×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New GPS Standard Published

michael posted more than 12 years ago | from the dont-need-no-stinking-directions dept.

Technology 111

jeffy124 writes: "The Dept of Defense has released a new standard for GPS. The new standard will go into become available for use starting in 2003 when the first satellites are launched. Full completion is estimated to 2014. The new standard allows for greater horizontal accuracy of 36 meters instead of 100 meters, and also sets a new baseline for transmission protocols that circumvent ionic interference."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

111 comments

new grenwich line ? (1)

johnjones (14274) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456153)

the GPS does not line up with genwich so are all the maps wrong in the world (excempting US which contain the error)

or is GPS wrong

(-;

standards

regards

john jones

Re:new grenwich line ? (4, Interesting)

epsalon (518482) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456167)

Actually, it does line up.
In greenwich they have museum about longitude measurment, and they have there a GPS device (turned on) and it shows almost 000 latitude (almost because it's a few meters away from the line itself).

Re:new grenwich line ? (2)

mpk (10222) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458858)

It's all a matter of datum, I think. I've been down to Greenwich with a GPS-12 and stood on the line, and it was shown as being just slightly off. Maybe 13 seconds or something -- can't remember, as my GPS with the waypoints concerned is at home.

The GPS displayed zero about 30m west of the line. Of course, this might all just be a matter of measurement accuracy, and a matter of the datum in use. Not enough of a difference to worry about, anyway...

FP !!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456156)

First post!
nah this sounds really cool, but 2003? thats ages away! I wonder if the technology is backwards compatibly with todays GPS hand units. Talking of satellites, what happened to that guy who was gonna launch a bunch if g4 cubes in space a while back? anyone have some ideas?

Re:FP !!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456221)

"Forty seconds to deep-fry a buffalo? But I want it NOW!"

-Homer Simpson

Current GPS can do 1m resolution (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456158)

NOW, obviously for military usages. "The new standard allows for greater horizontal accuracy of 36 meters instead of 100 meters, and also sets a new baseline for transmission protocols that circumvent ionic interference" -- now this all wrong, SlashDot editors READ YOUR STORY, it clearly says - "DoD, as operator of the GPS, now provides civil users a horizontal positioning accuracy of 36 meters, compared to 100-meter accuracy in the previous edition of the standard, which was published in 1995. ". NOW, not in the NEW standard.

Furthermore this won't change non military use (2)

Nailer (69468) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456192)

A long term friend of mine makes his living as a solo gold miner. Despite these artificial limitation posed by the the US and Australian DoD, apparently everyone who's wanted to has been able to get accuracy to within fifteen meters for quite some time now.

Unfortunately, I'm not too sure on the specifics whic hallow this. Do the sattellites give bad readings which can be easily re-set to their true value, is some kind of interpretarion of multiple results possible (a kind of triangulation)? Either way, this has been the case for over five years.

Re:Furthermore this won't change non military use (2)

stripes (3681) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456210)

Unfortunately, I'm not too sure on the specifics whic hallow this. Do the sattellites give bad readings which can be easily re-set to their true value, is some kind of interpretarion of multiple results possible (a kind of triangulation)?

From what I understand the low bits have some noise added to them. The noise is an encrypted stream, so a military GPS with the key can reproduce the noise and cancel it out.

Other GPSes have a few choices. If you sit in one place and avg together all the samples you get a value that converges on your real location (because the noise is more or less random, if it were fixed this wouldn't work, but something else would!). You can also use two GPSes, but I kind of forget exactly how this works. I *think* you keep one at a fixed point, and have it broadcast the delta between it's known position and the position that is being broadcast, your mobile GPS uses that delta to find the real location (this may only work if you are looking at the same satellites)

SA (1)

Tungz10 (99857) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458088)

The noise you refer to is known as Selective Availability (SA). It's an error that drifts over time. I believe it takes about a day to average it out exactly. Also, the DOD turned off SA a few years ago. Although with recent events it may be turned back on again if it hasn't already.

Now the error is the same for the same general area. So you can leave one gps at a known location and carry a second gps around with you. From the first GPS you transmit the error (you know where you are and you know where it says you are, you transmit the difference). And then subtract that error from the second gps to get extremely good accuracy. This is known as Differential GPS and I think it can achieve accuracy to about a meter.

Re:Furthermore this won't change non military use (2)

Yokaze (70883) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456211)

It's called Differential GPS (DGPS). (GPS is already triangulation of different signals sources)
AFAIK, the signals are delayed according to a certain algorithm (known to the DOD).
But there are several fixed GPS receivers which compare the measured position and the real position. The comparision yields a correction factor for the various signals from the different GPS-satellites.
Here is some short explanation [trimble.com]

Re:Furthermore this won't change non military use (1)

Tha_Zanthrax (521419) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456243)

AFAIK, the signals are delayed according to a certain algorithm (known to the DOD). The delay is known by everybody. The GPS satelites constantly emit their (atom)clock's time and their ID, a GPS-receiver uses those times to calcutate the source's distance.

Re:Furthermore this won't change non military use (1)

Yokaze (70883) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456325)

Not quite, the delay between sending the signal and recieving the signal is known by everybody, but with varying accuracy.
The small variation (the "delay" I'm writing of) added to the sending time-stamp is only known to the DoD.

Re:Furthermore this won't change non military use (2)

nathanm (12287) | more than 12 years ago | (#2457822)

The delay you're thinking of was called "Selective Availability," and was globaly shut off on May 1, 2000. The DOD did reserve the degrade it over a specific region though (possibly by jamming the signal).

