Slashdot Mirror


Discrepancy Detected In GPS Time

jones_supa writes that on Tuesday, 26th January, Aalto University's Metsähovi observatory located in Kirkkonummi, Finland, detected a rare anomaly in time reported by the GPS system (Google translation). The automatic monitoring system of a hydrogen maser atomic clock triggered an alarm which reported a deviation of 13.7 microseconds. While this is tiny, it is a sign of a problem somewhere, and does not exclude the possibility of larger timekeeping problems happening. The specific source of the problem is not known, but candidates are a faulty GPS satellite or an atomic clock placed in one. Particle flare-up from sun is unlikely, as the observatory has currently not detected unusually high activity from sun.

187 comments

  1. Faulty sat? No problem... by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

    ...disregard it if it continues to exhibit faulty timing.

    'course, there really should be a way to correct time in a GPS satellite, if only to avoid making them completely disposable (then again, maybe there is a mechanism to correct/self-diagnose timing issues on-board? One would think/hope so...)

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by chuckymonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think they have to be updated pretty much constantly. Their orbits aren't perfect and they have to be adjusted for relativity in their orbits.

      --
      "Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes."-Tycho
    2. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by buchner.johannes · · Score: 1

      ...disregard it if it continues to exhibit faulty timing.

      Sure, you just have to update the configuration of all GPS devices on earth... it is more realistic to turn it off.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    3. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Strider- · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually GPS receivers on earth are in a constant state of being updated. Part of the transmission from the satellite includes a continuous update of the orbital data for the GPS constellation, and other related data. Also, in North America, the WAAS system downlinks atmospheric correction data in real-time so that the GPS receiver can compensate for changes in the ionosphere.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
    4. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Well there are corrections that are broadcast from the satellites. If you have a GPS that allows a user to upload a new almanac manually you can get them here instead of waiting for the over the air update. Also there is the WAAS system that broadcasts corrections that take some of the error out of the system. Also this is a huge error, as in off by kilometers off. That said I don't think either of those would be able to correct for something like this. A time off by 13 milliseconds means position could be off by a couple of miles.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    5. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by PRMan · · Score: 4, Informative

      As someone who works in GPS software, you see these kinds of off-by-miles readings from time to time. If it was one time and not constant, we already have software in place to ignore the anomalous reading.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    6. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The time unit used was microseconds, not milliseconds. No one in their right mind would ever accept a 13 millisecond discrepancy.

    7. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Obfuscant · · Score: 5, Informative
      I'll expand on that a bit. The orbital data is called the ephemeris, and it takes (or used to take when I had to deal with such things) about ten minutes to download. This is a mandatory bit of information for high accuracy GPS since the actual location of the space vehicles (SV) have to be known with high accuracy.

      The status of each SV is also part of the datastream, and all it takes to "turn off" an errant SV is to set the flag in the data stream that says it is unusable.

      WAAS doesn't know about atmospheric corrections. What WAAS does is use a network of fixed ground stations that detect deviations in position and generate data to correct those deviations. The assumption is that the WAAS receiver isn't moving, so any deviations are from propagation errors. This is the same kind of thing that has been used by surveyors and other high accuracy GPS users for decades. At the highest level of accuracy it is called realtime kinematic GPS, and it uses both the correction data and actual carrier phase information to give centimeter level accuracy. There is also "differential", which makes use of the correction data to get multi-cm level accuracy. Both were very big issues when selective availability was on.

    8. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Snotnose · · Score: 5, Funny

      there really should be a way to correct time in a GPS satellite

      1) Press and hold the Set Time button until the indicator lamp lights (5 seconds)
      2) Press + or - until the correct time is reached
      3) Release Set Time button.

    9. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by gaudior · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I just put some black electrical tape over the flashing 12:00.

      I suppose it's a good thing I'm not running the system.

    10. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ephemeris only takes a few seconds to download. I think you meant Almanac which takes ~7 minutes and describes orbit with relatively low accuracy.

    11. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Strider- · · Score: 3, Informative

      In regards to WAAS, I think you're talking about something else. WAAS was developed for the FAA to allow the use of GPS in all stages of flight, including precision landing.

      It's based on a network of high precision ground receivers which are used to calculate two sets of correction information. The first is intended for all receivers in the WAAS footprint (basically North America), and consists of estimates of the error in the satellite position, and clock errors. The other breaks the continent up into a grid, and provides local estimates for errors in the ephemeris, clock errors, and ionospheric delay.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
    12. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Seraphim1982 · · Score: 4, Funny

      >Sure, you just have to update the configuration of all GPS devices on earth...

      If only they were capable of receiving signals from some sort of satellite.

    13. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Forever+Wondering · · Score: 1

      The time discrepancy is 13.7 microseconds [not milliseconds]. I don't know how that translates to position accuracy, but, to me, even that seems a bit large for something derived from an atomic clock.

      --
      Like a good neighbor, fsck is there ...
    14. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by hey! · · Score: 1

      You expect to get some kind of UI feedback that you've successfully long-pressed? Luxury!

      The long press is, hands down, the absolute worst invention of my lifetime.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    15. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      It's based on a network of high precision ground receivers which are used to calculate two sets of correction information.

      It sounds similar enough to what Obfuscant posted to be the same system. In either case, the high precision ground station is used to increase the accuracy by correcting various errors. He just simplified it more.

      Though looking it up - Ephemeris is 30 seconds per satellite, Almanac takes a bit longer.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    16. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh yeah, don't do any root cause analysis or anything, just keep ignoring all those gravity waves jittering the clocks on our orbiting atomic clock satellite network :-P

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    17. Re: Faulty sat? No problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speed of light, you know ?

