Galileo Sends Its First Signals

VVrath writes "Galileo, the European answer to the US Military-owned GPS has sent it's first signals to ground stations in the UK and Belgium. The first satellite in the Galileo system, Giove-A was launched on December 28th 2005, and is set to be followed by a further 29 satellites by 2010. At a cost of over $4 Billion, is this system really going to offer any major advantages over GPS, or is it merely a politicised 'anything you can do we can do better' by the European Space Agency?"

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

I agree

[MtlDty]

...it is always a good idea to have redundancy.

Re:In preperation for WWIII...

[ralphclark]

You don't understand, it's nothing personal. In the first place, Europeans don't hate ordinary American people as such. But it's not ordinary American people who are running the show. Most ordinary American people don't even know or understand what their government are doing, including (especially) most the ones who think they *do* know. The only problem we have with (some) ordinary Americans is their slavish tendency to believe whatever line of bullshit they are fed by the political and corporate establishment on Fox and CNN and disbelieve everybody else.

Secondly, global politics isn't about good and bad, it's about the exercise of military and economic power and control of information, to pursue the interests of the groups you represent.

To cut straight to the chase: I promise you that Washington's invasion of Iraq had nothing at all to do with liberating anyone and everything to do with gaining control of significant oil supplies in order to forestall an imminent and rapid worsening of the ongoing energy crisis.

To the extent that forestalling the effects of "peak oil" will keep everyone in the US comfortable for a couple of years longer than would have been the case without the Iraq invasion, you could say that the US govt's actions were beneficial for the US public. But because it is only a temporary fix, this is a policy that doesn't lead anywhere other than to further wars, both military and economic. It only buys time. But time for what?

If the US government were interested in the long term future of the US economy there would already be two crash programs in effect: one to reduce the nation's debt, and another to reduce dependence on oil, the latter starting with both a significant increase in tax on gas station pump prices right now (with much of the increase being spent on development of renewable energy sources - wind, wave, geothermal, solar, nuclear) and an aggressive program of public education aimed at decreasing domestic fuel consumption. These are the only actions that could make a positive difference.

I am talking about massive investment here, not the peanuts that is currently being spent or even considered. It is just not happening though. Instead the actions that *have* been taken, in toto, contribute to one goal only - to prevent the public at large, for as long as possible, from cottoning on to what will happen when either one of the following two scenarions hits:

(1) the growing disparity between global demand and global supply of oil pushes the price up (slowly at first, then over 5-10 years up to the $200-$400 a barrel range);
(2) one or more of the world's larger economies decides to divest their national reserves of hundreds of billions of dollars, in favour of something more stable and less inflationary - massively devaluing the dollar overnight and precipitating a complete collapse of the US banking system within days.

Both of these scenarios are on our doorstep right now. The Iraq adventure was intended to address both. But it will not solve either problem for long.

While the US very probably intended an expanded military presence in the Middle East to make OPEC think twice about redenominating oil sales in Euros (coming as it did right after Saddam Hussein did the very same thing), it hasn't made much difference to Iran who intend to open their own petrochemicals trading exchange on March 26, just ten weeks away. They are expected to offer at least some contracts denominated in Euros, and possibly all. Russia has also been making noises about moving their own oil and gas sales onto the Euro. And China already unpegged their currency from the dollar last summer.

I raise the question of what the US government thought they were buying time for, with their current economic, energy and foreign policies. Now the longer they manage to prolong the current situation the worse it will get for the unknowing public at large when these crises do finally emerge. As far as the economy is concerned it will be like falling off a cliff ed

Re:In preperation for WWIII...

[Boronx]

To cut straight to the chase: I promise you that Washington's invasion of Iraq had nothing at all to do with liberating anyone and everything to do with gaining control of significant oil supplies in order to forestall an imminent and rapid worsening of the ongoing energy crisis.

You give these guys far too much credit. The main motives are domestic political considerations and the prospect of looting hundreds of billions from the treasury on the backs of the military for friendly corporations. Oil strateg

Re:In preperation for WWIII...

[Rob Kaper]

Europeans don't hate ordinary American people as such. But it's not ordinary American people who are running the show. Most ordinary American people don't even know or understand what their government are doing, including (especially) most the ones who think they *do* know. The only problem we have with (some) ordinary Americans is their slavish tendency to believe whatever line of bullshit they are fed by the political and corporate establishment on Fox and CNN and disbelieve everybody else.

Very well said, we Europeans don't hate Americans, we just think ourselves superior. Must be some sort of slavish tendency to believe whatever line of bullshit we are fed by government-run, left-wing channels such as the BBC, NOS, et cetera.

jamming

[towaz]

What happened with the usa requesting that they can jam the sat network when needed?
Did they get this denied or incorporated in this network?

Re:jamming

[MikeWasHere05]

Could someone provide a link to an article saying that the US specifically wanted the ability to jam Galileo's signal? Not trolling here, just haven't seen one yet.

The closest thing I could find was this: http://www.useu.be/Galileo/June1902NATOBellGalileo GPS.html [www.useu.be]
If the Galileo signal directly overlays the GPS M-code signal, he warned, "jamming one would also jam the other, resulting in a negative impact on NATO's military effectiveness in the area of operations, potentially risking fratricide on friendly forces and civil populations."
So I don't think that NATO/US is asking for the ability to jam the signal, just stating that the frequencys are close enough that interference/jamming on Galileo could negatively affect GPS.

Sorry if this post isn't fully coherent. I have a pretty bad headache right now.

