Slashdot Mirror


Naval Academy Reinstates Teaching of Celestial Navigation

HughPickens.com writes: At the US Naval Academy in Annapolis, midshipmen studied celestial navigation for more than a century -- until 1998, after a decision that came after months of discussion that began with a 1996 curriculum review. Midshipmen were relieved. Celestial calculations were painfully difficult, requiring a nautical almanac and volumes of tables. Now Tim Prudente reports at the Capital Gazette that the Navy has reinstated the teaching of celestial navigation in the manual issued two months ago. The first midshipmen to receive training were juniors during this past summer school. Future classes will learn theories of celestial navigation during an advanced navigation course. And the Class of 2017 will be the first to graduate with the reinstated instruction.

But is there really any point in knowing how to navigate by the stars in a world of GPS? "In the event that we had to go into a national emergency, we would probably have to shut the GPS down because it can be used by potential enemies," says retired Navy Capt. Terry Carraway. "We went away from celestial navigation because computers are great," says Lt. Cmdr. Ryan Rogers, the deputy chairman of the academy's department of seamanship and navigation. "The problem is, there's no backup."

350 comments

  1. What the frack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This isx utterly retarded. Pilots learn to use analog instruments, I'm pretty sure the navy has enough back ups. Just seriously, get in the sea

    1. Re:What the frack by blindseer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Analog instruments in a typical aircraft "six pack" are quite useful when in the air but mostly useless if floating on water. About the only useful instrument of those would be the magnetic compass. These instruments are also only useful in getting a rough position in the air, close enough to get within visual or radio range of an airport. When on the water one's visible distance is greatly diminished, and in a time of war one might not want to broadcast their position with a radio.

      Also, who says that the USNA does not also teach how to use instruments similar to that on an aircraft? I expect that they do. I suspect that those are also just as fragile as GPS in a time of war. Celestial navigation is cheap, readily available, and impossible to "jam", so long as you know how to do it.

      You might think it "utterly retarded" but people smarter than both of us disagree with you.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    2. Re:What the frack by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 2

      Unless it's cloudy then you're fucked.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    3. Re:What the frack by reboot246 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not if you have a "sun stone". The Vikings used them a few years before I was born. Yeah, I'm that old.

    4. Re:What the frack by blindseer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Assuming it's cloudy, you're GPS systems just went down, all radio navigation aids are lost, and all your compasses were demagnetized, then, yes, I assume one could say they are fucked.

      One solution to this problem is like what reboot246 says in a sister post, have a sun stone as part of the celestial navigation gear. Another is to sail into a best guess of a safe direction until one can see a point of reference, be it a celestial object or terrestrial one.

      Celestial navigation is not supposed to solve all navigation problems. What it is supposed to do is reduce the reliance on GPS to the point that should it go down you don't have a navy full of ships that can't so much as steer towards a safe harbor.

      Having talked with people that sailed at sea, both for pleasure and for the US Navy, every ship has a number of readily available means to navigate. GPS is typically the primary means. Second on the list is likely to be radio navigation of one type or another. Third is typically dead reckoning. If you know where you were, what direction you are heading, and at what speed, you can usually keep sailing with relative safety and ease until you can restore one or the other means of electronic navigation. Those knowledgeable of celestial navigation can go without the electronic navigation for much longer and still reach their destination as scheduled. If it's cloudy while you are without electronic navigation aids then, yes, you will most likely arrive behind schedule.

      In war you may not have the luxury of reaching your destination late.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    5. Re: What the frack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not a GPS system you moron.

    6. Re: What the frack by blindseer · · Score: 1

      Wow. Just... wow. Of all the things I wrote you focus on a typo I made in the first line. Did you even read the rest of the post?

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    7. Re:What the frack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and all your compasses were demagnetized

      I believe ships typically use gyroscope-based compasses (though I'm sure they have an old-fashioned one on board too).
      It's a nitpick though. You're right. As long as you're updating your course on the chart as you go (which they are) a heading and dead reckoning will get you pretty far.

      Captcha: simplify

    8. Re: What the frack by AgNO3 · · Score: 1

      The enlisted guy whos title I forget who actually does the navigation has always been trained in astro nav. Teaching the officers is basically a back up they realize they need again.

      --
      OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink :-(
    9. Re: What the frack by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      You're thinking of the cock's son?

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    10. Re:What the frack by Excelcia · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm an officer for the Royal Canadian Navy. I've spent time on the bridge of some of our American friends' warships and it's sometimes a white-knuckle experience. Sailing into northern waters away from large constellations of GPS satellites can easily bring your dilution of precision to the point where you could be almost anywhere, and yet many of my American friends didn't even know what the reading meant on their display. HDOP would be flashing red on the bridge and they would be all fat and happy sailing at full speed. ECPINS put a dot on the electronic chart as to where they were, so that meant that's where they are.

      It was with puzzlement that I first learned that Americans didn't teach celestial navigation to its officers. It's not that celestial navigation by itself is really all that necessary, because yes, even without it, there are other methods. But the training of it produces officers that have a better understanding of when their machines are lying to them. It, and all the related skills you need to learn to make it work, gives more useful things in your toolbox to draw from. Because I will tell you from experience, it is not a matter of if a GPS will give you a wrong answer. It's a matter of when.

      It's also, if you ask me, not a matter of if but when a shooting war finally breaks out. And if and when it does, you can guarantee that one of the first priorities for the enemy will be to deny NATO (one way or the other) the use of GPS.

      Perhaps with a renewed focus on training techniques that don't rely on toys, the USN will stop having the most collision-dented ships in NATO.

    11. Re:What the frack by blindseer · · Score: 1

      Someone mod the parent post up.

      HDOP would be flashing red on the bridge and they would be all fat and happy sailing at full speed.

      In the middle of the North Atlantic what is there to hit?

      Perhaps with a renewed focus on training techniques that don't rely on toys, the USN will stop having the most collision-dented ships in NATO.

      Oh, yeah, you can hit other ships in your flotilla.

      At least you still consider us your "American friends".

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    12. Re:What the frack by OolimPhon · · Score: 5, Funny

      In the middle of the North Atlantic what is there to hit?

      That's exactly what the captain of the Titanic said!

    13. Re: What the frack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes choppers flying to gas rig pipelines still use LF radio beacons because I was told they could not trust gps

    14. Re: What the frack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry!. Platforms

    15. Re:What the frack by TheRealHocusLocus · · Score: 1

      Not if you have a "sun stone". The Vikings used them a few years before I was born. Yeah, I'm that old.

      Leif Erikson I presume? When I read your message something in my mind whispered, "calcite" and whaddaya know, it was correct! Check out the science behind it. P.S. when you landed on Erika (mis-named America) did you see any golden arches? I've always thought they were some natural feature, and people later decided to build restaurants under them.

      --
      <blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
    16. Re:What the frack by Gim+Tom · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Thank you Sir! Very well said. I am a 68 year old American engineer (retired) who learned his craft using a slide rule and trig tables. During my career I worked with almost every type of computer from Analog behemoths to microprocessors and the one thing I learned is that COMPUTERS WILL LIE TO YOU. You just have to know a bit more than they do to catch them at it.

      Also, I wonder if this move is not so much about just loss of GPS but loss of a lot of our electronic infrastructure due to Electromagnetic Pulse, whether man made or from natural events on the Sun. I know of engineers in the US currently working with some of our electric power companies to make contingency plans for such an event. Should we expect any less of the Navy?

    17. Re: What the frack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Computers do not lie. Any faults are human error.

    18. Re:What the frack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My wife's grandfather served as a navigator in the RCAF in WW2 on a Lancaster. He navigated the plane on a night bombing mission to Germany and back via sextant after its navigation equipment broke. The pilot and he were awarded the DFC for this action as broken navigation equipment was an allowable reason to return to base without proceeding to target yet they completed the mission. I am sure he would agree a ship should have a sound backup plan for navigation should your equipment break.

    19. Re:What the frack by dargaud · · Score: 1

      A GPS wouldn't have helped in that case...

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    20. Re:What the frack by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      America was called Vineland by the Vikings ;D but that golden arc thing is a mystery to me as well.

      For some reason they are here in Europe now as well!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    21. Re:What the frack by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      In the middle of the North Atlantic what is there to hit?
      Island for starters ... (that is an 'island' and a country, perhaps you want to look it up)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    22. Re:What the frack by pdclarry · · Score: 1

      US Navy ships (and most commercial ships) have multiple backup systems. One is the shipboard inertial navigation system (SINS), which is entirely self contained once you tell it your current location. It is accurate enough to find Tokyo after leaving San Francisco if you lost GPS, LORAN and all other forms of electronic navigation. I recall reading that the current generation would be off by no more than a mile on this voyage. Since the 1940's there is the DRT (Ded Reckoning Tracer) [No, "ded" is not misspelled - it is a shortening of "deductive"]. This device was on US Navy ships during WW II; like SINS it needs a starting location, but it then monitors ship's motion to project the course on a chart. It is still carried as backup. The "ded reckoning" part is because it cannot account for currents, so errors will accumulate, and it needs to be recalibrated using either landmarks or celestial navigation. It also needs to be recalibrated when you go off the edge of the current map. There are also classified VLF systems, used mostly by submarines. The point is any military service needs multiple backups. In spite of sophisticated telephone and data systems on modern ships, they all still have point-to-point sound powered phones and voice tubes.

    23. Re:What the frack by dow · · Score: 1

      I think you meant Ireland or maybe Iceland? Both fit the description...

    24. Re:What the frack by dow · · Score: 1

      Or, maybe you are Icelandic, where they apparently call Iceland, Island.

    25. Re: What the frack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You shouldn't expect anyone to continue reading when your first sentence contains an egregious grammatical error.

    26. Re: What the frack by petteyg359 · · Score: 1

      He didn't call you a GPS system. He called you GPS systems - plural, with no article. Be insulted correctly, dude.

    27. Re:What the frack by mjwx · · Score: 1

      It was with puzzlement that I first learned that Americans didn't teach celestial navigation to its officers. It's not that celestial navigation by itself is really all that necessary, because yes, even without it, there are other methods. But the training of it produces officers that have a better understanding of when their machines are lying to them. It, and all the related skills you need to learn to make it work, gives more useful things in your toolbox to draw from. Because I will tell you from experience, it is not a matter of if a GPS will give you a wrong answer. It's a matter of when.

      This,

      Its not about teaching them how to use a sextant, rather it's about teaching them how to think for them selves.

      There will be times where their only navigational aids will be basic, magnetic compass and the old MK I human eyeball. In peace time as well as wartime (although in wartime, it'll be a lot more common).

      It's also, if you ask me, not a matter of if but when a shooting war finally breaks out. And if and when it does, you can guarantee that one of the first priorities for the enemy will be to deny NATO (one way or the other) the use of GPS.

      This is why the European system, the bloated, expensive and over engineered Galileo (GNSS) operates on it's own frequency as well as that used by GPS and GLONAS (Russia). You can block Galileo without blocking your own system.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    28. Re: What the frack by fuzzy2k · · Score: 1

      You are asking a lot of an anonymous coward whose brain seized up when confronted with a typo/egregious grammatical error. Next you'll be demanding they take responsibility for their venom, which will also not happen.

      --
      --- Say something clever. Pretend it was me. Thanks.
    29. Re: What the frack by nullchar · · Score: 2

      And hardware never fails, cosmic rays never affect memory, and programs never terminate unexpectedly.

    30. Re:What the frack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excellent post,

      Navigation is about taking information from multiple sources that you understand may be wrong and choosing the best path so things will work out.
      The robustness of GPS makes that mis-trust a lost art.
      Understanding how errors propogate through your Celestial calculations should help in understanding how GPS can fail.

      The next step is to run the bridge on electron free dperiods where part of the watch has to operate the ship without knowing what the electronic aids say.
      (The rest of the watch can watch the little box just to be safe and keeps score, but they best not get to boastful when things go astray, because it will be their turn next.)

    31. Re:What the frack by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Best comment of the story.

    32. Re: What the frack by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Someone who's too young to remember the fdiv bug.

    33. Re:What the frack by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Iceland, I just typod again as Iceland is written Island in German ;)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    34. Re:What the frack by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Analog instruments in a typical aircraft "six pack" are quite useful when in the air but mostly useless if floating on water...

      The altimeter will double as a barometer.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    35. Re:What the frack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -- I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.

      I am armed because I am a biped.

    36. Re:What the frack by smhsmh · · Score: 1

      You've been on the bridge of US warships -- I have not -- but I wonder why inertial navigation has not been installed to serve as a backup at least on capital ships.

      Consider the navigation of nuclear subs. They may serve for months silently submerged. They can tow lf antennas, but they need to navigate in real time, and even semi-reliable techniques like sonar pinging the sea floor would enhance enemy tracking. I've heard that subs have well-developed inertial tracking for reliable navigation over nontrivial time periods. I'd like to know more out of intellectual curiosity.

      If inertial navigation works well enough, why isn't it also available on a $1e9 capital carrier?

    37. Re:What the frack by Excelcia · · Score: 1

      Inertial Navigation Systems are good pieces of hardware, and without giving anything away I can tell you that you can assume most major warships in any of the better NATO navies will be equipped with it. However, no unit (surface or submarine) relies on it as a principal means of navigation, certainly not for months at a time. It is a system that starts out accurate and gets progressively less and less so as you go, especially in rough seas. Remember, it has to add up every bit of inertia in every direction - including wave motion. By the time you reach your destination your area of probability can be so large that celestial navigation (using modern instruments) can actually be more accurate. INS has to be periodically corrected, and when GPS isn't available or is degraded (or we are training without it), this is done by old fashioned traditional navigation methods. Fixes based on visible features (land, nav markers), celestial fixes, bottom contour fixes, etc. It's bottom contour fixes using depth sounders that submerged vessels use as their primary means of navigation.

      INS does have its uses. And while I can't discuss when and what situations would call for its use as a primary means of position fixing, it probably shouldn't be too hard to work out likely scenarios. Traditional navigation is still king. INS is only used as a primary means of navigation by the authors of war novels.

  2. National emergency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean when trump becomes potus?

    1. Re:National emergency by pushing-robot · · Score: 1

      No, I think that would be a bit higher on the scale.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  3. Turn key back on? by tprox · · Score: 1

    Why wouldn't the military just turn their encryption keys back on so that they can use it but others get worse data? I do agree that teaching your officers celestial navigation is important, but when shit hits the fan, it will be interesting to see which ones actually retain it and can use it without constant practice.

    1. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why wouldn't the military just turn their encryption keys back on so that they can use it but others get worse data? I do agree that teaching your officers celestial navigation is important, but when shit hits the fan, it will be interesting to see which ones actually retain it and can use it without constant practice.

      They're not doing this in case they have to turn off the GPS. They're doing this because they realize that the enemy may be able to turn off the GPS (along with everything else that relies on modern microelectronics).

    2. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      selective availability is not part of recent GPS satellites, and in a conflict either our satellites would be obliterated by missile or jammed - the signals are quite weak.

    3. Re:Turn key back on? by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't the military just turn their encryption keys back on so that they can use it but others get worse data?

      What if there are no satellites to turn the key back on for? The Chinese for one are known to have anti-satellite weapons.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    4. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are more than just GPS satellites now. There is GLONASS, DORIS, Baidou, and soon Galileo. However, it wouldn't take much (a rocket with a payload of sand) for a Kessler effect to happen making all these GPS satellites useless, as they would be perforated by debris.

      The US, Russia, China, Israel, and even Iran wouldn't do this, but as technology progresses, it wouldn't be surprising to see some shithole country launching rockets whose sole job is to render entire orbital levels inoperable, especially upper orbits like geosync where particles will remain there for centuries.

      Having a backup using star charts just makes sense. We are one EMP away from disaster in so many ways, might as well as not have one segment vulnerable to this.

    5. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China's one test of anti-satellite weaponry to shoot down was conducted on a satellite that was already de-orbiting and thus in very low orbit. The US countered China's test by making slight changes in existing weaponry and the launch platform. All the really major countries keep their military related satellites in much higher orbits. Right now the only country that can take these satellites is the US. The X-37B has the capability to launch attacks when it is already in orbit.

    6. Re:Turn key back on? by aliquis · · Score: 2

      The Chinese for one are known to have anti-satellite weapons.

      US shot down the Solwind P78-1 satellite with an ASM-135 ASAT launched from an F-15 already back in 13th September 1985.

      "It's not rocket-science nowadays."

    7. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Did you even read TFS?

      "In the event that we had to go into a national emergency, we would probably have to shut the GPS down because it can be used by potential enemies," says retired Navy Capt. Terry Carraway.

      Now granted, what you mention might be another reason to reteach celestial navigation. But you are flat wrong in your suggestion that they are not doing this in case they need to turn it off.

    8. Re:Turn key back on? by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      Err - no.
      Modern satellites have many ways of denying GPS to areas or turning off the 'civilian' mode totally.
      As well as high power 'spot-beams' to make jamming much, much harder.

