockoon · 2011-12-27 11:53 · Score: 1
  
  Here is what it looks like with logarithmic GDP/Capita axis
  
  --
  "His name was James Damore."
51. Re:Not surprising by arkane1234 · 2011-12-27 14:03 · Score: 1
  
  It's okay, in another century or so we can go back to the prehistoric time period and get all the resources we want.
  
  --
  -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
52. Re:Not surprising by Man+On+Pink+Corner · 2011-12-27 16:06 · Score: 1
  
  They are going ape-shit dumping solar panels for way below the cost of materials + labor in the US market in effort to kill that industry and take it over for themselves.
  I'd be curious to read more about this. Any good links you would recommend?
53. Re:Not surprising by Man+On+Pink+Corner · 2011-12-27 16:17 · Score: 1
  
  Equivocation fallacy. There is no way to compare the regime of censorship in China with that in the US. In the United States, things like nudity may be "taboo", but the fact is, unless you get into child pornography or threaten to kill the President, nobody from the government will give you any trouble whatsoever.
  I could say any number of things in this very post that would get me arrested in China. Conversely, short of posting direct threats or incitements to violence, I can't think of anything I could say that would have criminal consequences.
  That is a very important difference, one that renders your whole post irrelevant.
54. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-28 02:15 · Score: 0
  
  Not this shit again. It looks like the shills from China are getting to the point where they even infect Slashdot.
  
  Would someone please do Slashdot a favor and not spread your hate here?
  Slashdot is not a place for hatemongers.
55. Re:Not surprising by crotherm · 2011-12-28 20:54 · Score: 1
  
  China has a huge amount of their own infrastructure, so this isn't really surprising. Unlike U.S., China likes to do everything themselves. This also means you're not dependent on other countries like the U.S. is. What you don't understand is that China thinks long term, and everything they've done will grant them the leading country status some day, probably even within 10-15 years, especially when considering how much U.S. and EU are struggling now after thinking only short term financial gains.
  China may like to do everything themselves, they still are extremely dependent upon the West's desire for goods made in China. Will China's middle class grow to the point that China will no longer need USA or Europe to buy their stuff in 10-15 years? I doubt it.
  
  --
  "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK
good by roman_mir · 2011-12-27 03:58 · Score: 4, Funny

the more the merrier.

--
You can't handle the truth.
1. Re:good by TubeSteak · 2011-12-27 04:34 · Score: 1
  
  Accurate to within 10 meters is good?
  Is there any way I can filter that signal out!?
  
  --
  [Fuck Beta]
  o0t!
2. Re:good by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:03 · Score: 0
  
  USA GPS is only accurate to 20m
3. Re:good by AmiMoJo · 2011-12-28 01:21 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know why this was tagged funny, diversity is a good thing. Chipsets that support all four GPS systems (EU's, China's, Russia's and the US') are already starting to come down the pipeline.
  And hay, perhaps the US wouldn't lose so many drones to Iran if they didn't rely on just one system to get home...
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Are they GPS satellites? by Ded+Bob · 2011-12-27 04:00 · Score: 2

Or are they GPS satellites "equipped with nuclear missiles and a laser cannon"?
1. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by msauve · 2011-12-27 04:04 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  You're thinking of sharks.
  
  --
  "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
2. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:07 · Score: 0
  
  Nah, japan already ate them
3. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:14 · Score: 0
  
  Why just one laser cannon ? Are saying the chinese aren't that evil ?
4. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:24 · Score: 0
  
  You can't shoot sharks into orbit.
5. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Sponge+Bath · 2011-12-27 04:27 · Score: 2
  
  No, but Beidou will help guide their missiles.
6. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:27 · Score: 0
  
  You're thinking of whales.
7. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:30 · Score: 0
  
  Why wouldn't you?
8. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Terrasque · 2011-12-27 04:40 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Well, a chinese spokesperson was quoted "They are as peaceful as the american GPS satellites, and contain no more armaments than those do" - so no worries.
  We do have some strange reports of a high-ranking american general running from the press conference with a panic-struck look on his face, but that's probably unrelated.
  
  --
  It's The Golden Rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
9. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Lumpy · 2011-12-27 04:58 · Score: 1
  
  Dont need that.
  Put a small nuclear warhead in the bird and wait for it to be overhead the target. BOOM, a nice wide area EM pulse to take out all of your enemy's electronics.
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
10. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by joebagodonuts · 2011-12-27 04:59 · Score: 1
  
  Japan ate them, too
  
  --
  "Give a woman two glasses of wine and some pad thai, and they'll agree to just about anything." the Sports Guy
11. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by jd2112 · 2011-12-27 05:07 · Score: 1
  
  Japan ate them, too
  Just the fins.
  
  --
  Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
12. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by jd2112 · 2011-12-27 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  No, but Beidou will help guide their missiles.
  And recon drones! If they end up in Iran we'll know where they got their UAV tech from.
  