Isn't GPS a lot more accurate ?! (1)

Tha_Zanthrax (521419) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456216)

I designed a program a little while ago which tracks big slabs of steel placed in stacks of 10 slabs high on one big 'parking lot' at a steelfactory. Cranes roll around the lot moving around slabs, controlled by orders given from a server. Each slabs GPS-location and position in it's pile is stored on the servers DataBase. The crane sends the current weight in it's grabbingthinghy to the server which then calculates how many slabs are picked from which pile.

But back to he point, those cranes are accurate to 5 metres/15 feet. See how GPS works [howstuffworks.com] more information. This page only leaves out on thing. They state you need 3 satelites to make out your position. They don't mention that it's posibble to make calculations with more than 3 satelites. In that case you end up with several position with which the actually position is interpollated. This works quite well because on most places on earth you receive signals from 4 or 5 satelites which means you don't get 1 position but 2 or even 3.

Re:Furthermore this won't change non military use (2)

mindstrm (20013) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456326)

No.. they can't be easily re-set to their true value; otherwise, there would be no point.

It's some noise in the low-order bits to introduce some added error.
It's been removed, as of last January, I thought. It was known as 'selective availability' or 'sa'. See, sometimes GPS MIGHT be really accurate, but not always.

Surveryors, etc, use DGPS (Differential GPS) where they use a GPS receiver at a known, precise location, so they can calculate the error being introduced by the satellites in question so they can get more accurate readings. It works very well.

The main reason that precision readings without DGPS are dangerous, I read, is because of mid-course corrections for ballistic missiles.... you see, to change the target, you change direction halfway through, way up in the air... at the top of your arc. A small margin of error at this level makes a huge margin of error on the ground.

Re:Furthermore this won't change non military use (2)

topham (32406) | more than 12 years ago | (#2457206)

After doing a lot of research on the net regarding GPS (having purchased one a few months ago) I'd like to comment on what you've said. DGPS only gets about 3-5meter accuracy (95% of the time, or some such statistic). DGPS is used to counter selective availability and some of the distortion caused by various atmospheric conditions. Survey units use a more robus version which actually gives them only distance from a specific point. (A very precise point mind you). If you know where that point is located very accuratly you can convert the data to get precise locations. Unfortunatly there are a large number of errors which have to be accounted for and the results for survey units look bizzar.

The really cool thing is, if you have 2 garmin units you can post-process the information later and get a very similar level of accuracy. But again, it is only as good as the set point you started with.

Re:Furthermore this won't change non military use (2)

nathanm (12287) | more than 12 years ago | (#2457958)

DGPS only gets about 3-5meter accuracy (95% of the time, or some such statistic). DGPS is used to counter selective availability and some of the distortion caused by various atmospheric conditions. Survey units use a more robus version which actually gives them only distance from a specific point. (A very precise point mind you).
Actually, DGPS is old news. Before that, you could do post-processing of the data from a base station receiver over a known position & another receiver. DGPS addded telemetry to each receiver, but you still had to sit at a point for 15-30 min to get 1 m accuracy at 95% Circular Error of Probability (CEP).

With newer technology & dual channel receivers, the accuracy is much better. Now, there is Real-Time Kinetic (RTK) surveying, which can give 1 m accuracy at 95% CEP in actual real-time. DGPS nowadays can get better than 5 cm accuracy at 95% CEP sitting at a point for 10-15 min.

Re:Furthermore this won't change non military use (1)

tmdybvik (70460) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456489)

Three ways to increase accuracy of a GPS:

1. Averaging.
Average position data over a long time. Will immensely increase accuracy, because errors (and selective availability) tends to even out over time. However, I believe the precision of the end result is not completely deterministic.

2. DGPS Get another GPS. Put other GPS in a fixed, known location. Connect to this GPS to your actual positioning GPS, by means of radio, cable, wireless ethernet or similar. Both GPS's should be roughly in the same geographical region, and "see" the same satellites. Any significant positioning error introduced by timing issues (or selective availability) in the GPS system will be the same for both units. Hence, the fixed GPS will calculate a delta, wich will be added by the mobile GPS.

3. Y-code
Obtain key for use in military GPS, allowing GPS to decrypt/use y-code to correct the errors introduced in P-code. Increases resolution to 'bout 11m. (Note: this method is, post 2000, not interesting in most areas of the world, since selective availability has been turned off.)

Re:Furthermore this won't change non military use (3, Informative)

nathanm (12287) | more than 12 years ago | (#2457926)

Despite these artificial limitation posed by the the US and Australian DoD, apparently everyone who's wanted to has been able to get accuracy to within fifteen meters for quite some time now.
It's not an "artificial" limitation. When they say GPS has a 36 m accuracy, they mean there is a 95% Circular Error of Probability (CEP) that it will locate your horizontal position on the Earth's surface any day within a 36 m sphere. It's quite possible that the position is more accurate. Some days, the accuracy with a 95% CEP has been as low as 7.8 m, and the 50% CEP as low as 2.9 m (both with only single frequency receivers).

Do the sattellites give bad readings which can be easily re-set to their true value, is some kind of interpretarion of multiple results possible (a kind of triangulation)? Either way, this has been the case for over five years.
Before May 1, 2000 "Selective Availibility" introduced a timing error that limited the 95% CEP accuracy to 100 m for civilian receivers. It's been turned off for good now, but the DOD has reserved the right to degrade the signal in a specific region, probably by jamming it.