Re:jamming

[towaz]

here is the slashdot bit.. heard it on bbc as well about the same time.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/12/01/122620 7 [slashdot.org]

Re:jamming

[Ryan Stortz]

According to Wikipedia's page on Galileo [wikipedia.org]:

The European Union has agreed to switch to a range of frequencies known as Binary Offset Carrier 1.1 in June 2004, which will allow both European and American forces to block each other's signals in the battlefield without disabling the entire system.

The writeup is a little confusing, it looks like its saying that GPS is blockable by "European forces" and the USA is alright with it. As far as I'm aware, that is not the case.

Re:jamming

[Some Bitch]

The writeup is a little confusing, it looks like its saying that GPS is blockable by "European forces" and the USA is alright with it. As far as I'm aware, that is not the case.

GPS is blockable by any idiot with a soldering iron, you don't need the permission of the US government just a little knowledge of electronics.

Re:jamming

[towaz]

probable means this...

http://www.phrack.org/phrack/60/p60-0x0d.txt [phrack.org]

Re:jamming

[Malor]

GPS satellites broadcast a (very weak) radio signal on certain frequencies. If you build a medium-strength radio transmitter blasting out noise on those frequencies, GPS receivers in the vicinity will stop working properly.

You can't easily touch the satellites, but you don't have to.... you just have to broadcast louder than they do.

What happened - another perspective

[MythoBeast]

We were once willing to go nuclear to avoid secret prisons, torture, and indefinite detention. What happened?

Somewhere America lost "more free" as one of its goals and replaced it with "more safe". I realized this when the DEA accused Canada of being too loose with its laws and spending too little on police. At that point we lost the title "Land of the Free", to be replaced with "Land of the Not Quite As Free As Those In Canada".

Yea, yea, it's off topic. I didn't write this for the benefit of the moderat

Re:What happened - another perspective

[Malor]

I agree with you wholeheartedly; we have become a cowardly nation, living in constant fear of everything.

Land of the Bound, Home of the Craven.

Re:jamming

[njh]

Admittedly, a very big and bright light bulb...;)

hum

[McGiraf]

it not 'anything you can do we can do better' by the European Space Agency it's 'you cannot prevent us from using this one USA' by the European Space Agency.

Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[reporter]

Regrettably, many Americans view Europeans as uncompetitive. The American urban legend says that the socialist states in Europe destroy economic growth and that, as a consequence, Europe lacks the economic structure to build competitive products.

Americans conveniently overlook the fact that Europeans have chosen to be a bit more socialist in their economic policies in order to build kinder and gentler societies. Just compare the crime rates between the USA and Europe. The Europeans have largely succeeded.

This Galileo system launched by Europe also demonstrates that Europe continues to be technologically competent and that slightly socialistic economic policies have not diminished Europe's ability to compete.

The Europeans should continue to build competitive national projects to demonstrate (1) that they can continue to compete with the USA and (2) that you do not need a huge military budget to spur innovation. Civilian budgets work just fine. The military industrial complex be damned.

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[Otter]

This Galileo system launched by Europe also demonstrates that Europe continues to be technologically competent and that slightly socialistic economic policies have not diminished Europe's ability to compete...you do not need a huge military budget to spur innovation.

Whatever the merits of these points, I'm not sure how reimplementing GPS 27 years after the analogous US satellite was launched demonstrates them.

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[JanneM]

Wou mean, as good of a version as the replacement GPS satellites that the US putting up are?

Yes - why on earth is the US doing that? They can just use Galileo after all.

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[EpsCylonB]

The USA has always been a bit crypto fascist but it really is insane how much it seems to have *increased* since the end of the cold war.

"we believe in freedom and peace yet also we must also spend 4 times as much as china on our military per citizen"

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[xiphoris]

A cursory review of the literature leads your statements to be fatally incorrect. Crime rates are in fact lower in the US than in many European countries.

Burglary rates for Scotland, Austria, and England and Wales are reported as higher for the entire period of 1980 through 2000. For England and Wales, this difference is as much as 50% higher crime rate per capita than the US after 1993.

Don't believe me. Check the figures yourself [crimereduction.gov.uk]. I should also point out that these figures come from a UK authority,

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[Anonymous Coward]

Now check the figures for murder and violent crime between the EU and the US and I think you'll see a somewhat different picture. Then look at how many of the deaths in the US were caused by guns and then have a think on why the burglary rates in the US are lower. I think I know which of those I would rather have a lower rate of.

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[justsomebody]

we avoid the crime-ridden inner cities where most gun-crimes occur. And if we do go there, we can defend ourselves; we haven't been made impotent by our government and are not defenseless.

20-and-some million people disagrees with you and it doesn't avoid New York, hell, they live there.

Do you really feel impotent witout a gun? In the rest of the world we have dicks, we don't need guns to avoid feeling impotent.

And you can believe me. If people don't have a gun, you don't need it either. Problem starts when

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[d34thm0nk3y]

Real Americans keep guns for fear of the government, not the populous.

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[Cerebus]

Perusing the DoJ report you linked to, it shows that in 1999, you were about 1.5 times more likely to have your house robbed or car stolen in the UK, but twice as likely to be raped and 4 times more likely to be murdered in the US (using the reported/1000 population rates). While the totals of all these show an overall rate in the UK as 1.45 times higher in the UK, the difference is nearly entirely in property crimes.

What was your point again?

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[whorfin]

Another 'trend' in US property crime statistics is that often unless the victim can prove that the property was intentionally stolen, the police are systematically and fraudulently classifying [villagevoice.com] the thefts instead as 'lost property' to reduce their reported crime rates.

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[Malor]

What's really stupid is that, fundamentally, the two systems aren't that much different. Europeans spend a great deal of money on social welfare, which the conservatives here say makes them non-competitive. I can actually, to some degree, buy that argument.

