Clarification about the term "GPS Shutdown"

Discussion in 'General GPS Discussion' started by Sam Wormley, Dec 16, 2004.

  1. Sam Wormley

    Hagar Guest

    Osama bin Laden recently said that he'd bankrupted the Soviet
    Union, and now he's going to bankrupt the USA.

    Looks like it's working.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
    The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
    is unverified.
     
    Hagar, Dec 20, 2004
  2. Sam Wormley

    Iolaos Guest

    THAT IS NOT THE ONLY WAY. RPN 10 approval requires an airline to demonstrate
    it's equipment meets certian accuracy requirements. Meeting those requirements
    allows 6.2 hours of flight without position updates. Several means of updating
    or increasing INS/IRS accuracy are mentioned, GPS is one but not the ONLY one.
    See: http://www.faa.gov/ats/ato/rnp.htm
    Quote from FAA order 8400.12A --- .
    Effect of En route Updates. Operators may extend their RNP-10 navigation
    capability time by updating. Approvals for various updating procedures are
    based upon the baseline for which they have been approved minus the time
    factors shown below:

    (1) Automatic updating using DME/DME = Baseline minus 0.3 hours (e.g., an
    aircraft that has been approved for 6.2 hours can gain 5.9 hours following an
    automatic DME/DME update).

    (2) Automatic updating using DME/VOR = Baseline minus 0.5 hours.

    (3) Manual updating using a method similar to that contained in Appendix 7 or
    approved by AFS-400 = Baseline minus one hour.[/QUOTE]

    All of these require that the aircraft be within range of a
    VOR/DME.
    That means it cannot fly directly across an ocean - it has to
    detour to get within range of such a ground installation.
    That's true.

    And that day is rapidly approaching.
     
    Iolaos, Dec 20, 2004
  3. Sam Wormley

    Hagar Guest

    hours).

    You're going to predict a terrorist attack within 72 hours?

    If you can do that, I'm sure that the US Justice Department
    would like to talk to you.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
    The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
    is unverified.
     
    Hagar, Dec 20, 2004
  4. Sam Wormley

    JM_Runs Guest

    RE: > Regional/very localized shutdown! How are you going do that
    techwize?

    I don't know how they do it. But I know they have done it.

    A large yacht under charter to the US Gov. crossed a line of longitude
    on it's way into a hostile zone. As soon as it crossed the line of
    longitude all three onboard civilian GPS units went blank. Several
    days later, while exiting along a similar route, all three civilian GPS
    units sprang back to life. I don't know how they do it. I have
    pondered this. At first the math to shut down a small region with
    clearly defined edges seemed a problem.

    At first I thought it was possibly a jammer. Terrestrial or low
    altitude would give sort of a fuzzy circle. I even thaught of a
    targeted jammer based on a doppler or fazed array system. I don't like
    this solution because terrain would be a problem. It's more likely
    that it's an the orbiting systems.

    In WWII the British built the first radio navigation system based on
    the interference between two radio sources. This was the first
    hyperbolic radio navigation. That morphed into to be Deca's DELRAC.
    Later in the US a copy cat system called OMEGA was developed. They
    worked by creating a doppler effect between two signals. The original
    signal was not masked but the user figured out location by the
    interference or masking of on against the other.

    If such a system can be used to figure out location, then, used in
    reverse, you could effectively interfere with the reception along a
    hyperbolic line by skipping some of the transmition.

    Since GPS uses the difference in the signals to fix location we know
    that the GPS satellites transmit very accurately clocked of
    transmissions. Therefor, with a lot of 3D spherical, and radio
    propagation math, one should be able to figure out what bit of the
    original signal to skip to selectively give a problem for some users
    but not all. The location of the affected users will be defined by a
    curve along the lost interference from the two satellites.

    You interfere with a single location by transmitting most but not all
    of each satellites signal.

