US military wants to jam EU Galileo satellite frequencies

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Czar
http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/energy_transport/galileo/intro/future_en.htm
about the accuracy of the system

Boy that page is just downright misleading!

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Czar
http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/energy_transport/galileo/intro/future_en.htm
about the accuracy of the system

Boy that page is just downright misleading!

?

 

[dpm]

Originally posted by: Dari
That's a terrible example. The earlier example I give earlier was better. Despite that fact that it is mostly a research entity, the ISS shows that man can work together without unnecessary competition. Furthermore, Europe and the US are part of the same defense club, NATO. It is stupid to create a redundant system that everyone (except our enemies) is happy with. Instead of competing with the US, the Europeans should compliment our system with something else. If the Europeans have something to say they should come out and say what their intentions are, rather than hiding behind a weak excuse. BTW, making redundencies is one thing. Making redundencies that will be available to our Chinese, North Korean, and Iranian rivals is totally unacceptable.

The current US GPS system is just as available to the Chinese, North Koreans etc as Galileo will be; ie only as far as its controllers let it be. Bear in mind that Galileo is not designed for the needs of today - it is designed for the needs of the EU for the next 30-50 years. Can the EU garuantee that the US will always agree with it, or even always be there to back it up? No. So there is a need to be self sufficient.

The ISS is a wonderful example of International cooperation, Dari. But when it comes to defense things don't work that way. In terms of defense the cardinal rule is that you cannot rely on anyone else sticking up for you - you must plan to be able to defend yourself, by yourself. This is why the US doesn't buy fighters or ships built or designed abroad. This is why the EU developed the Typhoon, or the French developed the Rafale, or the Chinese developed that upgraded mig-21 thing they fly. In something as important as your national defense you CANNOT rely on anyone else - no matter how friendly they may be today, even if its the US.

15 years ago the US and Saddam were friends and the US and the Russians were enemies. 50 years ago the French and Germans were fighting each other, and the US, Russians and Chinese were fighting side by side. You simply cannot rely on another country remaining your friend forever!

Europe, as a political entity, is starting to become serious. In the next 20 years it could easily become a world power. As other regional blocks form, or consolidate their power, it will be necessary to develop its defensive powers, and that needs starting today. Therefore the work on the RDF, or Galileo.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Czar
and oh yeah, why worry about china using the galileo system, china certanly isnt that interested
http://www.computerworld.com/mobiletopics/mobile/story/0,10801,82464,00.html

In another development, Mike Shaw, director of radio navigation and positioning in the Office of Science and Technology at the U.S. Department of Transportation, said the U.S. has some concerns that China has started to develop its own satellite navigation system. He said China has launched test navigation satellites but has not asked for a spectrum allocation through the International Telecommunications Union (ITU).

wrong. Read up more on the Chinese and Galileo.

 

[dpm]

Originally posted by: Zebo
[As I said it's too easy to cause our population centers extreme harm by rouge regimes .

OT: I'm seeing 'rogue state' spelt as 'rouge' so often now that I'm starting to wonder if its not a typo, but a clever Rogue state/ communist allusion...

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Czar
and oh yeah, why worry about china using the galileo system, china certanly isnt that interested
http://www.computerworld.com/mobiletopics/mobile/story/0,10801,82464,00.html

In another development, Mike Shaw, director of radio navigation and positioning in the Office of Science and Technology at the U.S. Department of Transportation, said the U.S. has some concerns that China has started to develop its own satellite navigation system. He said China has launched test navigation satellites but has not asked for a spectrum allocation through the International Telecommunications Union (ITU).

wrong. Read up more on the Chinese and Galileo.

ofcorse they are interested, everyone is interested, but do you think they want to trust europe for a positioning system?
is that maybe they want their own, like Europe does, like the US does, but yeah, pretty much what dpm posted

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Czar
http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/energy_transport/galileo/intro/future_en.htm
about the accuracy of the system

Boy that page is just downright misleading!

?

It's misleading for two reasons:

It implies that GPS cannot be used for accuracy of less than 40m. The charts imply that Galileo will improve the accuracy and then note in a footnote that that chart is dependent on future upgrades to the GPS system.

http://www.wileyeurope.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0471306266.html

The link above is to a text book you can purchase that will detail the use of GPS for determining position for land surveying. This requires Horizontal and vertical accuracy in the mm. GPS can and is used as the most highly accurate method of land measurement in the world. AFAIK the systems don't even use the secure channel of GPS that is more accurate.

