Brexit, for once some facts.

[flecc]

I don’t think it’s about the user operational use of sat navs in general use, it’s about the super accurate use by armed forces, the encoding part of it so it can’t be used by an enemy, and closing down use of it in areas of conflict,

If someone knows better then shout up.

While primarily for military accuracy gain, the Gallileo project announcement did promise very much great accuracy for the consumer too. See my post above.

The possible problem that I see is how much equipment producers will incorporate Galileo into consumer products like SatNavs and Cameras.
.
.

 

[ianboydsnr]

Not after Brexit, Europe will be theres and us just outsiders. By our choice, if Europe is important to us why are we leaving?

We can’t tow the UK out into the Atlantic, we are still part of Europe we never voted to leave Europe, we couldnt, only to leave the EU, You seem to be mixing Europe and the EU up, ones a place, the other is an organisation.

 

[Zlatan]

While primarily for military accuracy gain, the Gallileo project announcement did promise very much great accuracy for the consumer too. See my post above.

The possible problem that I see is how much equipment producers will incorporate Galileo into consumer products like SatNavs and Cameras.
.
.

Not sure how your application works flecc?
I know the current system can be used to find a single bouy in mid ocean.
In Caribbean drug smugglers, gun runners etc drop a bouy into sea with their goodies below. They then satellite txt to their buyers or sellers the position of the bouy and back off a few miles. Other party picks up mentioned whatever and deposits payment in same place, then sat txt transaction completed. Sellers using GPS return and pick up... Not sure why your usage needs more accuracy. Finding a 15 inch diameter bouy mid ocean ain't bad... Finding a field can't be that hard.

 

[ianboydsnr]

While primarily for military accuracy gain, the Gallileo project announcement did promise very much great accuracy for the consumer too. See my post above.

The possible problem that I see is how much equipment producers will incorporate Galileo into consumer products like SatNavs and Cameras.
.
.

Well I would expect the USA to be active at updating their system, but I can’t see why they can’t use both, they manage to with mobile phones to use two systems, of course it probably depends on the licensing cost, but it’s technically possible for the equipment to use either.

Of course promising and delivering are two very different things, as our government are finding out the hard way.

 

[oldtom]

How do you get from anything I have said that I think the EU will fail.

And it will end up as much of a white elephant as the EU one will become.

Will that do?

Tom

 

[oyster]

There's world of difference between the area covered by a 16 foot radius circle and one of circa 5 feet when looking for something tiny in dense plant or woodland litter ground.

There's a world of difference between two cars passing safely and two cars crashing into each other. I see that as a major reason for higher accuracy being required. Satnav itself - for general purposes - doesn't really need much improvement. But I do fully understand your need. Finding the location that a particular Helvella was last year, to see if it is there again this year, can be challenging!

 

[ianboydsnr]

Will that do?

Tom

So you think the existence of the EU is reliant on a successful gps system being implemented?

 

[oldtom]

I have no time for this champagne socialist and Blairite who was a complete waste of space as an MP in the Commons. I seem to get some of his tweets however and this is today's:



Really? I'll believe it when I see it.

Tom

 

[ianboydsnr]

I have no time for this champagne socialist and Blairite who was a complete waste of space as an MP in the Commons. I seem to get some of his tweets however and this is today's:

View attachment 25246

Really? I'll believe it when I see it.

Tom

At least we agree on that.

 

[oldtom]

So you think the existence of the EU is reliant on a successful gps system being implemented?

I'm not sure if you're asking me or telling me. If you are asking, the answer is no.

Tom

 

[ianboydsnr]

I'm not sure if you're asking me or telling me. If you are asking, the answer is no.

Tom

I was asking, that’s what the question mark was for,

So you quote me saying the EU gps system will be a white elephant as would the UK system be if they built one, and from that you say that I want the EU to fail because of that, I am struggling to see any connection whatsoever.

 

[Zlatan]

I was asking, that’s what the question mark was for,

So you quote me saying the EU gps system will be a white elephant as would the UK system be if they built one, and from that you say that I want the EU to fail because of that, I am struggling to see any connection whatsoever.