    18. Re: Faulty sat? No problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      About 0.3 meters for every 1 nanosecond of error

    19. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      In regards to WAAS, I think you're talking about something else. WAAS was developed for the FAA to allow the use of GPS in all stages of flight, including precision landing.

      No, I was describing WAAS. A network of ground stations determining corrections. I didn't deny it was implemented by FAA.

    20. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Worse than Windows 10 and systemd?

    21. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by daknapp · · Score: 2

      WAAS doesn't know about atmospheric corrections.

      That is incorrect. WAAS stations create a model for the ionospheric propagation delay over the entire network and use that to provide corrections for receivers located anywhere in the area covered by the network.

      WAAS also provides corrections for ephemeris and clock errors.

    22. Re: Faulty sat? No problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A 13 millisecond timing error results in a 2241 mile distance error. GPS Satellites are marked unusable for various reasons fairly often. This is not news.

    23. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Pseudonym · · Score: 2

      ...disregard it if it continues to exhibit faulty timing.

      I'm not sure of the specs of block III, but in the case of block II, each satellite has three atomic clocks each (i.e. two hot spares) and the constellation as a whole has a few hot spare satellites (my memory is telling me four, but this may be wrong). However, this may not be a single-satellite failure.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    24. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      The "root cause" is that remote sensing is inherently noisy and you learn to live with it. All the cool kids now how to use a Kalman filter.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    25. Re: Faulty sat? No problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So this satellite is off by 300m? (1 microsecond = 1000 nanoseconds)
      That's pretty severe!

    26. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by flatulus · · Score: 1

      I presume you're talking about RAIM: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Basically if your GPS receiver can hear more than the minimum (4 satellites usually) at once, the simultaneous equation solutions are overdetermined. This makes it possible for software to detect and ignore outliers in the solution set.

      I heard of a GPS failure back in the mid 90's that caused the entire Los Angeles area CDMA cellular network to stop working - because US CDMA (as opposed to UMTS CDMA) is exceedingly sensitive to timing errors. This particular satellite went for a while sending a time that was off by exactly 12 hours. This totally borked the equation solutions (for the GPS system used in CDMA cell towers) and caused the entire CDMA airlink to go non-functional.

      I was working for AT&T Wireless at the time and was asked to study this and ensure that our GPS timing equipment could not suffer this kind of failure. Our two vendors both implemented a form of RAIM - i.e. T-RAIM (where the T stands for "timing") which allows for detection of outliers, so that it would be immune to a single defective satellite.

    27. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by flatulus · · Score: 1

      I believe that is the responsibility of the Ground Segment http://www.navipedia.net/index...

    28. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      But that can only be done by a scientist during an EVA.

    29. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Drethon · · Score: 1

      Nothing new either. Kalman filters have been used for avionics with mixed and low quality sensors for a long time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    30. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      I meant to type microseconds and the calculation was done using microseconds.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    31. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Soon to be superseded in that measure by the "light press" vs the "hard press".

    32. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WASS also contains a satellite component

    33. Re: Faulty sat? No problem... by fintux · · Score: 1

      That's 300 m for every microsecond. So it is 300 m * 13.7 us = 4.11 km.

    34. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Forever+Wondering · · Score: 1

      Several AC's replied to me about speed of light being [roughly] one foot per nanosecond [which I had forgotten]. So, 13.7 us is 13,700 ns, or 13,700 feet, or 2.5 miles [just as you said]. Wow! I know that GPS receivers [try to] use several satellites. Can they compensate for this without an almanac update [automatic or manual]? Or, if they use the faulty one, what happens? Would they try to average it in or reject it as too far off the average of the others?

      --
      Like a good neighbor, fsck is there ...
    35. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually the NSA moving strategic cities around again to confuse (this time) the Arabs who want to bomb us. All in a day's work.

    36. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every satellite broadcasts the almanac every 11 minutes. You can do tricks to get it faster by compiling it from several satellites at once, in methods that have some relationship to how bit torrents work.

      Unfortunately it's possible to read the NMEA standard in such a way that you can't put out position information until you've received an almanac from a single satellite, so standard compliant GPS receivers take 11 minutes to give a NMEA position, even though it can take them a mere handful of seconds to determine a position.

    37. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I know that Greyfox was making a joke, but anyone who has worked with sensors knows that intermittent anomalous readings are normal. Any sensor which doesn't produce anomalous readings almost certainly does the filtering internally.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    38. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      If the solution can be oversolved, more than enough satellites to provide position, they will drop the ones that offer the least accurate positions. So in most cases it would drop that one since it would appear that the signal had traveled a couple of miles further. If however it can only really lock on to 3 (2D lock) or 4 (3D lock) satellites you would likely see huge issues with accuracy. With only the minimum ones in view there really wouldn't be any way for the GPS to know one was off without an update so it would miscalculate things. Not having a good lock is very common given that most devices don't use a large high sensitivity antenna let alone a large high sensitivity active antenna so some people may have been affected but it would have likely been those with cheap GPS devices.

      I have several GPS devices of varying quality from the cheap cellphone GPS, regular handheld GPS, high sensitivity GPS, to a couple of timing GPS modules and active antennas that can be used for RTK. The cellphone one is the worst of them all with a significant jump in accuracy by going to worse of the 2 handheld devices (old garmin with a non high sensitivity antenna). The cellphone really only gets locks on satellites that are closer to directly overhead than closer to the horizon. On the other end the high end timing module with large active antenna can lock on to all of the ones it sees but since there are accuracy issue when they are really low in the sky I tell it to only lock on to ones that are 10 degrees above the horizon when not using it for RTK, when doing RTK I have it grab everything and then handle it in post processing.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    39. Re:Faulty sat? No problem... by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Oh gawd, they put systemd in Windows 10?

  2. It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war.

    1. Re:It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war by pastafazou · · Score: 2

      That's it exactly! Had they executed their turn 13.7 microseconds earlier as planned, they would've avoided Iranian waters and been left alone.