    Lets assume that GPS use three basic bits of information to work:
    Satellite identifier, location and a clocked signal. The comparisons
    of variations in the clocked signal identifies the difference in how
    far a way two different birds are. The GPS receiver knows that it must
    be on one of the hyperboloids of intersection. Projected on to a
    mathematical sphere and you get a curved LOP. Now using several birds
    you get several hyperboloids, and the intersection of each gives you a
    3D fix in space, independent of the theoretical earth.

    Your ability to build each hyperboloid depends on your ability to hear
    both birds at once. If both birds had a hole in the transition, a
    short missing bit, it would create a dark spot. Just the locations
    where the two missing signals overlapped would be a problem. The shape
    of the problem would be curved lines running along the hyperboloids.
    Other GPS receivers located along different hyperboloids would still
    get the signal, but users on the masked band of hyperboloids would be
    in the dark.

    It's a bit more complicated than that. You need multiple dark bands
    caused by missing bits from all the birds in the sky. And they all
    need to be synced to blackout the target.

    Each bird would calculate it's own dark bands based on the location, or
    locations, to be blacked out. They would need some sort of
    synchronization algorithm.

    The blackout hyperboloids's would be curved, and so there would be
    other places along the LOP that also get blacked out. The simplicity
    of the system is that other locations on the hyperboloids would be
    covered by other satellites. Only at the targeted 'zone' would all the
    blackout hyperboloids intersect, effectively providing targeted
    blackout.

    For operational use you need to blackout more than one point on earth.
    Otherwise the receiver would just move off a little in one direction
    and be back in business. Each blackout hyperboloids would need to be
    expanded to a blackout band. The longer the missing bit of transition
    the wider the hyperboloids, and therefor a wider band for a foot print.
    Footprints would be shaped according to bird elevation and
    orientation.

    With enough computing power multiple narrow bands could be combined to
    create a complex footprint with edges that approximate operational
    needs. At first I thought the math would be horrible but then realized
    it's the same math that the chip in your GPS uses to figure out its
    HOPs.

    Because the satellite keeps moving the math for the blackout
    hyperboloids would have to be done in real time. Based on second hand
    reports from the field I suspect the function has been operational for
    at least ten years. Therefor I suspect the function is built in to
    the satellites OS.
     
    JM_Runs, Dec 20, 2004
  5. Sam Wormley

    Frank Looper Guest

    in message:
    That sounds like a good sig line...

    :)
    Frank
     
    Frank Looper, Dec 20, 2004
  6. Sam Wormley

    Frank Looper Guest

    Frank Looper, Dec 20, 2004
  7. Sam Wormley

    Mxsmanic Guest

    That's usually far more useful than knowing the approximate direction of
    the magnetic poles.
     
    Mxsmanic, Dec 20, 2004
  8. Sam Wormley

    Mxsmanic Guest

    Other words are not necessary. If you put three balls on a pool table
    and set them in motion, they aren't likely to hit each other very often;
    if you do the same thing with 200 balls, they'll hit each other
    regularly. Thus, precise navigation becomes more and more necessary as
    the density of traffic rises. Simple math.
     
    Mxsmanic, Dec 20, 2004
  9. Sam Wormley

    Mxsmanic Guest

    I'm not sure what you mean by this.

    The satellites transmit precise time of day and ephemeris information
    saying exactly where they are at specific times. Receivers note the
    positions of the satellites at the specific times when they broadcast a
    message, then observe the delay in receiving the message and use this to
    calculate the receiver's distance from each satellite. With a few
    satellites, it's straightforward to locate the receiver in
    three-dimensional space.

    So how would you change these transmissions to leave certain specific
    solutions "dark" in practice?

    You could turn off the transmissions completely, or transmit false data.
    So far, so good. The problem is that, at any given point on the Earth's
    surface, there are typically half a dozen satellites visible, and often
    a dozen. Each satellite has a footprint that nearly covers a
    hemisphere. It would be very difficult to change transmissions in a
    pattern that would make all satellites visible to a certain region look
    different from the way they look to the rest of the world. And it would
    incidentally be almost impossible to keep secret as well.