  --
  Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
13. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by joggle · 2011-12-27 05:17 · Score: 2
  
  They are very similar to the European Galileo satellites. They are similar to GPS, but use different frequencies than GPS.
  Originally, China was involved with the development of the Galileo constellation. They backed out because they didn't feel like they had a big enough voice in its development.
  The Chinese constellation, Compass, is intended to be as accurate as GPS. They will almost certainly have their constellation fully deployed long before Europe gets their act together and finishes the Galileo system.
  By the way, GPS doesn't only provide positioning service. Each satellite also has a detector for nuclear explosions and can quickly locate the position of any nuke going off on, or above, the surface.
14. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Maxo-Texas · 2011-12-27 05:44 · Score: 1
  
  This was my first thought too now.
  GPS can be spoofed now. It can't be long before wide spread spoofing and jamming takes place. Seems like they'll have to go back to navigating by landmarks. Perhaps they could use something like google earth that scans and recognizes the terrain where they are.
  
  --
  She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
15. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by lgw · 2011-12-27 06:36 · Score: 2
  
  Not really a concern - the US can certainly shoot down all the satellites it wants to. Those in lower orbits like GPS and spy sats can be taken down by (relatively) cheap missiles launched from a jet at high altitude. They'd all be gone in the first few hours of a real war.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
16. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 08:22 · Score: 0
  
  And the USA is also probably the one that would be dumb and arrogant enough to think that China would just stand there and do nothing.
  If anyone ever tries to shoot down another big nation's satellites at random, then if he's lucky, his own satellites will go down too, and if he's unlucky and the other side is just as stupid, a continent killer nuke will say hello to his capital city.
  P.S.: Why is it that the only three nations on the planet where I can imagine such insanity, are Iran, Pakistan, and... the USA?
17. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by WildBlueYonder · 2011-12-27 08:36 · Score: 2
  
  Not really a concern - the US can certainly shoot down all the satellites it wants to. Those in lower orbits like GPS and spy sats can be taken down by (relatively) cheap missiles launched from a jet at high altitude. They'd all be gone in the first few hours of a real war.
  Our GPS Satellites are in Lower Earth Orbits. These BeiDou satellites are in Geosynchronous orbits, far outside of our missile range, and possibly for exactly this reason. Keep in mind that in that "real war" the process of destroying the few dozens of enemy satellites you want to destroy will produce enormous debris clouds through LEO, possibly destroying yet more satellites and causing yet more debris clouds. This sort of has a MAD effect, as such a shooting war could wipe out most of the planet's LEO real estate. However, if one party doesn't have hardly any assets in LEO, this stops being much of a concern for them, it's sort of like if the US or Russia had developed an impervious ICBM shield at the height of the cold war.
  Unfortunately for the US, not only is China starting out their space infrastructure in higher orbits, but the Russians have done this for decades as well. Ever since the Space Shuttle came around with the capability of grabbing LEO satellites and bringing them back down for analysis the Russians started putting their Top Secret military satellites up in higher orbits where the Space Shuttle couldn't get them. Now they aren't as vulnerable to a Space Debris Doomsday scenario either.
  However, just because we can't hit GEO sats with missiles doesn't mean we can't destroy them. Satellites are very thermally sensitive due to how difficult it is to dump heat in space, and by definition GEO sats don't move with respect to the Earth much, so it's theoretically pretty easy to destroy them with lasers. And I don't mean vaporizing them with Star Wars lasers, I mean shining a high power laser on them for several minutes or hours and slowly adding more heat to the satellite than it can dump. Hard to do this to a LEO, (from a single ground station) you'll only get a shot at it for five or six minutes at a time, and it'll have its entire 90 minute orbit to cool off again, but you can shoot at a GEO forever.
18. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by lgw · 2011-12-27 08:59 · Score: 1
  
  Shooting down GEO sats just takes a (much) more expensive rocket (though I suspect there's a MI(n)RV payload for just such a circumstance). I'd guess the plane-carried ABM lasers could fry a satellite in actual Star Wars style as well, if that program happened to be funded by whatever administration was in charge during the war - that's some really impressive technology.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
19. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 09:14 · Score: 1
  
  Our GPS satellites are not in LEO (~20,200 km is the actual altitude).
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System#Space_segment
20. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by WildBlueYonder · 2011-12-27 09:43 · Score: 1
  
  I'd guess the plane-carried ABM lasers could fry a satellite in actual Star Wars style as well, if that program happened to be funded by whatever administration was in charge during the war - that's some really impressive technology.
  The technology necessary to fry a satellite is much less impressive, and much older, than the sort of lasers we are finally seeing today. The plane-carried ABM lasers needed to be portable (obviously) because they needed to be carried where they could target the launch sites, where the ICBM is still slow and has lots of propellant to catch on fire. In order to get a high-powered laser in a package a (very large) plane would carry they use chemical based lasers that produce very high power pulses but have a limited number of shots.
  Frying a GPS satellite is a lot easier, you do it from a ground station, so you have access to way more power and larger machinery (if you wanted to take out a satellite over China, and not over you then you'd need to put this on a ship or something), and you don't need a high-powered laser. We aren't vaporizing anything, we're just gently warming it. When people think lasers they are thinking something like this recent video, where a laser melts through a car hood and (supposedly) the engine underneath. That's totally overkill for what you need though, the boiling temperature of aluminum is 2467 degrees Celsius, heating a satellite to a hundred degrees Celsius would be more than enough, and while that takes more energy than the above video shows (larger mass being heated) it takes way less power, because you don't need to do it in two seconds, three hours is fine.
  You actually don't need a laser at all, really any spectrum of light you throw out there will do. An old (in both senses of the word) coworker of mine told me that one of the Apollo missions was landing near an existing instrument on the moon that transmitted on the same frequency of one of the Apollo commands. They didn't have the ability to remotely turn off the device so they just pointed a very powerful antenna at it and broadcast noise until they were sure it was dead. No citation for that unfortunately, but I would love one if someone else knows of this.
21. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 09:59 · Score: 0
  