However, you can't say that America is better in any significant way. Instead of spending huge amounts of money on social programs, we spend absolutely obscene amounts of money on the military. Money we don't even have... we are borrowing incredibly heavily to finance our war machine. (and you people are giving us the wealth to do it!) Both are consumption items; money spent on welfare or the military is just gone, consumed. It can't be used for investment or research. And it's no longer in the taxpayers' pocketbooks for them to use themselves. Our taxes, in essence, is organized theft of the population at gunpoint.... to make more guns.

The only reason the US standard of living isn't a lot lower is because we're borrowing from our children to live high on the hog... we'll have guns AND butter, dammit. Somehow, I don't think our kids are going to be willing to pay our debts.

There's an old aphorism, "Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime." Europe seems kind of stuck in the fish-giving stage.

The US, on the other hand, appears to subscribe to the theory, "If you have the biggest guns, you can just take all the goddamn fish you want."

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[patio11]

One of the reasons why the US pays a lot more money than the Europeans do for defense is that the US is also paying for the European's defense: we shared a somewhat more equitable share of the load back during the Cold War when there was a functional German army which would have comprised much of the first line of defense against the Soviet armored spearhead, but after the Soviet Union collapse Europe decided to pare defense budgets down substantially and spend the savings on further increasing the size of

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[Dun Malg]

European economies with heavy state involvement have gone up and down for sure since WW2, but have any of them really experienced the kind of serious hit that the USA did during the depression in the 1930s - a depression that was ultimately cleared up (I know this point is disputed) by good old fashioned state intervention ?

Uhhh....Weimar Germany experienced an even more disastrous depression at THE SAME TIME we did in the US. And really, Roosevelt's make-work bullcrap didn't get us out of the depression,

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[mormop]

WTF?

"Each other, for starters. You Europeans were a goddamn bloody bunch, with major wars going back every decade for as long as history has been recorded. This ended when the US came along and cut your balls off by crushing the Axis powers and parking our military all across Europe."

1: In 1939 when the Germans invaded Poland (Sept. 1st), America was working out how it was going to manage a relationship with a Nazi controlled Europe as it only expected Britain to hold out for 3 weeks after the "inevitable" defeat of the RAF in the Battle of Britain. Hitler's biggest mistake, if anything, was to turn and attack the Soviet Union (22nd June 1941) splitting his forces across another front on top of the Western and North African wars that were already in progress. If Britain had fallen in 1939, Europe would have been fucked anyway so the phrase "This ended when the US came along and cut your balls off by crushing the Axis powers and parking our military all across Europe" which negates the contributions of all the other allied powers is an insult to the millions of non-Americans who died in that war as well as being an expression of an obscene level of arrogance.

Your tone also suggest America's involvement was a totally selfless act despite the fact that America entered the war wholesale after it had been attacked by Japan and Germany had made a declaration of War against it. You also neglect to mention the arrangements from which America benefited, i.e. technology transfers including Radar, the jet engine, the cavity magnetron, Azdic, etc. and, post-war, faster than sound technology (developed by Miles Aircraft Corp and used by Bell to build the X-1, sideways looking terrain following all weather radar (developed for the BAC TSR 2 Nuclear strike aircraft - used in the cruise missile) and more that I can't be arsed to list. On top of this, America gained access to a global span of British territory for military use as part of Lease Lend as well being in a position to isolate itself from Communist Russia by transferring any fighting with the USSR away from Alaska which would be a bitch because no-one wants to fight a war at -40 in an environment where everything that moves leaves a trail that can be spotted from the air and into region that could form a handy missile launching platform close to the intended target.

"This made engaging the US a prerequisite to starting any European war, and defeating the US military was too high a bar for anyone to really consider trying."

Er, Nope.

The world's leaders understanding that there were enough thermonuclear warheads on both sides to blow the entire planet up stopped another war from starting.

"As a consequence, most of Europe has allowed its military to degrade into near-uselessness."

The ex-Axis forces were deliberately prevented from having an army large enough to cause any trouble while what was left of allied Europe had been so bombed to shit that it was bankrupt and couldn't have supported the kind of Army needed to fight a war. One country is notable as having actually come out of WW2 richer than when it went in primarily through selling arms to it's allies under the guise of Lease Lend opening up potential lines of argument as to whether it was an alliance or a business arrangement.

"Muslims are usually looking for wars"

What the fuck are you on? That is just the sort of statement made from a position of such supreme ignorance that it borders on being not worth answering.

Muslims and Christians have existing next door to each other for several thousand years. In fact, when the christian crusaders commissioned to fight a "holy" war in the middle east arrived, the cities they found under Muslim control contained mixed populations of Christian, Muslim and Jews and the laws enacted within the cities prevented anyone from attacking a holy building of any denomination. The rulers of the Muslim lands also endorsed the crusaders activities as a holy war and offered them food and shelter within the hous

Fighting to prevent ENEMIES, not war.

[EccentricAnomaly]

Fighting wars to prevent wars - is just plain idiocy.

Sure. But fighting wars to prevent potential enemies isn't. Eliminate all dangerous states and replace them with democracies structured in such a way to make it very difficult for them to wage war. Then advocate free trade, with disputes mediated by an international organization and you take away a reason for other powerful states to make war on you. Then you can get buy with a minimal army.

Just look at history and you can see the value of such a plan.

The US *government* (note: not the PEOPLE) are a bunch of fairly dangerous hippocrites at best.
  "We want free trade!" (unless of course, we're talking subsidising our farmers so that they can produce "cheaper" than 3rd world countries.

