If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
GPS interference and contests
Now I ask, NOTAMS or not, why should it be legal for ANYONE to jam a system which is used in air navigation? The US military own it, they can jam it or turn it off just as they please. No law to prevent them. Mike |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
GPS interference and contests
Mike the Strike wrote:
Now I ask, NOTAMS or not, why should it be legal for ANYONE to jam a system which is used in air navigation? The US military own it, they can jam it or turn it off just as they please. No law to prevent them. I don't remember all of the details, but the Department of Transportation has specific agreements with the DOD dating back to the early 90s that were put in place to allow GPS to be used to in safety critical applications (not just aviation, also railroads, timing systems for the power grid, etc.). Much of the subsequent funding for GPS satellite upgrades has been explicitly allocated for this purpose. The DOD can't "jam it or turn it off just as they please", at least within US territory... Marc |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
GPS interference and contests
That's why the Europeans are building Galileo - or did I miss something...
Only the military mind will conceive something of enormous benefit, develop it with no concern for economics, then intentionally break it because they can. So the question, in the litigious part of the world must be - is it legally defensible, to interrupt a service that does not belong exclusively to you, and which is used by commercial and private civilian users? Let's hope it does not take a fatal incident to find out. ESA has not started "commercial" use of its satellites yet - most of it's stations are terrestrial at present - so I suppose for the very short term the view that "we own it we can do what we like with it is valid". By 2010 there will be two satellite systems. Then what? Mike the Strike wrote: Now I ask, NOTAMS or not, why should it be legal for ANYONE to jam a system which is used in air navigation? The US military own it, they can jam it or turn it off just as they please. No law to prevent them. Mike |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
GPS interference and contests
I agree, but it is a National Security issue-Good luck on changing
that. On Jan 21, 10:22 am, ZZ wrote: Even though this thread is related to GPS jamming affecting contest flight documentation, please allow me this little rant. GPS navigation is now fully accepted in the US and there are even some instrument approaches based upon GPS. Now I ask, NOTAMS or not, why should it be legal for ANYONE to jam a system which is used in air navigation? Pilots who are fortunate not to live/fly near a military installation who jam these signals can enjoy the system. The rest of us have to put up with unreliable/intermittent use. Is this an issue that the AOPA and the SSA should try to address? Paul Bill Daniels wrote: It seems as if GPS interference testing is becoming more widespread. See:http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/gpsno...terference.pdf I wonder if anyone has thought of what might happen if one of these 'tests' happened near the time an place of a sechduled contest. Basically, you would lose all GPS systems including loggers. Back to photos? Anyone thinking about contingencies? Bill Daniels |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
GPS interference and contests
The military has vast testing ranges in places like Johnson Island in the
Pacific Ocean. They can test jamming there although it's probably more expensive than China Lake or White Sands. The reasons for testing jamming of GPS devices is due to well grounded concerns about post 9/11 civil defense. You can probably imagine scenarios so there no need to spell it out in a public forum. The latest block of GPS satellites will have the capability to deny enemy access in a restricted geographic area eliminating the need for jamming. Bill Daniels "mike" wrote in message ... I agree, but it is a National Security issue-Good luck on changing that. On Jan 21, 10:22 am, ZZ wrote: Even though this thread is related to GPS jamming affecting contest flight documentation, please allow me this little rant. GPS navigation is now fully accepted in the US and there are even some instrument approaches based upon GPS. Now I ask, NOTAMS or not, why should it be legal for ANYONE to jam a system which is used in air navigation? Pilots who are fortunate not to live/fly near a military installation who jam these signals can enjoy the system. The rest of us have to put up with unreliable/intermittent use. Is this an issue that the AOPA and the SSA should try to address? Paul Bill Daniels wrote: It seems as if GPS interference testing is becoming more widespread. See:http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/gpsno...terference.pdf I wonder if anyone has thought of what might happen if one of these 'tests' happened near the time an place of a sechduled contest. Basically, you would lose all GPS systems including loggers. Back to photos? Anyone thinking about contingencies? Bill Daniels |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
GPS interference and contests
On Jan 21, 9:22 am, ZZ wrote:
Now I ask, NOTAMS or not, why should it be legal for ANYONE to jam a system which is used in air navigation? Pilots who are fortunate not to live/fly near a military installation who jam these signals can enjoy the system. The rest of us have to put up with unreliable/intermittent use. Is this an issue that the AOPA and the SSA should try to address? Paul Because you're a pilot, YOU are LEGALLY required to avail yourself of all NOTAMS and such in order to legally fly. Yeah, it sucks -- especially when there is conflicting info, hidden info, Major League Baseball Games and such. Jamming GPS is just like a NOTAM that a VOR or ILS or Loran navigation aid is "out of service," whether for maintenance or due to disaster (e.g., when Filmore VOR "FIM" was burned in 2006 wildfires). The NOTAM is to warn you that it's up to you to figure out a different way to navigate (or document your badge/record flight)...sorta' like warning you that your battery will fail this week... Yes, inconvenient. Be glad they NOTAM it, rather than jamming without telling us. FWIW, I'm a flight test engineer, working on "something" at NASA- Dryden, and China Lake GPS jamming _this week_ may interfere with my livelihood. Fortunately, they can't move the mountains more quickly than NOAA can publish paper charts...yet. -Pete |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
