Google
  Web www.gpspassion.com


GpsPasSion LIVE!
www.flickr.com
This is a Flickr badge showing public photos from GpsPasSion Live !. Make your own badge here.

www.NaviBlog.com



Versions

Links/Liens




Portal/Portail
Rechercher

- -

Polls/Sondages
Sondage
Pour vous guider sur la Route :
GPS Mobile (SEM)
GPS Intégré
Smartphone
Autre
Voter  -  Résultat des votes
Votes : 2402




Club GpsPasSion
Soutenez le site!

USA: (US$)
EUROPE: (€)
Guide Paypal


GpsPasSion Forums
Home | Profile | Register/Enregist. | Active Topics | Search/Recherche | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 English Forums - General
 GPS and Mobile News
 Lightsquared - GPS Jamming - FCC Pulls the Plug
 New Topic  Reply/Répondre
 Printer Friendly
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 11 févr. 2011 :  16:29:18  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Updated 20120215 : FCC pulls the plug on the Lightsquared Network, see details on page 4.
Updated 20110512 : you can follow the testing process here: http://www.pnt.gov/interference/lightsquared/ - in their monthly reports.
Updated 20110311 : GPS industry and users are getting organized -> http://saveourgps.org/ !

Members of the Coalition : Garmin, Trimble, Caterpillar, ATA, etc...
Here is a study on the impact : >> LINK <<






Original post - Has anyone here been following developments concerning interference from the Lightsquared terrestrial network on susceptible GPS devices? Evidently, the GPS industry has conducted laboratory testing that indicates popular GPS devices might be 'jammed'.

http://www.gpsworld.com/gnss-system/news/data-shows-disastrous-gps-jamming-fcc-approved-broadcaster-11029

Ads


gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 11 févr. 2011 :  21:40:17  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Yes, I saw that the other day, it looks really bad based on the preliminary testing. Interestingly it's worse for the FAA certified receivers than for consumer road guidance systems. I suppose it's due to use of high sensitiviy chipsets in mobile car systems, not needed for planes that normally have a clear view and also because they work with lower signals and are less accurate.

The good news is that the FCC will not be able to ignore the results of the planned four month testing period due to start at the end of February.

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

offthegrid

USA
400 Posts

Posted - 19 févr. 2011 :  04:52:45  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
They have been approved for testing in 3 or 4 metro areas. I wouldn't be surprised to see that reigned in soon.
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 20 févr. 2011 :  17:39:38  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
This issue is finally getting the attention it deserves from the Air Force brass.

http://www.airforce-magazine.com/DRArchive/Pages/2011/February%202011/February%2017%202011/GPSinJeopardy.aspx

Although we are concerned with the L1 GPS open signal, the US Department of Defense operates encrypted signals on L1. There are two, the legacy Precision code and the newer Modernized precision code. I would think DoD would want to protect its capability to access these signals on the US mainland. let's hope DoD will be conduct its own testing scenarios.

Baltimore MD will be an interesting test city. There's a busy airport along with major port operations. Thousands of GPS equipped recreational boaters cruise the nearby Chesapeake Bay.

--- CHAS
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 24 févr. 2011 :  04:37:59  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
An article that goes into some detail : http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/23/fast-new-smartphone-network-cause-dangerous-interference-gps-fcc-fears/?test=latestnews

Apparently Lightsquared is saying that only poorly designed receivers will have an issue with their network
quote:
If you have a poor receiver, the outcome is either you get interference, or you restrict the transmitter so much that they’re not able to provide an attractive service.
That's going to add fuel to the fire!

I must admit Lightsquared is a pretty ambitious project since it apparently relies on two-way satellite communication for unlimlited coverage and with a bandwidth of 100+MB/second. Sounds too good to be true ! More info here http://www.lightsquared.com/what-we-do/network/

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 25 févr. 2011 :  04:19:41  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Lightsquared is toning it down a notch...and Garmin is revving it up

quote:
Garmin's Gartner said that he's just trying to make sure that the GPS industry has a say.

"We're a little bit concerned that LightSquared is in charge of this whole process, and we're concerned that somehow it's going to be incumbent on the GPS industry to be the ones that find the fix for this," Gartner said.
quote:
"They will send us a letter after the June 15th process to indicate whether they believe the problem has been addressed. We're very optimistic and we've gotten off to a great start," Carlisle [ED - From Lightsquared] said.