    9. Re:Turn key back on? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      That's all well and good. A lot of bright minds have been studying the future of warfare though. You might peruse some of the future war genre of Science Fiction. David Drake states it quite clearly. When the shit hits the fan, the satellites share first place honors with aviation for "shit to destroy first". In the age of energy and kinetic weapons, satellites are defenseless bits of scrap, just waiting to be shot up.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    10. Re:Turn key back on? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      In space, low orbit and high orbit mean almost nothing to a satellite. The Chinese hit the moon with a couple of spacecraft - WTF makes you think they can't hit something in high earth orbit?

      I'll grant that China has given us every opportunity to mislead ourselves - but you are still misleading yourself.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    11. Re:Turn key back on? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      "The US, Russia, China, Israel, and even Iran wouldn't do this,"

      You presume to much. Any of those actors would do so, if they believed conditions made the satellites more useful to the enemy than to themselves.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    12. Re: Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You always believe everything anyone says in an article?

    13. Re:Turn key back on? by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Mind you, there's a significant difference between hitting a satellite orbiting at slightly more than 300 miles up, and hitting one that's 11,000 miles up.

      A lot of the low-earth orbit satellites - which includes some reconnaissance satellites - are vulnerable to common fighter-launched ASATs, but hitting something in geosynchronous orbit is a bit more difficult. It would take large ground-based rockets to reach that altitude, and you would have to launch at least six to disrupt the GPS system over a particular area (and even then, the results would be only temporary as the network can compensate for some losses). Even ICBMs aren't powerful enough to reach them; you would need liquid-fueled rockets that need to be fueled up prior to launch (you don't just keep that stuff sitting around in the rocket's gas tank indefinitely) prior to launch, so your preparations would be very visible and very vulnerable. GPS satellites are also traveling at more than 10,000mph, which makes them a tricky target to hit, so you'll likely need to launch more than one rocket per satellite to ensure a successful interception.

      It's not impossible but it is difficult and probably more costly in resources than it is worth.

    14. Re:Turn key back on? by kybred · · Score: 1

      GPS satellites orbit at 12,500 miles. I don't think a jet launched missile would be able to reach them.

    15. Re:Turn key back on? by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 2

      A quick google shows that the angular resolution of an adaptive optics telescope is about 1e-5 degrees, which translates roughly to 4 meters at that altitude. You see where I'm going with this?

    16. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In space, low orbit and high orbit mean almost nothing to a satellite.

      Uhh, it makes quite a difference in scale. There is usually quite a trade off in payload between low orbit and high orbit and especially with reaching the Moon. The types of rockets used to send probes the Moon are much larger and much less common with more effort and time to deploy. Low earth orbit anti-satellite weapons are small enough to be launched by a typical missile launching ship or from an airplane, and can be stockpiled with effort similar to other advanced missiles. The higher the orbit you want to reach, the more you are going to end up with something that is very large, long setup times, and launched from only specially designed facilities.

    17. Re:Turn key back on? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Details. If I can destroy a target a couple hundred miles up, then I have the skills, knowledge, and probably the resources to reach a couple hundred miles more. Besides which - with energy weapons, range matters not at all after the atmosphere is below you. Range means nothing - if you can make an accurate shot of 200 miles, then you can also make an accurate shot of 20,000 miles. The same is nearly true of kinetic weapons. Unless you are planning on using your rocket/satellite to ram the other satellites, putting any weapons platform into orbit turns all satellites into potential targets.

      To be most effective, you probably want to put your satellite killer platform into the highest orbit possible, but even a low earth orbit is adequate.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    18. Re:Turn key back on? by evilviper · · Score: 1

      They're not doing this in case they have to turn off the GPS.

      No?

      "we would probably have to shut the GPS down" -Navy Capt. Terry Carraway

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    19. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're not doing this in case they have to turn off the GPS.

      No?

      "we would probably have to shut the GPS down" -Navy Capt. Terry Carraway

      OK, so the US shuts down the GPS. But that's not the only game in town... You can probably count on the EU playing ball and shut down Galileo, but what about Glonass and Beidou? Anti-satellite missiles?, or expect the Russians and Chinese to do the same calculation and put everyone back to radio beacons, compasses and eyeballs? What if one (or, unlikely, both) of them isn't part of the conflict? Multi-system chips that can use satellites from all/multiple systems are getting more and more common.

    20. Re:Turn key back on? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't the military just turn their encryption keys back on so that they can use it but others get worse data?

      Uh, the P-code is already encrypted. Selective Availability was turned off only on the C/A (Coarse Acquisition) code.

      Civilian GPS usage is C/A only. Military uses the C/A and P code.

      In fact, to use the P-code, you must already lock onto the C/A code to get rough positioning. You cannot acquire the P-code directly.

    21. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with this is that someone figured out that you can use the carrier wave itself of a GPS satellite for accurate positioning, without using the P code.
      So the only way to deny GPS for civilians, is to completely turn of GPS.

    22. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. I was Army, so these things are a bit different (we used map and compass instead of the stars... much easier, I assume), but navigation is one of the three things that every officer had to know, lawyer, nurse, or infantry. The other two were how to shoot an M16 and how to give a standard format operations order. Basically, no matter what you do in any branch of any military, it doesn't matter how good you are at your job if you can't get to the constantly moving place where you're supposed to be doing it.

      GPS batteries go dead (when I was downrange it amazed me how many batteries my company needed of 8 million different types and how hard it was to get them). More sophistcated enemies can jam GPS easily (although I suspect that Naby ships have inertial navigation). Over-reliance on GPS can mask an overall poor understanding of terrain. I don't see the classic techniques going away any time soon.

    23. Re:Turn key back on? by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 1

      Because they are really contemplating a far worse scenario where everything in orbit gets permanently disabled. Perhaps they should start teaching how to make and use pointy sticks again too?

    24. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Contrary to popular belief, directed energy weapons cannot be very well directed over large distances. The reason for this is diffraction (in case you want to google the underlying principles).

      Projectiles are the best "directed" weapon there is and will be.

      200 miles is an enormous distance for directed energy weapons, let alone 20,000 miles.

    25. Re:Turn key back on? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Please try to keep up here. We place the weapon into orbit. We are aiming at targets in orbit. There is no diffraction, unless someone left dirty handprints on the lens. We have a satellite, in orbit, designed to kill other satellites. 20,000 miles is nothing. A laser beam that measures several microns wide at it's origin will still be several microns wide at it's destination. Firing that same laser from the surface of the earth, at an orbiting target, will indeed diffuse the beam over several meters. At least as bad, the atmosphere is going to absorb a lot of that light, so the total energy of the dispersed beam is going to be much less than the total energy of the beam when fired.

      Since lasers work off of electricity, we needn't worry about sending up an electrical generation plant - just spread out a bunch of photoelectric cells. Fire - recharge - fire - recharge - continue until targets are gone, or someone kills your satellite destroyer.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    26. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "There is no diffraction". The OP probably meant "refraction".

      " if you can make an accurate shot of 200 miles, then you can also make an accurate shot of 20,000 miles. ".

      If "accurate shot" means that the target can be illuminated, I think that's true. but energy per m^2 can drop off fairly rapidly. The spread or divergence of a beam (in radians or milli-radians using the appropriate units) is approximately directly proportional to twice the wavelength and inversely proportional to the product of pi and aperture diameter. To minimize divergence, then, one should probably use an ultraviolet laser with a large aperture. (And a lot of power.)

    27. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they are really contemplating a far worse scenario where everything in orbit gets permanently disabled.

      Yeah, like twenty-somethings who never learned to drive because they felt participating in the fossil fuel economy was somehow 'beneath them'... finally giving in because their friends won't give them rides anymore, and attempting to parallel park.

      I took a nasty pill today.

    28. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      but hitting something in geosynchronous orbit is a bit more difficult.

      The information provided here is all correct and he doesn't specifically say that GPS satellites are in geosynchronous orbit, but they are not. I've won a few bets with engineers know this. Geosynchronous satellites orbit around the equator only and would provide poor coverage for the entire earth.

    29. Re:Turn key back on? by lgw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "In the event that we had to go into a national emergency, we would probably have to shut the GPS down because it can be used by potential enemies," says retired Navy Capt. Terry Carraway.

      Now granted, what you mention might be another reason to reteach celestial navigation. But you are flat wrong in your suggestion that they are not doing this in case they need to turn it off.

      When the military discusses in public what they would do in times of enemy action, take it with a grain of salt, yes? It's not their job to accurate describe their plans to their enemies.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    30. Re:Turn key back on? by lgw · · Score: 2

      It still helps to have the high ground. Aircraft on the ground won't last long, but stealthy aircraft in the air are a hard target. Sats in low orbit, like spy sats, are easy to take down if you can find them. Medium orbit like GPS is more difficult - weapons that can reach them are in limited supply, high tech, and expensive. I'm not sure anyone but the US and Russia could take out GPS sats reliably in quantity (though many countries could now take out 1-2).

      High orbit (GEO) sat are a different story. They take quite a bit of energy to reach, and taking them out is much like putting a sat in that orbit. How many GEO sats could we launch in a week? So far I haven't seen a "killer sat" designed for multiple targets (though I don't keep up with Jane's Fighting Spacecraft, or whatever it's called). You pretty much have to plan on a succession of orbital nukes to fry all the GEO sats, and now you have bigger problems.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    31. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that's the polite way of saying "because the enemy may be able to hijack the signal."

      This is supposedly what the Iranians did to capture the UAV a few years back via a mix of jamming and sending info.

    32. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because they're definitely going to publically claim that they might not have the choice...

    33. Re:Turn key back on? by evilviper · · Score: 2

      I think that's the polite way of saying "because the enemy may be able to hijack the signal."

      Also no:

      "because it can be used by potential enemies" -Navy Capt. Terry Carraway

      The big security controversy when GPS became public was that it's much cheaper and easier to make a GPS-guided missile than a cruise missile: "All normal GPS receivers got two limits build into them [...] a speed and height limit so no receivers can be used in automatic guided weapons"

      http://www.wired.com/2013/09/b...

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    34. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're not doing this in case they have to turn off the GPS.

      No?

      "we would probably have to shut the GPS down" -Navy Capt. Terry Carraway

      As they would if the GPS signals were corrupted. Such as telling you you were in Mali or Madagascar when you're really in mid-Pacific.

    35. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're not doing this in case they have to turn off the GPS. They're doing this because they realize that the enemy may be able to turn off the GPS (along with everything else that relies on modern microelectronics).

      And a modern warship would be able to operate without modern microelectronics? Maybe they need to learn about sails, etc. too.

    36. Re:Turn key back on? by godel_56 · · Score: 1

      You can probably count on the EU playing ball and shut down Galileo, but what about Glonass and Beidou? Anti-satellite missiles?,

      Encryption

    37. Re:Turn key back on? by Idarubicin · · Score: 1

      There is no diffraction...20,000 miles is nothing. A laser beam that measures several microns wide at it's origin will still be several microns wide at it's destination.

      This is fundamentally incorrect. Even under ideal conditions laser beams will diverge in proportion to their wavelength and in inverse proportion to their narrowest diameter. Effectively, the laser light interferes with itself - diffracts - as it passes through the aperture from which it emerges. At visible or near-infrared wavelengths, a "collimated" 10-micron-wide beam will be more than 30 meters across at 1 km from its source. (I confess to doing the math in my head, but the order of magnitude is about right.) At 20,000 miles, the beam will be more than 100 km across. Wikipedia has the formulas if you'd like to play with them: beam divergence.

      You can improve performance by increasing aperture (beam diameter) and wavelength, but there are limits. Beam divergence gets a hell of a lot better with a 1-centimeter (or 1-meter) rather than a 10-micron beam, but also puts about one millionth (or one ten-billionth) as much power down per unit of area on the target.

      This isn't to say that space-based anti-satellite lasers aren't possible, but your assumptions about the behavior and performance of lasers over long ranges (and the associated technical challenges) are not grounded in adequate physics knowledge. The Soviets took a stab at launching an anti-satellite laser weapon back in 1987. Polyus weighed 80 tons, required a massive booster, used a 1-megawatt carbon dioxide laser, and was still only intended for low-orbit targets. (And suffered a launch failure, but that's not important.)

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    38. Re: Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rather than "turn off GPS", they would "turn SA (selective availability) back on", or "turn off the public GPS signal while leaving the high precision military signal alive (probably with a new encryption key). However, there is less benefit to doing so now that potential foes have launched and use their own systems.

    39. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wasn't that the plot of two different spy films in the 90s?

    40. Re:Turn key back on? by kimvette · · Score: 1

      He is referring to the fact that we won't turn off GPS because we've convinced general aviation and commercial and private ships to use it - as a primary navigation aid. It's also used by law enforcement for tracking criminals, and for drivers. Taxis are often required to use taxi-centric GPS apps to ensure the most cost-effective (for the passenger) route. With the prevalence of GPS, finding up-to-date paper maps isn't as easy as it used to be.

      Even the errors introduced into the GPS signal have been reduced or turned off, because when it comes to accuracy, a few meters' worth of error isn't going to make one iota of difference if an enemy nuclear missile uses GPS to navigate.

      Turning off GPS at this point would disrupt the world's economy so it will likely never happen. Don't like it? Blame Ronnie Raygun, whose administration opened up the GPS system to worldwide public use.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    41. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Geostationary takes a lot of power to reach, but the payload is extremely simple.

      Just launch as much gravel as you can fit in retrograde geostationary orbit, aka space shotgun

    42. Re:Turn key back on? by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      I am sure that there are more than a few people here that could bypass these restrictions in an afternoon

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    43. Re:Turn key back on? by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      Are you bringing common sense and science to the discussion? This is the new /. so the real issue is if enough minorities were employed building the laser.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    44. Re:Turn key back on? by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      You see where I'm going with this?

      To the moon?

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    45. Re:Turn key back on? by st0nes · · Score: 1

      Practice is key. When I was at sea in the 70's and 80's, we didn't have GPS, just the old Navstar satellites which were in polar orbit so didn't provide fixes very often if you were near the equator. Company regulations were that noon position was fixed by sun sights in the morning combined with latitude observation at noon, and fix by star sights at morning and evening twilight. After a while it becomes so routine you can almost do it in your sleep. Today I wouldn't go to sea without paper charts, almanac, Norie's or Burton's tables and a good supply of 2B pencils, not because I don't like GPS, but because I can't trust something provided by a government which may be switched off at any time for any reason.

      --
      Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis
    46. Re:Turn key back on? by strikethree · · Score: 1

      GPS satellites are also traveling at more than 10,000mph, which makes them a tricky target to hit

      This is merely an engineering problem. It is not a question of "can it be done", it is a question of "when will it be done". That is the whole point.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    47. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no diffraction, unless someone left dirty handprints on the lens.

      Can't happen. We taught that naughty boy a lesson. We conned him into thinking we were God talking to him through his braces. Then we buried him in popcorn.

    48. Re:Turn key back on? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I have an ordinary handheld Garmin GPS that works just fine in an airliner at 30,000 ft and 900 km/h. I've had an iphone up to about 8000 feet on a hang glider, and it worked just fine too. Cruise missiles typically fly quite low and are generally subsonic.

      It's also kind of a ridiculous restriction because any determined enemy is going to have no problem building their own GPS receivers for their cruise missiles.

    49. Re:Turn key back on? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression most militaries still taught the use of pointy sticks, primarily in the form of bayonets and knives.

    50. Re:Turn key back on? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Sailing instructor's words of wisdom: you're an idiot if you go to sea without GPS. You're an idiot if you go to sea with ONLY GPS.

    51. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Laser weapon?

      China and russia have tried them against satellites. China "painted" some years ago some US satellites, white house was angry.

    52. Re:Turn key back on? by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      Sure, but then you've probably killed your system too, and probably pissed off everybody else who wanted GPS or equivalent, and made it a lot harder to put one back up after the war.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    53. Re:Turn key back on? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      The spread of lasers used for ranging the Moon is many kilometres by the time it gets to the Moon ; proportionately less at GPS altitudes. but still not going to be metal-cutting millimetres across. I think I see where you're trying to go with this, but you're not going to get there by that route.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    54. Re:Turn key back on? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      They might be contemplating such scenarios, but they also have to deal with the potential of spoofing and just plain radio jamming. Drowning out the relatively weak signals from the GPS satellites with noise across the appropriate frequency bands. Not exactly a high tech attack.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    55. Re:Turn key back on? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      just the old Navstar satellites which were in polar orbit so didn't provide fixes very often if you were near the equator.

      Sorry, but why do you get fewer fixes near the equator? Were the orbits set up with apogee over the poles to provide more "hang time" in polar areas? I guess such a system would have been optimised for navigating nuclear-loaded bombers to their targets flying over the North Polar regions. It's not as if the system was designed for civilian convenience, after all.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    56. Re:Turn key back on? by st0nes · · Score: 1

      just the old Navstar satellites which were in polar orbit so didn't provide fixes very often if you were near the equator.

      Sorry, but why do you get fewer fixes near the equator? Were the orbits set up with apogee over the poles to provide more "hang time" in polar areas? I guess such a system would have been optimised for navigating nuclear-loaded bombers to their targets flying over the North Polar regions. It's not as if the system was designed for civilian convenience, after all.

      No, the satellites were in polar orbits, which means they orbited in north-south direction following a particular meridian. Picture the meridians: they are further apart at the equator than the poles, hence fewer fixes.