    Now, if you had special transmitters on the satellites that could cover
    specific areas on the planet, the situation would change. But I don't
    know if that's the case now. I don't see how it could be done with
    single transmitters for the entire footprints of the satellites.
    I'm not clear on how the transmissions would be changed to produce dark
    bands only in certain locations. Remember, nearly half the
    constellation is visible from many points on the planet at any given
    time.
    A sophisticated denial system could be built into the satellites. But
    without highly directional transmitting antennas, I'm not sure I see how
    it could be done. Of course, nothing prevents the installation of
    exactly these types of antennas on the satellites to facilitate the
    task.

    Of course, Galileo would incorporate exactly the same thing. But it's
    hard to say who would be controlling the off switch in the European
    system.
     
    Mxsmanic, Dec 20, 2004
  10. Sam Wormley

    Robertwgross Guest

    The Germans would engineer the off switch, the Italians would build it, and the
    French would claim to control the action.

    ---Bob Gross---
     
    Robertwgross, Dec 20, 2004
  11. We could answer his point of "Which hemisphere are you on" with the
    classic "In the southern hemisphere everything is upside down" ;-)

    Juergen Nieveler
     
    Juergen Nieveler, Dec 20, 2004
  12. Don't - it would make you blind ;-)

    Juergen Nieveler
     
    Juergen Nieveler, Dec 20, 2004
  13. A gyroscopic compass doesn't show you the magnetic north, it shows
    true north. Airplanes tend to carry at least one of those nowadays...

    Juergen Nieveler
     
    Juergen Nieveler, Dec 20, 2004
  14. Sam Wormley

    Iolaos Guest

    There is no radar coverage over an ocean.
     
    Iolaos, Dec 20, 2004
  15. Sam Wormley

    Iolaos Guest

    THAT IS NOT THE ONLY WAY. RPN 10 approval requires an airline to demonstrate
    it's equipment meets certian accuracy requirements. Meeting those requirements
    allows 6.2 hours of flight without position updates. Several means of updating
    or increasing INS/IRS accuracy are mentioned, GPS is one but not the ONLY one.
    See: http://www.faa.gov/ats/ato/rnp.htm
    Quote from FAA order 8400.12A --- .
    Effect of En route Updates. Operators may extend their RNP-10 navigation
    capability time by updating. Approvals for various updating procedures are
    based upon the baseline for which they have been approved minus the time
    factors shown below:

    (1) Automatic updating using DME/DME = Baseline minus 0.3 hours (e.g., an
    aircraft that has been approved for 6.2 hours can gain 5.9 hours following an
    automatic DME/DME update).

    (2) Automatic updating using DME/VOR = Baseline minus 0.5 hours.

    (3) Manual updating using a method similar to that contained in Appendix 7 or
    approved by AFS-400 = Baseline minus one hour.[/QUOTE]

    All of these require that the aircraft be within range of a
    VOR/DME.
    That means it cannot fly directly across an ocean - it has to
    detour to get within range of such a ground installation.
    That's true.

    And that day is rapidly approaching.
     
    Iolaos, Dec 20, 2004
  16. Except when AWACS covers it, of course. However, there's no NEED for
    radar coverage over oceans, flight plans are calculated to make sure
    there's no spacing problem.

    When was the last time you heard about mid-air collisions over the
    Atlantic?

    Juergen Nieveler
     
    Juergen Nieveler, Dec 20, 2004
  17. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    :)
     
    Sam Wormley, Dec 20, 2004
  18. .... and the Americans saying we can't use it .. :)
     
    Fanatic GPS User, Dec 20, 2004
  19. Sam Wormley

    Dirk Straka Guest

    It doesn't matter who controls the off switch - if it's built
    by the Italians, it will not work most of the time anyway. ;o)

    Greets, Dirk
     
    Dirk Straka, Dec 20, 2004
  20. Sam Wormley

    jon Guest

    like they listen to us anyways :p
     
    jon, Dec 20, 2004
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads
There are no similar threads yet.
Loading...