The US is a democracy ruled by a congress full of people both for and against free trade. On some issues one side wins and on other issues the other side wins. This isn't hypocrisy, it is democracy. And if it is so hard to pass laws that hurt a few farmers in a democracy, how hard would it be for a democratic Iran to nuke Israel and bring about a response sure to kill millions of Iranians?

When an Iranian president calls out for wiping Israel off the map - "What an outrage". When Pat Robertson calls for the US to assassinate Robert Chavez "He's just a loony"

Pat Robertson is just a guy with a TV show that says crazy things because he seems to be suffering from some sort of dementia. Just this past year he has said things offensive to Venezuela, Israel, and Pennsylvania. He asks God to smite people all of the time. Now, the Iranian president (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) is a crazy old man who participated in the holding of the hostages from the American embassy when he was younger, and is actively pursuing a nuclear weapon. If Pat Robertson did either of those things, he would be thrown in jail in two heartbeats.

And Pat Roberstson's comments have been sparking outrage in the US for years... to claim that more than a small percentage of Americans aren't outraged by him is a gross distortion of the truth.

And while I AM absolutely grateful that the US helped free Germany 60 years ago...

I guess the US freed Germany from fascism and communism, but neglected to light the beacons of logic and reason. How the hell is Pat Robertson as big a threat as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad??
 

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[Malor]

Have you ever listened to conservative talk radio? That's pretty much the party line with them... I don't think you can call yourself a conservative if you don't look down on the European way of doing things.

I'm living in the South, a transplant from California... and let me tell you, the OP's assertion is pretty darn good.

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[anpe]

The blog you point to seems to choose the figures that back its theory up. From the same papers it cites as source[1], you can read:
Homicides / 100.000 inhabitants 1999
US: 4.55
France: 1.63
Germany: 1.22
Italy: 1.4
Switzerland: 1.25

[1]http://www.unodc.org/unodc/crime_cicp_survey_se venth.html [unodc.org]

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[Meikel2342]

Well... how about checking some official and non-propaganda sites? I was really wondering (as a european feeling possibly overly safe at home?) wether these statistics might actually be true. Go check for yourself:

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/hmrt.htm [usdoj.gov] which is from the US department of justice and claims the murder rate in the us for 2002 is 6.1 cases per 100.000.

A little more difficult to understand might be the official german site (as its in german...), but easy enough: the word "mord" means "murder", and the number of cases for 2002 in the table is cited as 873. As we have 80 Million people in Germany that amounts to a rate of 1.1 per 100.000. So the US has nearly 6 times the murder rate of that in germany. Here is the link to the official german statistics (the BKA is the german version of the FBI): http://www.bka.de/pks/pks2002/p_3_01.pdf [www.bka.de]

Btw. the table on the top of the page includes the number of attempted homicides in red, the number of sucessul ones in blue. Without so many guns available, obviously (and luckily) most murder attempts are doomed to fail.

Phew. So I can still feel safe here ;-)

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[sumdumass]

Well... how about checking some official and non-propaganda sites? I was really wondering (as a european feeling possibly overly safe at home?) wether these statistics might actually be true. Go check for yourself:

Well, lets compare apples to apples. You are bringing in just murders to backup your claim. I am looking at all the reported crime that fits the description of the data coplection policy.

So were do we stand on this? We are both right but you apear to be countering an argument I didn't make. Less murders doens't make less crime it makes less murders. Maybe the reason i used propaganda sites was because a google seach showed them when i was searching for crime rates and not murder rates. Now in case you werent' following this thread long enough, i will elaborate on why i was commenting. The GP made the statment

Americans conveniently overlook the fact that Europeans have chosen to be a bit more socialist in their economic policies in order to build kinder and gentler societies. Just compare the crime rates between the USA and Europe. The Europeans have largely succeeded.

So i lookeed at the crime rates and found them to be the oposite of what we should think acording to that statment. Only focusing on portions of the crime rate doesn't change the entire position of the crime rate is larger per capa in some (most)EU countries then USA.

Re:Staying Competitive: Europe vs. USA

[Anonymous Coward]

It is amazing that switzerland apears to have a larger crime rate then the US. This site http://www.gunowners.org/sk0703.htm [gunowners.org] apears to say that gun ownership has the oposite effect in crime then what is popularly taunted too.

It's funny how ignorant you are. Your sources are highly biased and you even succeeded to counter your own assertions.

Switzerland and Finland have most guns per person in Europe. In Switzerland many of the guns people have are military grade [bbc.co.uk]. That's because militia personnel are required to keep their guns at home as part of their military obligations. So how do you explain that even though people in Switzerland have powerful guns at their homes, there's still according to your sources a higher crime rate than in US? Weren't the guns supposed to lower the crime rate?

In Finland guns are mostly hunting rifles. Virtually nobody in big cities owns a hand gun. I'm from Finland, and can guarantee you that the low crime rate is not because people in the country side own guns, it's mostly because Finland is a very socialistic country when compared to US or even Switzerland. We take care of our poor, so they don't have to steal from other people to make a living. We also give a decent education to our poor, so they have a chance to get a decent job.

Galileo is nog about politics

[Erik Hensema]

... and that's why it's better.

It's the Eurpoean UNION

[BarronVonGoerig]

this isn't a chance for the EU to show off...it is just another way for the EU to become more independant, because remember, the US can shut down GPS service to the EU at any time. >tg

Re:It's the Eurpoean UNION

[EpsCylonB]

I don't see the EU as one big happy mutual-interest zone when it comes to transportation, telecommunications, and conflict engagement. I'm betting that the people in Eastern Europe feel somewhat differently about such policy issues than do, say, the politicians in France, Spain, Denmark, etc.

a bit like red states and blue states ?