"Your guess is as good as mine" as to what happens if the two sides can't agree, Gartner said.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380855,00.asp

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

Hurston

30 Posts

Posted - 25 févr. 2011 :  12:31:37  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
If all this does go ahead and L1 becomes unusable in places, maybe that will push the US government to decrypt the L2 P(Y) C/A signal.
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 11 mars 2011 :  05:16:56  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
The GPS industry and users are getting organized -> http://saveourgps.org/ !

Members of the Coalition : Garmin, Trimble, Caterpillar, ATA, etc...

Here is the study : http://saveourgps.org/GPS_Threatened_with_Widespread_Interference.aspx

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 22 mars 2011 :  00:19:45  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
The Space-Based PNT National Executive Committee is taking this situation seriously. They are going to conduct their own interference study in conjunction with the Lightsquared working group.

The National Executive Committee is sponsored by the US Government and is chaired jointly by the Deputy Secretaries of Defense and Transportation.

http://www.pnt.gov/interference/lightsquared/

--- CHAS

Go to Top of Page

ve7mdt

Canada
170 Posts

Posted - 24 mars 2011 :  09:45:05  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
This is indeed very interesting. Traditionally, a consumer class electronics has the lowest priority in terms of interference trump card. If you ever take a look at your manuals from your broadcast receiver, cordless phone, baby monitor etc, you will find a note (if it's in the U.S.) that quoted the FCC saying that your device must accept any interference that it may receiver, and it cannot cause interference to others (usually higher class devices, licensed classes etc). So I am not sure if a Garmin nav is considered one of those, but it is usually the case. Your average Garmin nav is not licensed, and is not protected from being interfered with. It's basically "good luck" from the FCC's point of view.

But since this is a big industry and many users are at stake here (i.e. the stake holders could be important users, in the government and commercial domain), it is causing a bigger concern.

Technical point of view: is Lightsquared transmission out of spec? e.g. Are they producing spurious or harmonic interference (i.e. out of their licensed spectrum), and if so, are those signal levels higher than regulation permits? If not, then Lightsquared could claim that they have already fulfilled FCC's requirement by transmitting according to regulations and specs.

Ironic point of view: GPS signal is by nature a DSSS signal (spread spectrum) and by nature rather immune to interference. So this is really a first. Of course nothing can be totally immmune to interference, but DSSS is quite a level higher than your older transmission methods. I'm no expert though.

This reminds me of the long standing interference complaints from 800MHz trunking users (many federal gov etc) to Sprint's iDEN network (inherited from their merger from Nextel). It took years and rarely resolved (both operated in the 800MHz band, but not overlapping, but close).

iPad WiFi w/ RoqyBT to use BT GPSr, LG Optimus G2x, BenQ S6, Samsung Q1, Toshiba e830, Toshiba e805, HTC Advantage X7501, Nextar MN2707 running P7, Magellan Springboard GPS on Visor 2MB, Haicom HI-303III + BT slipper, Holux GPSlim236, eTrex yellow
TomTom 1.9 for iOS, Navigon 2.0 for iOS, Navigon for Android, Garmin Mobile XT, Delorme Street Atlas 2009, Streets & Trips 2010, MapPoint 2010, APRSIS/CE, APRSIS/32, APRSDroid
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 24 mars 2011 :  19:45:57  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
The technical aspects are a bit over my head, but the gist of the problem seems to be that they are wanting to convert their existing satellite band (that sits right next to the GPS band) for terrestrial use and much more powerful transmissions, the study I linked just above explains that better, as well as the impact on GPS reception in the vicinity of the plannes 40,000 towers.

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

ve7mdt

Canada
170 Posts

Posted - 27 mars 2011 :  11:34:32  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
This also reminds me of the Broadband over Power Line (BPL) that was the darling of the broadband push, yet at the same time, a huge interference maker to amateur radio, HF, military, and other users all over. Although newer designed BPL has resolved some (but not all) the interference issues, it was a bit too late for the industry to save itself. Now BPL is nothing but a historical remark, and from being a broadband competitor, to being a telemetry transmission method for internal power companies use. Sure, FCC did not kill it, but it kills itself indirectly.

Will Lightsquared come to a similar fate? I don't know. But spectrum management is all about cooperation, it's like sharing water resources and clean air. So from that angle, it might not get the nod from FCC if the interference is found to be unavoidable (i.e. it is not the fault of simply "cheaply made" receivers as they are trying to spin / paint it).

