3 ms·
Is that really true? INS/inertial navigation systems accumulate errors over time, GPS is still required for them, its not a replacement?
by lyu07282 3y ago
Is that really true? INS/inertial navigation systems accumulate errors over time, GPS is still required for them, its not a replacement?
- jandrewrogers 3y agoAdvanced INS drifts very slowly, it only needs to meet a precision target for a finite period of time. Military INS only accepts GPS corrections within the (classified) drift model and larger military platforms crowdsource position from a network of INS units distributed throughout the hardware to lower the noise floor. For this reason, the amount of deflection you can induce by spoofing GPS undetected in military systems is measured in meters, which for high-precision work might be enough. The trope that you can make a military system fly off in a completely different direction by spoofing GPS is fiction. There is a fair amount of circumstantial evidence that state-of-the-art US military INS tech can exceed the precision of non-spoofed GPS for long durations. Some new military system specifications no longer accept GPS corrections. It is important to note that US military INS is a different animal than what is widely available in the commercial world. It is exotic tech and a closely held secret that has been under continuous R&D for half a century. The ubiquitous laser gyros we use now in high-precision applications were developed for US military applications in the 1960s and eventually de-classified.
- lxgr 3y agoVery interesting. I hope some of that progress will eventually trickle down into e.g. civilian aviation – GPS jamming seems to be a growing concern there.
- throw0101c 3y ago> Some new military system specifications no longer accept GPS corrections. Curious: are there specific MILSTDs / STANAGs / whatever that you can cite for this?