Bush Prepares for Possible GPS Shutdown

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

So, you're saying there are no GPS approaches whose missed approach
procedures rely upon GPS?


Aren't you required to have means to execute a non-GPS approach at either
your destination or alternate to be legal?

The real impact of this sort of thing will be (1) to convince the
Europeans/Russians/Chinese to deploy their own GPS-type system (effectively
obviating the advantage of being able to shut down the US system) and (2) to
prevent use of GPS as a true sole-source navigation system.

-cwk.

Larry Dighera wrote:

So, you're saying there are no GPS approaches whose missed approach
procedures rely upon GPS?

Dunno about that, but according to an article in the most recent AOPA Pilot, you
can't shoot a WAAS approach without some other navigation system (like a VOR
glide slope receiver) in the plane.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

C Kingsbury wrote:

The real impact of this sort of thing will be (1) to convince the
Europeans/Russians/Chinese to deploy their own GPS-type system

The U.S.S.R. had one at one time. What happened to it? Couldn't afford the
upkeep?

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 20:56:06 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in
GDmwd.582233$D%.446179@attbi_s51::

This is news?

The President has always had broad powers in times of national emergency,
and can disable (or enable) some or all parts of the national airspace --
including GPS, ILS, VOR, and NDB.

If you had read the news provided at the link in the original article,
you'd know:

The directives to the Defense Department and the Homeland Security
Department were part of a space policy that Bush signed this
month.

I'm sure they've got some contingencies to shut down access to the internet, for that matter.

You haven't a clue how the Internet operates. There is no Internet
central authority.

The President has always had broad powers in times of national emergency,
and can disable (or enable) some or all parts of the national airspace --
including GPS, ILS, VOR, and NDB.

If you had read the news provided at the link in the original article,
you'd know:

The directives to the Defense Department and the Homeland Security
Department were part of a space policy that Bush signed this
month.

I did read the article, and these directives are nothing new. What's new is
the media -- and you -- noticing them.

I'm sure they've got some contingencies to shut down access to the
internet, for that matter.

You haven't a clue how the Internet operates. There is no Internet
central authority.

I didn't say they could shut down the internet. I said they would shut down
your ACCESS to the internet. Surely you aren't so gullible as to believe
that the government couldn't shut down AOL, Mediacom, Qwest, and the dozen
or so other ISPs that provide 95% of Americans with internet access in time
of national emergency?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Aren't there some of the newer planes that are coming out with GPS only
panels?

mike regish

wrote in message
oups.com...

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:08:48 -0500, "Chris Gumm" wrote
in ::


http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/ns/news/...&w=APO&coview=



Mo


http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=248&a=103...a&s=rb041 215

================================================== ==============


This begs the question, what do you do if you're on a GPS approach
when they shut the system down?


You mean other than go missed and shoot something else? Kind of similar
to what you'd do if your GPS went South on you in the middle of an
approach?

Cap

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:GDmwd.582233$D%.446179@attbi_s51...
This is news?

The President has always had broad powers in times of national emergency,
and can disable (or enable) some or all parts of the national airspace --
including GPS, ILS, VOR, and NDB. I'm sure they've got some contingencies
to shut down access to the internet, for that matter.



Exactly. In your country and mine, Powers to shut down ports, roads,
bridges, airports, civil liberties, put troops in the streets, etc... have
always been there "in times of national emergency".

You have to excuse some questioning of these powers, however, because no one
is exactly sure what constitutes "national emergency". Does something
affecting 10 percent of the population constitute "national emergency"? 1
percent? 1 in 100,000? 1 in a million? Does a poised hostile armed force of
100,000? A few thousand? Several hundred militants and a bunch of
rabble-rousers? Armed with mostly light weaponry? Armed with atomic bombs?

We know full well that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts
absolutely.... which is why democracies were born in the first place. The
use of "power" in a "National Emergency" does not scare most people....
except for the power to define what is a bona fide "National Emergency"
requiring those powers.

Gotta be a "liberal" to be concerned about that, huh?

mike regish

"Jeff Franks" wrote in message
...

No, I didn't read that anywhere in his post. I believe his intent was to
say that it's obvious that many a liberal will go nuts about how we're all
screwed now that the government has a plan to shut down GPS (which I had
always understood that this was in place anyway). If terrorists are
somehow using our own GPS system against us, then I'm all for shutting it
down (or limiting it to military use somehow).

More the reason to keep the VOR's working.

jf

You haven't a clue how the Internet operates. There is no Internet
central authority.

Not that many border-gateway routers connecting US backbones to the rest of
the country though, which becomes a different argument. Unlikely, but not
overly difficult to isolate the USA from the internet if need be.

When Selective Availability was disabled in the Clinton administration,
regional disruption of the GPS signal was the stated
"back-up"/"alternative". This is not new news in the least.

Dave

Chris Gumm wrote:

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/ns/news/...&w=APO&coview=