Re:Current GPS can do 1m resolution (1)

GPSguy (62002) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458082)

OK. I really hate to be pedantic about this but let's talk.

1. When you talk about the 100m accuracies, 36m accuracies, 1m accuracies, 5 decimeter accuracies, 1 cm accuracies, etc. in general, you're talking about achievable reproducability with regard to "truth." More on this shortly.
2. Depending on how you account for the various error terms, the CURRENT system and standard allow for autonomous L1, C/A code-phase accuracies of about 29m.
3. Since Selective Availability was discontinued, I and others in the "game" have demonstrated routine L1 C/A code-phase autonomous accuracies of 6-10m, with most of the autonomous accuracies leaning toward 6,
4. The guys who determine error budgets are pessimists (God, I love those guys). They assume that all error terms are scalar additive values. So, they assume that there's no way an error term can be included in the error budget to your advantage. Thus, an error budget that is 6x larger than what I'm seeing regularly.

With a lot of work, long term observations, and use of a variety of hybrid GPS and conventional surve techniques, as well as using a number of sites with methods of ascertaining their relative positions to precise levels, without using GPS, we have been able to cross-correlate the international network of survey monumentation (more true in the CONUS than some other countries) to GPS positioning. Geodesists use network adjustment statistics (least-squares method) to minimize errors and use stable geometric networks to determine the coordinates in 2D or 3D space of an unknown point of interest. Densification of this network leads to a network that allows land surveyors to use either GPS or conventional monumentation with a degree of confidence.

When we refer to a 36m error budget, as the DoD spec does, it's a worst case scenario, and is consistent with the current signal specifications. As we enhance the GPS system with additional signals and methods, we should be able to refine the spec to reflect "reality" over time.

The 100m error budget mentioned refers to a 27-36m error budget for autonomous L1, C/A code phase systems, intentionally degraded using a pseudorandom algorithm called Selective Availability. This was a method of denying precise positioning to a potential enemy of the US. Over time, the integration of techniques, methods and systems to augment GPS autonomous positioning, as well as new techniques (I'm making a few assumptions now) that selective area degradation (denial of quality of service in selected regions/areas) as well as in-theatre jamming led to a US decision to terminate Selective Availability last May. With that, improved C/A positioning was obtained, with an almost instantaneous accuracy of 6m according to hose who were watching and looking for changes.

In short, the collective errors associated with troposphere (water vapor), ionospheric scintillation (solar influence) and refraction, those associated with signal multipath, Rayleigh propagation, and clock errors associated with both the user-receiver and those vaguaries on the spacecraft themselves... not to mention relativity, conspire to degrade the signal. The pessimists call it 36m. The engineers call it, currently, about 6m in my area (Texas; YMMV if you're close to the poles or near the South Atlantic Anomoly). And for those with some older receivers, you have to measure it and ascertain reality for yourselves.

There's no way you're going to reliably obtain a 1m autonomous GPS positional accuracy sans augmentation (WAAS, DGPS, etc). If you think you can, let's talk. I want to confirm your procedures and see if it's publishable.

Can we do better using carrier phase techniques? Sure. I can routinely use 2 receivers (or more, or the US NGS-housed CORS system) and get horizontal accuracies in a least-squares network adjustment on the order of 1cm (2 sigma). But that's not what you were implying.

Invalid form key! (-1)

Bilton (517325) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456161)

Invalid form key: oehKUq5Lk3 ! If you this error seems to be incorrect, please provide the following in your report to SourceForge: Browser type User ID/Nickname or AC What steps caused this error Whether or not you know your ISP to be using a proxy or some sort of service that gives you an IP that others are using simultaneously. How many posts to this form you successfully submitted during the day * Please choose 'formkeys' for the category! Thank you.

GPS accuracy (1)

flonker (526111) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456163)

The new performance standard codifies a change announced last year to discontinue DoD's ability to decrease GPS accuracy. See http://www.ostp.gov/html/0053_2.html [ostp.gov]

This announcement just when the ground war in Afghanistan is starting. Didn't they originally decrease the accuracy specifically for military reasons?

Re:GPS accuracy (2, Interesting)

vondo (303621) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456181)

Yes, but now they are decreasing the accuracy just in the Afganistan area with what they call Selective Availability.

Clinton issued the order to discontinue this obfuscation of the signal because of the SA capability and because he realized the benefits to businesses and ordinary people of doing it.

As a side note, during Desert Storm the GPS system became more accurate because most of the troops had off the shelf GPS units, not the military grade units.

Did you say "circumvent"? (3, Funny)

epsalon (518482) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456164)

"circumvent ionic interface"...

In other news, GPS have been announced as circumvention devices under the DMCA, due to the fact that some copyright protection method has been annouced to use ionic iterference...

Hey! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456165)

Stop reading crap open source loosers, go back and flip some burgers instead!

Re:Hey! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456170)

Hello, you are funny, just a quick question, where do you work?

DMCA! DMCA! (3, Funny)

TheMidget (512188) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456166)

and also sets a new baseline for transmission protocols that circumvent ionic interference

Hey, but won't the ionosphere sue them for DMCA infringment?

With improvements like these (1, Redundant)

Fat Casper (260409) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456173)

What kind of crack are they smoking that they want to give up the ability to downgrade non-military sets? Maybe it's just to lull folks into a false sense of security.