Those Gosh-Darned Europeans

[Schlemphfer]

or is it merely a politicised 'anything you can do we can do better' by the European Space Agency?"

Yeah, because God forbid those Europeans act unilaterally on a technological matter involving their self-interest. You would think that five years of the Bush administration would have convinced the rest of the world that we always have their interests at heart. OK, that's all I wanted to say, time to cook up another batch of Freedom Fries.

Re:Those Gosh-Darned Europeans

[timeOday]

Agreed, this is like asking "Why does Britain needs an air force when the US already has one?"

As it happens, this will also be good for all of us. Galileo promises [bbc.co.uk] sub-meter accuracy, faster acquisition, and better penetration through cover.

I'll be pleased as punch to accept this gift from Europe.

Re:Those Gosh-Darned Europeans

[adrianmonk]

As it happens, this will also be good for all of us. Galileo promises sub-meter accuracy, faster acquisition, and better penetration through cover.

I agree -- it will even be good for the US. It provides an extra level of redundancy, and what's more, it's engineered by a completely different group of people in a different country, so they may have different failure modes. Anyone for whom it's truly important to have accurate geolocation data will now have the option of getting a receiver for each system, with one serving as a backup to the other.

Nations other than the US and the EU nations will now have less risk of it shutting down because blocking acces to both systems will require the cooperation of the US and the EU.

Advantages

[Anonymous Coward]

Galileo has a bunch of advantages over GPS, like being designed to work to a higher degree of acuracy and to work inside buildings and in built-up areas. Take a look at this article http://www.gpsworld.com/gpsworld/article/articleDe tail.jsp?id=61295 [gpsworld.com] for more information.

Submitters stop with the editorials

[Anonymous Coward]

or is it merely a politicised 'anything you can do we can do better' by the European Space Agency?"

What the hell is this?? More like anybody with more than 1/2 a fuckin brain realizes its a BAD idea to have the only positioning system run by a country who has made it blatantly obvious they don't care about what any other countries feel.

Re:Submitters stop with the editorials

[Atmchicago]

It's not that the US doesn't care for other countries, it's just that each country has its own self-interest in mind. The US does what it thinks is best for itself, and Europe does the same. Big deal.

Independence

[Vlijmen Fileer]

One of the points, besides accuracy, is independence. Such a system is important for military uses. As the U.S. are getting more idiotic with the day, and can turn off GPS when they want, Europe has decided this is a thing worth having for yourself. And I wholeheartedly agree.

Re:Independence

[werewolf1031]

While I agree with the rest of your post, please make a distinction between U.S. citizens and its government, they are not one in the same, and there are a great many (myself included) who strongly disagree with many of the egregious actions taken by our current administration. There's quite a diversity of opinion and often sharp disagreement in this country, please don't lump us all into a single group.

That's all I'm asking. Thanks.

Politics

[denominateur]

I remember reading (In PhysicsWorld published by the IoP [www.iop.org] that the political reasoning behind the GPS workalike system was basically that the United States cannot be trusted to provide GPS functionality (as happened on 9/11) in emergencies and during exceptional circumstances. As more and more businesses (and most transport) depend on GPS functionality the European Union has decided to build something more thrustworthy and the improvements are just a side-effect. In the end, both parties will b

Mod article -1, flamebait

[vadim_t]

I would think the reason is completely obvious: It's a really bad idea to have your critical infrastructure depend on something external you can't control.

In a data center, do you trust your ISP has full redundancy and will never, ever fail, decide to disconnect you or go bankrupt? Or you you use several ISPs, have an UPS and a standby generator just in case some day something does go wrong?

Re:Mod article -1, flamebait

[Edmund Blackadder]

I agree, that article was obvious flamebait.

Piss and moan....

[Savage-Rabbit]

At a cost of over $4 Billion, is this system really going to offer any major advantages over GPS, or is it merely a politicised 'anything you can do we can do better' by the European Space Agency?"

What the hell is news of a new satilite navigation system passing it's first tests doing in the Politics section? Competition does not hurt, the lack of it does. Doing something better than the competition and never tolerating monopoly, Isn't that in the best traditions of a modern market economy? I cannot for the life of me imagine why it should be in our interest to allow the US-Military to monopolize the satilite navigation business. Please let's not turn this into another US vs. Europe pissing contest...

Please Mod Parent Up

[werewolf1031]

Very insightful cut-through-the-BS post. And...

Competition does not hurt, the lack of it does.

That sums up the whole issue quite nicely. Thanks.

Fucking moron flamebait

[Anonymous Coward]

Why include such idiocy in the story? One very obvious advantage over GPS that is stated in the fucking article is that the USA reserves the right to switch GPS off. And, with ten seconds over at Wikipedia [wikipedia.org], you could find out that Galileo has a much better resolution than GPS. So mod entire story as -1, Flamebait - because there's no -5, Fucking Idiot At The Wheel option.

Short answer: "YES"

[mi]

or is it merely a politicised 'anything you can do we can do better' by the European Space Agency?

The short answer is: "Yes, is". The longer answer is, the new system promises more precision and guarantees of the navigation quality. Both of these would be much easier to achieve withing the GPS' framework, but providing credible competition is usually the best way to shove almost any service provider into improving their offering.

When the provider is US Government, it may be the only way... Still, there is no reason for Galileo to be incompatible with the existing GPS clients, that's just evil...

Re:Short answer: "YES"

[denominateur]

When the provider is US Government, it may be the only way... Still, there is no reason for Galileo to be incompatible with the existing GPS clients, that's just evil...

it's fully compatible as it uses both its own and the GPS protocol

Re:Short answer: "YES"

[mi]

it's fully compatible as it uses both its own and the GPS protocol

Is it? I recall reading somewhere, that it was not going to be. Still, one has to wonder, whether the compatibility will be of the infamous "embrace and extend" kind...