  A worse problem might be them leaving our GPS satellites alone, such that we still try to rely on them at which point their nav sats might be capable of spoofing our signals. Precision GPS weapons aren't so great anymore if they go way off course. That's probably the most immediate problem our military planners have to watch out for.
  If we lose GPS for any reason, it's likely there are some fallback methods in place. A high altitude aircraft with a precise inertial navigation system onboard should be as capable of providing a position reference signal as any GPS sat. Whether or not such systems exist is likely highly classified, but I wouldn't put it beyond the military to have such redundancies ready and in place.
22. Re:Are they GPS satellites? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 20:13 · Score: 0
  
  "Our GPS Satellites are in Lower Earth Orbits. "
  your GPS sattelites are NOT in LEO. AFAIK 27500 km up. GEO is 36500.
Unlimited government by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:03 · Score: 0

Unlimited government, whether a Chinese flavor of communism, or an American flavor of corporatism, is guaranteed to result in oppression. Only through STRICT limits on government power will freedom and justice ever prevail, and unfortunately, the entire world is going in the opposite direction (unlimited power, unlimited revenue for the elite at the top).
Old news? by Bananana · 2011-12-27 04:06 · Score: 5, Interesting

we have car navigation systems that use Beidou for some time now (maybe less than a year).
1. Re:Old news? by cyfer2000 · 2011-12-27 04:11 · Score: 2
  
  I will mod this post "informative" if I have points.
  
  --
  There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
2. Re:Old news? by dotancohen · 2011-12-27 04:42 · Score: 1
  
  we have car navigation systems that use Beidou for some time now (maybe less than a year).
  Who is "we"? Are you Chinese?
  
  --
  It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
3. Re:Old news? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:53 · Score: 0
  
  ...no, you won't, unless you have a sockpuppet account to use.
4. Re:Old news? by Lumpy · 2011-12-27 05:00 · Score: 1
  
  We are the borg.... you will be assimilated.
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
5. Re:Old news? by SJHillman · 2011-12-27 05:42 · Score: 0
  
  The Chinese Borg use lead-based nanoprobes and the eye lasers have a tendency to blow up.
  Actually, the Chinese do have a lot of parallels with the Borg... steal technology rather than develop it themselves, a large supply of cheap labor, putting the collective ahead of the individual, funny colored skin...
6. Re:Old news? by dotancohen · 2011-12-27 06:09 · Score: 2
  
  We are the borg.... you will be assimilated.
  Resistance is V/I.
  
  --
  It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
7. Re:Old news? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 06:20 · Score: 0
  
  Resistance is V/I.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohm's_law
8. Re:Old news? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 07:42 · Score: 0
  
  I didn't know the Borg had chicks that suck a mean cock.
Old tech or new? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 04:10 · Score: 0

Did they do anything to improve on the old tech of GPS?
Re:Can I hack it using my ipad and a ping pong bal by AngryDeuce · 2011-12-27 04:12 · Score: 1

Now that Congress has authorized the official use of Cyberwarfare I'm sure they will be.
Although I'm far too cynical to believe that they've restrained themselves before now. That's just making it official...
So not "Global" then? by chiBrian · 2011-12-27 04:19 · Score: 0

So not "Global" then?
1. Re:So not "Global" then? by arkane1234 · 2011-12-27 14:08 · Score: 1
  
  it's asian pacific... so i guess it would be considered APPS (Asian Pacific Positioning System) ;)
  
  --
  -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
Active vs passive systems by tylernt · 2011-12-27 04:30 · Score: 5, Interesting

From what I can tell from the Wikipedia article, Beidou is an active system where the "client" sends data to the satellites in orbit. It makes perfect sense for the Chinese though, because now they can track where their users are -- something not possible with the passive US system since the receivers only receive and can't transmit any data back. In short, Big Brother Beidou always knows where you are.
Seems like an active system has a huge disadvantage, though. You can DOS the satellites by pointing an antenna at each satellite and jamming their uplink frequencies, knocking out the whole system for everyone, everywhere. In the US system, you can only jam local terrestrial reception and anybody over the next hill won't be affected.

--
DRM 'manages access' in the same way that a prison 'manages freedom'
1. Re:Active vs passive systems by gzipped_tar · 2011-12-27 04:46 · Score: 1
  
  Another implication is that the terminal will be more complex, cost more and consume more power compared with the GPS terminal.
  