I've never used a civilian set, and now I never want to. How the hell can anyone tolerate 100 meter accuracy? I can do better than that by looking at a map. Now it'll someday get down to 36 meters? Damn, I get pissed off when I can only get it down to 10 meters.

Re:With improvements like these (2)

phil reed (626) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456190)

What kind of crack are they smoking that they want to give up the ability to downgrade non-military sets?


Because "non-military" sets are turning up as essential navigation equipment in places like ships and airplanes, where +/- 100 meter accuracy would be a disaster waiting to happen.


That plus they can now selectively degrade the accuracy in a small region, plus jam it in even smaller regions, means they don't need to worry so much about degrading non-military GPS.

Re:With improvements like these (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456196)

fuck slashdot and your formkey you lazy bitches. Fix that crap.

Re:With improvements like these (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456371)

disaster waiting to happen? On a boat, hardly. If you are close enough to hit something, you are probably close enough to see it, too, and have better methods for determining your position (in other words, you don't need to use a GPS to do coastal navigation.) And a GPS will not save you from hitting another boat if you aren't looking where you are going. If you are offshore, then 100m is as accurate as it needs to be, eg. to aim for England rather than France.

I've used it plenty in the great lakes. Trust me, civilian GPS works just fine, for private and commercial vessels.

Re:With improvements like these (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456262)

If you were at sea, or in some other remote area with a "civilian" handheld GPS unit, I'd say 36 meters (118.11 feet for us Americans) would be "close enough" to get you back to port or the campground safely.

And as far as being able to get yourself closer than 36 meters on say a USGS quad map, you must be damn good, considering that the difference between this:

29 55' 33" N
096 24' 16" W

and this:

29 55' 33" N
096 24' 15" W

Is about 100 feet. (30.4801m).

Re:With improvements like these (2)

topham (32406) | more than 12 years ago | (#2457241)

You will easily get 10meter horizontal accuracy from an off the shelf unit today. Vertical accuracy is another story. (Seems they try to accumulate the error ito the vertical component, makes sense if your on the ground, sucks if your in the air.)

Is this really new? (1)

Zakal (301678) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456175)

It sounds like this was already done last year, they are just documenting it now. Although it was planned for 2006, the intentional degradation was turned off early. So there really isn't anything new here.

First Dildo Post!!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456176)

This is all very well, but can GPS help me find my MicroPenis(TM)? I haven't seen it for quite some time...

Part II of the First Dildo Post!!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456179)

This need is exceedingly urgent, as I have been unable to masturbate in the absence of my MicroPenis(TM). Can anyone shed any light on either issue?

:o)

How to find your MicroPenis(TM) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456203)

Get a Beowulf cluster made out of the freshest hot grits you can find. You should be able to feel the stirrings as you get hard. Then, take a turkey baster and gently brush over your groin. Soon, you shall be masturbating with ease.

Re:How to find your MicroPenis(TM) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456217)

It also helps if you can digest a voodoo doll of Natalie Portman. Rectally.

MOD PARENT UP!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456222)

It works!!! It works!!! Thank you, AC!!!!

:o)

I want to see Wil Wheaton's peepee (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456227)

Yes, I do. I bet it looks really nice.

Me too. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456231)

But I am not a homosexual. I just want a simple woody war with him.

Current GPS can do better than that... (5, Informative)

Cerlyn (202990) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456183)

A civilian differential GPS reciever always was able to do better than what selective availabilty should have allowed. These units gave (and still give) accuracies within 15 meters or so. Given a Loran compensation reciever (used to pick up posititioning signals meant for boats), one can improve on this accuracy by using additional known transmitters located at ground-based reference points.

If you want "new" GPS units that were recently releaesd in the past year or so, look for units with the Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS). Implemented alongside with the FAA, these units rely on two additional satilite signals for an average accuracy of three meters.

Obligatory manufactuers links: Garmin's GPS description page [garmin.com] and Magellan [magellangps.com] , another GPS supplier.

Re:Current GPS can do better than that... (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456213)

Cool. Thanks for the info. I was planning to get a Garmin GPS V in a couple weeks and now I'll check these units out again.

Re:Current GPS can do better than that... (1)

pomakis (323200) | more than 12 years ago | (#2457332)

My Garmin eTrex Vista GPS unit, which uses the new WAAS technology, is accurate enough to know which lane of the road I'm on!

There's one important thing to note about WAAS, however - It's currently only available in North America. More information about WAAS can be found here [garmin.com] .

Backdoors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456184)

Does this standard include backdoors in it?

Re:Backdoors (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456186)

Only Mr Goatse's.

:o)

Backwards compatible? (5, Interesting)

case_igl (103589) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456185)

I read over a few of the links but not the full spec. Will this be backwards compatiable or will the current generation of GPS devices just use the old satellite constellation until it dies?

I can just see it now...All the new GPS applications being developed needing to be tossed.
Anyone have some details on this?

Also, as GPS becomes more and more important to the world in general, who is paying the bill? And what price do other countries "pay" if they rely heavily on GPS that is US controlled?

I don't mind the US being "humanitarian" but it's troubling to think that we will basically be custodians of what could eventually be the primary method of navigation for lots of things.
Suddenly sanctions against country X means that planes there can't fly, lost puppies can't be found, and GPS tied 911 type services fail.

Re:Backwards compatible? (0, Flamebait)

Michael The Nifty (525352) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456206)

Suddenly sanctions against country X means that planes there can't fly, lost puppies can't be found, and GPS tied 911 type services fail.

