The old L1L2 sats are getting old and leaking chem trails. Thats what it's all about.
At least thats what Ted told me.:-|
Timmy
Some people think that clean air and clean water is a good thing.
Well, I can do both as I have robotics and single frequency gps. But I was at my state's convention and the local Trimble dealer had a lot more Total Stations displayed than GPS equipment. Hmmm?
I remember reading something to this effect, went and found it--took a photo. This is on the Locus receivers which are now going on 12 or 13 years old.
And I read the pdf attached to the article. Bottom line, the gubmint wants all the rural "democrats" to have a 4G mobile phone with service from T-Mobile, whether they can pay for it or not.
wasn't there plans to discontinue L1 transmission sometime near 2020? i did read about it somewhere.
i want to say this is why leica switched to upgradeable antenna types in their 1200 series. we would remove the L1 antenna for L3 or L5, whichever becomes its replacement.
can someone else vouch for me on this one?
this is why leica switched to upgradeable antenna types in their 1200 series. we would remove the L1 antenna for L3 or L5, whichever becomes its replacement.
can someone else vouch for me on this one?
Yeah! The Leica salesman!
😉
> this is why leica switched to upgradeable antenna types in their 1200 series. we would remove the L1 antenna for L3 or L5, whichever becomes its replacement.
>
> can someone else vouch for me on this one?
>
>
>
> Yeah! The Leica salesman!
>
>
> ;-)""
maybe the leica salesman.
ok, found some citations:
http://www.gpsworld.com/survey/survey-amp-construction-newsletter-early-november-7302
http://www.gpsworld.com/survey/survey-amp-construction-newsletter-early-september-2008-7298
will look for others
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pdf/L1/L1C-report-long.pdf
page 111, among others
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pdf/2008_Federal_Radionavigation_Plan.pdf
SECTION 3.2.7
from federal register e docket e8-11148:
The U.S. Government acknowledges the global use of GPS codeless and
semi-codeless techniques and plans to maintain the existing GPS L1 Y-
code and L2 Y-code signal characteristics until such time that an
alternative capability exists to replace it. Since 1999, the Department
of Defense has worked closely with the civilian agencies on the
National Executive Committee for Space-Based PNT (and its predecessor,
the Interagency GPS Executive Board) to add new capabilities to GPS
that supplant the need for codeless/semi-codeless access. In 2005, the
U.S. Air Force began launching modernized GPS satellites featuring a
new civil signal at L2 called L2C. L2C is designed to work in
combination with the legacy civil signal (called C/A) at L1 to enable
high accuracy without codeless/semi-codeless techniques. In 2009, the
Air Force will begin adding a third civil signal called L5 to all new
GPS satellites. L5 will also work in combination with L1 C/A and/or L2C
to enable high accuracy without codeless/semi-codeless techniques.
The National Executive Committee for Space-Based PNT seeks to
encourage the development and adoption of next-generation GPS receivers
that achieve high accuracy via use of L2C and/or L5 instead of
codeless/semi-codeless techniques. To facilitate business decisions and
stable planning for equipment developers and end users, the National
Executive Committee intends to set a fixed target date for the
equipment transition.
The National Executive Committee proposes December 31, 2020, as the
target date for transitioning the installed base of codeless/semi-
codeless GPS equipment to next-generation capabilities utilizing the
modernized civil GPS signals. This date is based upon the current
launch schedule for the GPS program, which will have 24 GPS satellites
transmitting the L2C signal to users by 2016, and 24 GPS satellites
transmitting L5 by 2018. The date is also based on preliminary
discussions the Office of Space Commercialization has held with GPS
equipment manufacturers. The manufacturers indicated that a transition
period of approximately ten years should be sufficient to allow the
installed base of codeless/semi-codeless GPS users to re-equip with
next-generation receivers as part of their normal equipment
amortization, obsolescence, and upgrade cycle.
Should there be unforeseen delays in the GPS modernization program,
the National Executive Committee will reassess the target date for the
transition.
After the transition date, the characteristics of the Y-code
signals transmitted by modernized GPS satellites may change without
further notice and may preclude codeless/semi-codeless use of the Y-
code signals. However, for those legacy satellites that have no
modernized capabilities, codeless/semi-codeless access to Y-code at L1
and L2 will continue until those satellites are decommissioned."""
or is my tinfoil hat on too tightly?