  --
  Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
2. Re:Active vs passive systems by tuxicle · 2011-12-27 04:49 · Score: 1
  
  So what you're saying is in Soviet Russia, navigation satellite tracks you?
3. Re:Active vs passive systems by chill · 2011-12-27 04:49 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  That was the "test" system. And their description is completely ass-backwards. I'm not sure how useful that would be for mobile units or wide spread use.
  The terminal sends a signal to the satellites (say, 3 seconds latency due to distance). The satellites send the timestamps to a ground station (again, 3 seconds). They do some maths, then send the answers back to the satellites (again, 3 second), which send it back down to the terminals (finally, another 3 seconds). That is like 12 seconds, plus calculations, etc. Good luck using that info reasonably at 100+ KPH
  That still leaves the issue of if terminals become popular, potentially MILLIONS of signals being broadcast skyward for the satellites to receive, sort, stamp and relay.
  The Wikipedia article reads like an instruction manual on how NOT to do GPS. What am I missing?
  
  --
  Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
4. Re:Active vs passive systems by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:10 · Score: 0
  
  No, that happens in Capitalist China.
5. Re:Active vs passive systems by cswilly · 2011-12-27 05:18 · Score: 2
  
  Somebody needs to attend his Physics Classes. 3 seconds to send a signal to a low Earth orbit satellite? Non-sense.
6. Re:Active vs passive systems by chill · 2011-12-27 05:30 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  We're both wrong. Me more so than you, however.
  The Beidou-1 satellites are Geo Stationary not LEO. That being said, according to Wikipedia latency is about 1/4 of a second for each leg.
  Still, the idea of transmitting potentially millions of signals blindly in the sky to a constellation of GEO satellites, and letting them do the work of sorting, stamping, and relaying seems a bit ass-backwards.
  Square Peg, meet Mssrs Round Hole and BFH.
  
  --
  Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
7. Re:Active vs passive systems by youn · 2011-12-27 05:33 · Score: 2
  
  To be fair, there may be other constraints such as bandwidth, collisions, processing on both ends... but somehow 3 seconds seems too much for that kind of thing
  
  --
  Never antropomorphize computers, they do not like that :p
8. Re:Active vs passive systems by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 09:08 · Score: 0
  
  I only have an issue with your terminology. When you say leg, you mean round-trip. Equator at sea-level to geostationary is 0.119 seconds.
9. Re:Active vs passive systems by arkane1234 · 2011-12-27 14:10 · Score: 1
  
  same difference.
  
  --
  -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
10. Re:Active vs passive systems by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 14:20 · Score: 0
  
  It's not hard to have DoS protection. Unfortunately, the Chinese don't innovate so it probably doesn't.
Better coverage through multiple systems by caseih · 2011-12-27 04:38 · Score: 5, Interesting

Something I didn't realize until recently is that in the northern latitudes (Canada, northern US), GPS coverage has occasional small gaps in it. My John Deere dealer was saying that in some areas every few days about 6pm (happens to be that time in those areas) GPS coverage drops below 1 meter accuracy levels, and in those areas GPS guidance on farm machines becomes unusable for about an hour or so. As well sometimes a satellite goes offline for maintenance. As agriculture is becoming very reliant on GPS (hence John Deere lobbying in washington against LTE usage of adjacent frequencies), this is a problem. Because of this John Deere now uses GPS and GLONASS together to get better coverage. When Galileo provides coverage, it will use those signals too. The point is, more GPS systems simply improve reliability for everyone, if the Chinese allowed western use of their signals.
1. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by BorelHendrake · 2011-12-27 04:49 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  When we were traveling across the United States, there was about 45 minutes of our trip through Utah where we were not receiving GPS signals. I believe it happened in the early afternoon. Fortunately there were not turns involved during that portion of the trip.
2. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:16 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  That was the Mormon Effect.
3. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:20 · Score: 0
  
  I think that was because the signals were evaporating in the air there due to the low humidity.
4. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:38 · Score: 1
  
  Before GPS we used to use things called 'maps' and something given the fancy-pants name of 'dead reckoning' (figuring out where you are based on direction, average speed, and duration of travel). I am astonished that someone is complaining that they had a 45 minute window (75 km gap at 100 km/hour) where GPS was not available and were worried about getting lost.
5. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by DerekLyons · 2011-12-27 05:44 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Something I didn't realize until recently is that in the northern latitudes (Canada, northern US), GPS coverage has occasional small gaps in it.
  It doesn't. The constellation's orbital pattern is uniform across the entire surface of the Earth.
  
  My John Deere dealer was saying that in some areas every few days about 6pm (happens to be that time in those areas) GPS coverage drops below 1 meter accuracy levels, and in those areas GPS guidance on farm machines becomes unusable for about an hour or so.
  Your John Deere dealer is a little shaky on how GPS operates. The birds are in 12 hour sidereal orbits, which means the pattern (as seen from an fixed location on Earth) repeats every 11 hours and 56 minutes.... Which means (if such an effect as he describes existed) it would steadily and regularly drift earlier through the day. Thus not only would the effect be seen 'about 6PM' every two weeks or so, but it would also be visible at varying times through the day for a week roughly every other week. (This also implies the gaps drift across the Earth's surface in a regular pattern, and would be visible in places other than the northern latitudes.) In addition, he may not realize that GPS accuracy *normally* varies somewhat over spans of a few hours as the geometry of the visible portion of the constellation varies. So what he's seeing is something else, amplified by observer bias.
  
