shrug-l: GPS - Accuracy Considerations

[swarner at gulfcounty-fl.gov]

I am by no means an expert on this topic, but I just saw a presentation at
a conference today on this topic, and Light Square says their solution is
to knock the power back 50% on the signal and to also use the lower
frequency of the two proposed bands and hold off on the upper frequency
band closest to the GPS band until a solution can be figured out.  They
claim it will fix all but some Agricultural gps receivers and virutally
have no effect on the rest.  I ask myself "how is this possible"? But
again, I have no expertise in this.  Just wanted to share what I heard
today from a Light Square rep.  
Supposedly, a 350+ page report was released this past Monday to the FCC on
their results of the test in New Mexico but I guess we will all wait and
see what comes of it.  
 
Scott

On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 09:23:01 -0400, "Sykes, John"
<John.Sykes at dep.state.fl.us> wrote:
> I have been following the LightSquared issue closely for the past few
> months.  LightSquared is developing a broadbrand system for smart
phones,
> I-Pads, etc.  The issue is, basically, that the bandwidth that the FCC
sold
> to LightSquared is immediately adjacent to the GPS L-Band.  Since the
> LightSquared terrestrial stations are planned to be high-powered (at
least
> compared to the GPS satellites at 11,500 miles distance), it completely
> blocks out the L-band GPS signal to civilian receivers (military
receivers
> have anti-jamming features built-in).  Several federal agencies say
these
> plans cannot go forward, as is, including DoD, FAA, NOAA, USCG, etc. 
Also,
> several congressmen and senators have co-signed a letter to the FCC
stating
> that GPS is vital to National Security and the LightSquared system
cannot
> go forward as planned.
> 
> LightSquared had claimed that they had a solution to the GPS problem but
> recent tests indicated that this did not work.  My feeling is that
> LightSquared will not be OK'd to go forward with the proposed system
until
> either; 1) a definite fix to the GPS issue is developed or 2) the FCC
> assigns a different bandwidth to the LightSquared system that does not
> interfere with the GPS system.
> 
> If you subscribe to the CORS newsletter online, it has almost weekly
> articles describing the LightSquared issue and progress towards
resolving
> it.
> 
> -- John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Department of Environmental Protection values your feedback as a
> customer. DEP Secretary Herschel T. Vinyard Jr. is committed to
> continuously assessing and improving the level and quality of services
> provided to you. Please take a few minutes to comment on the quality of
> service you received. Copy the url below to a web browser to complete
the
> DEP survey:
> http://survey.dep.state.fl.us/?refemail=John.Sykes@dep.state.fl.us Thank
> you in advance for completing the survey.
> 
> From: shrug-l-bounces at lists.dep.state.fl.us
> [mailto:shrug-l-bounces at lists.dep.state.fl.us] On Behalf Of C. Henry
Depew
> Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2011 1:59 PM
> To: shrug-L at lists.dep.state.fl.us
> Subject: shrug-l: GPS - Accuracy Considerations
> 
> Greetings!
>      There is a very interesting article on GPS problems in the July,
> 2011 issue of "Power & MotorYacht" (of all places" starting on page
> 34.  The impact of LightSquared broadcasts on GPS receivers may be of
> interest to you as well as the general discussion of different GPS
> coordinates from different GPS receivers.
> 
> C. Henry Depew
> sisu26 at nettally.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SHRUG-L mailing list
> SHRUG-L at lists.dep.state.fl.us
> http://lists.dep.state.fl.us/mailman/listinfo/shrug-l
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SHRUG-L mailing list
> SHRUG-L at lists.dep.state.fl.us
> http://lists.dep.state.fl.us/mailman/listinfo/shrug-l