SoCal /G pilots beware

On second thought, I guess the thread should have been called "Southwest..." Since this covers such a wide area.
 
Well I guess it's for our own "safety" so that's OK.

Now if it was done by a non-government type we would call it terrorism.
 
Meh. GPS shouldn't be your only method of nav, and they gave prior notice. They own the system, they can F with it all they want.
 
Well it's the American people who own the system, I just don't see why they can't do this stuff in the middle of nowhere, where it won't effect operations.
 
Agreed. Although I think even though they give these warnings, in practical use service is affected very little.
 
James331 said:
Well it's the American people who own the system, I just don't see why they can't do this stuff in the middle of nowhere, where it won't effect operations.
Click to expand...
Umm, they did, as close as possible. Have you ever been to China Lake?

When the effects reach for many hundreds of miles, there is no "middle of nowhere."
 
Embraer Phenom 300 flight stability controls are affected. Seems odd that it would affect only one model of one aircraft. Using GPS to control the control surfaces of an airplane doesn't seem right.
 
MAKG1 said:
Umm, they did, as close as possible. Have you ever been to China Lake?

When the effects reach for many hundreds of miles, there is no "middle of nowhere."
Click to expand...

Sure there is, how about the artic, or over Iraq or over the ocean away from any oceanic routes or something.
 
James331 said:
Sure there is, how about the artic, or over Iraq or over the ocean away from any oceanic routes or something.
Click to expand...
Doing it in places where alternative means of electronic navigation are scarce doesn't seem like that great an idea.
 
James331 said:
Sure there is, how about the artic, or over Iraq or over the ocean away from any oceanic routes or something.
Click to expand...

You mean, disrupt navigation in areas of strategic military importance, over surface where passage is guaranteed by treaty, and over other sovereign nations?

Think about the consequences. It's rather obvious you need to do this in airspace you have sovereignty over.

Not to mention, it's difficult to establish ground stations where you don't have any ground.
 
Time to be ready to navigate,the old fashioned way. Now if the govt,hadn't disabled the loran system.
 
MAKG1 said:
You mean, disrupt navigation in areas of strategic military importance, over surface where passage is guaranteed by treaty, and over other sovereign nations?

Think about the consequences. It's rather obvious you need to do this in airspace you have sovereignty over.

Not to mention, it's difficult to establish ground stations where you don't have any ground.
Click to expand...

If the US military is disrupting a system they own, it should not matter where they do it even if it is over another nation. The world does not have a right to the system, they are only allowed to use it.
 
SkyDog58 said:
If the US military is disrupting a system they own, it should not matter where they do it even if it is over another nation. The world does not have a right to the system, they are only allowed to use it.
Click to expand...
You can explain that to the incoming fighters. Disrupting navigation is an act of war.
 
He is correct though. We're giving away the service for free. Technically we could do what we wanted.

That's one reason we have "Galeleio", GLONASS, etc.
 
dans2992 said:
He is correct though. We're giving away the service for free. Technically we could do what we wanted.

That's one reason we have "Galeleio", GLONASS, etc.
Click to expand...

TECHNICALLY, we have to abide by treaties we have signed. So does the EU and Russia.

No, intentionally disabling navigation outside our own airspace in peacetime is not allowed.
 
MAKG1 said:
TECHNICALLY, we have to abide by treaties we have signed. So does the EU and Russia.

No, intentionally disabling navigation outside our own airspace in peacetime is not allowed.
Click to expand...
Exactly which treaty guarantees GPS service?
 
Clark1961 said:
Exactly which treaty guarantees GPS service?
Click to expand...

The Convention on International Civil Aviation, for starters, guarantees each nation sovereignty over its own airspace, in the context of air navigation. The US is not allowed to usurp that sovereignty because it owns some critical equipment.

There are also issues of centuries-old maritime law. GPS is not only used for airplanes.
 
James331 said:
Sure there is, how about the artic, or over Iraq or over the ocean away from any oceanic routes or something.
Click to expand...

I've been the tanker for a few of these tests and along with the points Palmpilot and MAKG1 stated, these GPS tests use a lot of different airplanes. Some fighters, ISR, heavies, tankers. To stage all of those out of a remote OCONUS location would cost John Q. Taxpayer a lot of money.
 
James331 said:
Well it's the American people who own the system, I just don't see why they can't do this stuff in the middle of nowhere, where it won't effect operations.
Click to expand...
Yes, the American people bought GPS primarily for the military. One of the few good things Billy Clinton did was turn of selective availability.
 
SkyDog58 said:
None.
Click to expand...
Roger. DoD can muck with it at will, and they made certain to retain that authority over the years. As a practical matter, they use care and caution, and don't want to bollox up nav just for the heck of it. But, end of the day, it's US owned, under DoD control, and not guranteed to be available. Unless a LOT has changed since I was last cognizant, in 2007?
 
Has anyone ever experienced an actual outage due to these activities, or is the NOTAM "just in case something happens"?
 
dans2992 said:
Has anyone ever experienced an actual outage due to these activities, or is the NOTAM "just in case something happens"?
Click to expand...

Happened to us when we got near the area to refuel them.
 
What kind of exercises were they doing?

You could (almost) be considered a "participant" in the tests though...
 
MAKG1 said:
The Convention on International Civil Aviation, for starters, guarantees each nation sovereignty over its own airspace, in the context of air navigation. The US is not allowed to usurp that sovereignty because it owns some critical equipment.

There are also issues of centuries-old maritime law. GPS is not only used for airplanes.
Click to expand...
You are really reaching there. GPS does not equal navigation in those contexts.
 
I've been searching about the Phenom 300 stability thing and can't find anything that explains what the problem is. GPS affecting not only the navigation of an aircraft, but it's flyability also is not passing the logic check with me. But there is obviously something to it.
 
Clark1961 said:
You are really reaching there. GPS does not equal navigation in those contexts.
Click to expand...

Agreed. What if, one day, the US decided that they no longer had the budget to maintain GPS? I don't think that would go against any treaty...

If they follow the same pattern as NASA, soon, all the GPS satellites will de-orbit and we'll all be using GLONASS. ;)
 
dans2992 said:
Agreed. What if, one day, the US decided that they no longer had the budget to maintain GPS? I don't think that would go against any treaty...

If they follow the same pattern as NASA, soon, all the GPS satellites will de-orbit and we'll all be using GLONASS. ;)
Click to expand...

Nah, they've been adding "other things" to the GPS payloads for a while now. Better versions of "GPS", less jammable versions, yadda yadda. And who knows what else for NRO.

Civilian GPS is just along for the ride these days. Way easier to pitch the whole budget that way. It's a "GPS satellite" and those who know better aren't going to "vote against GPS" in Congress.

There's actually some nifty tricks coming for GPS once there's a few more launches and replacements. It's likely that WAAS as we know it, won't be necessary for higher accuracy, even for civilians.

Last I looked, quite some time ago, they were behind on launches of the new birds, but it was slowly coming along.
 
What would be the advantage of that? Pretty much everyone already has WAAS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top