  As well sometimes a satellite goes offline for maintenance.
  Yes, they do. But the system is designed and operated such that having a bird offline for maintenance degrades total system performance by only a very small amount.
  
  As agriculture is becoming very reliant on GPS (hence John Deere lobbying in washington against LTE usage of adjacent frequencies), this is a problem.
  The problem isn't the GPS system. The problem is John Deere is trying to use the system at an accuracy (100% availability at 1m) greater than the specified [civilian] performance levels (95% availability at 7m).
6. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by GodInHell · 2011-12-27 06:09 · Score: 1
  
  I am astonished that someone is complaining that they had a 45 minute window (75 km gap at 100 km/hour) where GPS was not available and were worried about getting lost.
  Me too -- where did you read this because it's not in this thread.
  
  -GiH
7. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by maeka · 2011-12-27 06:41 · Score: 1
  
  The problem isn't the GPS system. The problem is John Deere is trying to use the system at an accuracy (100% availability at 1m) greater than the specified [civilian] performance levels (95% availability at 7m).
  While I can't speak as to the John Deere system in particular, most the Ag navigation systems are using WAAS on the low end and VRS RTK subscription systems on the high end.
  Here in Ohio ODOT offers a reduced-fee reduced-accuracy VRS option for farmers, who don't need the sub-cm service.
8. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by DerekLyons · 2011-12-27 09:07 · Score: 1
  
  While I can't speak as to the John Deere system in particular, most the Ag navigation systems are using WAAS on the low end and VRS RTK subscription systems on the high end.
  WAAS specifications don't meet the 1m/24/7 level either.
9. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by JaredOfEuropa · 2011-12-27 10:39 · Score: 1
  
  The good news is that it is rather easy these days to build equipment using multiple satellite positioning systems. The Apple 4S for example uses both GPS and Glonass, which is nice as Glonass apparently provides better coverage in western Europe. When Galileo goes live, we'll see circuitry for 3 systems. And at some point it'll be 4 when the Chinese one goes online.
  
  --
  If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
10. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by ngg · 2011-12-27 15:23 · Score: 1
  
  WAAS specifications don't meet the 1m/24/7 level either.
  ... which doesn't actually matter because Deer actually uses differential positioning.
11. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by caseih · 2011-12-27 16:01 · Score: 1
  
  Interesting. I wonder if talking to multiple systems, combined with an accuracy correction, can get the 100% 1 meter accuracy that ag desires. I guess the ag industry's needs is proof that GPS is somewhat inadequate, at least for their needs. Perhaps demand will drive a better overall positioning system.
12. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by DerekLyons · 2011-12-27 17:59 · Score: 1
  
  There already exist supplementary systems that can provide that accuracy level. They cost big bucks though.
13. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 19:26 · Score: 1
  
  Their ability to believe something as ridiculous as the Book of Mormon creates a reality distortion field that keeps things like GPS from functioning. Imagine, steel and European horses in the New World in the time of Jesus!
  Be glad you weren't using a pacemaker at the time.
14. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by gman99 · 2011-12-28 08:30 · Score: 1
  
  The constellation's orbital pattern is uniform across the entire surface of the Earth.
  Technically, yes, but this assumes you have good visibility of the sky. At high latitudes, especially when you're in cities/urban canyons (where you only have a narrow view of the sky & can't see the horizon), fewer satellites are visible (compared to closer to the equator)
  In these circumstances, having an additional constellation to track (GLONASS, Beidou, etc) means more satellites visible, so better performance (faster fixes, better tracking, higher accuracy, etc)
  Agree with the rest of what you said :)
15. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by DerekLyons · 2011-12-28 14:37 · Score: 1
  
  The constellation's orbital pattern is uniform across the entire surface of the Earth.
  Technically, yes, but this assumes you have good visibility of the sky. At high latitudes, especially when you're in cities/urban canyons (where you only have a narrow view of the sky & can't see the horizon), fewer satellites are visible (compared to closer to the equator)
  Not "technically yes", but "actually yes". The high latitude effects only take hold North of 80 degrees, and the effect is not one of visibility but one of (relatively speaking) bad viewing angles for navigational accuracy.
  
  The reason you can see fewer birds in urban canyons is because (duh) you're in an urban canyon. Which will block GLONASS, Galelio, Beidou, etc.., in an equal measure.
16. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by gman99 · 2011-12-28 19:25 · Score: 1
  
  you're in an urban canyon. Which will block GLONASS, Galelio, Beidou, etc.., in an equal measure.
  Of course.
  But the more independent constellation systems you have in the orbit, the greater the chance you're going to actually see a few satellites in "challenging" scenarios.
  So perhaps in a certain location when your car's satnav would usually lose it's fix, it may now continue to track because it can see some GLONASS (or Beidou, or whatever) satellites
  Plus, GLONASS is actually designed to give maximum visibility in places like Siberia specifically to work around the problems with GPS with high latitudes. Few links regarding this design decision off wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLONASS#System_description
17. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by sound+vision · 2011-12-28 23:46 · Score: 1
  
  Well, the parent said -
  "Fortunately there were not turns involved during that portion of the trip."
  Which implies that, if there had been turns, that would have been unfortunate. Which implies that something bad would have happened - namely, the parent getting lost.
  
