5 ms·

Selective Availability was replaced by regional denial capabilities with the GPS III satellites, i.e. instead of fuzzing the signal the US can now turn off GPS

by avar 10y ago

Selective Availability was replaced by regional denial capabilities with the GPS III satellites, i.e. instead of fuzzing the signal the US can now turn off GPS for entire countries[1]. It's strategically foolish for the major economies like the EU, Russia & China to depend on the US's goodwill in maintaining a system that drives a huge part of their economy, GPS is used pervasively for everything, and that's only increasing. Trump wants NATO countries to pay their fair share, how long until he gets the idea that all countries around the world should pay a GPS licensing fee least GPS regional denial be turned on? Those are the sort of reasons for why it makes sense to develop a GPS alternative, even if you're only aiming for feature parity, or even less than that. 1. https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/techops/navservices/gnss/faq/gps/#ad1 https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/at...

user837387 10y ago
>>Trump wants NATO countries to pay their fair share, how long until he gets the idea that all countries around the world should pay a GPS licensing fee least GPS regional denial be turned on?<< Now now, do not insert political commentary into this discussions. I got yelled at for doing that. [1] [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13197536 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13197536
- mattnewton 10y ago
  I don't think this is unwarranted political comentary, the reasons to build the alternative to gps are largely political according to GP
  - Normal_gaussian 10y ago
    I am largely with you, however the direct Trump referencing is unwarranted - it is the institution he will represent, not the man, which is involved in this political battleground. EDIT: to wit, the institution is the most powerful military force, active across the globe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Uni...
    - MBCook 10y ago
      He doesn't represent the administration, he leads it. It seems perfectly fair and reasonable reason to mention the power the president has in the situation given some of the president elect's statements.
swatkat 10y ago
>>> It's strategically foolish for the major economies like the EU, Russia & China to depend on the US's goodwill in maintaining a system that drives a huge part of their economy, GPS is used pervasively for everything, and that's only increasing. Exactly. For this same reason, India recently deployed its own satellite navigation system NAVIC[1][2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Regional_Navigation_Satellite_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Regional_Navigation_Sat... [2] http://www.isro.gov.in/irnss-programme http://www.isro.gov.in/irnss-programme
- alexqgb 10y ago
  Russia's GLONASS too, antennas for which have been built into iPhones since the 4S. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLONASS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLONASS
  - nradov 10y ago
    Most smartphones designed in the past few years support GLONASS. Russian law requires GLONASS support to be sold there, so manufacturers have generally added it across their model lines since that's easier than producing different SKUs for sale in Russia.
- satbyy 10y ago
  Indeed. In the India-Pakistan Kargil war of 1999, USA sided with Pak and turned off GPS for Indian troops. That led to the creation of NAVIC http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/How-Kargil-spurred-India-to-design-own-GPS/articleshow/33254691.cms http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/How-Kargil-s...
  - saiya-jin 10y ago
    seriously, WTF is wrong with US and their attitude towards India/Pakistan. India is democracy, never attacked anybody out of blue from 1947 when it was created (unlike its neighbors Pakistan and China who attacked it numerous times). Yet US sides with dictatorship which doesn't even control its own secret service which creates its own terrorist organizations (laskar-e-taeba).
jhayward 10y ago
I've never seen an authoritative reference for any area denial capability in block III. Can you provide one? There is an enhanced footprint signal boost capability for the military but that's the opposite of what you describe.
- avar 10y ago
  I think the FAA is an authoritative reference, and I linked to their claims about GPS III regional denial in my original post.
  - jhayward 10y ago
    Ah, I see where the misunderstanding arises. The reference to regional denial on that page is not a feature of any GPS satellite. The military has airborne and surface-based electronic warfare platforms that can be used to jam GPS. That's what is referenced on that page. The FAA is not considered an authority for GPS, with the exception of certifying that WAAS is in-service for aircraft when it is meeting FAA specifications. For civilian information purposes the appropriate agency is the US Coast Guard NAVCEN. The Air Force Space Command is the holds primary developmental, specification, and operational responsibility.
    - avar 10y ago
      Yes I'm pretty sure you're right. I wrote most of my comment from memory and just dug up a reference, knowing the FAA doesn't operate GPS, but figured their FAQ was summarizing the satellite features. But I've searched around and can't find anything that indicates that this is a feature of the satellites themselves, rather it's just as you say, the US military has replaced SA with the general ability to jam local radio traffic, including GPS. E.g. [1] is another source for that. So it does look like the US can't block GPS for entire countries anymore, I take that back. I must say though, I think any public commentary about GPS capabilities should be taken with a huge grain of salt. It's a military system, they're very likely lying or not telling the full truth about what it's really capable of. E.g. I find the claim that the new generation can't do SA by design dubious, surely just fuzzing the signal by some offset is a rather trivial change. 1. https://web.archive.org/web/20050921115614/http://ngs.woc.noaa.gov/FGCS/info/sans_SA/docs/GPS_SA_Event_QAs.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20050921115614/http://ngs.woc.no...
themihai 10y ago
Actually US can still jam Gallileo. US "asked" EU to patch it so that it can be controlled(turned off) by the US in case of war with Russia or China.
- msl 10y ago
  The "patch" was changing to a different frequency band, allowing anyone to block only one system without affecting the other [1]. This is very much different from being able to turn it off. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(satellite_navigation)#Tension_with_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(satellite_navigation)...
  - planteen 10y ago
    I think OP meant jam. I believe at some point in the discussions about the Galileo frequencies that the US threatened that they may need to use an ASAT weapon on Galileo spacecraft if they believe the system was being used against them. That would have been the only way to maintain GPS and stop Galileo. So Galileo switched to a different frequency than GPS.