Ya mean, that the planes would fly through between the towers instead of hitting them? And what's the bit about the lost puppy? The puppy is certainly easyer to find on the 83th floor, rather than in a large pile of rubble.

Re:Backwards compatible? (2)

OverCode@work (196386) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456606)

GPS is, in my opinion, one of the coolest things the Dept of Defense has done. Sure, you can criticize them for controlling an important world resource, but keep in mind that they took the initiative to design and build this resource, at the cost of billions of dollars. There's nothing stopping any country from launching its own navigation satellites, but until they come up with that kind of money and sufficient technology, I think it's pretty damn nice of the US to provide the service for free.

I have a portable GPS receiver (Magellan 315, highly recommended), and I love it. I've never used it for anything really serious, just a bit of mountain hiking. Set a waypoint at your house, and it's impossible to get totally lost. Geocaching (http://www.geocaching.com) is also a lot of fun -- I've found two caches so far.

As for backwards compatibility, keep in mind that the military would need to upgrade all of its hardware too, which would be pretty expensive. I don't think they'll break backwards compatibility unless they have to. If they suddenly rendered existing GPS receivers obsolete, I suspect there would be a large public outcry, and the DoD really doesn't need bad PR, especially now...

-John

Re:Backwards compatible? (2)

Remote (140616) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458031)

There's nothing stopping any country from launching its own navigation satellites, but until they come up with that kind of money and sufficient technology, I think it's pretty damn nice of the US to provide the service for free.

I think its very nice too, but the Russians have a comparable system for some years now. Check http://giswww.pok.ibm.com/gps/gpsweb.html#Header_5 0 [ibm.com] for details. I can't find a link now, but some people are considering building receivers that work with both systems so as to improve accuracy/reliability.

Re:Backwards compatible? (1)

nexthec (31732) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458670)

been done....very spendy, and very accurate I guess.....but I have nothing to back this up, I cant seem to find any links

Re:Backwards compatible? (1)

GPSguy (62002) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458719)

Javad/TopconGPS; Ashtech-Magellan; Trimble Navigation; Leica; Novatel.

Lots of folks have implemented dual-system receivers that incorporate GLONAS and GPS. Selective Availability was never incorporated into GLONAS. I've done some real-time surveying with GPS-GLONAS dual systems that were impressive in their ability to maintain lock even in areas where there was a lot of physical masking of the sky, because they had so many (14-16, for me) satellites in view at the same time.

Oh, and for the spatially challenged, GPS does NOT incorporate triangulation, but rather, trilateration.

Re:Backwards compatible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2458788)

Europe will build their own system, GNSS, to avoid this dependancy on the US.
As others have written, Russia already has a system.

They forgot the last item in the timeline (3, Funny)

nizo (81281) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456193)

In 2016, as part of the new anti-terror bills flying through congress, every American must have a gps tracking device implanted "for security purposes".

Re:They forgot the last item in the timeline (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2457037)

Personally, I think we should just make phoney implants on people who have these sort of paranoid delusions -- then the rest of us can laugh at them while the squirm and convulse.

Re:They forgot the last item in the timeline (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2457143)

It's already happening: cell phones are glued to most American's ears, and cell phones are getting GPS (or other location technology) by government mandate. You didn't really think that that was for E911?

Re:They forgot the last item in the timeline (1)

andi75 (84413) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458720)

In 2016, as part of the new anti-terror bills flying through congress, every American must have a gps tracking device implanted "for security purposes".

Shouldn't that be every terrorist must hast a gps tracking device implanted.

These could be delivered to them along with the new backdoored encryption softare

|\/|y g0ati3 b3 g0n3!!!! b00 h00!!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456197)

she bitten onto my penises n it hurt
so i clubbed unto her head becasue she was to be a bad g0at.

i was thought that g0ats do not be having the sharp teeths.

g0atmeat for sale!!!
g0atmeat for sale!!!

cool. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456198)

gps is cool. is my ip unbanned yet?

And Jim Morrison Sings.. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456200)

Fuck you in the ass. It's a great song.

GPS Upgradeable? (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456204)

I'm about 2 weeks from getting a Garmin GPS V and since it's a plunk down of aboug $450 it would be nice if Garmin's units are upgradeable in this instance. If not then are any other manufacturers? I'll check w/Garmin myself, on Monday, if there's no informative replies and post result as a reply to this thread.

Tnx

Re:GPS Upgradeable? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456230)

My eTrex has upgradeable firmware. I've flashed it a couple of times; I think I read somewhere that WAAS was originally supported in eTrex units via a firmware update. So if the antenna is sufficient, there may be a firmware update some day.

Re:GPS Upgradeable? (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456237)

Firmware covers these things? That's kinda neat. I would have expected the receiver circuitry to require changes. Must be broad enough :-)

Re:GPS Upgradeable? NEVER MIND (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456233)

According to a previous post, which appeared while I was battling the nefarious Slashdot Form Key error, trying to get my question in. The Garmin GPS V [garmin.com] with WAAS is already cool and won't result in a lost investment, which the article author has backward, the service is getting better, not worse.

This is what happens when you allow changes into production on a Friday. NEVER change systems on Fridays, except bug fixes. Sheesh, learn some Q/A

How that scene from Pulp Fiction should have gone. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456209)

"Bring out the gimp."
"The gimp's sleeping."
"Fuck it, get CmdrTaco."