BTW, not sure if related, about 10 to 20 years ago, there have also been big push of LEO satellites to provide media and broadband and phone services. Many problems came up including interference (to amateur radio and others), budget and financing, market shift, etc, and LEO seemed to have gone vapourware before they were even up. Is Lightsquared one of those era players, and now trying to reinvent themselves in another form?

GPS is too pervasive today, and so this is unlike another kind of challenge.

iPad WiFi w/ RoqyBT to use BT GPSr, LG Optimus G2x, BenQ S6, Samsung Q1, Toshiba e830, Toshiba e805, HTC Advantage X7501, Nextar MN2707 running P7, Magellan Springboard GPS on Visor 2MB, Haicom HI-303III + BT slipper, Holux GPSlim236, eTrex yellow
TomTom 1.9 for iOS, Navigon 2.0 for iOS, Navigon for Android, Garmin Mobile XT, Delorme Street Atlas 2009, Streets & Trips 2010, MapPoint 2010, APRSIS/CE, APRSIS/32, APRSDroid
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 29 mars 2011 :  03:07:40  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Had forgotten about BPL...didn't remember LEO though. Not sure what Lightsquared's model is, they certainly hadn't made the headlines until this potential interference with GPS.

According to http://saveourgps.org/related-articles.aspx TomTom has now joined the Alliance and testing has started : http://news.techworld.com/networking/3266108/gps-tests-started-by-lightsquared/?olo=rss - apparently the next update will occur on April 15th...

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 30 mars 2011 :  04:08:41  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
A major hurtle for Lightsquared will be proving they will not degrade the accuracy and reliability of GNSS avionics equipment that's a basis for the FAA NextGen air traffic control.

GPS/WAAS/EGNOS receivers are certified internationally. More than 100,000 receivers are currently in service. The equipment is stringently specified and performance is verified through extensive testing. GPS landing approaches are authorized at airports throughout the US. Europe is preparing its approach procedures.

These equipments are designed with wide bandwidth filtering admitting the total received power, that is spread over the entire radio navigation band. to enter the receiver. Evidently, that's a criteria for maximum accuracy but there isn't sufficient attenuation of the proposed adjacent Lightsquared power. An organization that sets avionics standards has filed a comment with the FCC warning these equipments were not designed to operate in the forthcoming electromagnetic environment. The preliminary Garmin testing tends to confirm that.

Wide bandwidth receivers are not malfunctioning because the adjacent spectrum is currently utilized for satellite downlinks that don't overpower the the GPS receiver.

--- CHAS
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 31 mars 2011 :  06:53:00  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Yes, high accuracy GPS systems that ignore weak GPS signals would likely be hurt the most, actually this is what Garmin's prelimnary studay showed when they compared the impact between a road and an aviation system.

This just in: DOD and DOT weighing in...US Gov't Agencies Slam LightSquared Network Plan
quote:
The DOD and DOT were not sufficiently involved in the development of the work plan for testing LightSquared's network, the agencies told Genachowski in their letter. Calling themselves "the national stewards and global providers" of GPS, the departments said they needed to be actively engaged with the process.

Another problem with the plan for evaluating interference is that there is no requirement for consensus among the various participants, the letter said. "DOD and DOT need to understand how differing conclusions and recommendations developed during the ... process that could affect national security and transportation safety will be addressed," said the letter, which was signed by Deputy Transportation Secretary John Porcari and Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn.
This brings us back to an early statement by Ted Gartner, Garmin's PR Man, who'd said : "Your guess is as good as mine" as to what happens if the two sides can't agree"!

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 12 mai 2011 :  20:59:57  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Some interference observations have emerged through emergency services personnel who participated in live sky tests around a Lightsquared tower:

http://www.gpsworld.com/gnss-system/first-responders-lightsquared-issue-11620

The testing was conducted at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico

--- CHAS
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 12 mai 2011 :  21:27:15  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Thanks for the update. I thought a report by the "Technical Working Group" was due on April 15th, but I don't see anything here: http://saveourgps.org/related-articles.aspx

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 12 mai 2011 :  22:44:10  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
For those who are interested in the testing and results, links to the important documents are here:

http://www.pnt.gov/interference/lightsquared/

The next Lightsquared report is due on 16 May 2011 and the final report is due mid June.