Politics?

[zardo]

Why was this categorized as politics? So that we could all argue who is better, Europe or the U.S?

Had this been put in the proper category, like Hardware or Science, I'd say: Great, maybe I could get 10cm accuracy with this, GPS and GPRS combined.

But since it's politics we're discussing here, I say: how long before France, Germany and the U.K. start argueing over trivial issues. This whole European Union thing is too de-centralized, it's only a matter of time before it's torn apart.

Re:Politics?

[WhiteWolf666]

...France, Germany and the U.K. start argueing over trivial issues.

Trivial issues, you mean like theEuropean Constitution [dw-world.de] or farm subsidies [bbc.co.uk], which are a substantial portion of the EU's budget?

The EU has been arguing over very, very substantial issues for a long time. The question is whether or not the Union will survive them. My money used to be on no, and is slowly moving towards yes. This is mainly because I believe integration will slow down; we'll have a European identity, and a great deal of cooperation, but I do not think Europe will ever become a superstate.

Personally, I think that's a good thing.

A new low for /.

[quax]

Now the wording of an article already tries to whip up nationalistic frenzy. What happened to this site? Am I the only one who remembers that /. used to be about cool open source technology? Technology that brings us together across all borders rather than drive us apart.

Doesn't anybody remember...

[peipas]

Doesn't anybody remember that our GPS system is on the brink of failure [slashdot.org]? Who knows, maybe soon we'll be borrowing their system!

Concept

[RomulusNR]

You know, any geek worth his salt has heard of the importance of redundancy in a high-dependency system.

grammar matters

[ChrisCampbell47]

Galileo ... has sent it's first signals to ground stations

Tilting at windmills, I know, but please see my sig. Grammar matters. The smart people you're supposedly trying to reach when you write are tuning out and moving on when you make errors as basic as its vs. it's.

The Jamming Issues

[Daneboy]

People mention the "jamming issues" -- here's the scoop... GPS transmits signals intended for both cilivian and military use, in distinct frequency ranges. The military one is encrypted and can (theoretically) thus only be used by the US military and its friends. In a war zone, the US military can "jam" the civilian bands while leaving the military signal intact, which from a military perspective is a Good Thing.

The originally proposed Galileo design was such that the frequency range used by Galileo's equivalent to the US civilian signal overlapped the GPS military one. Thus, if the US wanted to jam or block Galileo's civilian signal, it would also have to jam the GPS military one -- which (to the US military) is a Bad Thing.

I don't know if/how this situation was resolved. Anyone?

Oh please

[Edmund Blackadder]

Slashdot should really not post simple minded flame-bait like this:

"At a cost of over $4 Billion, is this system really going to offer any major advantages over GPS, or is it merely a politicised 'anything you can do we can do better' by the European Space Agency?"

Yeah the system will offer major advantages and they are the following:

It will work when the the US decides to turn off, or disrupt the GPS. The US has never promised that it will always keep the GPS working, and why should they -- we paid for it with our tax money and the US government will always turn it off or disrupt its operation when suitable for American interests.

For example, the civilian GPS has signal has an intentionally added error in order to prevent it from being used for military purposes. Also, the civilian GPS signal gets further disrupted over war zones (such as iraq) to make it especially useless for anyone that is not the US military. Apparently, the military uses another GPS signal which is not useable by other parties.

And thats the reason why Russia already has their own alternative GPS system in place and the Europeans are building their own. It seems pretty reasonable to me.

It should be noted...

[richdun]

...that having one satellite in orbit does little if anything for you, even if it is just a test sat. You need multiple satellites to do any real navigation, since only with multiple fixes can you eliminate errors in tracking, not to mention what you get when the satellite is on the other side of the world. This is a good sign, but it's just a test sat, and only one, so let's not get too excited just yet. Jules Verne (another ESA project, for the ISS) has been due for a long time, and was late even before Columbia.

Also, while Galileo receivers in general may be more accurate than, say, the GPS receiver in your PDA, high-grade GPS receivers used in military and commerical research applications can get centimeter or finer resolution - and that's with the current generation of GPS sats. There are two new, next-generation GPS sats in orbit now, with the entire constellation to be replaced over the next few years. These new sats promised even better performance. Plus, the signal of GPS that was previously military-only was recently (past two or three years) opened for civilian use, so given time to produce new receivers, I don't think you'll see great accuracy differences between GPS and Galileo (unless of course the DoD decides we can't have GPS, but I think that's more the point here anyhow).

Once upon a time...

[sm284614]

My neighbour has a swimming pool which he says my friends or I can use any time we like (unless there's an emergency), but we're decided to put our money together and build our own swimming pool, which will be slightly better than his. For some reason he accused us of showing off when we told everyone about this, we just thought that it was best to have our own in case we're not always friends.

If you must ask why

[blindseer]

Galileo offers:

- Higher accuracy for commercial subscribers than offered by GPS.
- Non-military, muli-national control. No one country/entity can turn it off.
- Availability on Arctic and Antarctic waters. While not useful to most, apparently including the US military, it is useful for shipping and search and rescue for many European countries.
- Interoperability/compatibility with GPS. One can back up the other to offer higher availability and/or accuracy.

The only problem I can see is that they use the same frequencies. If some one jams one they are also jamming the other. Given the military capability of the countries funding both systems I can imagine such jamming will be very short lived.

question for GPS geeks

[BigGerman]

Will GPS still work if the receiver is in low earth orbit? Say 60 to 100 miles up? Would it be reliable as far as the 3d positioning?