      --
      Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis
    57. Re:Turn key back on? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      OK - and the beams from the satellite were relatively narrow. Or you needed the satellite to be at a particular range of azimuths? Sorry, altitudes.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    58. Re:Turn key back on? by st0nes · · Score: 1

      OK - and the beams from the satellite were relatively narrow. Or you needed the satellite to be at a particular range of azimuths? Sorry, altitudes.

      Yes, a fix was only possible if the satellite was more than 15 degrees above the horizon.

      --
      Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis
    59. Re:Turn key back on? by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      Some stone age moon laser ranging experiment isn't really relevant to what the state of the art can do.

      You could focus around 50% of a laser beam into a 4 meter spot at geostationary orbit with an active optics telescope. If that is enough to fry them I don't know, the US military is researching active optics for anti satellite weaponry but they aren't telling.

    60. Re:Turn key back on? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      50% of the beam into 4m disc ... may be enough to damage solar cells or overheat the craft if you could sustain it for a while. But most spacecraft are not 4m across but are long and spindly (due to the problems of packing spacecraft into cylindrical rockets). The US military may be trying to develop such systems, but they're going to be difficult to develop. And not particularly efficient, which is always going to be a problem for high power devices (the wasted energy as to go somewhere, and it's is probably a good idea to try to get all that energy away from the guts of your fairly expensive power projection device). Couple that with the laws of optics and you're still looking at systems that struggle to fit into a large aircraft. Putting anti-satellite technology onto aircraft to get above as much pesky atmosphere as possible is obviously sensible.

      NASA have a converted 747 (wide-body) carrying the SOFIA AO telescope. Meanwhile the US military (I forget Navy, Air Force or Army) have a separate 747-load of equipment which they've publicised not-very successful anti-missile laser technology. If they're anywhere near the state of the art, then there is a long way to go.

      Of course, Black Skunk Works have it in a backpack version. I've seen it in computer games, so it must be true. But the Russian version that fits on a truck is one tenth of the cost.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  4. They cant control navigation. by Linkreincarnate · · Score: 1

    Even without gps computer vision should be more than capable of navigating via stars today. Shutting down gps is not going to stop missiles or anything else that would rely on gps very soon.

    1. Re:They cant control navigation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Astro-inertial navigation is old tech for missiles. There's no reason that someone couldn't slap together a similar system as backup for guiding a ship in lieu of GPS. That's not what this is about. This is about weeding dumb people out of the Naval Academy.

    2. Re:They cant control navigation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "should be" is not a guarantee of anything. Are there computerised systems as portable, sturdy, accurate and speedy as a trained user of manual celestial navigation tools, yes or no?

    3. Re:They cant control navigation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. There have been for many, many years. Many military aircraft used them, including the SR-71. Computer-aided celestial navigation is a long-solved problem.

    4. Re:They cant control navigation. by blindseer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What if the issue is not lack of GPS but lack of electrical power? Or, in the case of an EMP, the computers are scrambled? In the time it takes you to work out the issues with the electronics you can also have some people trying to figure out where you are by celestial navigation. That means less down time.

      Also, how do you know the computers aren't lying to you? In a sophisticated attack the navigation may not be down but merely rendered inaccurate. Having celestial navigation as an aid means you should be able to correct for electronic navigation errors more quickly.

      Also, electronic navigation may only provide one or two points in a triangulation. To complete your triangle of points one might want to know something as simple as which way is north. Reading a compass might seem trivial to you but for some young sailor fresh out of the academy that might not be trivial. Add to that some basics of dead reckoning and just some theory on celestial navigation then we have someone that can get back into the fight more quickly than a sailor ignorant of these things.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    5. Re:They cant control navigation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If an EMP goes off, no Navy ship is going to be worth a damn. Everything from aircraft carrier catapults (the new electromagnetic ones) to comms to missile launches, CIWS, and all weapons systems will be fucked. Shiny new laser system or railgun? Absolutely worthless.

      If an EMP goes off, the only thing you would be able to do is manually fire the 50 caliber guns.

      Navigation will be the last of your worries then.

    6. Re:They cant control navigation. by tomhath · · Score: 4, Informative

      Do you really think military hardware is that fragile? It's built to withstand a close by nuclear explosion. Really, a Navy ship is very, very robust.

    7. Re:They cant control navigation. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Or, in the case of an EMP, the computers are scrambled? In the time it takes you to work out the issues with the electronics you can also have some people trying to figure out where you are by celestial navigation.

      I guess you're assuming that the EMP is going to cause the navigator to forget where the ship was five minutes ago

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:They cant control navigation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no, US Navy ships are only designed to tolerate radiation coming from their insides!

    9. Re:They cant control navigation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if the issue is not lack of GPS but lack of electrical power?

      Then the ship is dead in the water anyway. Duh.

      Or, in the case of an EMP, the computers are scrambled?

      Then none of the systems that allow the ship to be controlled or to fight are functioning either. Duh.

      Did you even take the slightest moment to think things through before posting?

    10. Re:They cant control navigation. by blindseer · · Score: 1

      I'm expecting that in an EMP attack that the ship under attack is going to have to travel a large distance to either get aid or render it to another ship. This ship is going to have to find port, or another ship at sea, with disabled or unreliable computer systems. That means being able to verify your position over a period of hours or days. They may have to also do this while those of the crew normally tasked with navigation being dead, injured, or otherwise unable to perform their normal duties.

      Knowing your position five minutes ago is fine but then five minutes becomes five hours, perhaps even five days. During that time the ship is floating with the current, or (hopefully) moving under its own power. Knowing your position at a given time is quite helpful for dead reckoning. Assuming you also have a working clock and compass then you should be able to navigate with accuracy sufficient to find port. But in a time of war you may not have the luxury to wander in a general direction until you find land.

      Also, in a battle severe enough that would render normal electronic means of navigation unreliable it is quite possible to forget where you were five minutes ago. You could have the entire above deck crew injured from attack, which leaves the people below decks, such as the medical and engineering crews, left with the task of finding out where they are in the vast nothingness that is the open sea. These people, not needing to know where precisely the ship is located for their normal duties, won't likely be concerned with checking their position every ten minutes. All they will have is a general notion of the ship's location. Just having a handful of people on the crew capable of verifying their position with celestial navigation might be what they need to save the ship and crew.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    11. Re: They cant control navigation. by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1

      They're not that fragile.

      The housings holding critical systems are very well shielded and shock isolated. In fact, some of the housings around the system I worked on were LEAD LINED. They take their shielding fairly seriously :)

      Source: Ex Fire Control type

    12. Re: They cant control navigation. by techno-vampire · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Back in '72, when I was in the Navy, one of my friends was a Quartermaster's Mate. (Bridge crew, navigation, that kind of thing.) Most of the navigation was done by LORAN, but they still regularly used celestial navigation both to keep in practice and as a backup. And, they still had two different, hand-wound chronometers as the official time source for navigation. The ship used (I think.) steam turbines for propulsion, but we could still navigate if all the electric power was down, or the LORAN equipment was damaged by wind, wave or enemy action.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    13. Re:They cant control navigation. by blindseer · · Score: 1

      What if the issue is not lack of GPS but lack of electrical power?

      Then the ship is dead in the water anyway. Duh.

      Or, in the case of an EMP, the computers are scrambled?

      Then none of the systems that allow the ship to be controlled or to fight are functioning either. Duh.

      Having talked with several people that have been on actual US Navy ships I know what you proclaim is not true. Even today US Navy ships are largely powered by steam power plants with mechanical systems to operate them. There may be electronic systems to manage them in normal operation but there is always a manual override.

      If the means to generate electricity is lost there is nothing that prevents the ship from being able to still propel itself.

      Many of the weapons would also be capable of functioning without power. At a minimum the crew could operate small arms.

      Assuming the ship is unable to fight then at a minimum being able to determine their position would be vital to either head to safe harbor (assuming the ship is still capable of moving under its own power) or be able to call for assistance. Being able to give your position before the radio is lost would be vital to a quick recovery. Yes, I realize that a radio requires electric power. There is a chance that one battery operated radio still works. A hand crank radio was standard issue equipment, I don't know how common they are any more.

      In the case of more modern electrical propulsion ships the power generation and the propellers are quite close to each other. Damage to the power distribution systems may render a large portion of the ship without power but still capable of propelling itself. Navigation from the engineering deck is likely to be quite difficult, so someone on the deck is going to have to operate a compass, look out for obstacles, and so on, and let the crew below decks know which way to point the ship. Again the crew can either fight with whatever weapons they can without power, or tend to the ship as it navigates to port.

      So, in the case of a steam ship a total loss of electrical power is merely inconvenient. In the case of an electric propulsion ship total loss of electric power is unlikely. In a total loss of electric power then, yes, the ship is dead in the water. In the case of partial loss of electric power the ship may still be able to move but normal means of communication and navigation are lost. Even in the case of total loss of power anything battery operated will work for a period of time, with a radio you can let people know where you are before it goes dead. If everything goes dead then nothing was lost by teaching celestial navigation but a week or two of time in the academy on computer navigation.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    14. Re:They cant control navigation. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Will it survive an EMP?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    15. Re:They cant control navigation. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      I know that all that you say is true. I know that there are repetitively redundant backups for everything. But, one thing I never established for myself. Without electrical power, could we have fired our main guns? I know that after an EMP, our missiles and rockets would have been useless. Torpedos would almost certainly have been useless. But, the main guns? I'm just not sure. Some of the subsystems would be worthless, for sure. And, ammunition would be limited to whatever was in the ready locker, and what the powder monkeys could hump up three decks. Could we fire the guns?

      I just don't know for sure. Something would have to be hacked together to set off the electrical primers, for starters.

      http://ddg23.tripod.com/ddg23_...

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    16. Re:They cant control navigation. by evilviper · · Score: 1

      What if the issue is not lack of GPS but lack of electrical power?

      Then you'd better call out the galley slaves with their giant wooden paddles, because I can't imagine any scenario where a ship's engine would be operational, but they couldn't generate a few watts of electricity out of it.

      Hell, this is the military, they don't mind forcing a few men to turn a crank on an alternator around the clock, to generate a little power, when needed. Seriously, who is teaching celestial navigation, instead of just including a $30 solar panel as a tertiary backup power source in the event of inconceivable system failures?

      Or, in the case of an EMP, the computers are scrambled?

      We aren't talking about your cellphone. Military equipment is specifically hardened against EMP. And even if it weren't, a spare handheld GPS unit stored in an antistatic bag with a few batteries is all you need for a fix.

      Reading a compass might seem trivial to you but for some young sailor fresh out of the academy that might not be trivial.

      The compass is about the simplest interface around. There might well be the occasional person who can't figure it out, but most can, without trying. That's surely no reason to resort to celestial navigation training.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    17. Re:They cant control navigation. by Alypius · · Score: 1

      Naval warships are incredibly tough; these are not the grounded cruise ships you've seen in the news. We have extensive protection and backups, including sound-powered phones, and our crews are very, very good at keeping a ship combat-effective. There's an outstanding chapter in P.J. O'Rourke's Parliament of Whores that describes the resiliency of a Ticonderoga-class cruiser. Cel-nav training was (rather foolishly) dropped as a cost-saving measure. I'm glad to see it coming back.

    18. Re:They cant control navigation. by blindseer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Navigation will be the last of your worries then.

      Being up shit creek and all I had was a paddle I'd think that knowing where I was would be the first concern.

      Let's gather the situation here. Communication is down, weapons down to .50 M2 and small arms, no GPS, no power. Since the ship is likely steam or gas turbine powered the crew should still be able to get the ship to move. I presume as well that there are crew that are injured. This crew is also going to be in need of food, heat, and shelter. I'd think that what a wise captain would want to do is head for the nearest safe harbor for repairs. At a minimum getting to port would mean the crew can find food, heat, and shelter until the ship is repaired or they can be picked up in another.

      Given that situation what should a captain do? Head to safe harbor, right? Okay then, to get there they will have to be able to at a minimum know which direction to sail. With a watch, compass, and charts one can do wonderful things. With a sextant and the knowledge to use it, miracles can be performed.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    19. Re:They cant control navigation. by blindseer · · Score: 1

      Then you'd better call out the galley slaves with their giant wooden paddles, because I can't imagine any scenario where a ship's engine would be operational, but they couldn't generate a few watts of electricity out of it.

      Then perhaps you aren't thinking hard enough.

      Let's also consider a situation given in the linked article, the ship is fully operational but the Navstar GPS satellites are disabled. A GPS unit wrapped in aluminum foil won't save you then. The Chinese or Russian GPS systems might still be operational but in a time of war, where either nation might be the aggressor, they cannot be relied upon.

      If during an attack the people responsible for the navigation of the ship are just then seeing a magnetic compass for the first time can you be certain they will read it correctly? Reliance on a single means of navigation is a single point of failure. If that fails, for whatever reason, and you have no backup, then you have problems. Seems simple enough to have the cadets learn some basics of celestial navigation while at the academy so that if they do find themselves in the unlikely situation of a ship that can move but the electricity is out that they can at least find their way home.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    20. Re:They cant control navigation. by blindseer · · Score: 1

      I realized upon re-read that the context of this was proposing instead of teaching celestial navigation that the Navy should instead have computers capable of celestial navigation.

      Then you'd better call out the galley slaves with their giant wooden paddles, because I can't imagine any scenario where a ship's engine would be operational, but they couldn't generate a few watts of electricity out of it.

      And Tepco couldn't imagine a scenario where they'd lose the generators, batteries, and grid power at the same time. How well did that work out for them? Sometimes the worst can happen and simple things like a sextant, clock, charts, compass, and two weeks of training at the Naval Academy can save a lot of people a lot of trouble.

      Hell, this is the military, they don't mind forcing a few men to turn a crank on an alternator around the clock, to generate a little power, when needed. Seriously, who is teaching celestial navigation, instead of just including a $30 solar panel as a tertiary backup power source in the event of inconceivable system failures?

      Who's teaching celestial navigation? The Merchant Marine Academy, the Coast Guard Academy, as well as numerous universities, trade schools, and enthusiasts. Let's assume you have power. Assume we have a computer capable of celestial navigation. Everything is fine. That is also a piece of equipment that is in need of training, maintenance, and so forth. At the same time the US Navy could invest that same amount of time and money on training and equipment and not only do they cover situations where GPS is down they also cover a number of situations that they haven't even thought of yet. A celestial navigation computer is going to be an expensive piece of equipment, one that is going to be vulnerable to many of the same things that can take out GPS. If you are going to have a back-up plan then why not make it one known to be very robust, relatively inexpensive, and needing little maintenance?

      We aren't talking about your cellphone. Military equipment is specifically hardened against EMP. And even if it weren't, a spare handheld GPS unit stored in an antistatic bag with a few batteries is all you need for a fix.

      Hardened against EMP does not mean it is incapable of being disabled by it, it means it can take a much greater hit and survive compared to others. Just like "bullet proof" doesn't meet it can stop every bullet, but it can stop the first two or three. Again, if you are going to have a back-up plan then it makes sense to make it as resistant as possible to whatever might take out your primary system.

      A wise naval officer might want to buy an iPhone and a celestial navigation app, then keep it wrapped in foil in case of an EMP attack. Might be just what the Navy needs to win a war. It might also be wise to have some idea on how celestial navigation works so that if the app isn't working right away that the officer might know the best way to use that app and how to interpret the output. Same goes for an EMP hardened, US Navy standard issue, celestial navigation computer. Just knowing some basics on celestial navigation the operator, likely an officer in the Navy, would be able to tell if the computer is operating correctly and how to fix it if it isn't.

      The compass is about the simplest interface around. There might well be the occasional person who can't figure it out, but most can, without trying. That's surely no reason to resort to celestial navigation training.

      I suppose that in many situations that being able to read a chart, a compass, and some dead reckoning will be sufficient in most every case. However, these officers are going to be trained for war and be responsible for the lives of those under their command. It would seem prudent to take a few hours of their time to teach them the basics of celestial navigation so that if things go wrong in a big way we don't lose an entire flotilla because no one knew how to read a compass and chart correctly. Perhaps some light reading is in order:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    21. Re:They cant control navigation. by sphealey · · Score: 1

      = = = Even today US Navy ships are largely powered by steam power plants with mechanical systems to operate them. There may be electronic systems to manage them in normal operation but there is always a manual override. = = =

      The submarines and nuclear carriers still use steam turbines, but eyeballing the list the majority of the US Navy surface fleet use gas turbine propulsion, variants of the GE LM2500 being the most common. Land-based equivalents of the LM2500 ordered from 2000 forward generally have some generation of FADEC (full authority digital control) but I suppose it is possible the Navy uses an electromechanical backup.

      My concern is that every device we have whether general purpose, dedicated, specialized, COTS, or whatever has had more and more microcontrollers built in over the last 20 years, sometimes dependent on inputs you may not even be aware of. Many applications use GPS signals for timing, for example, whether or not they use GPS location data. Electric power dispatch centers used to maintain their own atomic clocks - now only the very largest do while the rest depend on GPS timing signals. And those types of dependencies are not always obvious. You might break out the sextant and figure out where you are only to find out the fuel pump speed controller won't turn on because it was using GPS timing signals as a reference.

      sPh

    22. Re:They cant control navigation. by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Let's also consider a situation given in the linked article, the ship is fully operational but the Navstar GPS satellites are disabled. A GPS unit wrapped in aluminum foil won't save you then.