L5 Is Ten Years Away
At the rate of current replacement it will be at least 10 years before enough useful L5 satellites are in place. L5 will not be more precise it will just have a stronger signal, especially stronger than L2. It means one might get one or two more satellites in "view" in urban areas. However those extra signals may actually be passing through buildings so the ranging distances would be very suspect.
Precision however comes from 2 different signals, currently L1 and L2. With L1 and L5 the spread will be a bit wider and allow for better differencing. If L1 is lost then we are stuck with differencing L2 to L5 which is a very narrow spread. Atmospheric correction will be come a greater problem. For truly precise work L1, L2 plus L5 will give 3 differences, hence precision from very short observations.
What I don't get is how Immarsat sold their L1 license which was for them to broadcast the WAAS L1 correction signal to a third party LightSquared and then FCC is allowing LightSquared to transfer a space licences to terrestial transmitters.
What we need is for congress to pass an GPS anti-jamming law, which would prevent LightSquared from any interference and subject to individual lawsuits similar to "Do Not Call".
What worries me is if this is a government conspiracy to stop doing something for free and allowing commercial entities to take the market. Then in a few years you would have to pay LightSquared a fee to use your GPS.
Even worse is if it can be shown that LightSquared is a Chinese or Middle East owned entity. Within one second they could put the US out of the GPS business without having to disable a single satellite.
Paul in PA
L5 Is Ten Years Away
I guess I'm too old to worry about it too much. I started out with a chain, transit and brush hook and could go back to it if necessary. The tools have been changing for a long time now, and they will continue to do so for better or worse. We just had a training session of civil 3-d, so now I'm going to have to relearn how to use ACAD, oh joy 😉 Adapt or go extinct.
DJJ
Looks like its back...
to setting grade stakes...
If this happens no more machine control!!
L5 Is Ten Years Away
In a manner it is actually a good thing that the existing satellites are routinely exceeding their predicted service life by so much. All things in time.
I sense a huge investment opportunity
Hi Wendell, and Angel,
Two quotes from the link you provided:
"If it weren’t for its detrimental consequences on GPS, I’d think that LightSquared’s system would be a great idea – high-speed wireless Internet access in most populated places, and lower-speed access anywhere in the world by satellite. And if the FCC wants to propose regulations requiring better frequency band filtering in GPS receivers, and other types of satellite-band-based systems, to allow exactly these kind of systems to be developed in the future, I could get on board with that as well. But it should be up to LightSquared to prove that their system won’t interfere with GPS the way it is right now. GPS is the established system – twenty years of operation, hundreds of millions of receivers, uncountable numbers of applications. If LightSquared interferes with GPS, it should be required either to fix the problem itself, or be denied permission to function. That the FCC would even consider LightSquared’s proposal without modification, much less approve it, is astonishing."
"As a privately held company, LightSquared is not subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or the reporting requirements of any other jurisdiction."
Just a soon as an IPO is mentioned, I,m on board!
Hope Noodles is up to speed :-), and have a great weekend.
Well something is not right.
I think perhaps that the issue is being misunderstood. There are folks using these frequenceia and it is more than just surveyors. The FCC has NO power over the defense department, for example.
What is likely to happen is that if there are proposed conflicting uses proposed for the same frequency, is that something is going to move. Fore example L1 may go away, but new recievers will come out that use L-C-2, L5, and L-C-5 or someother scheme.
I think the forest is being missed for the tree.
Well something is not right.
> For example L1 may go away, but new receivers will come out that use L-C-2, L5, and L-C-5 or some other scheme.
That's cool, in time. In the short run, my perfectly good GPS gear will quit working and a constellation of satellites will become orbiting white elephants.
Mark you know that is the game
You know it is the game. This happens with software and hardware all the time. I hate it but what choice do we have? The fact that these things are in flux now has have made me hold off on buynig much needed second hand gear.
I sense a huge investment opportunity
I wouldn't jump on that IPO. If any of this is true, I'd assume the law suits, ranging from the DOD, GPS manufactures, car manufactures, emergency responders, anyone with GPS (From cell phones to surveyors & machine control), etc, would bankrupt the company ...
I sense a huge investment opportunity
Won't be an IPO anytime soon. Philip Falcone is the money behind LightSquared, and he has deep pockets. They've already signed a 7 billion dollar deal with Nokkia/Siemens to supply the network infrastructure.
