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 |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
GNS430 on the Airway
Matt Barrow wrote:
wrote in message news:5I9If.38637$JT.20875@fed1read06... ted wrote: Sorry, my intended audience was people who could read english. I thought we were having a reasonable technical discussion. Instead, you are another Usenet droid asshole. That's rich...coming from the original Usenet droid asshole/****house lawyer. Well stated by one of the Usenet's finer jerk off inmates. |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
GNS430 on the Airway
Those involved in planning see it differently. That is why the new RNAV (RNP) criteria presumes a failure of GPS during a terrain-critical phase of flight. Is that because of the physics and architecture of the GPS/WAAS system or is it because the system is still new and not yet proven through enough testing and actual flight experience? It's because the known failure rate is considerably higher than with either VOR or ILS. Really? Where did you get that data? Show us your source. A long history of FAA ground-based nav aids has shown very, very little problem with the ground components of the system. And, where it occurs there is usually an alternate nav aid or aids available. It seems you missed the point. The original point was that the chance of a failure of GPS is not a rationale for preferring ground based navaids because ground based navaids can fail as well. No one said or implied that ground based navaids have a high probability of failure. If I missed the point then you didn't do a very good job of making that point. ted wrote: Sorry, my intended audience was people who could read english. wrote I thought we were having a reasonable technical discussion. Instead, you are another Usenet droid asshole. Sorry if I hurt your feelings. If you are truly interested in a technical discussion then why didn't you answer the question above? where did you get that data? |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
GPS jamming
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 13:52:03 GMT, "Ted" wrote:
Threat to GPS Fizzled The Great GPS Scare turned out to be a false alarm. You don't fly do you? Otherwise you'd have seen large areas where GPS was deemed unreliable while the tesing was going on in the US. As far as homing weapons... In your own country? That would go over really big with the civilians who already aren't happy. In the run-up to the war, some had expressed concern that Iraqi forces could employ inexpensive jammers to disrupt the relatively weak signal emitted by Global Positioning System satellites circling the Earth. Disruption of this nature would have put a severe kink in USAF's ability to use GPS-guided weapons and navigate in the desert. However, the problem proved to be largely unfounded, as coalition forces used GPS-guided weapons with impunity. DOD data shows that coalition forces by April 5 had dropped more than 3,000 Joint Direct Attack Munitions, just one type of GPS-guided weapon. Early in the conflict, there were reports that Iraq had obtained several GPS jammers, possibly from a Russian supplier. Maj. Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., Central Command operations director, announced March 25 that coalition forces had identified six of these jammers and had destroyed all six. Roger |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
GPS jamming
Oops, sorry...I hit CTRLN (send) before CTRLI (Insert sig)
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
GPS jamming
"Roger" wrote in message ... On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 13:52:03 GMT, "Ted" wrote: Threat to GPS Fizzled The Great GPS Scare turned out to be a false alarm. You don't fly do you? Otherwise you'd have seen large areas where GPS was deemed unreliable while the tesing was going on in the US. Did you actually read the article? It was talking about jamming GPS in a war zone not during testing. If you have a problem with the contents of the article then I suggest you take it up with the author. As far as homing weapons... In your own country? That would go over really big with the civilians who already aren't happy. Obviously a civilian enforcement action and not military would be appropriate for civilian interference issues. You don't know much about law enforcement, do you? In the run-up to the war, some had expressed concern that Iraqi forces could employ inexpensive jammers to disrupt the relatively weak signal emitted by Global Positioning System satellites circling the Earth. Disruption of this nature would have put a severe kink in USAF's ability to use GPS-guided weapons and navigate in the desert. However, the problem proved to be largely unfounded, as coalition forces used GPS-guided weapons with impunity. DOD data shows that coalition forces by April 5 had dropped more than 3,000 Joint Direct Attack Munitions, just one type of GPS-guided weapon. Early in the conflict, there were reports that Iraq had obtained several GPS jammers, possibly from a Russian supplier. Maj. Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., Central Command operations director, announced March 25 that coalition forces had identified six of these jammers and had destroyed all six. Roger |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
GPS jamming
Ted wrote:
"Jim Carter" wrote in message .com... -----Original Message----- From: ] Posted At: Sunday, February 12, 2006 5:53 AM Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr Conversation: GNS430 on the Airway Subject: GNS430 on the Airway ted wrote: wrote in message news:%_hHf.33984$JT.6861@fed1read06... ...clipped for brevity... [Jim Carter] Continuity means the reliability of the primary GPS sats themselves. They can have a sat failure or, more likely, jamming. [Jim Carter] Unless control of the satellite management system can be achieved, and the entire constellation interrupted, wouldn't jamming be a localized event based on the radiation pattern and power of the jamming transmitter? And to continue jamming wouldn't the transmitter have to stay active, making it a pretty easy target for any of several modern weapons systems that don't rely on GPS for navigation? http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/agm-88.htm http://www.vectorsite.net/twbomb8.html HARM Block 3a and 5 software updates have completed testing and were incorporated as a software only engineering change starting in August 1999. The software improves missile performance against several threat countermeasures... The Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) project is adding to the Block VI capability by demonstrating technology for RF homing integration with an active millimeter wave terminal seeker to provide a counter-shutdown capability. Fielding this capability could be in the 2005 timeframe. http://www.military-aerospace-techno....cfm?DocID=685 http://www.chips.navy.mil/archives/0..._files/GPS.htm http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news001/gpsnews001.htm http://www.afa.org/magazine/May2003/0503road.asp Threat to GPS Fizzled The Great GPS Scare turned out to be a false alarm. In the run-up to the war, some had expressed concern that Iraqi forces could employ inexpensive jammers to disrupt the relatively weak signal emitted by Global Positioning System satellites circling the Earth. Disruption of this nature would have put a severe kink in USAF's ability to use GPS-guided weapons and navigate in the desert. However, the problem proved to be largely unfounded, as coalition forces used GPS-guided weapons with impunity. DOD data shows that coalition forces by April 5 had dropped more than 3,000 Joint Direct Attack Munitions, just one type of GPS-guided weapon. Early in the conflict, there were reports that Iraq had obtained several GPS jammers, possibly from a Russian supplier. Maj. Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., Central Command operations director, announced March 25 that coalition forces had identified six of these jammers and had destroyed all six. The wink link in Air Traffic control is not GPS but communications. The FAA still uses AM VHF transmitters and receivers for AT communications. Very easy to jam and disrupt. One idiot with one radio could spread havoc around a major US airport. If the person stays mobile virtually impossible to locate and detect. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
GNS430 on the Airway
Ala stuck mic?
-----Original Message----- From: DILLIGAF ] Posted At: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 9:26 PM Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr Conversation: GNS430 on the Airway Subject: GPS jamming Ted wrote: The wink link in Air Traffic control is not GPS but communications. The FAA still uses AM VHF transmitters and receivers for AT communications. Very easy to jam and disrupt. One idiot with one radio could spread havoc around a major US airport. If the person stays mobile virtually impossible to locate and detect. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Odd clearance -- airway given twice | Roy Smith | Instrument Flight Rules | 15 | September 20th 05 03:32 PM |
GNS430 Installation | Wayne Sweet | Home Built | 0 | October 3rd 04 04:39 AM |
B-RNAV with GNS430 | Daniel Hofer | Instrument Flight Rules | 1 | September 1st 04 04:12 PM |
Wanted: Blank Datacard Garmin GNS430 | Marco Leon | Piloting | 4 | August 31st 04 06:20 PM |
Wanted: Blank Datacard Garmin GNS430 | Marco Leon | Owning | 3 | August 31st 04 03:33 PM |