Galileo satellite positioning (5, Interesting)

europrobe (167359) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456236)

On this side of the ocean, we are working on our very own satellite positioning system, Galileo [galileo-pgm.org] , which will be accurate down to 3 meters (last time I looked). It will be all civilian, with several QoS levels - so hikers can get one level of reliability and airplanes another. Unlike GPS, the Galileo consortium will guarantee a certain level of accuracy, which should help in critical areas of operation such as airplane navigation. If there is an accident due to Galileo malfunction, the consortium will accept liability.

Also, since it's civilian, the military will not have a "Selective Availability" feature.

Re:Galileo satellite positioning (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456241)

Swedish girls. I love them all.

Re:Galileo satellite positioning (1)

DiveX (322721) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456455)

>Also, since it's civilian, the military will not have a "Selective Availability" feature.

Want to bet? It would not take long before the military would claim "and rightly so" that this kind of ability be added in the interest of national security. If you claim it is sto be so accurate, then why have different levels?

Re:Galileo satellite positioning (1)

GPSguy (62002) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458744)

Pne has different levels of accuracy in the various positioning systems by using different means int terms of code sequence length and clocking speed to change the error budget. You also achieve a better code- and carrier-phase solution by mitigating atmospheric (ionoshpheric and tropospheric) influences (linear water vapor delay and ionospheric scintillation which manifests as diminished signal strength and non-linear delay) by using both the L1 and L2 signals.

Selective availability, a long-period dithering algorithm applied to clocks and code-phase signals, doesn't play into this.

And, from a security and engineering perspective, I'm pretty comfortable with the concept that Selective Availability would not have been discontinued unless another, more geographically agile/specific method of denying accuracies had not been developed. I don't know what it is or might be, and I don't have a need-to-know about it. But I'm pretty confident that we didn't give up a means of denial that doesn't have a larger-scale effect on safety of navigation like SA had.

Geocaching (3, Insightful)

xnn (451788) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456247)

Anybody else use their GPS units for Geocaching [geocaching.com] ? (Sort of a treasure hunt using GPS). In practice, the 100 metre figure is a 'guaranteed' level of accuracy, as i have never been anything like that far off. As it is a long weekend here, some friends and I have been using an old Garmin 45 to find all the geocaches within an hours drive of where we live. All caches so far have been within 10 metres of the waypoint, and the three we found today (one in the dark!) were within 3 metres of where the unit said the waypoint was. It is also quite common for match racing yachts to have centimetre accuracy units (often one in the bow _and_ stern), although the expense of these units (~$25000) makes for a very steep price/performance curve.

Re:Geocaching (2)

Technician (215283) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458668)

Yes I geocache. Just for fun, I have hidden a cache in a Hide A Key box. I have had more than 20 people find it so far. The location given is close enough they can identify what structure in the park it's hidden in, on, or under. Comments about wanting to tear it apart to find the cache are common. Use keyword "Tiny" if you want to look it up on the website. It is not uncommon for a cache to be found 50 or more feet from the posted location, but many finders post the error seen and other cachers get the same results. Caches on mountain ridges with a good WAAS signal typicaly are found with 10 feet. There is no question which tree, brush, or rock outcropping it's hidden under. Signals in heavy forest on the side of a hill or ravine are more of a job to find.

Ion Engine Compatibility (2, Funny)

SEWilco (27983) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456275)

"... transmission protocols that circumvent ionic interference."

Oh, good, so now it's easier to use GPS on devices with ion engines?

Missing the point again (2)

TheLoneCabbage (323135) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456304)

Were going to spend billions putting new satalites in orbit, and no one bothered to let the DOD know what the comercial market really needed out of GPS.

I've done allot of tracking software, for sporting events etc. We've always wanted a GPS system taht would let us put a simple unit on the back of an athlete and just report back his GPS position. Unfortunatly GPS has never been acturate enough to actually use for that.

But 36 meter's still doesn't solve bigger issues. Like useing it for car navigation systems, or tracking city bound objects (like children, convicts, laptops, cellphones, weapons etc). Im not proposing some orwelian oversight system, but something that would allow us to take GPS and use it as a system for tracking day to day issues. Not quite "Where did I loose my keys?" but "Where did I lose my laptop?" High res systems could also be used for created EXTREAMLY quick and acturate maps, and even building up 3D models of real world enviroments.

I know high resolution (down to 1 meter or less) is VERRY difficult, but with the kind of money that goes into satalites is it really imposible??

Re:Missing the point again (2)

nathanm (12287) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458011)

Were going to spend billions putting new satalites in orbit, and no one bothered to let the DOD know what the comercial market really needed out of GPS.
Actually, they solicited a lot of commercial input into the next generation satellites. The original GPS program was DOD only, so they didn't envision many of the uses people have found for GPS. Since last year, the GPS program is jointly managed by DOD & the Dept of Commerce.

But 36 meter's still doesn't solve bigger issues. Like useing it for car navigation systems, or tracking city bound objects (like children, convicts, laptops, cellphones, weapons etc).
It's already being used in car nav systems. Many trucking companies, mass transit, police depts, etc. are also using GPS with telemetry tranceivers to track their vehicles on GIS maps. And yes, there are already criminals wearing GPS & tranceivers to ensure they don't violate parole or house arrest orders.

My Casio GPS watch (3, Insightful)

clemens (188721) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456440)

model no. PAT2GP1V [casio.com] 's manual states that along horizontal plane the accuracy is 3.1m average, 10m maximum, and NO ACCURACY DEGRATION under U.S. DOD-imposed Selective Avaliability Program.
Geez, and they think such an 'upgrade' for GPS is NEWS.