All the systems will suffer from same problem. Let me try and explain. (probably badly)
Assume you walk into middle of a car park with a modern Differential/Doppler GPS unit. You hit coordinates and record your position. You draw a circle around your feet. I, m fairly sure that same unit will bring you back to exactly same position time and time again. (almost spot on)
This is called relative accuracy. Relative to itself.
Now you go home and plot the position onto a Ordnance Survey map. Amazingly you look and think "no I wasn't stood there". This is datum accuracy. You choose a point on the map and ask your unit to take you there. Yes, there will be an error. Is it the unit, the original survey or the datum used as reference. Who knows. (I don't anyway)
However, we are already at point where relative accuracy of machines is at least on par with datum data and in many places throughout world way better. So, I m not sure how Galileo can have better relative accuracy than current units. It's like your next car. Faster, more economical etc etc but is it.
If we plot to enter a harbour using chart data (ie position from chart/map) we might not be exactly where we want to be. If we have visited before (with that same unit) and hit "coordinates" we are pretty happy unit will take us straight into harbour.
How can Galileo actually be any better? It's operating under identical datum limitations, or I think it is. But like I said earlier I know nothing about it.

 

[Woosh]

How can Galileo actually be any better? It's operating under identical datum limitations, or I think it is. But like I said earlier I know nothing about it.

Progress in instrumentation.
the satellites themselves know the position to the other satellites with better accuracy. Earth gravity is influenced by the moon, weather, aircraft etc, now also calculated with better precision.

 

[oldgroaner]

We can’t tow the UK out into the Atlantic, we are still part of Europe we never voted to leave Europe, we couldnt, only to leave the EU, You seem to be mixing Europe and the EU up, ones a place, the other is an organisation.

Not me, we will not be a political part of the EU, and that's the difference, perhaps you are the one confused?

Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk

 

[flecc]

Not sure how your application works flecc?
I know the current system can be used to find a single bouy in mid ocean.
In Caribbean drug smugglers, gun runners etc drop a bouy into sea with their goodies below. They then satellite txt to their buyers or sellers the position of the bouy and back off a few miles. Other party picks up mentioned whatever and deposits payment in same place, then sat txt transaction completed. Sellers using GPS return and pick up... Not sure why your usage needs more accuracy. Finding a 15 inch diameter bouy mid ocean ain't bad... Finding a field can't be that hard.

A buoy is easy, they're comparatively big. It's not a field I or someone else needs to return to, GPS isn't needed for that.

Try finding a 1 cm radius nest hole of a rare bee that's been spotted in the 16 foot radius circle of ground the US system points to, when it's covered with mixed dense vegetation or woodland floor litter. That's when you realise how useless the US system is for such an application. Galileo will reduce the search area to under one tenth of the USA area, much more useful. The area ratio is about 10.3 to one in favour of Galileo.

That's just one example, there are many more natural world ones and no doubt there will be many more subjects with higher accuracy needs.

I notice you're questioning elsewhere how a system can be any better than the present US system. I understand it initially comes down to the number of geolocation satellites accessed for each location measurement, 20 would derive a far more accurate location than 5 for example, due to error averaging and centre point selection. It's the old classic bell curve again, the more samples, the greater the peak point accuracy. Below is an extract about Galileo:

"Now, Europe has decided it can do better. After 17 years of development and billions spent, on Dec. 15, the European Union flipped the switch and turned on Galileo, its own satellite navigation system. Right now, it includes 18 live satellites, but by 2020 there will be 24—and when the system is at 100%, it should be accurate to within three feet, AFP reports. There will also be a sort of “professional” version of the system that, the European Space Agency says, will be precise to within centimeters. In large part this is thanks to the mind-boggling precision of the atomic clocks carried on their satellites, which are accurate to one second in 3 million years."

That 3 feet accuracy is for civilian use, Galileo is primarily a civilian system, that intentional on the EU's part to avoid coupling with other's military systems and the security threat that could introduce.
.

 

[ianboydsnr]

Not me, we will not be a political part of the EU, and that's the difference, perhaps you are the one confused?

Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk

You mix up the EU and Europe all the time and you call me confused.

 

[ianboydsnr]

A buoy is easy, they're comparatively big. It's not a field I or someone else needs to return to, GPS isn't needed for that.