I see no need for a civilian GPS-like system that can deliver cm accuracy in a $50 handheld device. There is no need or reason to spend the billions necessary for that kind of accuracy in cheap handhelds.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: dpm

Originally posted by: Dari
That's a terrible example. The earlier example I give earlier was better. Despite that fact that it is mostly a research entity, the ISS shows that man can work together without unnecessary competition. Furthermore, Europe and the US are part of the same defense club, NATO. It is stupid to create a redundant system that everyone (except our enemies) is happy with. Instead of competing with the US, the Europeans should compliment our system with something else. If the Europeans have something to say they should come out and say what their intentions are, rather than hiding behind a weak excuse. BTW, making redundencies is one thing. Making redundencies that will be available to our Chinese, North Korean, and Iranian rivals is totally unacceptable.

The current US GPS system is just as available to the Chinese, North Koreans etc as Galileo will be; ie only as far as its controllers let it be. Bear in mind that Galileo is not designed for the needs of today - it is designed for the needs of the EU for the next 30-50 years. Can the EU garuantee that the US will always agree with it, or even always be there to back it up? No. So there is a need to be self sufficient.

The ISS is a wonderful example of International cooperation, Dari. But when it comes to defense things don't work that way. In terms of defense the cardinal rule is that you cannot rely on anyone else sticking up for you - you must plan to be able to defend yourself, by yourself. This is why the US doesn't buy fighters or ships built or designed abroad. This is why the EU developed the Typhoon, or the French developed the Rafale, or the Chinese developed that upgraded mig-21 thing they fly. In something as important as your national defense you CANNOT rely on anyone else - no matter how friendly they may be today, even if its the US.

15 years ago the US and Saddam were friends and the US and the Russians were enemies. 50 years ago the French and Germans were fighting each other, and the US, Russians and Chinese were fighting side by side. You simply cannot rely on another country remaining your friend forever!

Europe, as a political entity, is starting to become serious. In the next 20 years it could easily become a world power. As other regional blocks form, or consolidate their power, it will be necessary to develop its defensive powers, and that needs starting today. Therefore the work on the RDF, or Galileo.

Again, that sounds noble and all. But you speak as if Europe is a country or as if all Europeans think alike. What happens when/if Europe disintegrates? Llike you said, no one knows what the future holds. So, if this open secret is out, that Galileo is mainly a defense project, then why can't it work under the aegis of NATO. Or if it is an international project, then why not under the UN or under a US-Euro initiative? Who can be sure that the EU will be what federalist Europe envision?

By the way, what is "Europe?"

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: kage69
Jam away!

i feel the same.

 

[dpm]

Originally posted by: Dari
Again, that sounds noble and all. But you speak as if Europe is a country or as if all Europeans think alike. What happens when/if Europe disintegrates? Llike you said, no one knows what the future holds. So, if this open secret is out, that Galileo is mainly a defense project, then why can't it work under the aegis of NATO. Or if it is an international project, then why not under the UN or under a US-Euro initiative? Who can be sure that the EU will be what federalist Europe envision? By the way, what is "Europe?"

Don't get me started on what exactly Europe is Whether its the the Atlantic to the Urals, or to the volga, or whether its anyone who wants to call themselves European, today Europe means the EU/EFTA/Switzerland as well as anyone else in line to join.

Ok, Europe is not a country, but the EU is a supra-national entity, and likely to become more integrated rather that less, as time goes on. After all - look at the US. As time passed after the revolution, did the States gain more independance, or did the (at that time) supra-national entity the US get more integrated?

Galileo is certainly not an international project. It is a EU project, just as GPS was a US project. And Galileo will not be put under UN or NATO control for exactly the same reasons that GPS was not put under UN or NATO control.

 

[freegeeks]

I read somewhere that there were some issues with GPS because the USA limited the use of it during the first Gulf war. That had also consequenses for European GPS users. This is one the main reasons why the EU wants its own system. To be independant in a crucial technology

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: rahvin
The link above is to a text book you can purchase that will detail the use of GPS for determining position for land surveying. This requires Horizontal and vertical accuracy in the mm. GPS can and is used as the most highly accurate method of land measurement in the world. AFAIK the systems don't even use the secure channel of GPS that is more accurate.

I see no need for a civilian GPS-like system that can deliver cm accuracy in a $50 handheld device. There is no need or reason to spend the billions necessary for that kind of accuracy in cheap handhelds.

only the US has access to the "improved" precision and according to the other article during the war they managed to improve that precision to 3m

 

[Dari]

Well, this topic is probably being discussed more intensely at much higher levels. So long as we can destroy it or jam its frequency, I can sleep better at night.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: dpm

Originally posted by: Zebo
[As I said it's too easy to cause our population centers extreme harm by rouge regimes .

OT: I'm seeing 'rogue state' spelt as 'rouge' so often now that I'm starting to wonder if its not a typo, but a clever Rogue state/ communist allusion...

I'm pretty illiterate so I can't tell you what's proper spelling but most seem to get the gist. I know it can be annoying, it bothers me even sometimes when seeing mistakes I recognise but of course who am I to judge? They need to put a spell checker in forums.