  Personally, I could never understand people who relied solely on GPS for directions. Yes, it's very handy to have. But what if the battery runs out? Software or hardware error? Or, these gaps in coverage, which I didn't even know happened? Before any trip to a new place, I always trace the route on Google maps, and print it out. This way, not only do I have a hard-copy backup of my directions, I am also able to customize my route (which is oftentimes better than what my GPS picks). Not to mention, looking over the maps beforehand familiarizes me somewhat with my route and what's around it. This is ESPECIALLY important if I'm going on a long trip through multiple states that I'm totally unfamiliar with, like the parent.
  You just don't get any of those benefits when all you do it get in your car, turn the ignition, and wait until the robot voice tells you when to turn.
18. Re:Better coverage through multiple systems by maeka · 2011-12-30 02:27 · Score: 1
  
  To be pedantic WAAS is a differential system.
  And to be overly pedantic for the GP, WAAS specifications don't meet the 1m/24/7 spec, but in practice it is sub meter 95% of the time.
Is it possible to combine systems in a receiver? by ChronoFish · 2011-12-27 04:39 · Score: 3, Interesting

Would be possible to get a more accurate position if a receiver combined the various GPS systems - as a kind of check/balance. For non-military use the GPS systems introduce inaccuracies. Is there an algorithm that would bring the resolution down from 10 meters to 1 meter or less?

-CF
Could cause a problem for the USA.... by Lumpy · 2011-12-27 04:55 · Score: 2, Funny

If the China system does not have the same DOP setup then it will be easy for hackers to use two receivers to read a location from both and create a correctional signal or negate the DOP that the Us military puts on the US GPS system. Giving the TERRORISTS ultra precise coordinates to invoke their TERROR
Or at least that is how Fox news will spin it.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
1. Re:Could cause a problem for the USA.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:17 · Score: 0
  
  If the China system does not have the same DOP setup then it will be easy for hackers to use two receivers to read a location from both and create a correctional signal or negate the DOP that the Us military puts on the US GPS system. Giving the TERRORISTS ultra precise coordinates to invoke their TERROR
  I think you are referring to Selective Availability that was shut off toward the end of the Clinton Administration since it was useless with DGPS.
2. Re:Could cause a problem for the USA.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 09:34 · Score: 0
  
  No. he is talking about DOP. or Dilution of Precision that has always existed for civillian GPS recievers.
Good News by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:09 · Score: 0

This is GREAT NEWS, i cant wait for the new multi constellation receiver.
cool by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:10 · Score: 0

more satellites for them to shoot down or blow up when they malfunction or reach eol (leaving millions of destructive fragments behind)
Not at all by a_claudiu · 2011-12-27 05:21 · Score: 1

You are forgetting the main driver in China. It's not money but the big centralized party. Let's look into the future to see if the rich people will succeed in taking over the power (like in the west) or it will be the government keeping the power over oligarchs (Russia).
Re:Is it possible to combine systems in a receiver by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 05:24 · Score: 0

That is called "Sensor Fusion" and is very possible. Google sensor fusion and kalman filter for a good time.
What a (global) waste of money... by mholve · 2011-12-27 05:39 · Score: 1

The U.S. has theirs, China just went online, the Russians also have their own and the EU is also planning one. While I can certainly see why each country (or interest) would like to have their own to prevent being locked out - c'mon. What a huge waste of money and resources that could surely be spent in better ways. Then again, militaries have never really been known for their altruistic interests.
1. Re:What a (global) waste of money... by Jeremi · 2011-12-27 16:19 · Score: 1
  
  The U.S. has theirs, China just went online, the Russians also have their own and the EU is also planning one. [...] What a huge waste of money and resources that could surely be spent in better ways.
  Good point. Maybe the US, China, and the USSR could share a single collection of tanks and jet fighters as well. That would cut out a lot of redundancy, and also save fuel when a war started, since there would be no need to transport weaponry across the globe to fight -- it would all already be colocated together in the same hangar, so they could just start firing at each other right away.
  
  --
  
  I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
The Grand Canal by Zephyr14z · 2011-12-27 05:48 · Score: 2

That would be extremely uncharacteristic of China. We're talking about a civilization that built an 1100 mile long canal over a period of 1000 years or so. China has been doing long term planning, especially infrastructure planning, for an incredibly long time. That canal project started in the 5th century BC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Canal_(China)
Re:Is it possible to combine systems in a receiver by DerekLyons · 2011-12-27 05:58 · Score: 2

For non-military use the GPS systems introduce inaccuracies.
No, GPS does not deliberately introduce inaccuracy - that was part of selective availability, which was turned off in 1998. What GPS does do is not make available to civilians the correction mechanism that enable military grade accuracy.

The accuracy of civilian GPS units (within what's available from the system) is mostly dependent on factors outside of the government's control... The design of the antenna, how well it's matched to the receiver, the accuracy and stability of the clock circuits, etc... etc... all effect the accuracy of the GPSr.