Re:My Casio GPS watch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456534)

Selective Availability has been turned off since... forget the exact date, but it was Clinton. :)

Re:My Casio GPS watch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2457566)

Amen, brother. I also have one of the aforementioned devices. The U.S. DOD has been cracked! Deal.

Re:My Casio GPS watch (2)

nathanm (12287) | more than 12 years ago | (#2457980)

From the link you provided, the technical specs say 10 m RMS accuracy. The aforementioned 36 m accuracy is at 95% Circular Error of Probability (CEP).

Re:My Casio GPS watch (1)

clemens (188721) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458920)

Yeah, big deal. I was referring to the watch's operation manual, not the webpage.

GPS Accuracy (2, Interesting)

Kymermosst (33885) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456471)

All I can say for the military GPS signal is that it's already pretty damn accurate, and I think the civilian signal is fairly accurate as well.

When I was in the Army, we had a Magellan GPS receiver, a PLGR (military GPS), and the system our surveyors use for position and azimuth, (not sure if it's classified, so won't say much about it,) and all three of them were giving the same grid location. Of course, the Magellan GPS had to be put in Average mode with a couple minutes of sampling, but it got the same grid location.

Re:GPS Accuracy (1)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458759)

did a quick google [google.com] search and it came up with this [usgs.gov] page. short version off of that page makes me believe that an azimuth is a cordinate most often used by astronomers in locating things in the night's sky. this report talks about accuracy when using the azimuth for taking down telemetry and it's accuracy, ect. kinda interesting.

cool, new toys... (2)

A_Non_Moose (413034) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456472)

One of the facts being overlooked is that any thing designed for "military" application is usually done by the lowest bidder.

As a former military person (USN, if ya'll care) this was evident in many pieces of equipment I had to deal with in the service.
Don't get me wrong, the equipment was functional, as it should be, but sometimes a lot of stuff was meant to be "sailor proof"...one step beyond "idiot proof", because any devices 'intended' use will invariably be expanded unintended uses.

So if you take into account the specs of any equipment, there is always a tolerance for these devices...not only the physical abuse of changing hands many times, transporting, shipping, and varied levels of (in)competancy.

You have to realize that for better or worse, that the armed forces (I have to laugh, this is me to a 'T') personel are both the best and worst case scenarios.

Now that I am on the periphery of GIS (admin for a GIS training lab...man what a lot of data just for one state) I've gotten to play with the "toys" and for those out in the field, 30 to 100 meters ain't that big a deal, it is acceptable.

You would think it would not be, but consider:
A satellite has already imaged the area, and sometimes it has been surveyed from the ground and always surveyed from a aircraft plus the final check is to drive/walk the surveyed area with a GPS unit to do a final "triple check".

It seems more or less an integrity check.
Even the GPS is subjected to a test or two, where a building, area, large parking lot is measured with GPS points assigned and then checked against previous data.

It must be within an acceptable range (in civilian use, mind you) because I have not heard any complaints. The device was actually kind of neat (was the usual "military yellow" gear color) and had a palm pilot like interface, 6 tabs on the display, about 8 buttons to navigate and mark and save/recall points.

In the end, if it is 3meters, 30'ish meters or 100, I hate to sound cliche, but close enough for government work, perchance?

I don't know, but as long as the device does not say I'm in the artic circle when standing in the AZ desert, its gotta be doing something right.

Re:cool, new toys... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456549)

Sailors are a bunch of fags. FTN

hate to break it to you but... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2456553)

this is nothing new at all. You're being a bit vague when you say it's a "new standard." Think of it more like a report on the current state of GPS for civil users; the DoD is simply saying that their old estimates of average performance were off and they're correcting themselves. The numbers in that report only reflect what can be done right now with GPS (in terms of a stand-alone receiver, no differential GPS).

The next real improvement in GPS accuracy will come with the launching of the next few blocks of satellites (IIR, IIF, III). The Block III satellites aren't slated to be deployed until at least 2010 [gpsworld.com] and will include the new M code for more accuracy. Even sooner, the Block IIF satellites will support the new L5 channel for civil users which will give the public sector a big improvement in their accuracy. The C/A code (for public users) will be turned on L2 in the release of the IIR satellites starting in a couple of years. Up to now, the L2 channel was only for P(Y) code which public GPS users didn't have access to (P(Y) is the military PPS code (precise positioning service) and is heavily encrypted). And more improvements will be made as the OCS (operational control segment - the Air Force group that monitors and controls the GPS constellation) that will make GPS even more accurate and reliable.

But don't expect any more significant improvements in GPS accuracy until these new blocks of satellites are launched. Of course, these improvements exclude things like WAAS and other differential GPS solutions which will give a much more precise position solution than any single receiver can accomplish.

Here's a good page [navy.mil] describing some basic GPS terms I used. Also, for a good summary of the lastest GPS modernization efforts, read this article [gpsworld.com] .

t.