    2. Re:It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, he'd shoot them through his fence. of course this is after someone tells him where Iran is and how to spell it.

    3. Re:It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war by crackerjack155 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Using only the exact time from it and not having it calculate your location would only be useful for something like dead reckoning. They are not looking at a clock and deciding when to turn, they are looking at a GPS device to tell it where they are. The GPS is using the exact timing data to calculate it's location and even tiny errors can cause big errors in your location.

      For every nanosecond off you get about 1 foot (0.3 meters) off on your location, 13.7 microseconds is enough for the GPS to think your location is 2.55 miles (4.11 KM) away from where you really are. That is also the error from only one satellite so the error from other ones adds even more error to where the GPS thinks you are.

      http://www.montana.edu/gps/und...
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    4. Re:It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war by Tulsa_Time · · Score: 1

      He has more credibility than an AC in his mommys basement.... compare lifetime earnings... jobs created.

      --
      5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
    5. Re:It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      sure, but they misspelld it.. what they wanted was a deviation of 13.37 microseconds

    6. Re:It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't that be... compare number of bankruptcies... jobs destroyed.
      Don't understand how you Americans worship people who game the system, destroy jobs and outsource wealth to your enemies/competitors, though I guess being smart enough to be born in a position to get a large inheritance does take skill.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    7. Re:It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war by flatulus · · Score: 1

      They're using Slackware for nefarious purposes? Oh the horror!

    8. Re: It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only reason Obama knows where it is and how to spell it is because he was born there.

    9. Re:It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Iran already has hacked GPS. That is how a drone was taken from Afghan air space. This is also how 2 US Navy boats went off course and ended up in Iranian waters.

      Consider GPS tainted.

    10. Re:It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war by Tulsa_Time · · Score: 1

      What is worse. 100 successful business ventures that employ ten of thousands with 10 bankruptcies of ventures that fail. Or like you most likely, on a government job or welfare, paid for with printed money borrowed from your children ?

      --
      5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
    11. Re:It's a hacker or NK trying to start a war by dryeo · · Score: 1

      My business isn't big enough to qualify for the government handouts unlike some.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  3. Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by WarJolt · · Score: 1

    I think the clock went through a pocket of dark matter and the time dilation caused the time discrepancy.

    1. Re:Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      After reviewing the current state of Earth, in general, and of US politics and their recent "debates", in specific, Judiciary Pag has realized that the Earth population will not be satisfied alongside the existence of the rest of the Universe, and has sentenced Earth and its sun sealed in a Slo-Time envelope within which time will pass almost infinitely slowly until the end of the Universe, thus serving the dual purpose of protecting the Universe from Earth, and allowing us Earthlings to enjoy a solitary existence in the twilight of Creation.

      The atomic clock at Aalto University has simply detected that sentence being carried out.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    2. Re:Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Star Trek got it wrong!

      It's not April 5, 2063 it's Jan 27, 2016.... Mark my words a secret launch testing out the first warp drive is iminate lest the borg manage to stop it!

    3. Re:Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by olsmeister · · Score: 1

      Sounds kind of familiar...

    4. Re: Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gravity wave? Cosmic string?

    5. Re:Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Sounds kind of familiar...

      Thanks, I hadn't heard of that book/author.

      You do realize that what I wrote is a direct ripoff from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and what happened to planet Krikkit - right? If not, hand in your geek card. :-)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    6. Re:Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by balbeir · · Score: 2

      It's a glitch in the simulation.

    7. Re:Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Billionare makes a killing using programmed stock trading in conjunction with irradiating a GPS satellite to cause a 13.7 microsecond delay.

    8. Re:Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's daylight savings time.

      This discrepancy will be fixed around spring.

    9. Re:Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      but . . . . . wouldn't that mean that the Matrix is . . . fallible?

    10. Re: Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by IBME · · Score: 1

      Time is relative to the vector triangulation multiplied by the force of gravity divised by your kinetic energy.

    11. Re:Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

      The machine that is running the simulation we experience as our universe had a data fault, and we had to back up to the last savepoint.

    12. Re:Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by jobsagoodun · · Score: 1

      > It's a glitch in the simulation.

      They still got buggy pentiums in the renderfarm?

    13. Re:Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by idontgno · · Score: 1

      God is save-scumming.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    14. Re:Post your awesome and crazy theories here!!! by WarJolt · · Score: 1

      It's a glitch in the simulation.

  4. It was just a test... by bobbied · · Score: 1

    They where checking if they could skew the accuracy of GPS and if anybody would notice when they did. Oops, somebody noticed.

    Well, that's my theory.. Don't ask me who "they" are because I left my tinfoil hat at home today.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    1. Re:It was just a test... by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

      Moving at the speed of light, 13 microseconds is only 4 kilometers, at the speed most normal things move, you're looking at less than 10 millimeters.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    2. Re:It was just a test... by Strider- · · Score: 1

      With a good GPS fix, the receiver should throw out the 13 microsecond delayed data as being anomalous. If you only had a 3 satellite fix though, it could cause a significant positioning error.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
    3. Re:It was just a test... by bondsbw · · Score: 1

      Sure, if "most normal things move" around 0.77 km/s.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    4. Re:It was just a test... by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Well considering that the time stamp from each satellite is what is used in the calculations, see pseudoranges, and those travel at the speed of light your position could be off by some large, easily 100s of meters, amount.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    5. Re:It was just a test... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm moving at 0.1c and because of the 400m error I plunged in a ravine you insensitive clod.