There is also an independent report to be prepared by Space-Based PNT National Executive Committee. Apparently there is some shared use of assets between the two testers. Notice the first responders were requested to participate by the US Government FAA; not the Lightsquared working group.

Evidently, the US government testers will also prepare a classified report. Weapons vulnerability is typically classified information.

--- CHAS
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 13 mai 2011 :  00:41:14  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Thanks, I'll add that link to the first message. I had a quick look at the April 15th report, it's a very thorough document. No test results yet as far as I can tell.

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

danham

USA
7448 Posts

Posted - 18 mai 2011 :  15:52:26  Show Profile  Visit danham's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Testing is underway in Las Vegas:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/may/14/testing-new-wireless-network-could-cause-gps-outag/

-dan

- Nüvi forum moderator -
Nüvi 760 in a '14 VW GTI & zumo 660 on a BMW F800 ST
Guide to working with pre-programmed routes: >> details <<
Language Guide / US Topo / 350 & 680 / MacBook & Intel iMac with OS X & Win XP / BaseCamp / Cape Cod, MA
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 20 mai 2011 :  00:10:14  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
“GPS is really nice, but we’ve got a backup,” said Las Vegas Fire & Rescue spokesman Tim Szymanski. “We might be a little bit inconvenienced, but we’re not going to lose anything on the call.”

Fire trucks and police cars are hooked with GPS units to help officers respond to distress calls, but it’s really just an added level of insurance that’s mostly for convenience, officials said.

“All of our officers know how to read a map,” said Metro Police spokesman Bill Cassell. “They know how to look up an address, find that address on a map, and then drive to it ... and we even still know how to triangulate off of mountaintops and give aircraft cardinal bearings to help land search-and-rescue mission flights.”

In other words, these guys couldn't care less if GPS goes down.

Well, I can read a map and follow a compass course too. Does that mean I want to go back to that? Really, I'm 'Up to Here' with those kinds of map and compass comments.

--- CHAS

Edited by - HIPAR on 20 mai 2011 00:13:34
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 20 mai 2011 :  06:06:46  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Yes, it's completely beyond the point...maybe taken out of context and he meant that they were trained to work without having to rely on GPS systems.

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 27 mai 2011 :  06:54:55  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
On a related topic, Homeland Security looks into interference to the GPS system in general : http://www.insidegnss.com/node/2603

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 27 mai 2011 :  23:52:31  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
No surprises, just conformation of the obvious .. Lightsquared vs GPS aviation:

http://www.insidegnss.com/node/2628

quote:
RTCA Report Show Serious LightSquared Interference to GPS Aviation --- An executive summary of a special report by RTCA Inc. Special Committee 159 released today (May 27, 2011) indicates that GPS aviation receivers would experience serious interference from transmission planned by LightSquared in the upper portion of the 1525–1559 MHz spectrum adjacent to the GPS L1 band.

Conducted in response to a request from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to address the issue of compatibility between the operation of a terrestrial wireless broadband network, the study concludes that “the current LightSquared terrestrial authorization [from the Federal Communications Commission, FCC] would be incompatible with the current aviation use of GPS. . . .”

Among the RTCA SC159 recommendations was the following: “From an aviation perspective, LightSquared upper channel operation should not be allowed.” The full report will be delivered to the FAA next Friday. (...)
[ed]

--- CHAS
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 28 mai 2011 :  16:57:46  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Here are some preliminary results of a 'Live Sky' tower test conducted at Boulder City NV. Several precision survey GPS receivers were subjected to Lightsquared signals.

Reference Eric Gakstatter's presentation (Slide 27):

http://event.on24.com/event/31/14/42/rt/1/documents/slidepdf/gnss_marketinsightswebinar_ppt_052611.pdf


•Wide-band (20+Mhz -typical of L1/L2 receivers) began feeling the effects of LS within 1,800m of the tower and jammed within 1,600m.
•Medium-band (12MHz) L1 receivers began feeling the effects of LS within 1,200m of the tower and jammed within 1,000m.
•Test results are conservative.
•LS tower spacing upon build-out is similar to cell phone towers. Given the test results and project tower spacing, huge urban areas will be jammed for GPS, and even more so for high-precision GPS receivers.