 

[B00ne]

As far as I know GALILEO is mainly a commercial system - that is why industry is supposed to take its share in the cost. And yes apart from the fact that the future need more accuracy as well as higher reception reliability another reason for the system is that the US limit the possibilities of GPS as they see fit. Also bear in mind that our airspace is a lot more crowded and increasingly so - there is a need for further precision also decreasing the timeframes between trains on one track requires higher precision - the list of uses is long.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: dpm

Originally posted by: Dari
That's a terrible example. The earlier example I give earlier was better. Despite that fact that it is mostly a research entity, the ISS shows that man can work together without unnecessary competition. Furthermore, Europe and the US are part of the same defense club, NATO. It is stupid to create a redundant system that everyone (except our enemies) is happy with. Instead of competing with the US, the Europeans should compliment our system with something else. If the Europeans have something to say they should come out and say what their intentions are, rather than hiding behind a weak excuse. BTW, making redundencies is one thing. Making redundencies that will be available to our Chinese, North Korean, and Iranian rivals is totally unacceptable.

The current US GPS system is just as available to the Chinese, North Koreans etc as Galileo will be; ie only as far as its controllers let it be. Bear in mind that Galileo is not designed for the needs of today - it is designed for the needs of the EU for the next 30-50 years. Can the EU garuantee that the US will always agree with it, or even always be there to back it up? No. So there is a need to be self sufficient.

The ISS is a wonderful example of International cooperation, Dari. But when it comes to defense things don't work that way. In terms of defense the cardinal rule is that you cannot rely on anyone else sticking up for you - you must plan to be able to defend yourself, by yourself. This is why the US doesn't buy fighters or ships built or designed abroad. This is why the EU developed the Typhoon, or the French developed the Rafale, or the Chinese developed that upgraded mig-21 thing they fly. In something as important as your national defense you CANNOT rely on anyone else - no matter how friendly they may be today, even if its the US.

15 years ago the US and Saddam were friends and the US and the Russians were enemies. 50 years ago the French and Germans were fighting each other, and the US, Russians and Chinese were fighting side by side. You simply cannot rely on another country remaining your friend forever!

Europe, as a political entity, is starting to become serious. In the next 20 years it could easily become a world power. As other regional blocks form, or consolidate their power, it will be necessary to develop its defensive powers, and that needs starting today. Therefore the work on the RDF, or Galileo.

Again, that sounds noble and all. But you speak as if Europe is a country or as if all Europeans think alike. What happens when/if Europe disintegrates? Llike you said, no one knows what the future holds. So, if this open secret is out, that Galileo is mainly a defense project, then why can't it work under the aegis of NATO. Or if it is an international project, then why not under the UN or under a US-Euro initiative? Who can be sure that the EU will be what federalist Europe envision?

By the way, what is "Europe?"

GPS started as an US military project. They didn't want anybody else involved (even their European allies).
Why should the EU involve the USA in the Galileo. It's always the same story.

1)Europe starts some project
2)the USA thinks that the project could affect its supremacy in some screwed up way
3)the USA says that we should cooperate in these project
4)the USA forgets that it probably has dozens of secrets projects that it doesn't want to "share" with its allies (see the GPS project initially)

and about desintegration, maybe the USA will fall apart in 50 years, who knows

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: Dari
Well, this topic is probably being discussed more intensely at much higher levels. So long as we can destroy it or jam its frequency, I can sleep better at night.

Here is a link to some of the U.S. arguments. The format is powerpoint.

Text

html link

 

[dpm]

Originally posted by: Dari
Well, this topic is probably being discussed more intensely at much higher levels. So long as we can destroy it or jam its frequency, I can sleep better at night.

Things to make you worry at night then ; ( )
1) GPS is only as secure as its base stations;

<FONT face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2>While most mission control facilities for U.S. space systems are located within the continental U.S., there are still many of these facilities located outside the U.S., in remote areas, which can make physical security of the site difficult. For example, the Global Positioning System (GPS) has five fixed monitoring stations, and four fixed ground antennas located around the world. The accuracy of the GPS system is highly dependent on contact between the GPS satellites, the five fixed monitoring stations and the GPS Master Control Station in Colorado.<a href="#rft19" name=ft19><B>(19)</B></A> Loss of some of the monitoring stations or ground antennas could result in a significant decrease in GPS performance worldwide. If the GPS system were to experience widespread failure or disruption, the impact could be serious. Loss or degradation of GPS timing could disable the majority of pager and cellular telephone networks around the world; disrupt the global banking and financial system, which depends on GPS timing to keep worldwide financial centers connected; and interrupt the operation of electric power distribution systems. Loss of the precision navigation data from GPS could affect search and rescue, as well as air and sea navigation worldwide.