    6. Re:It was just a test... by Shatrat · · Score: 1

      It's also about 10% of a Sonet frame. Fortunately most telecom clocks don't blindly repeat GPS time, but instead use it to gradually steer their internal rubidium and quartz clocks so there wouldn't be an abrupt change in the output.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    7. Re:It was just a test... by TWX · · Score: 1

      Imagine the entertainment as thousands of self-driving cars suddenly try to correct their positions without notice...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    8. Re:It was just a test... by PRMan · · Score: 1

      This happens occasionally already. We throw that kind of data away, because it's clearly not valid for some to travel a mile in a millisecond.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    9. Re:It was just a test... by OverlordQ · · Score: 1
      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    10. Re:It was just a test... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, GPS time sources use the location of the antenna to identify bad clocks in satellites.

    11. Re:It was just a test... by bondsbw · · Score: 1

      I don't understand your confusion:

      1) 500 knots is 1/3 of 0.77 km/s. 3.3 mm is 1/3 of 10 mm.
      2) 10 mm is the number you provided, so it's the number I calculated. 3.3 mm is significantly less than 10 mm, so if you meant that, why not say "around 3 mm" or "less than 4 mm" or "3.3 mm"?
      3) I don't know too many "normal things" that move even at 500 knots.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    12. Re:It was just a test... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Planes are fairly normal. I can usually see half a dozen every time I look out the winow.

    13. Re: It was just a test... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, just this...

      http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?Do=gpsShowNanu&num=2016008

      Satellite 23 was decommissioned. Launched back in 1990, she had a good run.

  5. Wormhole by ickleberry · · Score: 1

    Y'heard it here first! Don't tell me I didn't tole ya!

    Going back in time by a mere 13.7uS doesn't seem very exciting though.

  6. Temporal Anomaly! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's about to get exciting, folks!

  7. faulty satellite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like the aliens are preparing for an invasion.

  8. That's a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use a GPS-DO to generate a lab reference 10.000000MHz signal. 13 microseconds is huge, but if it only happened once, it'll buff right out. But if it wasn't supposed to happen, then you gotta find out why. Maybe that intern didn't crimp his SMAs properly.

    1. Re:That's a lot by jabuzz · · Score: 0

      It's 2016 so I would say using GPS to generate reference signals in a lab is a daft idea. Far more sensible to use a chip scale rubidium atomic clock and not depend on some external reference signal that might go away at any time.

    2. Re:That's a lot by belthize · · Score: 1

      Agreed, 13.7 microseconds is a substantial error. Large enough that this isn't some obscure esoteric unexplained phenomena; one of the two devices being compared is essentially broken.

      It's like reporting that somebody has a car that's supposed to get 30mpg but mysteriously they only get 22mpg. Is it aliens, sunspots, quantum thingamajiggery or just poor maintenance.

    3. Re:That's a lot by Obfuscant · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A GPS clock comes with the time already set. Your private rubidium clock needs someone to tell it what time it is, which is probably going to be GPS-based anyway.

    4. Re:That's a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you will still need an external reference for your lab clock, unless you don't need to measure very long intervals. Those clocks (Jackson labs) claim 900 ns / day drift. If GPS did clocks did that without correction they would be junk for navigation.

      http://scpnt.stanford.edu/pnt/PNT11/2011_presentation_files/18_Lutwak-PNT2011.pdf

    5. Re:That's a lot by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Its 2016. We have a widely available set of external reference signals from multiple governments running multiple satellites providing redundant sources of a stable reference. It is far more sensible to use something highly accurate and easily available than spend many thousands of dollars rolling your own.

    6. Re:That's a lot by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Except he is using GPS as a very precise 10MHz signal, not a clock. The private rubidium clock (about 1500USD from memory) will provide that very nicely.

      Personally if I was running an experiment that required that sort of precision then the private highly accurate frequency source is going to be fairly small beer in the total cost of the experiment and freezes you from the trouble of getting the GPS signal into your lab, which for most labs I know is going to be a right pain in the backside because GPS signals don't extend indoors. Further more is there is not chance that some random event won't knock it out for a few seconds and potentially ruin your experiment.

      I guess the point is that until recently using GPS was a valid way to get a very high precision reference frequency, though here in the UK I would suggest that using the BBC Radio 4 LW signal might have been a better idea. The carrier frequency is controlled by a rubidium atomic frequency standard for the express purpose of enabling it to be used as an used as an off-air frequency standard. However time and tide move on and now it is not such a valid choice as it was previously.

    7. Re:That's a lot by ChumpusRex2003 · · Score: 1

      GPS is not a particularly stable frequency reference over the short term due to atmospheric distortions and various other noise sources. However, over the long-term it is outstanding.

      The normal process is to use a very high quality short-term stable oscillator, e.g. a temperature controlled quartz crystal oscillator - but discipline it to the long-term stable GPS signal. Over periods of hours to days, the quartz oscillator can drift in frequency due to aging, shifts in environmental factors which affect the regulated temperature, etc. By averaging the deviation of the local oscillator from the GPS reference over a suitable period, and gradually tuning the local oscillator to null that error, you can get a frequency with the short-term stability of top-quality quartz, with the long-term stability of GPS.

      A similar principle is used with atomic clocks - the atomic reference is used to discipline a good quality quartz oscillator. However, the long term stability of rubidium clocks is several orders of magnitude worse than GPS, hence it is common to find many capable of being disciplined by GPS, or an alternative very high stability atomic source (such as a caesium clock, or hydrogen maser).

    8. Re:That's a lot by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Except he is using GPS as a very precise 10MHz signal, not a clock. The private rubidium clock (about 1500USD from memory) will provide that very nicely.

      $1500 clock vs. $100 clock. Hmmm. And how do you know the shift was 13.7ms as TFA reports unless you know which clock is right?

      and freezes you from the trouble of getting the GPS signal into your lab, which for most labs I know is going to be a right pain in the backside because GPS signals don't extend indoors.