During testing, the tower was operating at reduced power:

http://www.gpsworld.com/gnss-system/lightsquared-las-vegas-test-towers-flawed-fcc-filing-shows-11679

--- CHAS



Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 28 mai 2011 :  20:34:54  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Thanks for the link, it looks like some companies in that presentation are coming up with solutions to make GPS work after Lightsquared gets deployed...the audience must have been perplexed. The "guardband" concept in that presentation is interesting, might be the way to go, but it would have to be tested of course.

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 31 mai 2011 :  21:06:47  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
A preliminary interference report from Deere & Company:

On the FCC comment page for the Lightsquared action SATMOD2010111800239:

http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/ib/forms/reports/related_filing.hts?f_key=-216679&f_number=SATMOD2010111800239

Find Deere Ex Parte (OET 5-26-2011) posted on 05/27/2011

That document discloses a Deere & Company presentation to the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology.

Quote:

'Deere explained that, in the course of its careful technical analysis undertaken in the time available, Deere’s engineers have determined that there is currently no practicable technical solution, or solutions in combination, available to avoid or substantially mitigate interference from the LightSquared’s base stations to Deere’s existing precision GPS system and to similar systems operated by others particularly in the agriculture and construction industries'.

Check out the titles of those in attendance. Someone in that group of 'technologists' should have raised the red flag signaling trouble ahead.

The presentation is included. It contains interesting photographs showing the test setup in the White Sands NM anechoic chamber. Testing supports the validity of an earlier Deere interference analysis.

The Deere system consists of a precision widebanded L1 GPS receiver augmented by corrections downlinked by Inmarsat via their network of geostationary satellites. Deere notes Lightsquared jammed the downlink at the Holloman NM live sky test tower. Ironically, Lightsquared plans to operate within Inmarsat licensed spectrum and has paid them to rearrange their satellite channels.

--- CHAS
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 01 juin 2011 :  23:43:53  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Here's a direct link to the Deere comment:

http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=891387
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 16 juin 2011 :  19:55:15  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Lightsquared has been granted two more weeks for submission of their interference test report. Its now due 01 July 2011:

http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=894067

The GPS industry contends Lightsquared should submit what's finished and supplement the report when the work is finished:

http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=894155

OnStar (General Motors) wants more study before the LightSquared network is allowed to operate. Their test report filed with FCC:

http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=893548

--- CHAS

Edited by - HIPAR on 18 juin 2011 22:26:48
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 21 juin 2011 :  05:40:02  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
This just in, Lightsquared think they have a "fix"...that Trimble qualify as "bordering on the bizarre"! They're planning on limiting their emissions to the lower range of their allotted spectrum, i.e. 1526 to 1536 Mhz instead of the full 1525 through 1559 they own. The GPS L1 band uses the 1575.42 MHz frequency. Unfortunately they acknowledge that this is still causing problems to some high-precision GPS systems (surveying as opposed to Airplane GPS one would hope). Can't see how that can pass muster...

Details here : http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/lightsquared-will-use-lower-spectrum-bands-avoid-gps-interference/2011-06-20

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 21 juin 2011 :  23:48:40  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
FCC has granted Lightsquared more time to submit its final working group interference report. Meanwhile, an independent report prepared for the Space-Based PNT National Executive Committee has become available:

http://www.govexec.com/pdfs/061711bb1.pdf

Data proves Lightsquared operations on the upper 10 MHz channel are not compatible with current certified avionics but it does suggest they might transmit in the lower 10 MHz channel without causing interference.

Equipments remaining most susceptible to interference are high precision units for survey and science. Lightsquared contends this is only 0.5% of the installed base. Are they implying these minority users can be sacrificed?

Complicating matters, satellite provider Inmarsat currently operates in that lower channel. Lightsquared has a deal with them to use that spectrum and, evidently, has persuaded them to accelerate spectrum clearing.

FCC is obviously sympathetic to Lightsquared but they finally gave way to Congressional pressures. They will accept public comments before finalizing Lightsquared's license.

--- CHAS
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 22 juin 2011 :  00:28:27  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Yes that's what I posted yesterday.

As for the FCC being "sympathetic", there are two things I recently became aware of that have been conveniently "forgotten" in this whole debate :
- Lightsquared already have a dual satellite/terrestrial licence for the 1525-1559 Mhz band
- their "promise" is to bring 4G to the masses. The FCC mandates that they cover 100 million people by 2012 and 260 million by 2015.

Clearly that doesn't mean they should create problems for people who rely on GPS, but they're not doing that on a "whim" as there is value to the community as a whole to have access to high speed mobile data.