Re:question for GPS geeks

[Greger47]

It'll work where ever you are as long as you can receive the signal. Given a good enough antenna you could be on the moon. :-)

But seriously, the GPS satellites have their antennas pointing downwards and they are in middle earth orbit which is the next step above LEO. Just remeber that you don't have interefence from the atmosphere when you do your calculations and you should be fine.

Happy LEO flight!

/greger

Not Accurate

[RemovableBait]

It is important to note that Giove-A is NOT the 'first satellite in the system', it is only a TEST satellite, for TESTING purposes. As the system stands, no useful navigation can be made with just one satellite (as you need multiple signals to correct errors).

The original intentions of ESA was to make Giove-A a testing satellite providing signals back to ground stations throughout the life of it's 2 year mission. This particular satellite will not be part of the fully functional Galileo system.

On another note, we need a moderation system for articles: -1, Flamebait; -2, Wrong Section; -3, Submitter-knows-fuck-all-about-the-subject.

Did the submitter/author read about Galileo?

[TBone]

At a cost of over $4 Billion, is this system really going to offer any major advantages over GPS, or is it merely a politicised 'anything you can do we can do better' by the European Space Agency?

You mean, will it do anything besides...(taken from here...) [bbc.co.uk]):

• Galileo should offer greater accuracy - down to a metre and less
• Greater penetration - in urban centres, inside buildings, and under trees
• Faster coordinate fix
• It will be able to tell users if there are major errors that could compromise performance.
• Users will also benefit enormously from the agreement between Europe and the US to make their sat-nav systems compatible and "interoperable"

No, it's just political maneuvering....

Cost is a non-issue

[Werrismys]

The GPS as we know it is US military controlled. GPS is needed now, everywhere. US is not what is used to be. Hence, need for European GPS clone.

You can't turn off the stars...

[GrpA]

About 10 years ago, when visiting an air force base in Australia (as a journalist) I asked about the clear navigational dome on some of the older aircraft. I expected to hear a response about how the aircraft in service were all so old that they predated more modern navigation methods, but was suprised to hear,

"The US government may be able to turn off the GPS system, but they still can't turn off the stars".

They were serious. This pretty much illustrated to me that most countries don't trust the GPS system for critical purposes.

GrpA

Re:Better than US GPS?

[jm92956n]

Military grade GPS hardware is accurate to within a few centimeters as well. Consumer equipment isn't, but this isn't due to technical limitations of the satelites.
Much of the equipment has been upgraded in recent years, too. Signals were originally intentionally inaccurate because the military didn't want Kim Jong Il to have a $99 missle guidance system. Recent upgrades have allowed the military to distort signals based upon geography: selectively, certain "hostile" areas are subject to this distortion.

Re:Better than US GPS?

[gtoomey]

The difference in accuracy of military and civilian GPS is due to the algorithms used. Civilian GPS is not able to decode all the bits of the signal, as the least significant bits are encrypted.

There is a more accurate "workaround" for civilian use called differential GPS. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_GPS [wikipedia.org]

Re:Better than US GPS?

[Erwos]

If by "workaround", you mean centimeter-level accuracy, sure. Differential GPS is already being used by many people who require insane levels of accuracy - I've seen it in action, and it's damned impressive. You can also use it while moving, so the idea that GPS isn't good enough for aircraft is kind of stupid. P-code is not the end-all, be-all of accuracy, in any case.

Reading these posts, it's pretty obvious that the last exposure some people had to GPS information was in 1997 or something. Low-res selective availability? That got turned off in like 2000. And "turning off GPS for Europe" sounds kind of stupid, too - are American pilots just going to fly into the dark all the sudden? A little less paranoia, and a little more education, please...

-Erwos

Re:Better than US GPS?

[Fishead]

I was in Italy last month installing some equipment on a commercial vessel. The guy I was working with has been in the marine communication industry for over 30 years (he is 74 years old, and still enjoying his job?!?). Anyhow, he was telling me that some time last year, he was getting hundreds of phone calls from angry customers saying that the navigation systems he installed were not working. All the systems had an error factor of 20KM because the US government decided that it would be best for US citi

Re:Better than US GPS?

[Erwos]

I don't know if you realize this, but GPS can't just be turned off for only European citizens, and not Americans. The satellites are either broadcasting the common carrier and p-code, or they're not. If what you're saying is true (and, frankly, I'd like to see some sort of documentation on it), it screwed over any American shipping in the area as much as everyone else. US citizens aren't _always_ in the US, and many US companies have holdings overseas where they use GPS.

The idea that the US would just unila

Re:Better than US GPS?

[HugePedlar]

Not to mention that it won't be turned off or degraded in times of war, or on the whim of one country's military - quite a necessity for a technology that people and corporations will come to rely on more and more.

Re:Better than US GPS?

[CptNerd]

Not to mention that it won't be turned off or degraded in times of war, or on the whim of one country's military - quite a necessity for a technology that people and corporations will come to rely on more and more.

And we know this how, exactly? The EU has "assured" us that they won't be as petty, vindictive, and politically motivated as the US, even if the US does something the EU doesn't approve of?

Will they cheerfully sell centimeter-accurate receivers to all buyers, even Iran and North Korea?

Re:Better than US GPS?

[Nutria]

Will they cheerfully sell centimeter-accurate receivers to all buyers, even Iran and North Korea?

Probably.

But even if they don't, EU will license the tech to the PRC, and the PRC will sell it to them..

Re:Better than US GPS?

[fbjon]

Why don't you hate America? ;)

Re:Better than US GPS?

[JourneyExpertApe]

P.S. If you don't, we'll turn off your GPS signal.