Clever work arounds for GPS inaccuracies (1)

RNLockwood (224353) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456613)

The clock signal for civilian use is less precise than the military one and 'selective availability' degraded it in a kind of random but non-gaussian manner. Early on clever folks found that they could increase the accuracy in spite of that by placing a second receiver in a known location and either post processing the data or broadcasting the signal from the fixed location. This Differential GPS could have sub-cm accuracy. Other clever folks used other aspects of the signal such as phase difference to boost the accuracy. Others made receivers that could use the Russian and US GPS at the same time. In other words Selective Availability was cracked about 10 years ago but the Military refused to kill it. I think that it was for political reasons - not wanting to hear that a rogue missile directed against us used our own GPS for navigation , for instance. It is possible to mount antennae on the wingtips, nose, and tail of an aircraft and use differential GPS to determine the attitude to a 1/100th of a degree or less. This can be combined with new, cheap, Inertial Navigation systems that allow you to point an IR camera from an aircraft and drape the image over a digital terrain model or map in real time. I think that the Garmin site, http://www.garmin.com, claims less than a meter horizontal accuracy with WAAS for the Garmin V. Nate

Internet DGPS (Re: Clever work arounds...) (1)

u.hertlein (111825) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458997)

Did anyone check this [wsrcc.com] out? They deliver GPS data for a fixed point in the Bay Area to do DGPS. Wouldn't it be cool to setup a network of these stations/sites all over the world so you could select the one closest to your current location?

European GPS (2)

Malc (1751) | more than 12 years ago | (#2456673)

I heard something in the last year that talked of a planned European GPS. Does anybody know anything about it? I think it was supposed to be deployed before the new US one, and offer more features then the current US one. I wonder if it renders the built-in inaccuracy of the US one a moot point?

Location - Information - Money (1)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 12 years ago | (#2457192)

The new GPS network will also incorporate Digital Rights Management Technology by Microsoft(tm) to insure people don't get too used to free positioning. So, remember folks: when you go down to the woods today, be sure to bring your credit card, else your be lost forever...

Now availible!!! the new MS GPS-MP3 player!! yes, now you can listen to your favourite tracks _and_ know your position to within 1m (20000m for un-registered users). But remember, don't try to break our DRM system, or go faster than 80mph: 'cause now we really do know where you live.

(Microsoft(tm) GPS network(r) may not be accurate and should not be used for mission critical applications, in the event of network outage, Microsoft is not responsible for loss off life or ruined terrorist plans, See Mictosoft GPS-NT)

GPS Information (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2457213)

A great site for information about GPS is Here [mehaffey.com]

Logically unexpected (1)

ixt (463433) | more than 12 years ago | (#2457304)

I'm kinda surprised that the DoD would go on with their decision to make civilian GPS as accurate as it is technologically possible, even after we know that the hijackers located and flew into their targets on September 11th using civilian GPS. I'm not saying that the hijackers should spoil the treat for the rest of us. I just find it paradoxical.

And what if other countries design their offensive weapons to aim with our system? (Temporarily shutting civilian GPS down might work.. then again, we can tweak the numbers that are transmitted to any civilian client during this event so that we are able to redirect those weapons to our targets)

Re:Logically unexpected (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2457594)

umm..you dumbass. the attackers used their EYES to stop the BIG FREAKING TOWERS in the heart of a GIGANTIC CITY to crash into the buildings. they didnt use GPS which wouldnt be accurate enough to hit a precise spot in the centre of the buildings that would cause em to fall down. lets blindfold all the passengers! woo! that would make us safe wouldnt it ?
all the other countries use inertial guidance and dont use GPS in their weapons. GPS is easy to jam and inertial guidance is impossible to jam. of course you probably dont know what inertial guidance is you ignorant paranoid fuck.

Re:Logically unexpected (1)

COAngler (134933) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458706)

I'm kinda surprised that the DoD would go on with their decision to make civilian GPS as accurate as it is technologically possible, even after we know that the hijackers located and flew into their targets on September 11th using civilian GPS. I'm not saying that the hijackers should spoil the treat for the rest of us. I just find it paradoxical.



Why? It's a navigation system. Of course it's going to be installed on commercial airliners.



Remember the line from "Hunt for Red October?" (The movie, not the book): "With a map and a stopwatch I can fly the Alps in a plane with no windows." It's not much more complicated. Without precise satellite equipment, the hijackers would be forced to navigate with a chart and a compass and an airspeed indicator and a clock. That buys an extra minute or ninety seconds of life in the target building. Not much help at all.



Shutting down GPS will really hurt civil aviation, but with no benefit. Better to just keep the terrs off the flight deck.

link to ICD and other stuff (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2458242)

For those who work in the GPS community the DoD statement has a faulty reference. It links to ICD-GPS-200 revision B when in fact the last release of the ICD was revision C. Hopefully this will be corrected shortly.

For those who are wondering why the DoD removed the "degredation" from the civilian GPS signal it is because they now have a more effective means of preventing enemies of the US from using GPS - selective deniability. This link [wired.com] talks of its use in Afghanistan. By improving the signal to friendly nations it improves GPS as a product which means that US companies who make GPS equipment (and dominate the market) can improve their sales figures.

scott.

as far as i know (1)

jlemmerer (242376) | more than 12 years ago | (#2458800)

GPS has not only an accuracy of 1m of military uses but a resolution of a few inches. this is accomplished by feeding the satellite input into a special device that is used for missiles to strike accurately hardened targets

centimetre accuracy ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2458828)

and they can still piss off the Chinese royally by flying their cruise missiles into the Chinese Embassy in Belgrad. Maybe they should've been using the civilian GPS?

Anyway, Diff. GPS has been around for ages. It's what I would use if I ever got myself back on track with designing and writing a Traffic/Collision Avoidance System out of the mishmash of BSD's ISO/OSI, fsp, gnats, and whathaveyou...

Have compiler, will @#$%$^%$&& General Protection Error
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...