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 23 juin 2011 :  20:13:53  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
It's true Lightsquared holds a satellite/terrestrial license for the 1525-1559 Mhz band. Prior to that now infamous FCC 'fast tracked' waver, that license didn't authorize 40,000 terrestrial stations.

The GPS industry contends the original license authorized a satellite service with a 'few' terrestrial 'fill ins'. The modified license allows a terrestrial network with satellite 'fill ins'. So, FCC effectively re-purposed spectrum without following rule making procedure. Consequently they inappropriately altered the electromagnetic environment associated with GNSS operations.

--- CHAS
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 30 juin 2011 :  20:01:48  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hundreds of pages of Lightsquared test data are available for public review at the FCC website. The report is huge and is segmented into multiple documents. For those who are engineering oriented, search for the filings of 06/30/2011.

http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/ib/forms/reports/related_filing.hts?f_key=-216679&f_number=SATMOD2010111800239

I superficially scanned through a few of the documents. I'm flabbergasted .. so much coordination, so much intellect, so much work accomplished in so little time. As expected, several detailed filtering presentations are included.

A highly technical analysis of GPS avionics (RTCA) is also there. I still contend Lightsquared vs NextGen airspace is the ultimate challenge. Direct link:

http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=900115

Internationally, the ICAO is voicing concern. Letter to FCC:

http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=900180

Perhaps the problem technical specifics are now understood. I think that's the most Lightsquared, industry and FCC can conclude from their massive effort. I didn't find anything outstanding proving the full and complete LTE network can proceed as scheduled.

--- CHAS


Edited by - HIPAR on 30 juin 2011 20:07:27
Go to Top of Page

wco81

USA
227 Posts

Posted - 05 juil. 2011 :  01:27:02  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
How did the FCC license this spectrum without realizing this potential conflict?
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 24 juil. 2011 :  17:45:10  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
The European Commission has finally commented on Lightsquared's potential to disrupt GNSS receivers. Evidently, they have performed Galileo interference testing:

http://www.insidegnss.com/node/2692


Here's the skillfully written letter addressed directly to FCC Commissioner Genachowski:

http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=906632

Where is the Russian Federation? Success of everyone's Global Navigation Satellite System depends upon global access. There might also be 'back channel' diplomatic activities relating to this matter.

--- CHAS
Go to Top of Page

JGinhisSS

USA
92 Posts

Posted - 17 sept. 2011 :  05:22:07  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Air Force general pressured to change testimony

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/09/15/lightsquared-did-white-house-pressure-general-shelton-to-help-donor.html

nuvi 680 - nuvi 500 - nuvi 1690 - nuLink! 1695 - nuvi 3597

Edited by - JGinhisSS on 17 sept. 2011 05:42:47
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 13 déc. 2011 :  09:51:34  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
The battle rages on : LightSquared Slams Leak on GPS Tests, Expects to Win.
quote:
...LightSquared believes a government official selectively leaked results from tests of its proposed mobile broadband network to set public opinion against the company, and it is seeking a federal investigation of the apparent leak.

But executives of the fledgling carrier, which plans to build a national LTE (Long Term Evolution) network in spectrum near GPS frequencies, said they are still confident of getting government approval in time to launch the network next year.

"The tide is on our side completely in terms of getting through this process," LightSquared General Counsel Curtis Lu said on a conference call with reporters on Monday.

The company believes the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will be able to make a decision in the first quarter of next year and will rule in LightSquared's favor, said Martin Harriman, executive vice president of ecosystem development and satellite business. LightSquared has said it could launch the network within nine months of receiving government approval.
Oddly enough there are no more comments about the GPS systems being poorly designed in the first place, at least not the way they should have been to filter our interferences from the then empty adjacent frequencies. This seemed to be a valid argument based on what I'd heard. I guess it's a bit of a mooth point anyway as the receivers are out there now and can't be degraded by the LS network.

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

JGinhisSS

USA
92 Posts

Posted - 16 déc. 2011 :  04:30:05  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
DOD and DOT joint statement- LightSquared interferes with terrain avoidance warning in aircraft :
quote:
Preliminary analysis of the test findings found no significant interference with cellular phones. However, the testing did show that LightSquared signals caused harmful interference to the majority of other tested general purpose GPS receivers. Separate analysis by the Federal Aviation Administration also found interference with a flight safety system designed to warn pilots of approaching terrain.
http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2011/dot16411.html

nuvi 680 - nuvi 500 - nuvi 1690 - nuLink! 1695 - nuvi 3597
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 16 déc. 2011 :  12:26:51  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Not getting any better, I wonder whether that means that these systems use some form of GPS, I would have thought they would be more "radar" based.

