"“Is reduced accuracy an ‘actual harm’ in your mind?” asked another attendee."
That tells all that know, that attendee has no conception of what is
required to fly on instruments, or do an instrument approach into a busy
airport with reduced separation. Look into what GPS jammers on trucks
and cars near airports have already caused. They are easy to purchase.
Then there is surveying. The list is large where ten feet would be
unacceptable. IN many cases it could mean life or death.
Reduced accuracy is likely to result in what is called a missed
approach, where the airliner has to change from the landing
configuration to essentially a take off configuration. Then they have to
fly a specific procedure to a "hold, (fly a holding pattern until ATC
can fit them back into the landing pattern.) As the approach to landing
is essentially the busiest part of the flight with the highest workload,
it is the worst possible time and the most likely place for ground based
interference. I'll spare you the specific steps, but this adds
considerable risk and workload in high traffic areas where none of the
aircraft know where they are with the required accuracy. Aircraft
separation must be immediately be increased substantially. Where do you
put the suddenly excess aircraft with no airspace for them? IOW, it
creates the likelihood of a major disaster looking for a place to happen
and over highly populated areas.
The critical point? The pilots have to realize they are receiving
inaccurate information. Loss of signal is easy to detect, but error
where you are required to be within 10 feet of an imaginary line, or
plus 100 feet and minus nothing farther out.
Aircraft do have backup systems, but they all depend on GPS as the only
viable and developed ground based alternative has been scrapped. It was
not just turned off. The towers and equipment were quickly destroyed
making the entire system an "all your eggs in one basket", single point
failure, vulnerable GPS package. One direct hit from a class X CME
would do the job and take years to fix.
But if LightSquared wins, what will it mean for RFI to ham cases?
If the FCC, who is short on man power has "tied up" working on a project
like this, how many resources do they have available (people money, and
time) for ham problems? As I believe Ed said, We have to pick our
battles . We need to provide the necessary information they need to
minimize the resources the FCC would have required to get that
information. Still that information must be easily verifiable.
73
Roger (K8RI)
On 8/5/2015 3:37 AM, dalej wrote:
"The company also wanted a complete set of data with the names of the manufacturers of each
receiver — a change in the confidentiality arrangements that governed tests done several
years ago when the LightSquared proposal first was being considered. Furthermore, the test
results should indicate receiver resiliency and that should be made public."
"“Is reduced accuracy an ‘actual harm’ in your mind?” asked another attendee."
I bet they have a roomful of lawyers on the payroll.
Dale, k9vuj
On 04, Aug 2015, at 21:04, qrv@kd4e.com wrote:
I respectfully request that you follow the money to
understand why this group has access to the FCC.
It's mostly partisan but not entirely.
Contact your Congressmen - House & Senate, and let them
know that you'll take a dim view at election time if they allow
this madness.
Also, contact your favorite 2016 candidate(s) and give
them the same message.
Also, contact your local EOC, public service, airport
& private pilot groups, SAR, etc. and give them a heads-up.
We live in a participatory-Republic & if we don't
participate effectively then the crony corporations will
eat our lunch.
BTW: Also let those concerned about health harm from
RF know that 40KW transmitters at those frequencies could
cause all manner of unknown harm to man & beast.
Make a Donald Trump/Al Sharpton big noise out there!
IMHO, YMMV ... David KD4E
Your prediction is quite timely and accurate: They are back.
http://www.insidegnss.com/node/4437
Like a virus or some relatives, they never seem to be gone for long.
Their return does not bode well for ham RFI problems when a high profile
company whose product has been shown to cause dangerous interference,
returns from bankruptcy to do it again because Billions of dollars are
at stake.. If they can fight GPS and flight safety, how does our fate
fighting RFI look? They are not addressing solving the problem it
appears they are proactively fighting for the potential Billions of
dollars they would gain from the unfair advantage the inexpensive
spectrum would give them over existing companies that are playing by the
rules.
As before, LightSquared blames others for their problems. They trying to
require those being interfered fix the problem rather than the one doing
the interfering. Depending on how this is settled could spell trouble
for the ham community. As this has some very powerful people behind
it, People who are well connected. I find it worrisome that we appear
to almost be back to square one with the GPS interference issue.
Remember, the FCC was originally behind the LightSquared proposal. This
spectrum was created specifically to work with very weak signals as are
the aircraft receivers where weight, physical size, and cost are
paramount.. It also has the appearance that the implementation of high
speed broadband is being sought at the expense of safety with the
entire, established system, including users of that system, being
expected to bear the costs rather than the interloper.
It's basically the same as telling us, that if someone interferes with
us, we have to pay for the fix and that no spectrum is safe if there's a
buck to be made so it will remain a fight to keep what we have and be
glad the ARRL has had enough clout and connections to preserve and at
times, even expand the spectrum to which we have access. Let's hope it
remains that way.
Roger (K8RI)
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|