      That's simple, really. Ships should have radio direction-finding equipment aboard, as a backup. There's no reasonable situation in which all major broadcasters stop transmitting (and the ship's navigation remains urgent), so they'll be able to find their way, day or night, in any kind of weather & heavy cloud cover, and far more accurately than cellestial navigation.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    23. Re:They cant control navigation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If there's been an EMP nearby, there will be a nuclear response in retaliation, so finding a safe harbor is probably going to be a lot more difficult than you think...

    24. Re:They cant control navigation. by Lew-the-nerd · · Score: 1

      . That's not what this is about. This is about weeding dumb people out of the Naval Academy.

      Like Organic Chemistry

    25. Re:They cant control navigation. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      If during an attack the people responsible for the navigation of the ship are just then seeing a magnetic compass for the first time can you be certain they will read it correctly?
      Yes you can. A magnetic compass only shows a number ... every child can read a nautical compass.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    26. Re:They cant control navigation. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Solar panels don't work at night.
      But you see the sky and have stars :D hopefully.

      Anyway, what is your damn problem? Are you jealous that naval cadets now may learn celestial navigation again, because you where not allowed to?

      Your posts are just ridiculous. I have to pay over $1000 to learn it (and get the certification), and those guys get it for free and you complain about that? How dumb is that?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    27. Re:They cant control navigation. by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Solar panels don't work at night.

      Unused LSD NiMH batteries hold a charge for 2+ years. A small solar panel could keep recharging them, keeping your spare hand held navigation system operating, indefinitely.

      Anyway, what is your damn problem?

      It's an absurd, wasteful reaction to a non-problem, which provides basically no benefits.

      How would you feel if modern Linux certification required a Morse Code signalling & equipment maintenance course? You know... just in-case the internet goes down.

      I have to pay over $1000 to learn it (and get the certification), and those guys get it for free and you complain about that? How dumb is that?

      No, they don't get it for free. I'm paying for their training (which I'm betting they don't want), and all the time they waste that could be better used. All for no benefit to anyone.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    28. Re:They cant control navigation. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I'm paying for their training (which I'm betting they don't want),
      You are paying for their training time what ever they do train in that time.
      And I hold that bet: most naval officer do want to learn celestial navigation: because it is archaic and because: it is FUN! And it is damn pretty useful, too!

      How would you feel if modern Linux certification required a Morse Code signalling & equipment maintenance course? You know... just in-case the internet goes down.

      That has nothing to do with each other. Makes no sense, very bad example. How do you send morse codes if you have no line? If I have a radio attached to my Linux box I use HAM radio, packet radio ... and that is still TCP/IP.

      What about: what is the difference between paging and swapping? Or: how do RPCs work, and which is the most still in use application of RPC? What is the difference between a loader and a linker, what is a link editor ... there are plenty of archaic things which are quite helpful and amazingly interesting if you read about them.

      Bottom line: you are simply an idiot. If the navy decides that a certain skill is _NEEDED_ then in your position (with no knowledge what so ever about maritime topics) I would suggest to trust the Navy.

      And ost of all: no one gets harmed by knowing things!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    29. Re:They cant control navigation. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      That was meant to look like this:
      -----

      I'm paying for their training (which I'm betting they don't want),
      You are paying for their training time what ever they do train in that time.
      And I hold that bet: most naval officer do want to learn celestial navigation: because it is archaic and because: it is FUN! And it is damn pretty useful, too!

      How would you feel if modern Linux certification required a Morse Code signalling & equipment maintenance course? You know... just in-case the internet goes down.

      That has nothing to do with each other. Makes no sense, very bad example. How do you send morse codes if you have no line? If I have a radio attached to my Linux box I use HAM radio, packet radio ... and that is still TCP/IP.

      What about: what is the difference between paging and swapping? Or: how do RPCs work, and which is the most still in use application of RPC? What is the difference between a loader and a linker, what is a link editor ... there are plenty of archaic things which are quite helpful and amazingly interesting if you read about them.

      Bottom line: you are simply an idiot. If the navy decides that a certain skill is _NEEDED_ then in your position (with no knowledge what so ever about maritime topics) I would suggest to trust the Navy.

      And ost of all: no one gets harmed by knowing things!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    30. Re:They cant control navigation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Radio direction finding? What radio?

      You're in the Pacific Ocean and the GPS goes out. Assuming no major EMP fuckup of the ionosphere, the only radio signal you're going to get is some AM station in Diluth. Remember, LORAN is being phased out. The sun is not.

      The only real shit-hits-the-fan backup for GPS is inertial guidance - like the subs use. I'm sure most surface ships have a backup inertial system but there really is no excuse for not teaching celestial navigation to Navy officers. With it and a few, rugged, inexpensive instruments you can navigate anything from a life raft to an aircraft carrier.

    31. Re:They cant control navigation. by blindseer · · Score: 1

      every child can read a nautical compass.

      Having been in the US Army and gone through the terrestrial navigation training in Basic Training I know that not to be true. All of these recruits graduated high school, were over 18 years old, and some of them could not read a compass. Unless you can show how a nautical compass is fundamentally different than a terrestrial one then I don't believe you.

      Seems to me that teaching some basics of celestial navigation in the US Naval Academy is a very low cost solution to the potential issue of having common electronic navigation aids fail. Reading a compass may be very different than reading a sextant but having both skills could prove lifesaving in a real shooting war.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    32. Re:They cant control navigation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's about weeding out people who can't hack celestial navigation.Being "dumb" is not even remotely the same thing.

    33. Re:They cant control navigation. by evilviper · · Score: 1

      it is archaic and because: it is FUN

      That's not what training time is meant to be focused on. People say the military is too focused on fighting the LAST war, but the navy seem intent on fighting the last-century's wars...

      If the navy decides that a certain skill is _NEEDED_ then in your position (with no knowledge what so ever about maritime topics) I would suggest to trust the Navy.

      Your appeal to authority is a pure fallacy. The Navy is a huge organization, filled with plenty of dead-weight and led by a string of idiot politicians. No doubt it was one of those many useless morons that got it back on the agenda, not any actual need.

      The fact that NOBODY here has come up with one good sane reason this is NECESSARY (including you), is a good indicator of that fact.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    34. Re:They cant control navigation. by kimvette · · Score: 1

      > What if the issue is not lack of GPS but lack of electrical power?

      Then the ship is a sitting duck anyhow, considering that it's usually electric motors driving the propellers.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    35. Re:They cant control navigation. by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      People in general have become far too comfortable in their reliance on modern technology. Techniques taken for granted just a generation or two ago aren't just not practiced they appear to have been forgotten completely. You and your ilk are the reason I still come to this site. Amongst the noise and idiocy there are still a few gems to be found.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    36. Re:They cant control navigation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being up shit creek and all I had was a paddle I'd think that knowing where I was would be the first concern.

      Let's gather the situation here. Communication is down, weapons down to .50 M2 and small arms, no GPS, no power. Since the ship is likely steam or gas turbine powered the crew should still be able to get the ship to move. I presume as well that there are crew that are injured. This crew is also going to be in need of food, heat, and shelter. I'd think that what a wise captain would want to do is head for the nearest safe harbor for repairs. At a minimum getting to port would mean the crew can find food, heat, and shelter until the ship is repaired or they can be picked up in another.

      Given that situation what should a captain do? Head to safe harbor, right? Okay then, to get there they will have to be able to at a minimum know which direction to sail. With a watch, compass, and charts one can do wonderful things. With a sextant and the knowledge to use it, miracles can be performed.

      Wrong. Turning on your engines will be heard by any nearby hostile submarines while the ship is deaf and blind and said submarine will promptly put a torpedo right up your ass. Game over, man, game over.

    37. Re:They cant control navigation. by volmtech · · Score: 1

      Starting up a steam powered ship without electricity is more than merely inconvenient if you are part of team manning the hand powered boiler feed pump. In the mid seventy's I was in the Navy reserve on a WWII era destroyer. We lost our condensate pump and had to shut down the boilers when the main condensers flooded. Being an underfunded training ship both emergency diesel generators were non functional. It was somewhat discerning to wakeup to complete silence while out to sea on a ship that was drifting with the current.

      After helping repair the condensate pump I was ordered to the #1 boiler room to help get steam up. Two of us would crank like mad on the manual feed pump to pressurize the water going to the boiler. Every thirty seconds a new team took over. After an exhausting five minutes there was enough steam pressure to run the steam powered feed pump. After a few more minutes there was enough steam to run the main turbo generators and we got electricity back.

    38. Re:They cant control navigation. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Using a compass well enough to navigate long distances isn't trivial at all. You have to know how to plot rhumb lines, perform dead reckoning, and deal with the fact that in much of the world compasses don't actually point north.

    39. Re:They cant control navigation. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I'm a sailing instructor, trained in celestial navigation. I've heard stories of people in midocean who've had their GPS (and their backup) flake out, and had to use celestial navigation to make landfall. If nothing else, I get a lot of satisfaction from being able to navigate anywhere in the world using a book and simple tools. Even the sextant and compass can be made from scratch if necessary.

    40. Re:They cant control navigation. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Here you go:

      http://solarscience.msfc.nasa....
      http://www.dacust.com/navigati...
      http://www.thenauticalalmanac....

      It's certainly handy to take a course with a good teacher, but if you'd like a challenge the first PDF shows you how to build a sextant out of things you'd find at home, and the second will teach you how to use it to navigate. The third one has the daily pages and sight reduction tables.

    41. Re:They cant control navigation. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I know, but it does not give me the certificate ;)
      Only saves a bit of money. For the certification I have to pay anyway.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    42. Re:They cant control navigation. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      You seem not to read what other people write in this thread.
      And insulting me by claiming I would 'appeal to authority' won't help you either.

      You did not realize so far, or did you ... that the US Navy is the only naval institution in the world where celestial navigation was abandoned?

      You can not captain a sizable ship in any other nation/navy/merchant navy on this planet without being able to navigate by the stars.

      Heck for my third 'high seas sailing license' (called SHS ... sports high sea sailing license in German Sport Hochsee Schifferschein) I need astro navigation! And this is for: sports. That an american carrier navigator can mot do what every pimp is required to learn here is just ridiculous!

      That americans first abolished it: that is the ridiculous fact. That they reintroduce it is not only sane, but the most rational thing to do.

      You might disagree, but you would be wrong.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    43. Re:They cant control navigation. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      A nautical compass is a swimming half ball in a big ball filled with a liquid on the bottom and a plexy glass upper half.

      The compass is in front of the stearing wheel. At the rim of the floating disc are the degrees in numbers.

      The number that is under the 'mark' is your course.

      What can you misread there? Many compasses have a second way, a huge line going over the glass topping and a second rim of numbers on the outside of the disc.

      So you the course as a number in front of the compass and the course with the 'wind rose' if you look from the top onto it.

      Sorry ... if a child can not read an ordinary compass, then there is something wrong with it.

      If an adult can not read a naval one I would assume he has server mental problems.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    44. Re:They cant control navigation. by tibit · · Score: 1

      Be careful, because a single counterexample will prove you wrong. And eventually it will happen.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    45. Re:They cant control navigation. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Unless you're planning to be a merchant or military navigator, the certificate is only for your own satisfaction, and you can probably get a much cheaper one from your national sail training organization. I have a celestial navigation certification but it's highly unlikely I'll ever use it. Celestial navigation, on the other hand, I use periodically to stay in practice, and may be a lifesaving skill at some point.

    46. Re:They cant control navigation. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      the certificate is only for your own satisfaction No it is not.

      As a hobbyist you still "need" certificates, especially if you want to take part in educating others.

      In Germany we basically have 4 sports/hobbyists sailing licenses. You need the next higher one to teach the lower one, e.g. License 2 to teach License 1 (and of course proven track of your miles traveled)

      You need the certificate for the SHS, "sports high sea" sailing license. And as far as I know for a few of the British licenses, not sure what is ll included in the "Royal Yacht Master".

      But, yes, bottom line you do it for your own satisfaction ;D why else would one make an SHS when basically an SKS is enough.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    47. Re:They cant control navigation. by evilviper · · Score: 1

      That they reintroduce it is not only sane, but the most rational thing to do.

      You've not provided a single reason to support that.

      And yes, your entire comment here is an appeal to authority fallacy.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    48. Re:They cant control navigation. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      You've not provided a single reason to support that.
      Of course I have, you failed to grasp them ;D

      And yes, your entire comment here is an appeal to authority fallacy.
      No it is not. It was an attempt to point out that YOU LACK the authority and knowledge. That is something different ;D
      The fact that you did not realize and uderstand my reasons I gave (and others gave) supports my opinion about your competence in this field.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  5. Not the real problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Having to shut down GPS isn't the real problem, as there are a number of alternatives available to potential enemies. The real problem is that GPS satellites can be shut down quite easily by anyone with satellite launching capability (which these days is a lot of countries), making navigation extremely difficult for those who have become totally dependant upon it - the USA and its allies.

  6. Seems weird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I appreciate the value of a backup navigation system if the electronics stop working. But so many things depend on GPS nowadays that there's a good chance some software bug would disable the ship anyway.

    Even if it is a useful thing to learn, I don't see why everyone should have to learn it. It is like teaching graph theory to everyone in a university. Save it for the math and CS majors, and let everybody else learn something relevant to their specialty instead. Only those officers who will potentially at some point perform navigation should learn it. There are lots of totally unrelated specialties in the Navy where an officer can make a career: weapons, engines, aviation, medicine, etc. and others that are only tangentially related, like communications or radar/sonar.

    How do you navigate a submarine by the stars?

    1. Re:Seems weird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't see why everyone should have to learn it.

      If the GPS satellites get knocked out, presumably, we are at war. So it is best to have full redundancy, in case the few officers who can navigate by the stars get taken out, others can take their place. Same reason why the engineering corps has to go through basic training, even though there are plenty who can shoot.

      How do you navigate a submarine by the stars?

      By surfacing every once in a while, just like they have to do when navigating by GPS.

    2. Re:Seems weird by ka9dgx · · Score: 1

      Absence of GPS does NOT imply war.... it implies a mad scramble to navigate and synchronize clocks by other means.

    3. Re:Seems weird by lhowaf · · Score: 1

      That's interesting because submarines on patrol wouldn't be susceptible to EMP damage. They also have inertial navigation systems. Some of them have a shitload of angry, angry missiles.

    4. Re:Seems weird by arth1 · · Score: 1

      I appreciate the value of a backup navigation system if the electronics stop working. But so many things depend on GPS nowadays that there's a good chance some software bug would disable the ship anyway.

      If there's an EMP blast, ships will switch over to mechanical systems. Computer bugs won't come into play. Neither will GPS or anything else that depends on software. Dead reckoning, a slide rule, a compass and a sextant is what you'll have.

      But those who need to know that are the pilots and gunners, not everybody else. What this is primarily useful for is weeding out those too stupid to learn celestial navigation or how to use a slide rule. Can't fault them for that. Let the army have the grunts that live up to the description.

    5. Re: Seems weird by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1

      In order for officers to earn their Surface Warfare badge, they will have a turn playing Officer of the Deck while underway at some point. ( I assume the sub-surface fleet has similar requirements )

      Contrary to popular belief, the Captain is not on the bridge guiding the ship 24/7.

    6. Re:Seems weird by ka9dgx · · Score: 2

      The Trident 2 class submarines also have gravity gradiometry, which allows covert navigation without emitting any signals.

    7. Re:Seems weird by blindseer · · Score: 1

      Even if it is a useful thing to learn, I don't see why everyone should have to learn it.

      Seeing as it's being taught at the US Naval Academy it's only the officers that have to learn celestial navigation. I assume the enlisted ranks outside of the navigation ratings won't have to learn it, but those that wish to earn navigation ratings would.

      Considering that any naval officer could at some point in their career be in charge of a vessel larger than a canoe it would be helpful, if not necessary, to know what every person under their command must do. They may have to teach someone how to do their job, such as an inexperience crew member or someone doing a job not normally assigned to them. They may have to check the work of a navigator, or no one on the crew (not dead or injured) was trained in navigation and may have to navigate on their own.

      I believe that this is excellent training for a US Navy or Marine officer to have. If things really get bad the crew is going to look towards the highest ranking officer that is still standing, which might be the ensign or lieutenant fresh from the academy. One of the first questions asked, if not THE first question asked is, "Where are we?" If that officer cannot get a reading from the GPS, and the navigator is dead, then I'd hope they'd be looking for charts and a sextant rather than pissing their pants.

      Also, there are several direct commission position in the US military that do not necessarily come from a military academy. You mentioned some that might not come from an academy. Some typical direct commission positions are those in medical, legal, and chaplain services. Less common direct commissions would be in engineering, logistics, sciences, and intelligence. These direct commission positions are not likely to be seen on a battlefield, or at sea.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    8. Re:Seems weird by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      How do you navigate a submarine by the stars?