2) A nuke set off in LEO could wipe out nearby sats through EMP, and slowly kill ones further away,

3) China may already be working on a more direct ASAT capability;

<FONT face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2>There are examples of plans to use microsatellite technology to develop and deploy long-duration orbital ASAT interceptors. The Sing Tao newspaper recently quoted Chinese sources as indicating that China is secretly developing a nanosatellite ASAT weapon called "parasitic satellite." The sources claim this ASAT recently completed ground testing and that planning was underway to conduct testing in space. The Chinese ASAT system is covertly deployed and attached to the enemy's satellite. During a conflict, commands are sent to the ASAT that will interfere or destroy the host satellite in less than one minute.<a href="#rft49" name=ft49><B>(49)</B></A>

</FONT>


source - read it and worry!</FONT>

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: rahvin
The link above is to a text book you can purchase that will detail the use of GPS for determining position for land surveying. This requires Horizontal and vertical accuracy in the mm. GPS can and is used as the most highly accurate method of land measurement in the world. AFAIK the systems don't even use the secure channel of GPS that is more accurate.

I see no need for a civilian GPS-like system that can deliver cm accuracy in a $50 handheld device. There is no need or reason to spend the billions necessary for that kind of accuracy in cheap handhelds.

only the US has access to the "improved" precision and according to the other article during the war they managed to improve that precision to 3m

Correction: Only the US millitary has access to the millitary grade precision. If you clicked the link I posted you will notice it's a bloody EUROPEAN textbook on using GPS for Commerical Land Surveying. GPS has the accuracy desired right now, you just have to set up on a known location/elevation (benchmark) to correct out the error.

There is absolutely NO need for an additional system that provides that level of accuracy in hand-held devices. None. I don't need a hand-held device that is more accurate than 100m let alone 40m and neither do you or anyone else.

The accuracy argument is a pathetic attempt to justify a system that is going to spend billions of euro's of tax money on something that's only purpose is to eliminate control by the US of the positioning system.

This movement is undoubtably driven by the French who are desperately afraid that french culture is going to be destroyed by US influence if they don't actively and aggresively try to destroy that influence. The worst part is that they are trying to tell you that you need this system and using missleading statements and justifications to try to convince you.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: rahvin
The link above is to a text book you can purchase that will detail the use of GPS for determining position for land surveying. This requires Horizontal and vertical accuracy in the mm. GPS can and is used as the most highly accurate method of land measurement in the world. AFAIK the systems don't even use the secure channel of GPS that is more accurate.

I see no need for a civilian GPS-like system that can deliver cm accuracy in a $50 handheld device. There is no need or reason to spend the billions necessary for that kind of accuracy in cheap handhelds.

only the US has access to the "improved" precision and according to the other article during the war they managed to improve that precision to 3m

Correction: Only the US millitary has access to the millitary grade precision. If you clicked the link I posted you will notice it's a bloody EUROPEAN textbook on using GPS for Commerical Land Surveying. GPS has the accuracy desired right now, you just have to set up on a known location/elevation (benchmark) to correct out the error.

There is absolutely NO need for an additional system that provides that level of accuracy in hand-held devices. None. I don't need a hand-held device that is more accurate than 100m let alone 40m and neither do you or anyone else.

The accuracy argument is a pathetic attempt to justify a system that is going to spend billions of euro's of tax money on something that's only purpose is to eliminate control by the US of the positioning system.

This movement is undoubtably driven by the French who are desperately afraid that french culture is going to be destroyed by US influence if they don't actively and aggresively try to destroy that influence. The worst part is that they are trying to tell you that you need this system and using missleading statements and justifications to try to convince you.

what is wrong in investing in a technology that makes us less dependant of the USA. The EU wants this freedom just like the USA has right now with its GPS system. We have the money for it. It seems like a nice project for European
tech companies

like I said before, the USA wants lapdogs, not a strong ally with a mind of its own

 

[Zebo]

The worst part is that they are trying to tell you that you need this system and using missleading statements and justifications to try to convince you.

Haha ravin sounds like almost every project over here too. What we need for department of *defense* is quite different than the *offensive* nature of most projects. Unless you prescribe to the view the best defense is a good offense. I don't. I think it leads to offensive tactics and uses by having these toys at our disposal. I think our guys understand this too about this european system which is why they want to prevent it.

 

[kage69]

I'd like to think a "strong ally with a mind of it's own" wouldn't support a new system like this which could be used by rogue states.
And yes, the French going about their 'defense against Anglo influences' is most likely a cause for this all. It wouldn't surprise me in the least.

 

[Czar]

kage, whats your definition of a rouge state?

 

[kage69]

Appearing pink, red, or 'flushed.' Rosacea too I suppose, why, what's yours?

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: kage69
Appearing pink, red, or 'flushed.' Rosacea too I suppose, why, what's yours?

lol, just classic.