      I understand they're developing a solution to that problem, and it will be distributed once the patent has been issued. They're taking a wire, surrounding it with some insulation, then around that goes a mesh of copper to make a second conductor, and then around that all more insulation. I hear they're calling it cropaxial cable or something like that. They claim, but I don't believe it, that you can actually put the GPS antenna outside the building while having the receiver inside! What will they think of next?

      I guess the point is that until recently using GPS was a valid way to get a very high precision reference frequency,

      Still is.

      I've been running a GPS in the lab for almost two decades. Maybe I need to file with the patent office showing "prior art"?

    9. Re:That's a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somebody left a "fingerprint" of their communications poke at the satellite. We'll never know if what they tried to do worked or not...

      Remember back early/mid 2000s all the undersea comm links kept breaking at oddball places, several times forcing the repeated re-rerouting of different big chunks of ALL the traffic through the US? Ooops. NOT.

    10. Re:That's a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nitpick: microseconds (us, but written with a mu instead of a u -- stupid Slashdot), not milliseconds (ms)

    11. Re:That's a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have been involved in and know plenty of experiments that still use GPS, even with receivers much more expensive than the $1500 named, because they either need long term average consistency, or need synchronized consistency with other locations. There are plenty of setups that don't care about small jitter as long as it averages out, but really need to avoid long term drift.

  9. Was systemd installed on any of the satellites? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Was systemd installed on any of the satellites recently? Maybe it was installed unintentionally, while upgrading the satellite from Debian 7 to Debian 8?

  10. Crap! Trouble now by CycloneGT · · Score: 1

    Damn, my $80 dash cam uses GPS time. I'm screwed.

  11. Black cats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's obviously a glitch in the Matrix. Something's changed!

  12. Re:Crap! Trouble now by Stavr0 · · Score: 1

    13.7us means about 4km of position error, so yeah, a big deal.

  13. From U.S. COAST GUARD NAVIGATION CENTER by edesio · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Re:From U.S. COAST GUARD NAVIGATION CENTER by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Damn I wish I hadn't commented elsewhere so I could have spent some mod points on this. That said it looks like they need to update their satellite almanacs as PRN-23 is still showing good while the NANU says otherwise. I would think the satellites are broadcasting an updated almanac now so there won't be any major issues with this then.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    2. Re:From U.S. COAST GUARD NAVIGATION CENTER by Hrdina · · Score: 1

      That was a planned re-retirement of a really old SV (launched in 1990!) in anticipation of next week's launch of GPS IIF-12.

    3. Re:From U.S. COAST GUARD NAVIGATION CENTER by Hrdina · · Score: 1

      It was PRN 32 that was retired, not PRN 23.

      PRN 32 happens to be SVN (space vehicle number) 23, which was GPS IIA-10 launched in November 1990.

      PRN 23 is SVN 60, which was GPS IIR-12 launched in 2004. It is still part of the constellation.

    4. Re:From U.S. COAST GUARD NAVIGATION CENTER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does that report say it took a 6+ hour response time?

      Unusable 15:36
      Decommissioned 22:00

    5. Re:From U.S. COAST GUARD NAVIGATION CENTER by megabeck42 · · Score: 1

      While likely related, Martin Burnicki posted a more detailed explanation of the actual event to the time-nuts mailing list:

      https://www.febo.com/pipermail...

      --
      fnord.
  14. Noooooo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is Cathrine Zeta-Jones at it again?

  15. Re:Crap! Trouble now by ickleberry · · Score: 1

    Surely if you have more than a couple of satellites in view it will discard the 13.7mS one as a multipath. The chance of it actually giving you a reading thats off by 4km would be quite low I'd say

  16. GOOD. by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Mr. President, they are using our own satellites against us and the clock is ticking.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  17. Interesting, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that should be a fun detective story to watch unfold.

    I wonder if anybody else noticed.
        Surely NIST boulder or the Naval Obs in Washington, or greenwich should have seen it.

    Unless it was confined to a part of the constellation on the other side of the planet.

    Most likely a h/w failure, seems unlikely somebody has figured out to hack into the system.

  18. Just a Motorola Oncore Receiver bug by phkamp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is the second time a bug in the firmware of Motorola Oncore GPS receivers have manifested itself. There is a bug relating to a 32 bit wide bitmap, and DoD just took the GPS satellite numbered 32 out of the constellation and that seems to be the cause. I have data for two such receivers showing the anomaly and for one different receiver seeing no trouble at all.

    --
    Poul-Henning Kamp -- FreeBSD since before it was called that...
  19. Micro black hole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A small black hole passed through the path of satellite beam in front of the receiver.

  20. Devonshire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has the HMS Devonshire been seen lately? Someone should check Elliot Carver's secret lab for evidence...

    1. Re:Devonshire by TWX · · Score: 1

      I'm more worried about the USS Eldridge...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  21. Re:Crap! Trouble now by pastafazou · · Score: 2

    What the hell are you driving, the Millenium Falcon?

  22. Redundancy by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

    This is why there's redundancy built into the system, more satellites than are strictly needed for operation. If one's clock goes out-of-spec, you notice that it's not agreeing with the rest of the constellation and drop it from your sources. If it's a transient glitch it'll come back in-spec and come back into use, if it's a permanent problem they decommission it and schedule a replacement. Redundancy makes the difference between a major crisis and a minor annoyance.

  23. Tiny? by alvieboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "(...) reported a deviation of 13.7 microseconds. While this is tiny (...)"

    Tiny ? It's huge.

    If such an error occurs every hour, the total accumulated error would be more than 7 seconds. It's tiny if you look at it individually (well, not so tiny - your 2GHz CPU clock has a period of 500ps (picosseconds) - that's 0.0000005 microseconds).

    The atomic clock period (based on Cs-133) is 108.78278 picosseconds. So this is very very large.