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 18 déc. 2011 :  05:30:15  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Nobody wants to be responsible for flying an airplane into a mountain so I'd say there's a certain amount of theater citing disruption of terrain avoidance systems. However, FAA can present statistics proving controlled flight into terrain is a rare occurrence since aircraft were equipped with these systems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_flight_into_terrain

Let's observe Lightsquared's creativity spinning their way out of this one.

--- CHAS




Go to Top of Page

cleo43

Canada
149 Posts

Posted - 14 janv. 2012 :  04:41:51  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Federal body concludes LightSquared can't work with GPS

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9223447/Federal_body_concludes_LightSquared_can_t_work_with_GPS
Go to Top of Page

LER

USA
212 Posts

Posted - 14 janv. 2012 :  04:49:32  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
And LightSquared, Predictably, cries "BIAS". uh huh, right.....

Buh-bye LS.

Garmin SP2720/7.20 Firmware/GTM-12 (5.50)/CNNA NT 2012.30 (Lifetime)
Garmin Nuvi 1690/3.90 Firmware/CNNA NT 2012.30 (Lifetime)
Garmin Nuvi 3790T/4.70 Firmware/CNNA NT 2012.30 (Lifetime)
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 14 janv. 2012 :  17:25:07  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Yes, Last act of desperation. They don't like the results of testing so they attempt to discredit those who organized the testing. Did they not have their own technical person looking after their interests during the conduct of testing.

http://www.lightsquared.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Letter-NTIA-EXCOMM.pdf

And they are attempting to dump a load of manure on Professor Parkinson. For those who don't know who he is, he was US Air Force project manager who oversaw the development of GPS way back during the 1970's.

--- CHAS
Go to Top of Page

wco81

USA
227 Posts

Posted - 14 janv. 2012 :  18:49:10  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I'm not sympathetic to LS's arguments either.

However, if they got their way, would it be that disastrous? PNDs are cheap now and every year, smart phones and tablets with GPS are probably outselling PNDs by a huge margin.

So would it take that long to turn over the installed base of PNDs and GPS-enabled devices to co-exist with an LTE network as planned by LS?

LS claims GPS devices could have better filtering to work correctly. Not sure if this is a trivial change or would make GPS devices too expensive. But if it's feasible, would it take that long to turn over the installed base?

In return, we'd get another LTE network, which would be a positive thing for the mobile telecom infrastructure in this country.
Go to Top of Page

HIPAR

USA
29 Posts

Posted - 14 janv. 2012 :  20:56:00  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
This is bigger than your Garmins, TomToms and iPhones. These devices might already work just fine if Lightsquared operations are confined to the lower half of their spectrum. They only require about 2 MHz of GPS spectrum to provide acceptable personal positioning. That's a realizable filtering problem.

The testing of November 2011 actually indicates many of those devices continue working as is. Failed consumer devices might very well be redesigned and marketable within a year or so.

Lightsquared needs to get past the FAA, DoD and scientific users. That is the equipment where wider filters are required to improve precision and reduce multipath. The required shape factors and environmental stability for these filters are a more daunting design challenge.

JAVAD has demonstrated a precision receiver claimed to be Lightsquared compatible. But don't buy Lightsquared's claims the interference problem is resolved. What has been demonstrated is, if only the lower network channel is operating, the problem appears to be solvable. There remains a problem in binging a half million (or so) fielded receivers into compliance.

Lightsquared's show stopping nemesis is aviation. Testing has indicated lower channel signals degrade GPS avionics .. a terrain avoidance system recently making news. Avionics cannot be modified without triggering lengthy certification rituals.

--- CHAS
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 16 févr. 2012 :  02:22:52  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Well that's it, the FCC has pulled the plug on the Lightsquared network:
quote:
“To drive economic growth, job creation, and to promote competition, the FCC has been focused on freeing up spectrum for mobile broadband. This includes our efforts to remove regulatory barriers that preclude the use of spectrum for mobile services. To advance these goals, the Commission runs open processes – the success of which relies on the active, timely, and full participation of all stakeholders.