Try finding a 1 cm radius nest hole of a rare bee that's been spotted in the 16 foot radius circle of ground the US system points to, when it's covered with mixed dense vegetation or woodland floor litter. That's when you realise how useless the US system is for such an application. Galileo will reduce the search area to under one tenth of the USA area, much more useful. The area ratio is about 10.3 to one in favour of Galileo.

That's just one example, there are many more natural world ones and no doubt there will be many more subjects with higher accuracy needs.

I notice you're are questioning elsewhere how a system can be any better than the present US system. I understand it initially comes down to the number of geolocation satellites accessed for each location measurement, 20 would derive a far more accurate location than 5 for example, due to error averaging and centre point selection. It's the old classic bell curve again, the more samples, the greater the peak point accuracy. Below is an extract about Galileo:

"Now, Europe has decided it can do better. After 17 years of development and billions spent, on Dec. 15, the European Union flipped the switch and turned on Galileo, its own satellite navigation system. Right now, it includes 18 live satellites, but by 2020 there will be 24—and when the system is at 100%, it should be accurate to within three feet, AFP reports. There will also be a sort of “professional” version of the system that, the European Space Agency says, will be precise to within centimeters. In large part this is thanks to the mind-boggling precision of the atomic clocks carried on their satellites, which are accurate to one second in 3 million years."

That 3 feet accuracy is for civilian use, Galileo is primarily a civilian system, that intentional on the EU's part to avoid coupling with other's military systems and the security threat that could introduce.
.

You can’t access 20 satellites on a system using only 24 satellites, the maximum is around 12, I know that you know this, but you’re right the more satellites a gps sees the more accurate it will be

The system uses some guesswork, because the ionosphere bends the microwaves used to send the signal, a bit like how light is bent when a fisherman try’s to spear a fish in a pond, the guesswork is how much correction the fisherman uses in order to hit the fish, only the bending effects the time taken to reach the gps,
the guesswork can be done in the satellites or in the gps unit, surveying equipment are more accurate that car units, the Americans used to add or subtract a small variation in time from the satellites before about 2000, to make their system appear less accurate to the user.

 

[Zlatan]

Progress in instrumentation.
the satellites themselves know the position to the other satellites with better accuracy. Earth gravity is influenced by the moon, weather, aircraft etc, now also calculated with better precision.

None of that increases the accuracy of the data on any given chart or map or how we reference to it. They can only increase the relative accuracy of whichever unit ( or its system) we speak of. The charts and maps for example need to be 100% accurate, our plotting on and off them the same. Charts/maps are not and our use of them certainly isn't.
We naturally assume the charts/maps we use are perfect. They are not. The current system already shows weaknesses in the data, further improvements (for general users) will only show more.
For example if you took the coordinates of your front door from an OS map how accurate is it? Then there is the added issue of referencing the units position into whatever system utilised. There are inbuilt errors by the mere fact we project a sphere into a series of flat "maps".
I, m not for a moment saying the system can not be improved nor that Galileo isn't more accurate (relatively) than system in use, but once we reference to a chart/map, which we always do, that will introduce errors bigger than the ones we can get from system in use.

 

[Woosh]

The charts and maps for example need to be 100% accurate, our plotting on and off them the same.

let's take an example.
Our man tag a door for a drone to blow up.
The tag sends its coordinates to the drone. Both drone and tag do not need maps, they use the same reference latitude, longitude, altitude.
The new satellites will help maps to be more accurate.

 

[Zlatan]

You can’t access 20 satellites on a system using only 24 satellites, the maximum is around 12, I know that you know this, but you’re right the more satellites a gps sees the more accurate it will be

The system uses some guesswork, because the ionosphere bends the microwaves used to send the signal, a bit like how light is bent when a fisherman try’s to spear a fish in a pond, the guesswork is how much correction the fisherman uses in order to hit the fish, only the bending effects the time taken to reach the gps,
the guesswork can be done in the satellites or in the gps unit, surveying equipment are more accurate that car units, the Americans used to add or subtract a small variation in time from the satellites before about 2000, to make their system appear less accurate to the user.

Good points. Apart from the accuracy issue and number of satellites. The best accuracy is achieved with a broad spread of satellites, from directly overhead to the horizon. It's both the triangulation effect and finding best satellite signal for greatest Doppler effect. (ie going across satellite will have zero Doppler, going directly away or towards maximum)
First thing unit does is calculate its speed, which it needs for any further calculation.