    Alvie

    1. Re:Tiny? by 4wdloop · · Score: 2

      1us = 1000ns = 100000 ps hence 500ps=0.5ns=0.0005us=0.0000000005s=5e-10s

      but yes, not a tiny error given expected GPS accuracy.

      pulse-per-second signal derived from GPS should be accurate to tens of ns...

      --
      4wdloop
    2. Re:Tiny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's an odd assumption that it's a *rate* of deviation, and not a static offset.

    3. Re:Tiny? by ortholattice · · Score: 1

      Interesting post, but 500ps is 0.0005 microsec, not 0.0000005 microsec. Look at it another way: 500ps is 1/2 ns, i.e. 1/2 of 0.001 usec.

    4. Re:Tiny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since position error is roughly 1 foot per nanosecond... we're talking positional accuracy from this satellite (not taking into account corrections from the other 3+ you'd be connected to) of roughly 13700 feet, or over 2 miles.

      No wonder my running tracker is bogus sometimes...

    5. Re:Tiny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In particular, it would give rise to a position error of about 30cm * 13700 ~ 4km, if it weren't caught by cross-checking.

    6. Re:Tiny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "(...) reported a deviation of 13.7 microseconds. While this is tiny (...)"

      Tiny ? It's huge.

      Idiots, both of you. It's medium sized.

    7. Re:Tiny? by alvieboy · · Score: 1

      Indeed. My point was that despite being considered "tiny", you have to contextualize it. It's tiny if it's a single event (well it's rather big even for a single event), it's huge if such errors accumulate.

    8. Re:Tiny? by alvieboy · · Score: 1

      Absultely right. Thanks for the correction. Too many zeroes too keep track of.

    9. Re:Tiny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Also, remember that GPS positioning really depends on clocks sufficiently accurate to measure how far radio has travelled in a certain amount of time - which is of course, the speed of light. That means you need damn accurate time.

      As such, it could be a 4.1 km / 2.6 mile error in your GPS location; or simple refusal for the GPS gear to get a fix.

      That's right, a four kilometre error. Puts things in perspective.

    10. Re:Tiny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if it's a single event it's not insignificant. It takes light that long to travel 4km. So every receiver will think the satellite is several km away from where it truly is. That means any receiver using that satellite will put its location perhaps a whole kilometre away from its true location. Certainly your satnav would not be able to tell which road it's on. Before a correction is applied anyway.

    11. Re:Tiny? by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

      No it wouldn't.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    12. Re:Tiny? by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      1us = 1000ns = 100000 ps

      You missed a 0 here. Not complaining, just point it out.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    13. Re: Tiny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An error in a standard frequency source will be a rate.

    14. Re:Tiny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it would. Your position is measured by finding the intersect between distances between the satellites. The distance from each is based on the time the signal took to reach you, calculated using the difference between the signals. If one of those times is offset its distance is wrong which means the intersect will be in the wrong place. 4km is a worst case of the error you'll get. In reality it'd be less due to angles, knowing you're on the surface (specifcally satnav), and using more satellites reducing the error. 1km was entirely possible.

  24. Time-Nuts... by sillivalley · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Lots of folks on the time-nuts mailing list have GPS-based systems to maintain not only precision time, but also precision frequency standards, and many of them saw and recorded this one.

  25. Re:Crap! Trouble now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Millenium Falcon? Pfft. Doesn't even hit Ludicrous Speed, let alone go plaid.

    Spaceball One would smoke that thing.

  26. I'm not saying it's aliens..... by wkwilley2 · · Score: 2

    But it's aliens

    --
    Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
    1. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless it's aliens.

    2. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The X-Files just started here, so the the proof is in the cake, and the cake is in the pudding, buddy.

  27. OK finally by argStyopa · · Score: 5, Funny

    Reading this, I really feel like I'm living in the future:
    "The automatic monitoring system of a hydrogen maser atomic clock triggered an alarm which reported a deviation of 13.7 microseconds."

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:OK finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bonus points if you read the news on your portable supercomputer.

    2. Re:OK finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God to point out and well said!!

    3. Re:OK finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You, sir, are most definitely living in the future... since you posted this.

    4. Re:OK finally by JargonScott · · Score: 1

      Data: "Sorry I'm late Captain, by my hydrogen maser atomic alarm clock triggered with a deviation of 13.7 microseconds."

      Wesley: "Ha Ha!"

      Picard: "Shut up Wesley!"

      --
      Nuke Gay Whales for Jesus.
    5. Re:OK finally by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      "I am sluggish for want of recharge; my cursory examination of the room has required .8 seconds. . . . " - Keith Laumer, "Combat Unit"

    6. Re: OK finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been feeling like I'm living in the future for 16 years.

    7. Re:OK finally by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Bolo!

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  28. Re:Crap! Trouble now by TWX · · Score: 1

    Surely if you have more than a couple of satellites in view it will discard the 13.7mS one as a multipath. The chance of it actually giving you a reading thats off by 4km would be quite low I'd say

    What if you're coming out of a tunnel or out of a parking garage?

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  29. Re:Crap! Trouble now by CycloneGT · · Score: 1

    My son borrowed the MF. I'm going to have to have a talk with him. He hasn't been his old self lately, its like he's joined some kind of cult. Well, I'm sure it will go ok.

  30. Evidence of Holographic Universe by MakersDirector · · Score: 0

    Here’s the problem:

    Engineers and Scientists have constructed a model of time based on it being a fluidic thing.

    Time has traditionally been thought of as being a wave like function, analogizing the flow of time to the flow of a river or stream.

    The concept had been simplistic: Sometimes time flowed faster and sometimes it flowed slower.

    Einstein’s relativity helped predict that flow.

    Accordingly, Computer Scientists have calculated GPS time based on Einstein’s relativity adjustments – erroneously.