by avar 10y ago

user837387 10y ago

>>Trump wants NATO countries to pay their fair share, how long until he gets the idea that all countries around the world should pay a GPS licensing fee least GPS regional denial be turned on?<< Now now, do not insert political commentary into this discussions. I got yelled at for doing that. [1] [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13197536 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13197536

mattnewton 10y ago
I don't think this is unwarranted political comentary, the reasons to build the alternative to gps are largely political according to GP
- Normal_gaussian 10y ago
  I am largely with you, however the direct Trump referencing is unwarranted - it is the institution he will represent, not the man, which is involved in this political battleground. EDIT: to wit, the institution is the most powerful military force, active across the globe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Uni...
  - MBCook 10y ago
    He doesn't represent the administration, he leads it. It seems perfectly fair and reasonable reason to mention the power the president has in the situation given some of the president elect's statements.

swatkat 10y ago

>>> It's strategically foolish for the major economies like the EU, Russia & China to depend on the US's goodwill in maintaining a system that drives a huge part of their economy, GPS is used pervasively for everything, and that's only increasing. Exactly. For this same reason, India recently deployed its own satellite navigation system NAVIC[1][2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Regional_Navigation_Satellite_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Regional_Navigation_Sat... [2] http://www.isro.gov.in/irnss-programme http://www.isro.gov.in/irnss-programme

alexqgb 10y ago
Russia's GLONASS too, antennas for which have been built into iPhones since the 4S. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLONASS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLONASS
- nradov 10y ago
  Most smartphones designed in the past few years support GLONASS. Russian law requires GLONASS support to be sold there, so manufacturers have generally added it across their model lines since that's easier than producing different SKUs for sale in Russia.
satbyy 10y ago
Indeed. In the India-Pakistan Kargil war of 1999, USA sided with Pak and turned off GPS for Indian troops. That led to the creation of NAVIC http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/How-Kargil-spurred-India-to-design-own-GPS/articleshow/33254691.cms http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/How-Kargil-s...
- saiya-jin 10y ago
  seriously, WTF is wrong with US and their attitude towards India/Pakistan. India is democracy, never attacked anybody out of blue from 1947 when it was created (unlike its neighbors Pakistan and China who attacked it numerous times). Yet US sides with dictatorship which doesn't even control its own secret service which creates its own terrorist organizations (laskar-e-taeba).

jhayward 10y ago

I've never seen an authoritative reference for any area denial capability in block III. Can you provide one? There is an enhanced footprint signal boost capability for the military but that's the opposite of what you describe.

avar 10y ago
I think the FAA is an authoritative reference, and I linked to their claims about GPS III regional denial in my original post.
- jhayward 10y ago
  Ah, I see where the misunderstanding arises. The reference to regional denial on that page is not a feature of any GPS satellite. The military has airborne and surface-based electronic warfare platforms that can be used to jam GPS. That's what is referenced on that page. The FAA is not considered an authority for GPS, with the exception of certifying that WAAS is in-service for aircraft when it is meeting FAA specifications. For civilian information purposes the appropriate agency is the US Coast Guard NAVCEN. The Air Force Space Command is the holds primary developmental, specification, and operational responsibility.
  - avar 10y ago
    Yes I'm pretty sure you're right. I wrote most of my comment from memory and just dug up a reference, knowing the FAA doesn't operate GPS, but figured their FAQ was summarizing the satellite features. But I've searched around and can't find anything that indicates that this is a feature of the satellites themselves, rather it's just as you say, the US military has replaced SA with the general ability to jam local radio traffic, including GPS. E.g. [1] is another source for that. So it does look like the US can't block GPS for entire countries anymore, I take that back. I must say though, I think any public commentary about GPS capabilities should be taken with a huge grain of salt. It's a military system, they're very likely lying or not telling the full truth about what it's really capable of. E.g. I find the claim that the new generation can't do SA by design dubious, surely just fuzzing the signal by some offset is a rather trivial change. 1. https://web.archive.org/web/20050921115614/http://ngs.woc.noaa.gov/FGCS/info/sans_SA/docs/GPS_SA_Event_QAs.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20050921115614/http://ngs.woc.no...

themihai 10y ago

Actually US can still jam Gallileo. US "asked" EU to patch it so that it can be controlled(turned off) by the US in case of war with Russia or China.

msl 10y ago
The "patch" was changing to a different frequency band, allowing anyone to block only one system without affecting the other [1]. This is very much different from being able to turn it off. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(satellite_navigation)#Tension_with_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(satellite_navigation)...
- planteen 10y ago
  I think OP meant jam. I believe at some point in the discussions about the Galileo frequencies that the US threatened that they may need to use an ASAT weapon on Galileo spacecraft if they believe the system was being used against them. That would have been the only way to maintain GPS and stop Galileo. So Galileo switched to a different frequency than GPS.