Re:Better than US GPS?

[gtoomey]

GPS receivers for civilian use are limited in their resolution. Its worse than 10 metres, cerntainly not enough to land a plane (planes use GPS for general navigation, ILS for landing).

Re:Better than US GPS?

[Hal_Porter]

Yeah, that'll come in handy for Chinese missiles.

http://www.gpsworld.com/gpsworld/article/articleDe tail.jsp?id=21977 [gpsworld.com]

I really wonder what the implications of this are if the US squared off with China over Taiwan for example. I don't really have a problem with the EU wanting to have an "ndependent defense identity" or whatever, the problem is if it ends up giving a leg up to China or North Korea, or even Iran in a future conflict with the US. Since EU countries would either be on the same side as the US, or

Re:Better than US GPS?

[Malor]

Nuclear missiles, as presently deployed, are largely ballistic. You don't need much of a guidance system... you throw them way, way up, nearly to orbit, and let gravity take care of the rest.

Ballistics...

[ktakki]

Ballistic missiles are largely, well, ballistic as you say. But modern ICBMs do need sophisticated guidance systems.

MIRV systems, multiple warheads delivered by one missile, do deviate from a purely ballistic course during the midcourse phase (sub-orbital flight between liftoff and re-entry). This is to help deploy the multiple warheads on different targets. The warhead bus uses small rocket engines to follow its pre-programmed course. Navigation was originally via inertial guidance or celestial tracking, but newer warhead buses use GPS.

Even single-warhead weapons need some sort of guidance in order to compensate for the effects of local gravity anomalies. Again, military-grade GPS is the preferred method.

Tactical ballistic missiles need guidance packages, too. The Scud, considered crude by modern standards, uses intertial guidance to control moveable surfaces on its fins during boost phase. Once its motor shuts off, however, gravity is in charge, as you have noted. Still, more recent tactical weapons have terminal phase guidance systems, so even these deviate from a purely ballistic mode of operation.

k.

Re:Better than US GPS?

[justsomebody]

So you basicaly say that it is ok if US has GPS, but not ok if China has. Yep, fair and square.

Funny, non-US people mostly don't agree with that. If you have enemies there's probably a good reason for that. But still, it is funny to listen to you how whole world is your enemy. Just why? Does anybody know?

Re:Better than US GPS?

[QuietLagoon]

Your message says more than I could ever manage to say in a reply to it.

Thank-you for proving my point.

Re:USA Leads, Rest of World Follows

[MikeWasHere05]

This, Ladies and Gentlemen, is how Americans get a bad reputation as arrogant fools. I was agreeing with this poster until the "The United States of America is the greatest country in the history of the world. This Earth belongs to the US, the rest just live here." line.

Yes, the US does do great things. Yes, the US does make some mistakes (as does any country.) But to say that the world belongs to the US is just pure arrogance.

-Mike
A proud citizen of the United States of America

Re:USA Leads, Rest of World Follows

[d474]

"So what are we to think?"

Well, if we in the USA end up with a dictator with a taste for conquering nations (we're getting pretty fucking close), the EU will owe the American citizens a return favor (for WWII) and get over here and dismantle our government. By the time our nation is in a Military Police State, the good Americans will be powerless (and probably imprisoned). We'll need the EU's help to topple the new American fascists. Keep that in mind.

Re:USA Leads, Rest of World Follows

[Paul Jakma]

Whether it is the Internet you are surfing on now,

Where is Tim Berners-Lee from? Which research organisation was he working for when he invented HTTP/HTML?

--paulj

Re:USA Leads, Rest of World Follows

[Paul Jakma]

Who invented packet switching, the premise upon which IP builds?

You think ARPANet was somehow the *only* packet-switched computer network in the 70s/80s? Ever heard of Cyclades? You think the internet was the only widely deployed computer information network? Ever hear of 'Minitel'?

Re:USA Leads, Rest of World Follows

[MichaelSmith]

The United States of America is the greatest country in the history of the world

History is loaded with great countries which don't exist anymore.

Re:Better, but not equal

[cliffski]

like be in denial about evolution AND global warming? Yeah I would have thought that impossible in 2006 too.

Re:can't we all just get along?

[Plyschmannen]

According to a newspaper I read (its swedish, sorry folks) http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=597&a=513 113&previousRenderType=2 [www.dn.se] the systems can work together. They pretty much said that twice the satelites means better coverage.

Another clip here: http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/energy_transport/gal ileo/international/cooperation_en.htm [eu.int]
"This includes, quite naturally, co-operation with the two countries now operating satellite navigation systems. Europe is already examining a number of technical

Re:can't we all just get along?

[10Ghz]

Would USA be willing to let EU control the GPS-system? No? Then why should EU be content with letting USA control a key piece of technology?

Re:Galileo is a weapon of war against the USA

[dizzyduck]

Don't be ridiculous. It would be the height of folly to base our infrastructure and security on the "promises" of the US. Perhaps in past it would be conceivable that we rely upon GPS, but in the Bush era, such actions are reckless.

The Iraq fiasco has shown Europe that the US cannot be trusted, nor relied upon. Therefore we must build our own network of satellites.

It's like the Cold War all over again.

Re:Why US so steamed up?

[CmdrGravy]

Yes I can see that the when faced with the precision, needle like, payload of ICBMs aimed at the constantly moving American cities and military establishments you'd want to deny cm accurate guidance systems to the aforementioned ICMBs.

Thank goodness we don't live in a world where nuclear missiles can cause damage over many square miles and cities are anchored in one place and even, god forbid, have their locations marked on maps which are widely available throughout the world, oh the horror.

I'm actually sur