    The problem, in a nutshell, is that time is discrete, and the error detected with the GPS system is a glitch outlining the discrete nature of time.

    Time is best thought of as a sequence of events happening in a predictable fashion and documented from an observer’s perspective.

    In its most simplistic fashion, it is the diurnal cycle and the notation of those days through a system called a calendar.

    At the atomic level, it’s the precise number of vibrations of a cesium atom which happens at a predictable rate which are then used to create the definition of a second.

    For a photon, it’s the constant and highly predictable duration it takes a single photon to cover roughly 186,000 miles.

    Time, you see, is a discrete passage of events, but has consistently been calculated as though it were a fluid and changing thing.

    GPS Programmers actually INTRODUCED error through their calculations based on a very simple misinterpretation of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity by regarding time as an analog function of nature rather than a discrete function of events.

    It’s my theory that we are seeing our first direct evidence of a holographic universe.

    And that these Finnish researchers are picking up transmissions of GPS signals from alternate realities.

    And the map issues Apple and Google have been plagued with are yet another example of these issues.

    1. Re: Evidence of Holographic Universe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      constant and highly predictable duration it takes a single photon to cover roughly 186,000 miles.

    2. Re:Evidence of Holographic Universe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Time has traditionally been thought of as being a wave like function,

      No it is not, as wave like equations are a rather specific category and have nothing to do with how time is currently or traditionally thought of...

      The concept had been simplistic: Sometimes time flowed faster and sometimes it flowed slower.

      Einstein’s relativity helped predict that flow.

      You're over simplifying here, as relativity doesn't describe it like the flow of a river, as the passage of time is not a specific rate for a given location.

      For a photon, it’s the constant and highly predictable duration it takes a single photon to cover roughly 186,000 miles.

      And yet that is precisely what relatively is based upon, the time it takes photons to travel a distance to different observers.

      GPS Programmers actually INTRODUCED error through their calculations based on a very simple misinterpretation of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity by regarding time as an analog function of nature rather than a discrete function of events.

      They didn't misinterpret relativity... which would be a different issue from saying relativity is wrong.

  31. Wasted ooportunity! by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

    When the atomic clocks in GPS satellites have a discrepancy, you don't report a discrepancy. You report you have done some experiments that suggest faster than light travel across some 30 km apart in the Swiss Alps. By the time they track it down and attributed to some discrepancy in some atomic clock, you got your headlines, the 15 minutes of fame.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Wasted ooportunity! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It only happened once. That is like trying to convince people you can make the ground shake after the earthquake has already passed.

  32. The future is now: Airports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live near an airport. I like to remind people that X years ago people would be in awe of that the same way we muse about "spaceports" of the future.

  33. Cover your heads! by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    God is messing with space time getting ready for the rapture!

  34. Root Cause: Chuck Norris by burni2 · · Score: 1

    Chuck Norris did some push ups so aggressivly that in contrast to his normal work out he liftet his body upwards and did not push the earth down,
    thus generated a gravitational wave hitting the gps satellite.

    The other explanation is:
    It is a black hole and we all are doomed.

  35. new physics? by peter303 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Clock speeds are sensitive to the structure of the gravitational field. Maybe other aspects of the Universe.

    GPS times have all sort of noise. Some geophysicists use this "noise" to figure things like the atmospheric temperature and density. The GPS signal wavefront bend slightly then. You can tomographically invert for spatial location of the travel time anomalies to locate temperature and density changes. There are papers on this every year at the American Geophysical Union meeting.

    Microsecond size anonalies are huge and may have more mudane causes like software.

    1. Re:new physics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or systems failure/user (airforce) error?

      Which is more likely

    2. Re:new physics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any passing gravitational wave associated with a pathlength difference of 4km over the 20000km surface-geo distance would imply a metric strain of ~1e-5 at a wavelength of 20000km. This signal would lie near the maximum-sensitivity frequency of the world's gravitational observatories, which currently detect nothing while searching for signals ten thousand trillion times smaller.

      Whatever glitched, it wasn't spacetime unfortunately.

    3. Re:new physics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe peter303 meant Earth's gravitational field. As in how much would passing a gravitational minimum affect a clock of a satellite? Probably not much since the field measurements are done with extremely precise instruments at a very low orbit.

  36. Nuke it from the orbit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's the only way to make sure! ... that it's no longer in the orbit...

  37. Syria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It has been rumored that the "public" GPS in the region over Syria started having some precision issues around the same time that Russia started bombing Syria.

    The US DoD does not use the "public" GPS; their precision tends to stay spot-on, and is much higher than what the "public" GPS provides.

  38. I knew something was wrong with GPS time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I could just feel it.

  39. WAR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It could also be a prelude to a military action someplace. Changing the atomic clock results could completely disable the accuracy of any weapons that depend on it.

    I would not be surprised to see a sudden major war involving the United States, Russia, China, or other major power.

  40. It's not a problem by clovis · · Score: 1

    It's not a problem unless all four corner days are off and thus the four corners of the cube.

    1. Re:It's not a problem by narcc · · Score: 2

      You educated evil human have not the education or rationale to comprehend Nature's Simultaneous 4-Day Cube. who can't understand 4-day simultaneous cubic time. You are probably brainwashed, indoctrinated, educated stupid and cannot comprehend Nature's Harmonic Simultaneous 4-Day

      No single corner human can occupy or experience more than a single corner at the same time during a 4-corner rotation within the 4/16 creation principle. Earth sphere rotates within an invisible Time Cube.

      Educated people are the evil empowerment of the self - the lowest form of humanity. Humans are brainwashed stupid and indoctrinated evil. A human will rotate around 4-corner lifetime stages within a family metamorphosis - baby, child, parent and grandparent. Name your 4/16 greatgrandparents.