GPS interference and contests
Does the military ever tell anyone what area is affected by the jamming? I don't see that in the NOTAM. It seems that would be useful information. 309 wrote: On Jan 21, 9:22 am, ZZ wrote: Now I ask, NOTAMS or not, why should it be legal for ANYONE to jam a system which is used in air navigation? Pilots who are fortunate not to live/fly near a military installation who jam these signals can enjoy the system. The rest of us have to put up with unreliable/intermittent use. Is this an issue that the AOPA and the SSA should try to address? Paul Because you're a pilot, YOU are LEGALLY required to avail yourself of all NOTAMS and such in order to legally fly. Yeah, it sucks -- especially when there is conflicting info, hidden info, Major League Baseball Games and such. Jamming GPS is just like a NOTAM that a VOR or ILS or Loran navigation aid is "out of service," whether for maintenance or due to disaster (e.g., when Filmore VOR "FIM" was burned in 2006 wildfires). The NOTAM is to warn you that it's up to you to figure out a different way to navigate (or document your badge/record flight)...sorta' like warning you that your battery will fail this week... Yes, inconvenient. Be glad they NOTAM it, rather than jamming without telling us. FWIW, I'm a flight test engineer, working on "something" at NASA- Dryden, and China Lake GPS jamming _this week_ may interfere with my livelihood. Fortunately, they can't move the mountains more quickly than NOAA can publish paper charts...yet. -Pete |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
GPS interference and contests
On Jan 21, 9:16 pm, Greg Arnold wrote:
Does the military ever tell anyone what area is affected by the jamming? I don't see that in the NOTAM. It seems that would be useful information. See https://pilotweb.nas.faa.gov/distrib...nterQuery.html or: !GPS 01/021 ZLA GPS IS UNRELIABLE AND MAY BE UNAVAILABLE WITHIN A 324 NM RADIUS OF 372023.4N/1160158.4W (LOCATED WITHIN THE TONOPAH TEST RANGE) AT FL400, DECREASING IN AREA WITH DECREASE IN ALTITUDE TO 277 NM RADIUS AT FL250, 198 NM RADIUS AT 10,000 FT MSL AND 197 NM RADIUS AT 4,000 FT AGL. THE IMPACT AREA ALSO EXTENDS INTO THE MEXICAN FIR. 1900Z-0845Z DLY WEF 0801211900-0801260845 They're describing a VOLUME about the jamming point: the higher you are (diamond altitude, a little under FL400), the farther you need to get away to be "unimpacted." Notice they admit the jamming area includes Mexican airspace. Do you think Europe might be next? Plot the lat-lon given in SeeYou, draw your circle at FL250 (yeah, it would be nice if they gave you 17,999) and if your path flies through that line, your record might be toast. They've got reasons for doing this, and in the really long view, I believe that at least SOME of what they do actually protects my ability (privilege) to fly and soar. Is it that difficult for IGC to allow camera backup to Logger GPS traces? For those that think there's an ulterior motive, I sold my Kodak stock years ago. Or should I take up bowling, instead? -Pete |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
GPS interference and contests
Bruce wrote:
ESA has not started "commercial" use of its satellites yet - most of it's stations are terrestrial at present - so I suppose for the very short term the view that "we own it we can do what we like with it is valid". By 2010 there will be two satellite systems. Then what? Technically, there are already two: GLONASS is the other, though I'll admit I've never seen a receiver for it. I read the other day that it had rather fallen on hard times, but that the Russians are about to bring the constellation back to full strength and possibly to open it up. I wonder if either Galileo or GLONASS will provide better polar coverage than GPS? There seems to be some confusion as whether current GPS receivers will work with Galileo. I understand that the frequencies are similar and the satellite IDs have been arranged to avoid clashes. I asked this question after an article on Galileo appeared in New Scientist: apparently the correct answer is "suck it and see" because nobody knows for sure. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org | |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
GPS interference and contests
309 wrote:
On Jan 21, 9:16 pm, Greg Arnold wrote: Does the military ever tell anyone what area is affected by the jamming? I don't see that in the NOTAM. It seems that would be useful information. See https://pilotweb.nas.faa.gov/distrib...nterQuery.html or: !GPS 01/021 ZLA GPS IS UNRELIABLE AND MAY BE UNAVAILABLE WITHIN A 324 NM RADIUS OF 372023.4N/1160158.4W (LOCATED WITHIN THE TONOPAH TEST RANGE) AT FL400, DECREASING IN AREA WITH DECREASE IN ALTITUDE TO 277 NM RADIUS AT FL250, 198 NM RADIUS AT 10,000 FT MSL AND 197 NM RADIUS AT 4,000 FT AGL. THE IMPACT AREA ALSO EXTENDS INTO THE MEXICAN FIR. 1900Z-0845Z DLY WEF 0801211900-0801260845 They're describing a VOLUME about the jamming point: the higher you are (diamond altitude, a little under FL400), the farther you need to get away to be "unimpacted." Notice they admit the jamming area includes Mexican airspace. Do you think Europe might be next? Plot the lat-lon given in SeeYou, draw your circle at FL250 (yeah, it would be nice if they gave you 17,999) and if your path flies through that line, your record might be toast. The 277 nm radius at FL250 roughly covers San Francisco to the west, San Diego to the south, and Salt Lake City to the east. I am not sure that this information is terribly helpful for pilots (power as well as soaring) who would like to know if they can believe what their GPS is telling them. They've got reasons for doing this, and in the really long view, I believe that at least SOME of what they do actually protects my ability (privilege) to fly and soar. I am skeptical. -Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
sectionals for contests | BB | Soaring | 17 | January 23rd 07 06:54 PM |
CONTESTS UPDATE USA # 711 reporting | [email protected] | Soaring | 2 | January 14th 06 09:19 PM |
SSA Web Page - Contests | Bob | Soaring | 8 | August 23rd 04 02:31 AM |
ideas for fun contests at fly-ins | Hoot | Piloting | 9 | April 30th 04 10:58 AM |
Motorglider participation in USA contests | Eric Greenwell | Soaring | 0 | October 11th 03 02:17 AM |