      You surface every now and then and look at them.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    9. Re:Seems weird by Poohsticks · · Score: 1

      In battle, officers are lost just the same as regular crewman. Don't you think it's a good idea that ANY officer can backup the navigators that were just blown to smithereens? The military works on the idea that multiple redundant systems is a good thing, and that includes personnel. For heaven's sake, the Marine Corps motto is "First and foremost - I'm a rifleman", and the Marine's are an adjunct branch of the Navy. It makes total sense to teach it to all officers so they've at least had the exposure and can hopefully recall it when necessary.

      --
      "The story so far: In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been wide
    10. Re:Seems weird by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      it implies a mad scramble to navigate and synchronize clocks by other means.

      Why a mad scramble? I'm carrying a LW radio-controlled watch on my wrist at this moment. Just because something is old technology doesn't mean that it stops working or is taken out of service. I don't actually have any need for synchronisation to better than a couple of minutes, but I don't see that tech being taken out of service for a long time.

      Unless someone drops a nuke on it. Or a 737. At which point, there are several dozen alternatives.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    11. Re:Seems weird by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      If things really get bad the crew is going to look towards the highest ranking officer that is still standing, which might be the ensign or lieutenant fresh from the academy.

      I remember - possibly from a Heinlein SF story - that there was a case on record of 7 levels of command of a ship being taken out in one explosion during an engagement, with command then devolving onto a teenage mishipman as the ranking remaining officer.

      I don't know how true that is, but IIRC that Heinlein was a Naval reservist and generally knew his stuff about military history.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  7. The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    They are so against education. So against education.

    1. Re:The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what idiots modded this interesting?

    2. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clemsoning is the way of their kind.

    3. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they hate us. You should never vote for a Republican.

    4. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they want us to die. Rent us to die. Bt

    5. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a airy dievyantvswgg when someone nene else he bergs have. Besee

    6. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They hate wdcTion ns wnt us to die.

    7. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jbecauae yhey hte us.

    8. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is the way of their Republican kind.

    9. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Death is what they want.

    10. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Death us the wy of year kind

    11. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And data limits on ar&t keep us ignorant.

    12. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They killed
      My parents.

    13. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They e tithe I pattie of death or.

    14. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Death is what hey want for us all.

    15. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Death for ill is the way of there kind.

    16. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you mean their kind?

      They want us to die

    17. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that is the way of the Republicans.

    18. Re: The Reoublicans are going to be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is why they hate teachers.

      Why was this moderated down? It's true.

  8. GPS Jammer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Over reliance on any technology creates an Achilles Heel. Want to confuse ships? Jam or interfere with GPS. Isn't that how Iran snagged a drone?

  9. can do it with a computer by lorinc · · Score: 1

    I wonder how much this can be automated. Seriously, I bet it's fairly easy to program a software that takes a picture at night or of the sun and guess where you are.

    1. Re:can do it with a computer by gman003 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's been done - some nuclear missiles had star-based navigation systems for mid-course corrections, as did the SR-71.

      However, it's still a good idea to have people who can do it manually, because anything that will take out GPS has a good chance of taking out your computers as well. It doesn't even have to be a common thing - a dozen people on a ship crewed by five thousand is enough.

    2. Re:can do it with a computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's exactly how U2 spy plane (and SR71, etc.) navigated... computer snap a picture of the sky and figure out where the airplane was.... combined with a gyroscope for dead reckoning. GPS didn't exist and compass was useless when flying over poles.

      I'd be surprised if there isn't an app for it :-)

    3. Re:can do it with a computer by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      On a pitching, rocking ship in the middle of the sea, with a sky that may have cloud coverage so you don't have much choice in the stars that you can shoot? A picture of the sky tells you very little - you need the angle of the celestial object relative to the local horizon. A good human navigator might be able to shoot a few stars through a hole in 9/10ths cloud coverage and get a fix.

      Star-trackers work well in space because the platform is relatively stable and you don't have any clouds (usually). Apollo 13 had problems with its star tracker after the explosion because of a cloud of reflective debris around the ship. They had to do a manual burn sighting the Earth's terminator through the reticle.

      Not saying a computer couldn't be designed to do it, but getting a robust cel-nav system for sea vessels that can handle the noisy environment that is the sea and sky will be a challenge. Humans still beat computers in some things, this is one of them.

      --

      Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

      Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    4. Re:can do it with a computer by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      I would imagine that a small subset of it still taught in SERE school as well - finding your way at night when you are ERE'ing would be rather helpful, and it is almost guaranteed that you wouldn't have a GPS... or sextant, piles of charts, etc

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    5. Re:can do it with a computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      because anything that will take out GPS has a good chance of taking out your computers as well.

      If your computers are taken out on a modern ship, you have worse problems than your GPS not working. Are you planning on poking holes in the side and paddling the ship because I doubt most modern ships are going anywhere without their electronics.

    6. Re:can do it with a computer by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I think it started in the late 40s - well, the idea and tech. A quick(ish) check on Wikipedia has some cryptic information about the Snark. The Snark used astro-inertial guidance and is the earliest one that I know of and was able to find. According to Wikipedia, the project started in 1946 though I doubt the tech was quite ready at the time for the accuracy desired. Consider, also, at that time we were okay with bombing large areas and it wasn't until later, in Khrushchev's reign, that both sides of the Cold War decided we should limit ourselves to targeting military targets only.

      Some information can be found here:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      The related links are a bit sparse. I know I've seen a documentary, at least one, about this? Unfortunately, I can't remember the name. IIRC, even the Germans were looking at autonomous celestial navigation for their V2 rockets and for any that followed. I believe MIT was involved in the work, I'm positive that I've seen that posted somewhere but, for the life of me, that memory is long since gone. It also may not have been the celestial systems but I could have sworn it was.

      Anyhow, there's a link and you can dig on your own if you're curious.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    7. Re:can do it with a computer by KGIII · · Score: 1

      This is like the 8th wise comment that I've seen from the ACs tonight. Is there a full moon or something?

      I understand that they're all hardened and heavily segmented so it'd be pretty difficult to take them all out at once though you could probably take out a centralized monitoring area but I think they commonly have a secondary bridge, not in the superstructure, for just such eventualities.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    8. Re:can do it with a computer by Shinobi · · Score: 1

      Yeah, knowing the usual commenting on how easy it should be, because can do it, those geeks would probably implement it so that it'd require a 90% match of a clear sky, would be incapable of dealing with clouds, water or ice on the lens and all other such things that are a pain in the ass.

      Plenty of young people going into the military nowadays think that it's pointless to learn how to read a map or how to use a compass. Then they whine about how unfair it is when they are sent on an excercise where GPS is jammed, inside deep old growth forest, so they can't orientate themselves via direct observation of sunlight, moss growth etc. Another favourite, just to mess with them is to place them nearby high voltage lines, so their compasses occassionally freak out too :p

    9. Re:can do it with a computer by PPH · · Score: 1

      The cloud coverage is a valid point. But the rocking ship isn't that big a deal. With a sextant, you are trying to measure the elevation of a celestial body above the horizon. Both images are moving in unison relative to the ship so it's not that difficult to bring the star to the horizon. It is easy to do unless the rocking is so bad you can't keep the star in your field of view.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    10. Re:can do it with a computer by Shinobi · · Score: 2

      Don't forget water or ice on the lens etc

    11. Re:can do it with a computer by tomhath · · Score: 1

      Gosh, what did sailors do for thousands of years when all they had was a sextant?

      Learning how to navigate starts with understanding how and why a sextant works.

    12. Re:can do it with a computer by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 1

      But a lot of ships don't simply rock to and fro, especially when seas are bad. They pitch, roll, heave, and gyrate in all sorts of weird ways. And the angle is worthless if it isn't down to the nearest horizon (i.e. if your sextant is slightly tilted it is a bad sight). You need to orient quickly to local vertical and stay there, so you would need an inertial system to find the gravitational acceleration vector - on a frame that is pitching and bucking and accelerating in all sorts of crazy ways.

      And we also need to remember to code for Error 123: Star Not Found. If it is overcast (or even if merely foggy and you can't get a clean horizon), you are not going to be able to determine your position with cel-nav, period.

      --

      Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

      Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    13. Re:can do it with a computer by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 1

      Airliners and military aircraft up until the 1960s or so had sextant domes so the navigator could shoot stars during flights over the ocean. That was the only way back then.

      --

      Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

      Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    14. Re: can do it with a computer by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1

      Yes they do. In fact more than one. A secondary conn and even a third deep inside the ship.

    15. Re: can do it with a computer by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Allow me to introduce you to the ships gyro. Also referred to as a stable element.

      It's the reference plane the fire control systems utilize while plotting a firing solution for the ships guns.

      Some of the older manned directors also referenced them and kept the director perfectly stable even in rough seas. Was the best place to be in the event you and the pitching seas didn't get along :)

    16. Re: can do it with a computer by KGIII · · Score: 1

      That makes sense. The US Navy takes their shit serious. They're pretty good, all things considered. They are, bar none, the best on the planet. I'm not surprised to hear about a third but I knew I'd recalled hearing about a secondary. I think they'll be okay. That and, well, they're hardly ever just tooling around the ocean at random and all alone. They tend to be in groups.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    17. Re:can do it with a computer by blindseer · · Score: 1

      There's probably an app for that.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    18. Re:can do it with a computer by stridebird · · Score: 1

      The sextant hasn't been around that long, and is pretty useless without accurate timekeeping too. Accurate celestial navigation is about 200 years old. You also need an almanac, and it was only was possible to complile those data with developments in the telescope dating back only a couple of centuries. Before that, you didn't have much other than latitude measurements to go by (aside from general observation of lifeforms, swell patterns, cloud formations and so on). Before the 19th century, ocean navigation was most definitely an art and not a science.

    19. Re:can do it with a computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ships sink. More so in wartime. Some times thing break, more so in war times. Sometimes things are just wrong (advanced enemy compromises GPS).

      In the old days your had people who were hardcore. Bligh sailed 7,000km in a 20ft open boat with 18 others across open ocean with just a compass (after all things a mutiny). People were tougher then. Shackleton built a boat out of frozen seal blood and sailed 1000nm around from the Antarctic using his eyeballs as a compass.

      I would imagine most navies would like to think if a ship sank, their people would be the sort of make an impossible voyage on the back of a hollowed out shark skin than just die.

    20. Re:can do it with a computer by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      The thing that ought to amuse all of us is that they believe the GPS is trustworthy. I've spent a road trip getting regular laughs from looking at where the GPS thought I was--it was utterly convinced that it was in a boat or perhaps a submarine. I had no idea my car at the time was so capable!

      The worst part of this is that even your average modern GPS unit will do this to you. One of the things I will do when utterly bored is check to see where my phone thinks it is, which hasn't failed yet to be quite entertainingly off. (I'm still trying to figure out where one place it thinks I've been really is because I kind of want to go there, actually...)

    21. Re:can do it with a computer by mysidia · · Score: 1

      On a pitching, rocking ship in the middle of the sea, with a sky that may have cloud coverage so you don't have much choice in the stars that you can shoot?

      Why not leave the visual range, and use passive microwave, UV, IR, and radio wave sensors?

      The clouds mostly block visible light, but there is a much broader spectrum of particle emissions from the sun to earth than the naked eye can perceive.

    22. Re:can do it with a computer by stridebird · · Score: 1

      Frank Worseley's navigation of the James Caird from Elephant Island to South Georgia. This will forever be one of the most outstanding examples of Sextant navigation and seamanship in general.

      I am not sure the James Caird was made out of seal blood though, but near enough.

    23. Re:can do it with a computer by sphealey · · Score: 1

      The first model of the 747 (the 747-100) had a port in the cockpit roof with a fitting for a sextant. Apparently the port is still there in later models (part of the original design basis) but it is now used for an air outflow valve.

    24. Re: can do it with a computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HOLDING...GIMBALS COLD.

    25. Re:can do it with a computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Gosh, what did sailors do for thousands of years when all they had was a sextant?"

      The sextant is an 18th century instrument, before that was the astrolabe. Until the the marine chronometer was developed, also in the 18th century, latitude could be calculated with reasonable accuracy but longitude had to be estimated by dead reckoning.

      So what did the sailors do for thousands of years? Mostly kept land in sight especially since for most of those thousands of years there was no marine compass either.

    26. Re:can do it with a computer by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      They pitch, roll, heave, and gyrate in all sorts of weird ways.
      And how much exactly does a super carrier do that?
      Having heavy weather implies the sky is clouded. Being able to see the stars implies that the weather is fine and hence the sea is bearable.

      Your problem might be a problem on a yacht. Not on a ship.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    27. Re:can do it with a computer by Shinobi · · Score: 1

      "Having heavy weather implies the sky is clouded. Being able to see the stars implies that the weather is fine and hence the sea is bearable."

      Say what?!? You can CERTAINLY have bad sea conditions without even a single cloud in the sky, or only mildly overcast. Certain parts of the world are infamous for that, such as Bay of Biscay for example, or Cape Horn, and cause large tankers, that ride pretty low, to pitch, roll and otherwise make things uncomfortable. So yes, it's problem for ships too.

    28. Re:can do it with a computer by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I said: imply! I did not say: proof or automatic conclusion.
      Surely after a storm you have waves for days.
      Big ships roll so slowly that using a sextant is absolutely no problem at all: that was my point.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    29. Re:can do it with a computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they don't teach formal celestial nav in SERE (Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape) school. They do teach very basic stuff like how to find North with a watch, tree or just by looking - but the vast majority of military personnel who end up using SERE skills just don't happen to have a sextant or set of tables...

    30. Re:can do it with a computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's ... actually a really good idea, but I wonder how big the rig would have to be. Could it conceivably fit on a vessel smaller than an aircraft carrier?

    31. Re:can do it with a computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Bligh sailed 7,000km in a 20ft open boat with 18 others across open ocean with just a compass (after all things a mutiny)."

      Yet another mutiny - okay it was his first out of what 4 or 5 if you count his Australian problems

    32. Re:can do it with a computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Gosh, what did sailors do for thousands of years when all they had was a sextant?"

      Died, mostly

      Royal Navy losses during the entire Napolean Wars (>20 years) comes to 2-3000 in combat, 2-30000 accidents incl shipwrecks and 200.000 disease.

    33. Re:can do it with a computer by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Given a bit of reasonable hardware, I don't think it would be that hard. Provided the camera is sensitive enough to see stars, you could code something up on an iphone that works in mostly clear skies pretty quickly, and cloudy ones with a bit more work. A bit of user intervention to mark the horizon and maybe the sun or a few stars would make it even easier. I've looked into writing something like that to do auto locating and alignment on robotic telescopes. Most of the commercial ones that do it currently get their location from GPS.

      But the point of teaching celestial navigation is that you can navigate without using gadgets that require batteries.

    34. Re:can do it with a computer by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Samsung Galaxy?

      My friend had one of the ones that had GPS problems. It was pretty entertaining. Failing that, phones today seem to be pretty eerily accurate most (but not all) of the time.

    35. Re:can do it with a computer by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      You are incorrect. The sextant is over 300 years old and is just the most recent incarnation of the celestial sighting device. Various staff-type devices have been associated with ancient Greek and Egyptian ships and there are navigation instructions using the stars for direction finding in the Odyssey.

      The ability to easily determine your longitude is only about 250 years old, but latitude determination using polaris or meridian transits dates back to at least the ninth century when arab sailors used the kamal. Knowing your latitude is enourmously valuable: you simply sailed along your desired line of latitude until you made landfall.

    36. Re:can do it with a computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Germans did the selectial navigation probably to equip the america rocket A-10.

    37. Re:can do it with a computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a rather good british movie about the problem of Longitude. In 18th century John Harrison builds the marine chronometer.

      Observing the sun or stars would give you the latitude, but not the longitude unless done in conjunction with a clock that would keep time accurately at sea, and no such clock existed. After one too many maritime disasters due to navigational errors, the British Parliament set up a substantial prize for a way to find the longitude at sea. The film's main story is that of craftsman John Harrison: he built a clock that would do the job, what we would now call a marine chronometer. But the Board of Longitude was biased against this approach and claiming the prize was no simple matter.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ykl2RleVTy8

    38. Re:can do it with a computer by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      Nope, I've never owned any Samsung phones actually. I've owned Blackberries and currently own an LG--I may look at Blackberry again, eventually, since while I won't miss the OS one bit but the hardware...how can I not miss having reception where nobody else, even on the same network, had any?

      I'm pretty happy with both my previous and current phones' GPS, but really every single GPS device I've used--even borrowed ones--have had idiosyncrasies which ensured that I learned very well to only rely upon it when I'd never been in the area before or when what I really needed was to know how bad the traffic was/how long I should expect the trip to take. 'Most of the time' isn't quite good enough to rely upon it exclusively.

  10. Makes no sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, maybe the US would shut down GPS under some extreme necessity. But that wouldn't affect Glonass or Galileo or Beidou.

    "There is no backup" is clearly not true. Or, in other words, if terrorists have backup GNSS systems, why not the US Navy?

  11. Dumbing down of Humans by rmdingler · · Score: 2

    But is there really any point in knowing how to navigate by the stars in a world of GPS? "In the event that we had to go into a national emergency...

    National emergency?