Is there an algorithm that would bring the resolution down from 10 meters to 1 meter or less?
Using WAAS corrections, even a cheap-ass handheld unit can routinely obtain accuracies under 5m, and accuracies under 3m are not unheard of. Surveyor grade GPSr's can obtain sub-meter (down to centimeter) accuracy using GPS alone, but require that the receiver be stationary for extended periods (a couple of hours) and use high quality antennas and electronics. (Which is why they cost $10k+.)

Would be possible to get a more accurate position if a receiver combined the various GPS systems - as a kind of check/balance.
Yes, and such units are commercially available, but generally only in higher end units because you're essentially buying two systems in one box.
Re:Is it possible to combine systems in a receiver by batistuta · 2011-12-27 06:01 · Score: 5, Informative

Yes. This has been done for many years in survey equipment. a typical combination of Navstar (U.S. GPS)/GLONASS increases the number of satellites in view and therefore the accuracy. The biggest problem with combinging Navstar and GLONASS is that Navstar is CDMA (code division multiple access) while GLONASS is FDMA (frequency division multiple access). The former technique makes each satellite use a different "language" sort to say, while the later one uses different frequencies. The result is that a dual receiver needs two independent receivers, making them more expensive. New GLONASS satellites will start using CDMA signals in addition to the FDMA, so that legacy receivers work, and some time in the future new CDMA receivers can use both Navstar and GLONASS with a single type of tuner. Galileo was from the ground up designed to use CDMA and as a result, it is much easier to design a Navstar/Galileo dual receiver. As a matter of fact, many survey devices designed for Navstar can be upgraded via a firmware update to use Galileo as well. You can't upgrade to use GLONASS with a simple firmware update, you also need another tuner.
Regarding accuracy, the thing is that you can't go much less than 5m by just adding more satellites. This is because this error is part of ionosphere delays, and more satellites can't correct this error. It is like trying to do a measurement by averaging 1000 readings, but all done with a bad ruler. At some point, you need to figure out how good your ruler is. And the problem is that this changes dynamically so standard Kalman filter techiques also stop being effective for better than 5m accuracy. There are two approaches for this: the first one is dual frequency, and this is in part how Galileo achieves better accuracy. The idea here is to exploit the dispersion property of the ionosphere. It works like this: different frequencies have different delays, so you send the same signal using different frequencies, measure the delay different, and solve for the ionosphere error. This is what survey-grade equipment do, but they do this by tracking the encrypted military P(Y) code, which is encrypted. The result is a dual frequency solution but full of hacks that make it unstable. This means, as soon as the signal is interrupted for a short time, you need to re-sync.
The other approach for sub meter accuracy come from differential GPS. This technique uses to close receivers, one with a fixed known location. By measuring the error on the known location, you can apply corrections to the moving rover. But for this you need a link between the two (radio, UMTS, GSM, etc) or some post-processing. In addition, you need receivers capable of recording RAW data and then doing some complex math.
The cream of the desert comes from using carrier-phase measurements. With this technique you can go up to cm accuracy. This requires tracking the actual carrier wave, and a very precise model of the earth or post-processing software. The accuracy comes at a price: very very unstable. You need clear blue sky and uninterrupted signals. Plus about 20 seconds to lock the signal, even after small interruptions.
So to answer your question: more satellites guarantee better consistency and readings, particularly in cities and urban landscape. But you can't go below 5m unless you enter differential GPS or dual frequency measurements.
Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 06:07 · Score: 0

I'm just not sure if you should be modded +1 Funny, or +1 Insightful...
Canada has all the fossil fuels the Us requires by arcite · 2011-12-27 06:17 · Score: 1

And Alaska and Gulf of Mexico.
1. Re:Canada has all the fossil fuels the Us requires by jbeaupre · 2011-12-27 07:26 · Score: 1
  
  When did Canada get Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico?!? I really should pay closer attention.
  
  --
  The world is made by those who show up for the job.
2. Re:Canada has all the fossil fuels the Us requires by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 08:08 · Score: 0
  
  if America needs oil, it will get it somehow...
3. Re:Canada has all the fossil fuels the Us requires by BlackPignouf · 2011-12-27 12:45 · Score: 1
  
  Once and for all.
  What about oil peak?
  ONCE AND FOR ALL!
4. Re:Canada has all the fossil fuels the Us requires by lsatenstein · 2011-12-28 11:25 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, I as a Canadian fear that sometime in the next 40 years the USA will make war on Canada, forcing us to join it, a country who is North America's and probably on a per capita basis, "the biggest polluter and the country that wastes more resources than any other country on the planet."
  I think the USA should look at its urban sprawl as one major cause, and try to have more housing development on less land and to make better use of land. The idea of a many employees doing 40 mile commutes to/from work is something to be rethought. Do you all need one-acre lots and do you need that 1 hour drive each way?
  So, you three or four car families, what are you going to do when technology development starts to be done in China, and other countries, due to lower costs of living? When your income drops as it is already happening, what are you going to do? As for sliding down the from the top of the highest standard of living to something closer to the world average, this is happening now. Just look at the USA unemployment problem. And finally, no country or group has exclusivity on intelligence. This statement means that other countries whose standard of living is rising will produce their fair share of geniuses and new inventions.
  Canadians are too generous, allowing our limited resources to be sold to a country that really wastes it. We are taking short term gain for long term pain, when these resources are gone.
  Happy New Year.
  