      All Educated are Stupid from brainwashing and indoctrination. Pedants cannot comprehend that there are 4 simultaneous Years within a single rotation of Earth about the Sun.Each season has its own separate Year.

    2. Re:It's not a problem by clovis · · Score: 1

      I don't think that I can ever comprehend the 4 simultaneous years within a single rotation of Earth about the Sun.
      What makes it hard for me is that I now know that I am educated stupid.
      I understand that this is the truth, but I cannot occupy more than a single corner at the same time.
      This is so hard for me - the not occupying or experiencing.

  41. Gravitational waves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would create this sort of point discrepancy.

  42. The actual problem is CERN by Cito · · Score: 1

    The activation of the Large Hadron Collider with full power this past year has ripped a hole in the space time continuum and has been jumping the planet forwards in time by nanoseconds, now milliseconds. If the rift is not contained it will eventually grow exponentially from seconds, minutes, hours, days, months, years, centuries, millenniums to eventually eons, and may forward us in time past the moment of when Sol had collapsed killing us all!!!

  43. Somewhere, right now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An elite team belonging to the Impossible Mission Force has broken into some high security facility where the only exploit vector was the clock to the mainframe computer which manages the fingerprint pads, voice recognition, iris scanning, and DNA testing of some corporate entity...

    Either that or it's Oceans Fourteen being directed by James Cameron and he's gone a bit overboard on the real life sets again...

  44. History channel says..... by meglon · · Score: 1

    Aliens. Wait, Bigfoot. WAIT, ALIEN BIGFOOTS!!!!11!1!!!1

    --
    Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
  45. More info -- the last of the Block IIA birds by sillivalley · · Score: 1

    The troublesome bird was SVN-23, one of the oldest GPS birds, launched in 1990!
    It was the last of the Block IIA birds, and had an expected 8 year lifetime, which it beat by quite a few years!
    It featured a combination of cesium and rubidium clocks -- two of each. Now decommissioned -- http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?Do...
    Read more of this bird's interesting history -- http://www.schriever.af.mil/ne...

  46. Warhollian Tribute! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wacky Delly did it 20 years ago!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b_polwFplI

  47. The actual problem: Bad data upload by Whip · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It looks like the actual problem was a bad data upload; Specifically, some satellites were transmitting incorrect parameters for UTC offset correction. https://www.febo.com/pipermail... is the posting from a gentlemen at Meinberg that has the details. http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/... has more information about the time offset parameters (A0 and A1) and how they interact with GPS and UTC time.

    According to another message (https://www.febo.com/pipermail/time-nuts/2016-January/095686.html), PRNs 2, 6, 7, 9, and 23 got hit. It is interesting to note that the satellite that was taken out of service this morning (PRN 32) is not in this list. It looks like the decommissioning of PRN32 was quite possibly scheduled (see http://gpsworld.com/last-block...), and even if not, a failure of that specific satellite could not have caused multiple satellites to start broadcasting incorrect offset data.

    I'm really looking forward to the postmortem on this.

  48. Someone at Meinberg tracked it down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (source)

    There was no glitch in GPS time, but one satellite was transmitting bad GPS/UTC difference information.

    GPS time is not quite UTC time. Each satellite transmits the necessary translation factors along with other housekeeping information. One factor is the number of leap seconds and the time of the next change. The other is a linear function (with an offset parameter A0 and a slope A1) that specifies a precision offset.

    Normally, A0 is tiny, but one satellite broadcast a bogus A0 value of 13.7 us. Any receiver that believed it would then jump its UTC output by the same amount, leading to the glitch.

    A receiver that used GPS time (all GPS receivers have an option to not apply UTC corrections to their PPS output) would not have seen a glitch.

    1. Re: Someone at Meinberg tracked it down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm confused. GPS time and UTC are only offset by an integer number of seconds. Never by fractions of a second.

  49. The Aliens Have Arrived by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Be veery careful of your electromagnetic transmissions!

    Ha ah

  50. 13.7 us is a small eternity. by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
    Even if you're using a slowpoke processor with 1 MHz clock, that's over a dozen clock cycles.

    And if you're measuring the distance that radio signals travelled, that's a whopping 4 km.

  51. That's funny by Xenna · · Score: 1

    Is this one of those "that's funny" events that lead to world shattering discoveries?

    Or just a bug...?

    1. Re:That's funny by lucien86 · · Score: 1

      Probably a bug.. Sadly.

      --
      Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
  52. 13.7 microseconds tiny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    working in the securities trading industry, 13.7 microseconds is considered HUGE, that is 6 micro seconds longer than our 99.9% latency numbers last week when we generated 24 billion messages in 6 1/2 hrs.

  53. Schroedinger's cat at play... by aurizon · · Score: 1

    Just patted a passing bird(in orbit)

  54. I thought I was the last of the fans! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to constantly search my local bookstores for any new stories on our giant metal protectors, but it seems this flavor of military SF has all but disappeared.

  55. Misalignment 4.11 Km by lucien86 · · Score: 1

    13 us in GPS is a pretty big or small misalignment, depending on how you look at it - some 4.1 Km. Definitely enough to upset systems like GPS guidance. - Of course most of the time there is plenty of satellite redundancy..

    --
    Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
  56. Omega 13.7 by EricTheO · · Score: 0

    Galaxy Quest holds the answer to the GPS time problem. Omega 13 actually rols back time 13.7 milliseconds.

    --
    -Eric
  57. Re:Crap! Trouble now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You need at least 3/4 to give you a position as you use the time signals to give the distance from each satellite and give where they intersect. One radius will be 4km different than it should be. That means they'll intersect in completely the wrong place. You're guaranteed it'll be off. 4km is worst case but it's more likely to be half that. 2km is still pretty badly out though. You'd need twice as many satellites to cancel it out really.