    Just my 2 cents, but you should have to train a dog to mind you before you have a child, and you should be able to navigate by the stars prior to being allowed to use the GPS.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:Dumbing down of Humans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't want anything to do with dogs, ever. I have 4 children--so far so good.

    2. Re:Dumbing down of Humans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a student pilot once who i felt depended too heavily on GPS for navigation. He knew how to read charts & stuff... but he never actually used them in flight... always GPS.

      So one day during a cross country i snatched his GPS unit off the dash to simulate its failure... & said ok what now smart guy?

      He reached into his bag & pulled out a 2nd GPS unit.

      So its not like he didnt have a backup plan.

    3. Re:Dumbing down of Humans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just my 2 cents, but you should have to train a dog to mind you before you have a child, and you should be able to navigate by the stars prior to being allowed to use the GPS.

      And you should be able to prove your programs correct before you are allowed to use the internet.

  12. Makes sense by leathered · · Score: 1

    Even if they didn't shut down GPS in a conflict it's ridiculously easy to jam by the enemy and highly susceptible to EM disturbance if nukes are involved.

    --
    For all intensive porpoises your a bunch of rediculous loosers
  13. coast guard requirement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    My son is an officer on a Naval supply ship and his coast guard certification as a 3rd mate required extensive testing on both terrestrial and celestial navigation.
    Not sure what the difference can be with the Naval Academy. But lots of seaman are still being trained in the art.

    1. Re: coast guard requirement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He he you said seamen

    2. Re: coast guard requirement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No they didn't, you just read what you wanted to read. How revealing...

  14. USMMA never stopped teaching cel nav. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The U.S. Merchant Marine Academy never stopped teaching celestial navigation- their midshipman take an entire 3 or 4 credit COURSE of just this topic, not just the 2 weeks that USNA is adding. I wouldn't really call this adding celestial navigation back into the curriculum.

  15. We *need* a backup plan by blindseer · · Score: 2

    If the federal government keeps slicing away at our capability for space flight then at some point we might see Navstar GPS fail merely due to lack of maintenance. Ground based radio navigation has been losing support due to the success of Navstar and other GPS systems. Having the US military rely on foreign built navigation systems just sounds like an easy way for an enemy to add confusion in a battle.

    The nice thing about ground based radio navigation is that they are easy to maintain, no need for a rocket that can reach orbit. The bad thing about them is that they make easy targets. So if a nation can figure out how to take out Navstar then they can handicap the US military. In the absence of GPS and radio navigation beacons one would hope we'd still have enough people smart enough and knowledgeable enough to find other means to navigate.

    This doesn't necessarily mean celestial navigation is the answer but that is probably one of the most reliable and accurate means we have available outside of GPS. Any radio transmitter can be used as a radio navigation beacon, just so long as you know where that transmitter is located, and enough smarts to operate a radio. In fact radio transmitters were used in WWII as beacons for pilots flying from California to Hawaii. Normally radio silence was practiced on the islands so that the Japanese couldn't use them as a navigation aid either but getting bombers safely to the air base was seen as a priority, and therefore an exception to the rule.

    Using a commercial radio station as a navigation beacon did several things for the US in WWII. The radio station already existed, so no additional cost for the military. If you are going to transmit something then it may as well transmit music that is soothing to the flight crews as well as the general public. It also didn't broadcast that flights from the US mainland was underway, only that radio silence was lifted for some reason which could mean a lot of things. In modern times, during a real war, I expect creative aids to navigation to pop up like this. However, this isn't the 1940's. Any potential enemy we have today is going to have the technology to take out radio transmissions with greater ease than the Japanese Imperial Navy.

    --
    I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    1. Re:We *need* a backup plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We *had* a Backup Plan- LORAN, with all of its prefixes and suffixes. Killed off due to political pressure. Rather than just mothballing the old stations... Youtube has a bunch of videos showing the creative ways a 700' tower can be made to respond to Gravitational Pull.

      Europe is proceeding with eLORAN.
      (The US started up an Experimental eLORAN Station on New Jersey back in June.)

      That said, the hysterical tone on the Subject is a little weird; we have far more to worry about from a Bad Day on the Sun, than from somebody accurately throwing high-tech rocks. Satellites die all the time. 17 iridium Satellites have failed so far, including one due to a rather odd collision with another Satellite.
      No, the reason there should be Backups is simply because Shit Happens. I still have my now two useless Raytheon LORAN-C receivers, and a pretty good Heathkit MR-18 RDF. (One never knows...)
      I have two Sextants, both are Davis Mark 25. The Backup I bought for $40 at a Consignment store, the first one I paid list price, ~25 years back. Normally, I don't pay List, but the guy who was selling these included Classes, two nights a week, for six weeks.
      (Given that a Sextant is a basic Surveying device, they can be used to figure out how high things are, or flipped horizontally for Land-Based triangulation.)
      Well, Latitude easily taken care of, let's talk about easy Longitude. Harrison figured this out nearly three Centuries back; he designed Chronometers of increasing accuracy and decreasing size. (Critical parts were bi-mettalic, so dimensional changes with temperature cancelled out.) Greenwich being convenient, that's where Longitude Zero was.
      I also have one of those WWV "Atomic Clocks", which uses Batteries... A proper Chronometer is _wound_. And they aren't cheap. Many thousands of dollars.
      (Decent Rubidium Atomic Clocks are getting cheaper; ~$1500 for one that could be mounted on a Circuit Board, the last time I looked.)
      Determining Longitude without a Chronometer is considerably more difficult. Considerably.

      OK, who needs to worry:
      For whatever reason, GPS is down Worldwide, and eLoran is fried too, and you aren't on Land-
      *Airlines. At one time, special Sextants were made for planes, called "Bubble Sextants". But with a Compass, and Charts, doable, as always.
      *Naval Vessels. Well, they are getting their Sextants back, aren't they? Ditto Compasses and Charts. Paper Charts.
      *Air Forces. Screwed.
      *Merchant Marine. The Guy who taught our class Celestial taught also at the California Maritime Academy. It was his day job. They'll do OK.
      *Yachties. Even though most of now have some kind of GPS, it is deeply mistrusted. We remember how quickly our $1500 Raytheon LORANs became obsolete. For us, there is the ASA 107 Celestial Navigation Classes, a yardstick against which other Classes are measured, for better or worse. (A curious thing- this is all Classwork- you are on your own figuring out how to actually use a Sextant until ASA 117.)

    2. Re:We *need* a backup plan by blindseer · · Score: 1

      I agree with you on every point except that of "Air Forces". Having read plenty of history I know that the Allied Forces of WWII came up with several ingenious ways to navigate in war time. You even pointed out a couple in your assessment of the other users of GPS, use of charts, compass, and bubble sextants.

      While many of these are most convenient while in a larger aircraft, like a bomber or passenger plane, I've heard of systems that can work even in the confines of a single seat fighter. Examples of this are modified sextants that hang from the canopy, charts in a book strapped to a leg, along with the typical navigation aids common to all aircraft.

      Inertial navigation has become increasingly accurate. Even handheld devices can reach accuracies that can be used to navigate within a building. Getting something accurate enough for a bombing run, or get a fighter jet back home, should be nearly trivial.

      I'll also assume that military navigation could be brought up to speed quickly so that things like radio navigation by commercial radio transmitters would be viable, if only in "safe" territory. It's still useful to have such navigation in safe territory as it aids in logistics.

      I will agree with you on your other points. The loss of LORAN does reflect poorly on the powers that be. At a minimum they could have left them standing just in case they were needed in the future. They didn't even have to maintain them, just let them slowly rot. It's much easier to repair them than to build them up from nothing. Perhaps they know something we don't. I suspect not though.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
  16. Ship GPS can go out by danbuter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    On the 1991 cruise I was on when in the Navy, our ship's GPS went out. No way to fix it. We had to use compasses and star charts till we got to Pearl Harbor so it could be fixed. If the guys hadn't been trained for it, we'd have been screwed.

    1. Re:Ship GPS can go out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. In 1991 your ship (assuming you were actually in the US Navy) would have been using inertial navigation as its primary position source. GPS would have only been used as a secondary correction input. Hell, GPS wasn't even considered operationally ready until 1993; it's likely that even if your ship was using it in 1991, it was treated as a bit of a novelty and a toy. In fact, it's more likely that your ship was using LORAN at the time for secondary position input, not GPS. Anyways, your navigation department/division would have been doing periodic celestial fixes anyways, because let's face it, it's boring on a cruise and you have a ton of time on your hands. Loosing shipboard GPS at that time would have been barely inconvenient unless you were an ET and it was your job to fix it.

    2. Re:Ship GPS can go out by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Or you could have just used the radio and someone would have found you eventually. I don't think you'd have been screwed so much as annoyed and not doing a whole lot. It's not like there were pirates, German submarines, or Japanese battleships. What kind of ship where you on that wasn't part of group? I'm no expert or anything but I bet they'd have noticed you went missing and come to find you.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    3. Re:Ship GPS can go out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoken by someone who has no idea just how hard it is to find something in the ocean.

    4. Re:Ship GPS can go out by KGIII · · Score: 1

      They were finding stuff in the ocean back in WWII days with planes and little else. We've got triangulation and last points of contact. I think they'd be okay.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    5. Re:Ship GPS can go out by blindseer · · Score: 1

      Having talked to people that were on US Navy ships at about that time I was told that a common means of navigation was by land based radio navigation. One person described to me a rather large antenna array on the bow of the ship that could give the direction of a radio beacon. I was told that normally this was folded down so as to not interfere with the weapons but in a case of a need to get somewhere quickly they'd prop it up so they can get an accurate location and heading.

      Knowing what I do about radio navigation at a minimum one could get a directional antenna and point it to a radio source near your destination and, assuming the antenna was in line with the direction of travel, just point the ship in the direction of the strongest signal. With a ship at sea aiming for Hawaii I'd think that someone on the ship would know how to operate the directional antenna and know the frequency of a radio transmitter on the island. That radio source didn't have to be a dedicated radio navigation aid, just something with a consistently strong signal like an AM radio station.

      How far out to sea were you that nothing but GPS and star charts worked for you? I'd think that a couple of the communication guys would know enough about which stations were located where that you could navigate that way.

      Also, given the year you said you were on cruise I have to wonder if you are referring to Navstar GPS or one of it's predecessors, such as TRANSIT.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    6. Re:Ship GPS can go out by SimonInOz · · Score: 1

      In 1981 I sailed a small boat across the Atlantic (30' cat, took 22 days). GPS (civilian) did not exist [1996 was when it became useful and accurate], we used the sun, tables, and a sextant. I only shot the sun, not stars. Sight reduction is tedious, but not too bad with tables and perhaps a calculator. I used an HP41c - wonderful gadget.
      Even with a calculator, it is not especially quick, and what you get is a position line (LOP) [actually a large circle mapped onto the earth surface corresponding to a constant angle between the sun and the horizon, but it appears as a straight line 'coz it's big]. You have to shoot the sun again in few hours, and you get crossing lines, which have to be adjusted by your speed and direction.
      At night, you can shoot stars, but it's hard and I never did it. The ocean is big, and pretty empty, after all. But no matter what you do, you won't get a position much more accurate than a nautical mile. Maybe you can do better on a more stable large ship.

      So not instantaneous, not terribly accurate, and kinda tough if the conditions are rough. Which they often are.

      And you get no position if it's cloudy.

      But the sun has one major advantage over GPS.
      It's really, really hard to turn off (and if someone did, I think there might be other problems).

      --
      "Cats like plain crisps"
    7. Re:Ship GPS can go out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At 19 and 20 years years of age I was sailing on merchant ships and was a good navigator. None of the ships I was on had either LORAN or RADAR. The only time I ever saw RDF used was when I experimented with it once in the Gulf of Mexico. One problem with it is to find charts that have radios antenna marked, another is that it takes two people to use it, one to work the antenna and another to mark the ship's heading when the RDF bearing is taken. BTW the RDF we had worked by 'swinging' the bearing to locate a null, that is, the signal was at the lowest with the RDF antenna at right angles to the bearing to the station. The position I got was really poor and I never tried the RDF again.

      In the late 60's LORAN was unreliable in the South China sea, probably due to atmospheric refraction. When rendezvous with an aircraft carrier our navigator and the carrier's would compare their calculated positions which could differ considerably. Of course the carrier's position was the correct one.

    8. Re:Ship GPS can go out by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      As radio travels the line of sight, your approach only works if the sending antenna is above the horizon. (Wavelength that are reflected by the atmosphere are not helpful for "aiming" the ship at).

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    9. Re:Ship GPS can go out by danbuter · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what the exact name of the system was, I wasn't on the bridge. I do know it wasn't working, so they had to check positions via the stars every damn night. You shouldn't call bullshit when you don't know what you are talking about.

    10. Re:Ship GPS can go out by danbuter · · Score: 1

      We were in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, by ourselves, coming back from the Persian Gulf. I don't believe our ship had that antenna, it was an LST, and an old one, at that.

    11. Re:Ship GPS can go out by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I hear admirals LOVE it when when they have to rescue naval ships at sea because their gizmos broke. It's quite likely that the captain and some officers would have indeed been screwed. It's also more than possible that a ship without the ability to navigate will encounter a reef or shoal before someone comes to rescue it.

    12. Re:Ship GPS can go out by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I wonder how pissed they are when they have to send out one of those funny ships that sinks itself part way and then gives the big ship (even carriers!) a ride on it like a piggyback ride?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  17. Bowditch by ISoldat53 · · Score: 0

    Everything I ever needed to know I learned in Bowditch.

    1. Re:Bowditch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and Dutton's

    2. Re:Bowditch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything I ever needed to know I learned in Bowditch.

      Mod parent UP, UP, UP!

  18. Hard? No way! If you can do freshman math . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Celestial navigation is way cool. Anyone who meets the standards for admission to the Naval Academy can easily do this. This is basically simple trig. True, it is modified to account for the topography of a sphere, but otherwise the same. The tables merely contain the data to plug into the formulas. The critical part is learning to carefully read the sextant and record the time. That requires care and a pocketful of give-a-damns.

    1. Re:Hard? No way! If you can do freshman math . . . by Cornwallis · · Score: 1

      Yep. And it is fun. You can pick up a $20 sextant off Amazon to play with (although you'd be better off with a more serious instrument). Like typewriters and other analog tools it slows you down and makes you think.

    2. Re:Hard? No way! If you can do freshman math . . . by chipschap · · Score: 1

      Yep. And it is fun. You can pick up a $20 sextant off Amazon to play with (although you'd be better off with a more serious instrument). Like typewriters and other analog tools it slows you down and makes you think.

      The "makes you think" part is what's really important here. Thinking leads to understanding ... sounds pretty valuable to me.

    3. Re:Hard? No way! If you can do freshman math . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen on analog. That is why the slide rule is so awesome.. It operates in real time and shows you the rellationship between numbers, and illustrates logarithms in a beautiful useful way, not merely a textbook abstraction. I was lucky enough to be in the one of the last classes be taught the slide rule before the electronic calculator was required. To this day, when I use a calculator, i usually just enter the most significant digits of the operands and mentally place the decimal point in the result.

    4. Re:Hard? No way! If you can do freshman math . . . by stridebird · · Score: 1

      THIS thread, all the way back to the AC. You guys get it. Any slashdotter worthy of the name would get navigation in an afternoon. I spent two weeks on a boat crossing an ocean and in that time nailed every observation in the book: sun-run-suns, noon sights, compass checks, planetary observations, moon sights, 7-way star fixes. The calculations are straightforward, the only required input data that you can't work out by hand is the celestial ephemera. But even if the almanac went overboard, a sextant, the sun and my casio F-91W wristwatch ($15) would get me across an ocean to a landfall.

    5. Re:Hard? No way! If you can do freshman math . . . by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      You can find a good amount of information online--this is a good place to start--and yeah, a lot of its basic uses doesn't require much math, especially if you're mostly using it to check your dead reckoning work, which is always a good idea. Part of why people developed celestial navigation in the first place, and why it was so important, was because dead reckoning was not reliable enough; every so often you found yourself in places you didn't want to be, including 'Middle of the !@#$ Ocean' and if you were really lucky and had somebody aboard who knew celestial navigation you could at least figure out where to go to reach land before you died horribly.

    6. Re:Hard? No way! If you can do freshman math . . . by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Have some real fun. Make your own. THEN buy one off Amazon.

      http://solarscience.msfc.nasa....

    7. Re:Hard? No way! If you can do freshman math . . . by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      With polaris or the sun and a straight edge and a string (or your hand at arms length), you can make a reasonable landfall.

  19. From The Avengers by laurencetux · · Score: 1

    Is the Sun Coming up?? then put it on the LEFT!

    1. Re:From The Avengers by peragrin · · Score: 1

      Being off by just 5 degrees can put you hundreds of miles off course. Also 2/3 rds of the fleet is near or around the Indian ocean. Try looking at a map and see why it would be bad.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  20. do they carry sextants around? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am a big fan of teaching manual skills (no calculators until high-school, teaching Drafting 101 on paper, etc.), but I have to wonder celestial navigation is practical if they won't have the tools handy.

    1. Re:do they carry sextants around? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn straight they'll have the tools handy.