LightSquared’s proposal to provide ground-based mobile service offered the potential to unleash new spectrum for mobile broadband and enhance competition. The Commission clearly stated from the outset that harmful interference to GPS would not be permitted. This is why the Conditional Waiver Order issued by the Commission’s International Bureau prohibited LightSquared from beginning commercial operations unless harmful interference issues were resolved.

“NTIA, the federal agency that coordinates spectrum uses for the military and other federal government entities, has now concluded that there is no practical way to mitigate potential interference at this time. Consequently, the Commission will not lift the prohibition on LightSquared. The International Bureau of the Commission is proposing to (1) vacate the Conditional Waiver Order, and (2) suspend indefinitely LightSquared’s Ancillary Terrestrial Component authority to an extent consistent with the NTIA letter. A Public Notice seeking comment on NTIA’s conclusions and on these proposals will be released tomorrow.

“This proceeding has revealed challenges to maximizing the opportunities of mobile broadband for our economy. In particular, it has revealed challenges to removing regulatory barriers on spectrum that restrict use of that spectrum for mobile broadband. This includes receivers that pick up signals from spectrum uses in neighboring bands. There are very substantial costs to our economy and to consumers of preventing the use of this and other spectrum for mobile broadband. Congress, the FCC, other federal agencies, and private sector stakeholders must work together in a concerted effort to reduce regulatory barriers and free up spectrum for mobile broadband. Part of this effort should address receiver performance to help ensure the most efficient use of all spectrum to drive our economy and best serve American consumers.”

from TMF Associates MSS blog

So GPS as we know it is safe but since poorly designed GPS receivers are at fault I wonder what that does to LightSquared's likely legal claims ?...

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

gpspassion

94154 Posts

Posted - 18 févr. 2012 :  12:33:40  Show Profile  Visit gpspassion's Homepage  Reply with Quote
According to this article in computerworld, Lightsquared are looking at some options :
- appeal
- sue FCC and GPS industry
- swap their frequencies

Discounts and Assistance/Réductions et Assistance (Club GpsPasSion) / Où commencer?
Go to Top of Page

wco81

USA
227 Posts

Posted - 18 févr. 2012 :  12:44:38  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
So it's a greedy hedge fund which is going to make demands and threaten litigation unless it gets its way.

They must have got the spectrum on the cheap.

Otherwise, it would be a better strategy to bid for new spectrum, such as the one which Congress plans to auction next year. But those auctions are expected to bring $25 billion and you know AT&T and Verizon will make sure they lock them up to prevent competitors.
Go to Top of Page

ve7mdt

Canada
170 Posts

Posted - 18 févr. 2012 :  14:15:53  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Lightsquared maintained that the tests were flawed and rigged (by supporters of GPS industry); and that there is this conspiracy , again by supporters and insiders of the GPS industry, to make it the worst case test results making the report; while their own tests showed differently, and better results (less interference).

They also claimed that the FCC has been heavily lobbied by GPS industry, and influenced. (WHILE they retain an ex FCC Commissioner to be their advisor).

And lately, they were even spewing nastier wordings after the rope got tightened.

I don't really know who's telling the truth here, but FCC will take big flak if they accept a flawed report (or rigged) as good, as they are supposed to be the expert themselves (it'll be like the ATF dept were sold toy guns as real ones), as they have big responsibility. But my bigger problem is the high profile the Lightsquared liked to take the fight onto.

If big corporation can bully the governing body / agency, if not lobbied them successfully, then it'll be the end of any fair games.

Thus I never like this corporation from the start; they were already acting like a bully before they were even operating, licensed, and established. Imagine how they will act if they were indeed given a licence? Probably use the licence "to kill"!

iPad WiFi w/ RoqyBT to use BT GPSr, LG Optimus G2x, BenQ S6, Samsung Q1, Toshiba e830, Toshiba e805, HTC Advantage X7501, Nextar MN2707 running P7, Magellan Springboard GPS on Visor 2MB, Haicom HI-303III + BT slipper, Holux GPSlim236, eTrex yellow
TomTom 1.9 for iOS, Navigon 2.0 for iOS, Navigon for Android, Garmin Mobile XT, Delorme Street Atlas 2009, Streets & Trips 2010, MapPoint 2010, APRSIS/CE, APRSIS/32, APRSDroid
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply/Répondre
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
GpsPasSion Forums © 2002-2015_GpsPasSion/Manzanite Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 1,97 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05