  --
  Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
Re:Is it possible to combine systems in a receiver by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 06:25 · Score: 0

Civilian GPS signals no longer intentionally introduce inaccuracies: http://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/modernization/sa/
Increased geometrc diversity (more satellites) leads to a lower dilution of precision: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilution_of_precision_(GPS)
Re:Is it possible to combine systems in a receiver by maeka · 2011-12-27 06:48 · Score: 1

Close.
Carrier tracking does not require a very precise model of the earth. Real Time Kinnematic GPS has been done for well over a decade with rather sane processing requirements. It also isn't unstable. So long as the L1 and L2 signal of five satellites are tracked one can initialize on the fly, and you only need to track four continuously to maintain said initialization.
Like differential (a code-base correction) kinnematic requires a base receiver and a rover receiver. They can either be in real time contact or the results can be post-processed. Differential and kinnematic both work by estimating the ionospheric delays, the difference is between tracking the long-period time code or tracking the short-period (19cm) carrier wave.
Isolationism is easy to solve by ElusiveJoe · 2011-12-27 07:10 · Score: 1

Just extend the territory of China to the whole world.
Great by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 07:22 · Score: 1

So they have the technology to position the Earth where ever they please!? Great!
Re:Is it possible to combine systems in a receiver by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-27 07:25 · Score: 0

Amongst others, Javad (Russian) makes such receivers.
Well Then, by cfkboyz · 2011-12-27 08:47 · Score: 2

From what most people know about China is they make "Excellent Quality" items. How long do you give before we are given a golden shower of chinese satellite parts?
Re:Is it possible to combine systems in a receiver by colsandurz45 · 2011-12-27 09:27 · Score: 1

You can get better accuracy by remaining stationary and averaging you location.
Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-12-27 09:46 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion
When you're trying to kill someone by Colin+Smith · 2011-12-27 09:56 · Score: 1

It makes a lot of sense to hit the right spot. No matter the price.

--
Deleted
who's going to trust the data? by Ritz_Just_Ritz · 2011-12-27 13:12 · Score: 1

I wouldn't trust those clods with printed maps (which are all censored to suit their tastes) so why on earth would I trust them to not only provide me with nav data, but to have the ability to track my receiver? Jeebus....
All this while the vast majority of their country lives in what most first world countries would consider abject poverty.
Re:Is it possible to combine systems in a receiver by arkane1234 · 2011-12-27 14:19 · Score: 1

Wow, I never thought that would goatse you so easily! :P jk

--
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
Re:Is it possible to combine systems in a receiver by batistuta · 2011-12-27 22:17 · Score: 1

Close.
Carrier tracking does not require a very precise model of the earth.
correct. Carrier tracking doesn't. But my understanding though, is that a 1 cm-accurate *positioning* does. This is at least what our survey-grade equipment vendor claimed.

Real Time Kinnematic GPS has been done for well over a decade with rather sane processing requirements. It also isn't unstable. So long as the L1 and L2 signal of five satellites are tracked one can initialize on the fly, and you only need to track four continuously to maintain said initialization
Which essentially means, that anything that is not surveying, driving on a highway, or airborne will be unstable. I didn't want to get into the details, but Slashdot readers should understand that you can't obtain cm accuracy when driving with trees and water reflections on the side of the road, trucks passing by that reflect signals, etc. For the reasons you've mentioned above, it is difficult to be continuously locked to 5 or more satellites, particular since re-syncing can take up-to 20 seconds even if the lock is lost for a very short period of time.
Re:Is it possible to combine systems in a receiver by ResidentSourcerer · 2011-12-28 05:07 · Score: 1

AFAIK cm level accuracy requires differential GPS. Between 1 and 3 meters of the GPS error is due to atmospheric issues. By siting one receiver at a known point, and broadcasting the current 'location' your field instrument can correct it's idea of where you are.
In essence differential GPS is a local version of WAAS. The closer the receivers are, the better the accuracy.
Another trick is done by tracking the phase of the carriers. Requires much better electronics, and if you lose carrier sync you have to return to a known good location to re-establish it. This system is a real pain in forested areas.

--
Third Career: Tree Farmer Second Career: Computer Geek First Career: Teacher, Outdoor Instructor, Photographer.
Re:Is it possible to combine systems in a receiver by maeka · 2011-12-30 02:24 · Score: 1

Your vendor is likely confusing you (and perhaps themselves).
GPS horizontal positioning does not require a very precise model of the earth.
GPS vertical positioning does not require a very precise model of the earth.
The gotcha there is that GPS works in ellipsoidal heights, NOT elevation. The ellipsoid is a simplified model of the earth. Elevation is height above mean sea level if the sea reached where you are. The elevation of any point measured by GPS is a combination of the ellipsoidal height and a gravity map (if there were no land, no wind, no tides the sea would still be uneven due to uneven distribution of gravity potential) called a geoid model.
As for lock and initialization times - I routinely profile roads, in traffic, and have no trouble maintaining initialization. That and a Trimble R8 GNSS (R8 model III) can initialize FAR faster than 20 seconds.