      If you are a recreational sailor then you should have at least one of these aboard for when the unthinkable happens.

      Even if you're stuck at sea in a liferaft with no means to propel yourself, just knowing where you are can have a remarkable impact on your morale. See this movie for a passable example.

      You can bet that any military vessel worth its salt has a locked box with at least one premium quality sextant, all the books, and a chronometer, all ready to go.

    2. Re:do they carry sextants around? by tomhath · · Score: 1

      Yes, all Navy ships carry sextants, accurate timepieces, and paper charts. You would be a fool to go out to sea without them.

    3. Re:do they carry sextants around? by Proudrooster · · Score: 1

      You can get a sextant at Harbor Freight for $20, $10 on sale. This is the Chinese military issue version.

    4. Re:do they carry sextants around? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Essex Brass" doesn't sound altogether very Chinese.

  21. Another part of the equation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Celestial navigation, depending on the method used (and there are various)........ requires a very accurate knowledge of what time it is at the instant an observation is taken. Before GPS we used the time signals from WWV and WWVH to know accurate time, a necessary part of the equation...and a necessary part of being able to get both accurate sights that would yield accurate latitude and longitude. Many years ago before the advent of accurate shipboard chronometers mariners used a technique called lunar distances to try to estimate longitude and an idea of time--- via measuring angles between the moon and other celestial bodies. A local apparent noon sight yields accurate latitude but longitude is tougher. Presumably along with the GPS being jammed or destroyed or non operational for whatever reason, the reception of the WWV signals would go away as well. That would necessitate an accurate time standard shipboard- one not tied to GPS reception. 20 years ago ships carried mechanical chronometers in gimballed cases that were synchronized to WWV daily and a rate sheet- how much error there was.....was recorded.

    I also subscribe to the comment about the necessity of being able to practice celestial navigation if need be. Just out of the classroom navigators arent going to be able to get decent sights for a while. Studies done years ago show that for any individual the first 500 sights are generally garbage for any number of reasons-- motion of the ship. mishandling or misreading the sextant, mis figuring the time at the point the sight is taken, misidentification of celestial bodies &c. So there is a lot to it-- however with a basic knowledge of spherical trig(one of the methods not using various tables), not much else is needed in the way of technology provided you know what time it is. Celestial navigation is an art as much as the practice of steps needed to identify and measure the altitude of a celestial body above the horizon, and translate the measurements into meaningful position information on a chart. Each sight of a body whether a star, planet, the moon or the sun, yields one line that goes on a chart. sights of 2 separate bodies yield 2 different lines- they are actually huge circles- circles of equal altitude- and where they cross is your position. A practicing celestial navigator will take a minimum of 3 and most times 5 sights of different celestial bodies to obtain a position. Takes an unobscured (not many clouds) sky and a defined horizon- so many sights are done just before sunrise and just after sunset. Its an interesting practice.

    1. Re:Another part of the equation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your comments about time synchronization are all spot on, yet overlook the simple fact that modern quartz crystal timepieces are cheap, common, and extremely precise.

      Yes, drift may become a problem after a year or so, but by this point you'd want to park the ship someplace and take a stroll on land.

    2. Re:Another part of the equation by tomhath · · Score: 1

      Even if you don't know the time you can still get home. Just navigate to the latitude you want and head east or west, you'll get there. That's how it was done for eons.

    3. Re:Another part of the equation by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Actually it wasn't ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:Another part of the equation by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      A millenium anyway: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Probably a few more before that without the use of formal instruments.

    5. Re:Another part of the equation by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      That does not fix the false claim of the parent that they sailed up or down to the appropriated latitude and then straight west or east :)

      Which they did not ... waste of time, you sail diagonal as good as you can and use the Kabal to make sure you stay on the latitude you desire.

      Also, it can be used much more tricky way (actually it is quite simple) to have a 'diagonal' course by default, no need to go to a defined latitude first.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    6. Re:Another part of the equation by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      You're really nitpicking. The important part is that you sail to a line of latitude and then sail along it until you get where you're going. If you want to hit an island, or you know your landfall (or transit) has to be precise because of reefs, shoals or other hazards, you're likely to make very sure you get on your parallel as quickly as possible. Also, sailing "in a diagonal" isn't quite as straightforward as it sounds when you're travelling long distances. Since the earth is curved, you need to sail in a curve as well, following a different compass heading each day.

      You might be particularly likely to head straight north or south if you were lost, as is implied in the OPs post, to minimize the amount of time you were sailing through unknown waters.

    7. Re:Another part of the equation by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      You're really nitpicking. The important part is that you sail to a line of latitude and then sail along it until you get where you're going.
      No, I'm not nitpicking.
      This is what wikipedia claims. And it is wrong. It is no difference ... "technically" ... if you first find your longitude and then go straight north or south. No one is doing that either.
      The tools is a good help to fix your latitude, but usually it was used to fix your distance towards light houses, or other visible lights at night.
      We actually have literature about how they where used, hence I know it was not a "go to the latitude" and then go east or west till you hit the target. I saw a movie about it over 30 years ago, amazing how much knowledge from "before the internet" makes it never to wikipedia ;D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  22. Exactly by Etherwalk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    On the 1991 cruise I was on when in the Navy, our ship's GPS went out. No way to fix it. We had to use compasses and star charts till we got to Pearl Harbor so it could be fixed. If the guys hadn't been trained for it, we'd have been screwed.

    Exactly. Tech can fail or be disabled, either deliberately or due to enemy action. Remember how Russia was testing their GPS jamming tech against the US a few years ago in the middle east, by providing it to one of the countries we fought? Similarly, Iran used GPS to bring down a drone. Our guys need to be able to get by without it and, for that matter, to confirm that the computer is right.

    It's not like we're requiring every enlisted man to know this stuff--but the officers on a ship of war should damn well know how to navigate by the stars if they have to.

    1. Re:Exactly by Etherwalk · · Score: 1

      either accidentally or due to enemy action.

      (Can Slashdot join the modern world and add an edit button?)

  23. Reasons for knowing by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 3, Informative

    First off you should never completely trust your computers. What happens if a software bug or a hardware problem occurs and says your 10 nautical miles west from where you really are? Not likely but still always good to check to make sure that your systems are running correctly.

    The other reason is what if something happens to your ship and you have to abandon it before a distress call could be sent. Quite possible in times of war. You would want to know how to locate where you are so you could paddle the raft in the right direction (if you had a map or knew the location of land) or had some form of communication.

    1. Re:Reasons for knowing by evilviper · · Score: 1

      What happens if a software bug or a hardware problem occurs and says your 10 nautical miles west from where you really are?

      Well, after your other two redundant systems flag the bad one, you just mark it for maintenance when you get back to shore.

      still always good to check to make sure that your systems are running correctly.

      That's great advice if there's absolutely no cost to the time and effort being wasted. Otherwise, it's pretty foolish.

      It's pretty damn easy to check that GPS is working... Check that everything on the maps lines-up while you're in port. As you are sailing away, make sure there were no sudden jumps in your GPS fixes, particularly ones that don't match-up with the inertial tracking.

      A guy looking up at the stars isn't really going to be that accurate, and it would be a soul-crushing job to work for week after week, to just keep coming up with the answer that: "Yep, the GPS is always accurate."

      what if something happens to your ship and you have to abandon it

      Then one of the people in the raft pulls the GPS unit out of the supplies bag, or his pocket...

      Your scenario is insane... No GPS, but somehow the one trained navigator on the ship got into your life-raft, and remembered to bring a local map and his sextant along? Those silly myths should be dismissed, not encouraged.

      You would want to know how to locate where you are so you could paddle the raft in the right direction

      Accurate navigation is only important when you want to hit a tiny target... That's not happening in a life-raft. Generally you float aimlessly until someone rescues you, or you wash-up ashore. If you're damn lucky you'll realize there's a continent just a short distance to the north/south/east/west of you, and head in that general direction. You'll consume twice as much food and water in the effort to paddle somewhere. You'll make no headway against the wind and currents, or else will add barely any more speed. It will consume time better spent trying to fish. And if you're not very close to land, you simply can't make it before your supplies run out anyhow.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    2. Re: Reasons for knowing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.google.hr/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://oneminuteastronomer.com/860/measuring-sky/&ved=0CEIQFjAKahUKEwiZjJautcvIAhVLvRQKHTzrCtE&usg=AFQjCNEKeLug-NJpq0WcgFHqGq5wXiwN-w
      You might not have gps but you will probably have at least one person with eyes and a hand.

    3. Re:Reasons for knowing by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      It's pretty damn easy to check that GPS is working... Check that everything on the maps lines-up while you're in port. As you are sailing away, make sure there were no sudden jumps in your GPS fixes, particularly ones that don't match-up with the inertial tracking.

      You clearly never made a sailing course.

      Please give advice only about stuff you know about.

      Your scenario is insane... No GPS, but somehow the one trained navigator on the ship got into your life-raft, and remembered to bring a local map and his sextant along? Those silly myths should be dismissed, not encouraged.
      It is pretty hard to get into a life boat and not have a sextant and maps. They are stored in the craft ... sigh.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:Reasons for knowing by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Please give advice only about stuff you know about.

      Okay. I'm an engineer for a major company in GPS navigation & guidance. It's true I'm usually doing this stuff in relation to automobiles, not sailboats, but we're talking about military vessels, not sailing, anyhow.

      It is pretty hard to get into a life boat and not have a sextant and maps. They are stored in the craft

      And so is a handheld GPS... I was asking the parent to explain how the GPS unit got lost, but the sextant (and a trained navigator) did not.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    5. Re:Reasons for knowing by cynyr · · Score: 1

      I wonder how well a modern large ship (air craft carrier, or battle ship, or the like) runs without it's main and backup generators? how about after a nuclear blast fires most/all of the electronics on board? If you can still run the main engine, and control the ships direction, you could at the very least then limp to with-in sight of a port, and hopefully within tug distance of the port, and get repaired.

      Is it likely that a smaller class of ships could have a similar issue? Can run the main engine, all steering is hydraulic, but the electronics are fried or don't have power? Paper charts and hand calcs generally still work then and again we are talking about getting the boat within visual sight of the nearest port so you can towed in for repairs, not actually trying to hold some sort of precise fixed position for some sort of mission objective.

      Anyways, you are correct, the lifeboat situation is a strawman at best.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
  24. Bah! GPS! Give me Astro-Inertial Navigation System by Proudrooster · · Score: 1

    The SR-71 had astro internal navigation long before GPS. This system required quite a bit of calibration at pre-flight, but with the sensors we have available today (gyros, accelerometers), this could easily be added to ships. This system can work day or night as well. It is pretty ingenious. There are several commercially available versions which could easily be incorporated into ships or drones. CelNav is a great exercise in math, but if your ship gets hit with an EMP, knowing your location won't do much good since you won't be able to move the ship.

  25. TACAMO by braindrainbahrain · · Score: 1

    Decades ago, I worked in the TACAMO aircraft, the older KC-130 version. TACAMO was a US Navy aircraft charged with maintaining communications with nuclear submarines in the event of nuclear war. The aircraft had a small "sunroof" and it's sole purpose was to allow the navigator to see the sun and stars so he could use the sextant that was part of the issued equipment. The idea was that there would be no radio navigation aids left when their mission was over and they had to return to ... well anywhere they could land since the survival of any airbase was not guaranteed.

  26. Parallet to hiking w/ map and compass by Morpeth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As an avid backpacker, I'm amazed how often recent enthusiasts I've come across have little or zero/map and compass skills. Sure, your GPS on your iPhone and hiking app are great, IF you have power, and if it's accurate. But if you lose it, break it, battery dies, then what?

    I still travel with Trails Illustrated maps (or other topo maps) and a compass whenever I'm in the backcountry.

    I think the Naval Academy made the right decision.

    --

    'The unexamined life is not worth living' - Socrates
    1. Re:Parallet to hiking w/ map and compass by Etherwalk · · Score: 1

      As an avid backpacker, I'm amazed how often recent enthusiasts I've come across have little or zero/map and compass skills. Sure, your GPS on your iPhone and hiking app are great, IF you have power, and if it's accurate. But if you lose it, break it, battery dies, then what?

      I still travel with Trails Illustrated maps (or other topo maps) and a compass whenever I'm in the backcountry.

      I think the Naval Academy made the right decision.

      Trails are blazed or marked most of the time unless you get pretty far off the beaten path. It's pretty rare to see someone *need* to use a compass these days outside of an orienteering course, even if they don't have GPS, so long as they have a map of their area.

    2. Re:Parallet to hiking w/ map and compass by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Funny

      Sure, your GPS on your iPhone and hiking app are great, IF you have power, and if it's accurate. But if you lose it, break it, battery dies, then what?

      You keep walking along the trail until you hit the next Starbucks.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Parallet to hiking w/ map and compass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen multiple campers in the middle of nowhere off blazed trails more times than I can county and my family and I have routinely caught people from the coasts trespassing on their property because it is "prettier" than the places there are or they just walked "where nature took them" and counted on their GPS to show them the way back out.

      Even though people don't "need" to use maps or the like, maybe they should. Idiots get themselves lost all the time.

      P.S. If I hear one more yuppy say, "Can you really own land?" while kicking them off of mine, I might make that kicking a little more literal.

  27. 'National Emergency' - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We are reinstating the teaching of celestial navigation because we are preparing for a nuclear war."

    Fixed that for you.

  28. Let me translate this for you by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1

    "In the event that we had to go into a national emergency, we would probably have to shut the GPS down because it can be used by potential enemies," says retired Navy Capt. Terry Carraway."

    When the shit hits the fan against a capable enemy ( cough. . . China . . . cough ) the first thing they're going to do is target all satellites considered military assets. GPS, Sigint and recon systems will be the first to go down.

    If you, or your weapons, rely too heavily on such things, the War will be a very short one.

    There is a very good reason modern weapons systems still have alternate guidance systems. In a GPS denied environment, they would be useless without them.

    1. Re:Let me translate this for you by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, it would be a good exercise for the whole GPS system to go offline ever once in awhile, maybe once a month, to keep people alert. It would be an excellent thing for navigation as a whole, particularly civillian navigation, to be forced to not be entirely dependent on those birds in the sky. I used computer mapping to get around long before I got a GPS unit. Back when GPS was much more expensive than now, there were plenty of resources to have map/trip software on your PC. Perhaps if everybody didn't rely on GPS all the time for everything, location beaconing systems would be put into place.

      I can't imagine the mess that 'self driving cars' could turn into if they're entirely dependent on GPS for navigation.

  29. will they allow pocket calculators? by softcoder · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When I was learning Celestial Navigation, there were two sets of 'Almanacs' we had to use. One was the Nautical Almanac which gave the positions of the stars, the Sun and the Moon for each minute of each day of the year. These were issued every year by some National Observatory. The other set was just a cookbook of spherical trigonometry. Obviously you can program any modern calculator with the appropriate trig formulas so the Midshipmen would not have to waste time looking up those numbers in the books. I am pretty sure that with modern memory you could put the entire almanac for the year on a USB stick, and so you would not need to look up those numbers either. Add the two together and you can have a rugged, solar powered device that can do the calculations for you. Now all you need to do is get out your sextant and clock, take the sights, plug in the time, the readings and the corrections, and let the pocket calculator do the grunt work.
    pgmer6809

    1. Re:will they allow pocket calculators? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Celestial Navigation Calculators have been around a long time. Hell, I saw this kind of Software running on HP-41s back in the '80's.
      Pre-programmed ones are still available, including all the tables:
      http://www.globalmarinenet.com/product/starpilot-ti-89/

      The trend these days is iThingies. The ones with built-in GPS may not even need an external Chronometer, but may play "The Wreck Of The Edmund Fitzgerald" if you can't even resolve the right Hemisphere:
      http://blog.francis-fustier.fr/en/celestial-le-point-astro-sur-iphone-et-ipad-2/

    2. Re:will they allow pocket calculators? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They shouldn't.

      If we're talking fall-back modes then paper and pencil it is. Why have a fall back mode that doesn't rely on computers, but only teach people how to use it with pocket computers? Makes no fucking sense, but I wouldn't put it past the armed forces. I've seen more absurd things due to the left hand not knowing who the right hand is doing.

    3. Re:will they allow pocket calculators? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The military likes its books and charts too much to change the way it does things.

      When I was learning to calculate fallout ranges and radiation decay (to determine whether or not an area was safe to enter H hours after detonation of Y yield) we were required to use a particular set of formulas & charts with a specially-made aid akin to a slide rule. The process was was cumbersome to me, so I went back to the formulas they provided and tried to come up with a single equation that I could solve to find the answers more quickly. After several variations I couldn't get my equation(s) to match the answers in the book, so I took it all to the instructor to see where my math was off. He told me my first equation was spot-on in terms of real-world values. Apparently the military process came about because the math I came up with was considered too difficult at the time for everyday use so the military adopted a less-correct-but-easier-to-teach method.

  30. Makes good sense by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    This isx utterly retarded. Pilots learn to use analog instruments, I'm pretty sure the navy has enough back ups. Just seriously, get in the sea

    http://breakingdefense.com/201...

    The last few generations have come to rely on technology. If the tech breaks, YOU are fucked. The boys and girls who understand physics, and have studied the ancient arts are a lot less fucked, so they might survive to fuck each other.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    1. Re:Makes good sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is why I thought the original proposal for Rambo 4 (or one of those) was so fascinating. Basically, the military connects Rambo with a modern SEAL unit or the like, but they get hit by an EMP or something so their gear stops working, they then have to rely on Rambo's old methods to get the mission done. But I think one reason that pitch didn't get off the ground is that it would be too difficult to get military support from the Pentagon, as it would be too easy to make the SEAL people look like dufusses due to their overdependance on technology.

  31. As a former naval officer... by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Celestial navigation was taught in our Naval Science Navigation course. As naval bridge officers, we were required to learn celestial navigation primarily as tradition and to have a working understanding of the mechanics of the process. That being said, one must know where the ship is at all times. Today, we rely on GPS, inertial navigation systems and the gyroscopic compass (as opposed to a magnetic compass). There have been times when we lost GPS or LORAN C while at sea. We did experience loss of the gyroscopic compass in the middle of ocean and our ship didn't have INS. You have a mission to carry out and that entails safely navigating your vessel.

    Basic skills such as dead reckoning and visual position fixes are used when near land. At sea, with no landmarks, knowing where you is just as important. Case in point is that there is an underwater mountain in the Pacific that ships still manage to hit. Avoiding those things is pretty important. Murphy's law will ensure that your ship fill find the underwater mountain or shoal waters if you aren't prepared.

    Do navigators take celestial fixes every night the skies are clear? No. They do it from time to time to keep the traditions alive. And, should the skills ever be needed, they will have them. The calculations are tedius and no where as accurate as GPS fix. But, it's an interesting exercise and a time honored tradition.

  32. Backup to GPS is great but just use computers by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    My mostly ignorant opinion manually filling out forms and digging thru sight reduction tables is a pointless exercise.

    I think a backup for GPS is worthwhile but all people really need is some experience using a sextant and reasonable ability to quickly spot nav stars and input measurements into a computer. Alternatly use a star nav system that will automatically and accurately compute your position based on image capture of the sky.

    No matter what you'll still need an accurate clock to get a fix so there is still some reliance on technology which constrains the cyber/attack/disaster scenario one is able to dream up as justification.

    1. Re:Backup to GPS is great but just use computers by mysidia · · Score: 1

      input measurements into a computer.

      Computers break or become unavailable due to loss of power, moisture ingress, or due to being hit with an EMP

      Computers are also not very effective for navigating life rafts, when there are no batteries to power the computer.

    2. Re:Backup to GPS is great but just use computers by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      It depends on who and how smart the enemy is. Can they do a lot of anti-satellite missile above the area of interest? Got a fifth column or special forces in surrounding nations?
      The next big worry for most modern navy planners is what is carried deep into the modern ship in terms of consumer grade crew electronics.
      Was the ship designed to be some clean intranet where every internal computer command is considered as quickly as possible with less consideration on origin and security? Is the ship 'running' on parts of common commercial consumer operating systems to make it more easy to find contractors to 'fix' and 'upgrade' back in port?
      With every patrol the number, capacity and power of cheap consumer grade electronics grows. Different navy commands around the world understand the need to enforce a total ban, others have to consider crew retention, how happy the crew is over the weeks. The need to allow outside devices packed with images, videos, music into even the most secure areas without comment is a fun issue. Where did the file come from, what extra code may have been pushed onto any device "just" playing music?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:Backup to GPS is great but just use computers by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      No matter what you'll still need an accurate clock to get a fix so there is still some reliance on technology
      No, you don't need a clock. It is helpful but not needed. We are talking about celestial navigation not using the sun alone, but multiple stars.
      As soon as you have figured where the lines cut, you have place and (local) time.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:Backup to GPS is great but just use computers by cynyr · · Score: 1

      life rafts have charts, sextants, and nautical almanacs in them? Good to know.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    5. Re:Backup to GPS is great but just use computers by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Computers break or become unavailable due to loss of power, moisture ingress, or due to being hit with an EMP

      Computers are also not very effective for navigating life rafts, when there are no batteries to power the computer.

      The computer can be a wristwatch, an ipod or a solar powered calculator. There is no reason a couple AA batteries could not power such a computer for years and no reason computer would not be suitably rated for conditions (e.g. water resistant)

      It takes nothing to do the required calculations. You can store them in a faraday cage (oven) if you want. Doomsday scenarios just don't work.

    6. Re:Backup to GPS is great but just use computers by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      No, you don't need a clock. It is helpful but not needed. We are talking about celestial navigation not using the sun alone, but multiple stars.
      As soon as you have figured where the lines cut, you have place and (local) time.

      No clue what you are talking about. The only way I know how to do this is lunar distance which is not what you describe, really sucks and still requires a clock to track of deltas. Care to provide a citation?

    7. Re:Backup to GPS is great but just use computers by mysidia · · Score: 1

      You can store them in a faraday cage (oven) if you want. Doomsday scenarios just don't work.

      The device won't be very effective and usable if it's locked away in a faraday cage.

      The military are the folks who need to be able to respond to situations like that: EMPs, and quite possibly multiple successive EMPs.

      You might consider it a doomsday scenario, but these entities charged with the defense of the US still need to have a workable plan for responding to them and continuing operations.

    8. Re:Backup to GPS is great but just use computers by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      You use the roughly 500 brightest stars on the sky.
      Measure angels of them above the horizon.
      Look up the tables in an almanac(h) and draw the circles (circles of same angle above the horizon) on your map, where those circles "intersect", you are.

      By defining which star to watch at you narrow down your time. Local time is usually accurate, not really sure - you made me thinking - if you indeed can figure GMT with that. I thought you could, but meanwhile I'm not so sure.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  33. Accuracy ???? by macpacheco · · Score: 1

    Military GPS accuracy = 0.001 nm (a few yards).
    Inertial accuracy = 0.1 nm / hour degradation
    Celestial navigation accuracy = hundred nm
    So unless GPS is gone for days, inertial is still better
    That's a result of USA getting rid of LORAN which before GPS was the primary update source for inertial systems, and after GPS was fully operational switched to backup.
    Celestial navigation is pretty much strictly a means to getting to the nearest port. Very limited usage for combat operations.

    1. Re:Accuracy ???? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Military GPS accuracy = 0.001 nm (a few yards).

      There is no difference between "military" and "consumer/civilian" GPS. The accuracy and everything else is the same.
      However in times of crisis the military scrambles the GPS signal (in a way that they can revert the distortion but civilians and enemies get a wrong coordinate)

      Also your numbers are way of. GPS is accurate to a hand span ...

      Celestial navigation accuracy = hundred nm
      That is complete nonsense. Everyone with a bit practicing under good conditions manages a nautical mile and if you are fast and good you do it on 1/10th of that.

      Stuff like LORAN can be used by everyone. Even the enemy ... and you can not prevent him from using *YOUR* LORAN.

      Very limited usage for combat operations.
      Also complete nonsense. The only systems "under combat" that might need GPS are missile guiding systems (Tomahawl etc.) everything else is done via sight, surprise, or radar. I neither need your nor my location to fire a heat or radar guided missile at you.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    2. Re:Accuracy ???? by macpacheco · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Civilian GPS is single frequency.
      Military GPS is dual frequency L1/L2 P(Y) signals.
      Civilian GPS use a hack called semi codeless to do iono corrections without a second civilian signal.
      L2C is still not even IOC status. It should take another decade until there are a normal 30 operational L2C sats.
      The other advantage of two full military GPS bands is if one is jammed and the other isn't (unlikely but possible), then you can still get a fix in the 10 meter range.

      Just because intentional degradation of L1 C/A is gone doesn't make it all the same.

      Tomahawk range is hundreds of nm.
      Perhaps you're talking about harpoon and other sea attack weapons, if I recall harpoon top range is 55nm, beyond line of sight for a radar fix.

      Modern sea war needs accuracy in the 0.1nm range. 10nm is a very degraded mode fighting.

      But continuous enhancements to INS should allow for a whole week without GPS while maintaining a 1 nm error.

    3. Re:Accuracy ???? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Very limited usage for combat operations.

      And yet blue water navies managed to fight wars for centuries before the development of GPS, INS, or anything along those lines.

      GPS was designed for targeting nukes to allow for first-strike capability. No more, no less. Navigation was a happy secondary use.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    4. Re:Accuracy ???? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      No, I'm talking about Tomahawk.

      Why should I talk about a close range weapon when we are discussing GPS?

      So how exactly do you think a 'Harpoon' missile suffers if GPS is not available?

      http://www.navipedia.net/index...

      Again: there is no difference between military or civilian GPS, there is only 'GPS' ... how many bands my receiver is using is between me, the vendor, and my receiver. Facepalm.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    5. Re:Accuracy ???? by macpacheco · · Score: 1

      Long distance targeting usually involves relaying target coordinates between sensor platforms like a destroyer and its chopper, a carrier strike group and awacs radar aircraft. Coordinate grids are used.

      The less accurate is your determination of where you are in the grid, the less accurate is your targeting.
      Launching a sea attack against a target 50nm away usually involves telling the harpoon/whatever what bearing to fly at and how long until homing radar goes active. You want to delay activating the homing radar as long as possible to avoid alerting your enemy.
      So if your coordinates might be 10nm off vs 0.1nm off you might be forced to set your weapon to go active too soon, allowing your energy to shoot it down.
      Modern sea-to-sea battles involve swarm of weapons, cause your typical high tech enemy has the means to shoot at least a few incoming missiles down.

      So unless you're fighting within gun range, and alone, having something ideally that gives you accurate positioning within .1nm is very important, with many shades of gray all the way to dozens of nm errors.

      Its not by chance that GPS is a FORCE MULTIPLIER. Having no GPS means your force looses effectiveness.

    6. Re:Accuracy ???? by macpacheco · · Score: 1

      Wrong. While GPS is very useful for long range strikes. Nuclear weapons are the least dependent on GPS, as they have substantial blast radius.
      Its conventional long range weapons that need GPS the most.
      Some attack weapons like tomahawk has systems that recognize landmarks and update its positioning accordingly. But ballistic weapons different.
      Radar guided weapons also different.

      GPS is a FORCE MULTIPLIER. Not having GPS or some similar alternative means your force lost its multiplying edge. Doesn't mean you must give up and go home, but it will be less effective in many subtle ways for us civilians, but very much in the mind of captains of the ships on both sides. One side having GPS/equivalent vs the other side not having IS significant.

    7. Re:Accuracy ???? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      More or less correct.

      And as you realized your self: no GPS involved.

      Thank you, that was easy.

      Except:
      Its not by chance that GPS is a FORCE MULTIPLIER. Having no GPS means your force looses effectiveness.
      You should have spared yourself this last sentence ;D

      Grid coordinates don't use GPS. If I know "where" the targetis, I have ist Grid coordinates. No GPS needed either,

      Your whole Argument makes no sense: did you ever figure how Long a nm is and what 0.1nm is? Basically all ships smaller than a carrier are shorter than 0.1nm.

      So why do you use such distances as argument, when GPS is as accurate as 3 inches? (even better often)

      Finally: if you fire at extreme ranges, lets say 100km (roughly 55nm) the Missile needs roughly 7 minutes to reach the target. Assuming the target is aware of the battle situaton and moves rather fast it will likely travel with ~30kn. In seven minutes the target will move 6.5km (3.6nm or 4 land miles).

      You see: neither for the shooting nor for finding nor for hitting GPS is in any way useful or needed. If at all the Harpoon can track ist own position via GPS, how useful that may be.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    8. Re:Accuracy ???? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Nope. Navstar was designed to allow for sub-launched nukes to hit enemy nuke sites, from around the planet. You need rapid, precise strikes to eliminate enemy launch capability.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  34. I've got some bad news for you guys. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But potential enemies can use celestial navigation too. All you need is an accurate clock, a sextant, and a few star charts. They used to use it long before universal education and computers. I'm sure they'll find it easier now with better education and calculators (and computerised star charts).

  35. Doing stuff with your hands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One very good reason to learn celestial navigation is that it teaches you a lot about errors, and how they are always present: it teaches you this emotionally, rather than as a piece of theory.

  36. Out of reality and into highschool-physics-land? by ridley4 · · Score: 1

    Wow, you found mathematically perfect lenses that do not have any surface imperfections?

    A manufacturer that can guarantee zero alignment error (even down to the nanoradian!), and a crack team that can design for absolutely no thermal expansion/contraction problems?

    A lens form for vanishingly-near-zero aberration (Certainly, someone of your intellectual caliber would, after all, know lasers have variations from their stated value due to manufacturing flaws), and constructed from a material that has near perfect transmittance in the given wavelength of laser?

    Please, do tell me how you will manage to correct for the small but nonzero amount of atmosphere at high altitude, which would also introduce diffraction that would have to be corrected for in real time to hit the target with that 'microns wide' beam while also attenuating the amount of light from scattering and absorption.

    I'd also love your opinion on spacecraft thermal management, and how you'll put this umpteen-kilowatt laser in orbit and fire it without melting the laser discharge tube, the metal holding the tube, the optics focusing the beam onto a microns-thin point that'll put even more thermal stress on the spacecraft's optics than the target's own, and also how you'll fire it without melting the rest of the spacecraft. Furthermore, I'd like to hear how this thermal management solution, laser, optics package, and spacecraft bus will be small and light enough to fit on a small, lightweight military booster that can be launched on a moment's notice without providing warning to enemy state actors to attract cruise missiles or other ballistic bombardment.

    Please try to keep up, here. I'm genuinely curious.

  37. afaik by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    on subs it was still required, the argument is this, it was no more or less reliable than gps or a very good gyro system, the oceans are pretty unforgiving yet they sell fish boats and crappyjobs.com as the greatest money makers ever, celestial is very very dependent on weather patterns bigtime, that was the argument knowing your north south east and west blindfolded is far more valuable it forever lets you for god or man end up some place that doesnt suck after you get past the camps and the ideology and bars.

  38. Re:Out of reality and into highschool-physics-land by lgw · · Score: 1

    Wow, you found mathematically perfect lenses that do not have any surface imperfections?

    Old tech, actually. Spy sat use lenses that change dynamically to compensate for the atmosphere, turbulence and all, in realtime. The same tech works fine for laser weaponry, and was part of the Airborne Laser plan. Merely being a good lens in a vacuum is easy by comparison. I suspect this isn't the limiting factor in hitting a satellite 20 km away with a laser - it's payload cost. I'd bet it's cheaper to get a payload to GEO than build a laser weapon capable of hitting a target like that with it's onboard guidance. The problems may all be solved, but's different from solved cheaply.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  39. Re:Out of reality and into highschool-physics-land by ridley4 · · Score: 2

    It's worth noting adaptive optics for a camera isn't the same as trying to focus a laser beam onto a tiny point thousands of kilometers away. The shape of the earth's atmosphere is somewhat forgiving anyways, from outside-looking-in. It refracts light to a point instead of diffracting outward, for one thing. Then, there's the matter of just looking at light bounced off the sun instead of trying to take a laser designed to melt things. Here, you have the problem of trying to focusing your infrared doom beam onto a point using onboard optics, without melting things where you don't want them melted. ie: your onboard optics.

  40. Re:Out of reality and into highschool-physics-land by ridley4 · · Score: 1

    Trying to focus your infrared doom beam, even.

  41. Re:Out of reality and into highschool-physics-land by lgw · · Score: 1

    The ABL project apparently solve this well enough for in-atmosphere to in-atmosphere as considerable distance, for the specific problem of focusing laser weaponry. Everything's classified of course so I can't say for sure.

    A focusing lens in a vacuum for a mere 20km just isn't that hard of a problem. Other problems will dominate, including finding the target in the first place if it's a stealth military sat and not a telecom sat. I rather suspect you could build a ground-based laser to take out a telecom sat, but I think we'd know if anyone had, so that orbit seems reasonably safe for now, short of nukes (which of course would get used in a real war, rendering this whole discussion moot).

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  42. They stopped? by DirtyAmish · · Score: 2

    I'm surprised they even stopped. I mean, common sense would tell you that electronics can fail for one reason or another and you should have a backup. (I have backups for everything) I assume they don't teach Morse code either. I mean, don't spend an entire semester on these things, but at least the basics or a crash course.

  43. LORAN by Mr+44 · · Score: 1

    Yes, that system was called LORAN, and we shut it down a few years back to "save money":

  44. Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Similarly, US Navy SEALs land navigate in Afghanistan with magnetic compasses because GPS doesn't work in valleys there.

    In any real conflict with China or Russia the GPS network will be disabled in less than an hour.

  45. time keeper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    don't they need good clocksto determine longitude ?
    pls tell me they don't use gps clocks for the celestial navigation !!!

  46. And when the GPS satellites fail? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Having manual backup skills that allow you to survive is pretty damn important. I would think doubly so if you are in charge of massive military weapon systems like naval vessels.

    This is a good decision. You can't blindly depend on computers and GPS, because if I was the enemy, those are the first systems I would target, either through hacking the GPS network, or by using EMP to knock out your receivers (and both scenarios are very plausible for any foe the US would be truly threatened by).