The University of New South Wales has developed an advanced GNSS receiver that can receive signals from GPS and Galileo satellites across multiple frequencies. The Australian Space Agency provided funding for the project via the International Space Investment initiative.
The receiver may play a key part in the future for Australian space missions.
Professor Andrew Dempster, director of the Australian Centre for Space Engineering Research (ACSER), led the development of the receiver and notes that it is an upgrade of Kea, a receiver made in Australia and New Zealand.
“The idea was to take that work (on Kea) and upgrade it for this multi-frequency, multi-system solution,” Professor Dempster said. “We needed to scale up the performance of many of the components on the boards – in particular, where the digital processors and hardware live.”
ACSER aims to have the receiver support upcoming satellite missions. The receiver can provide precise positioning, timing and velocity information. It enables satellites to produce higher quality images from space with better pointing.
Photo: U.S. Army/Spc. Brooke Davis, Operations Group, National Training Center
BAE Systems has unveiled its ultra-small MicroGRAM-M GPS receiver that receives the new M-code military GPS signals resistant to jamming and spoofing.
About the size of a postage stamp, MicroGRAM-M is a small, lightweight and power-efficient M-code embedded GPS receiver, capable of delivering assured positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) for size-constrained and other micro-applications.
“We’re delivering reliable PNT where our customers need it — from soldiers’ handheld devices to small unmanned aerial vehicles,” said Greg Wild, director of Navigation and Sensor Systems at BAE Systems. “MicroGRAM-M provides our armed forces and allies with a low-SWAP M-code GPS solution that’s resistant to adversaries’ disruption efforts in highly contested environments.”
MicroGRAM-M features rapid, secure GPS signal acquisition, enhanced security and resiliency, anti-jamming and anti-spoofing capabilities, and very low power consumption for an M-code device. The 1.0 x 1.25 x 0.275-inch MicroGRAM-M has the same physical dimensions as its predecessor, enabling quick upgradability to M-code and reduced system integration costs. At its core is a proven, tamper-proof M-code Common GPS Module that encapsulates classified data and signal processing.
“MicroGRAM-M is the latest BAE Systems M-code military GPS product, joining MPE-M and NavStrike-M, which deliver enhanced awareness in highly contested environments and precision munitions guidance,” said John Watkins, vice president and general manager of Precision Strike & Sensing Solutions at BAE Systems. “Qualification of MicroGRAM-M is underway, with full-rate production expected in 2022.”
Delivering M-code User Equipment to Germany
On June 29, BAE Systems received the first contract from the Space and Missile Systems Center’s Space Production Corps to deliver M-code military GPS user equipment to Germany. Under a Foreign Military Sales contract, the company is delivering the advanced M-code GPS technology to Germany, enabling precise, resilient, and secure geolocation and positioning capabilities that improve the effectiveness of allied operations.
The German FMS order focuses on BAE Systems’ Miniature PLGR Engine — M-code (MPE-M), which delivers precise positioning, navigation and timing capabilities; anti-jamming and anti-spoofing capabilities; a modern security architecture; and a size suitable for space-constrained applications.
BAE Systems will provide the first MPE-M receivers to Germany for integration, test and evaluation in 2021. Work on the program will be performed at BAE Systems’ facilities in Cedar Rapids and Coralville, Iowa.
uAvionix Corp. has received a Technical Standard Order (TSO) from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for its truFYX GPS receiver for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS).
Capable of receiving satellite-based augmentation system (SBAS) and wide area augmentation system signals, the receiver specifically targets UAS platform navigation and surveillance solutions.
With an increased regulatory focus on certifiability of UAS for beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) operations, truFYX provides a critical component to enable safe navigation and airspace integration. A uAvionix’s blog article — “Why Certified GPS with Integrity for UAS Navigation Matters” — describes the importance of GPS receivers for UAS BVLOS operations.
The TSO-C145e Class Beta 1 GPS weighs 20 grams, which includes the receiver, antenna, DO-160G power supply and interface protection circuits. A Class Beta 1 GPS enables the truFYX to be the primary position source for domestic enroute and terminal navigation, as well as the primary position source for ADS-B OUT solutions.
The Source Integrity Level 3, System Design Assurance 2 system ensures reception and processing by Air Traffic Control and Traffic Collision Avoidance System when used as a position source for ADS-B. For these reasons, the Airbus Zephyr program was announced as a truFYX launch customer in January.
A certified position source for UAS navigation reduces position error by implementing a strict Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) / Fault Detection and Exclusion (FDE) engine, and processing advanced SBAS messages designed to improve accuracy and integrity. These systems combine to detect unhealthy GPS satellite transmissions and remove them from the position calculation, providing critical differentiation from a typical commercial GPS receiver.
Design Assurance Level C software and hardware is achieved through the use of RTCA DO-178C and DO-254 engineering processes. As with all uAvionix TSO certified avionics, truFYX is manufactured in Montana under an FAA Manufacturing Inspection District Office approved quality-control process and facility.
truFYX technology has been previously TSO-certified in several form factors, including the highly integrated and complex skyBeacon, tailBeacon and tailBeaconX platforms.
Swiss company SpacePNT will develop an advanced spaceborne GPS/Galileo receiver to demonstrate for lunar navigation and positioning.
A vision of the NAVIMOON receiver. (Image: SpacePNT)
The European Space Agency (ESA) has selected SpacePNT to develop an advanced spaceborne GPS/Galileo receiver to demonstrate the use of terrestrial satellite navigation signals or real-time and autonomous orbit determination and positioning, navigation and timing (PNT).
The receiver will be carried aboard the ESA-SSTL Lunar Pathfinder spacecraft, which will be placed in orbit around the Moon.
The contract includes the development, qualification and delivery of one proto-flight model (PFM) and two engineering models of the NAVIMOON receiver. NAVIMOON is the high-sensitivity version of SpacePNT’s NAVILEO high-performance GNSS spaceborne receiver.
The NAVIMOON receiver implements high-sensitivity algorithms able to receive and process signals extremely attenuated coming from the spillover (side lobes) around the Earth of signals transmitted by satellite navigation systems. It combines these signals’ measurements with advanced on-board orbital filters to achieve onboard the spacecraft in real time an unprecedented target orbit determination accuracy of 100 meters root-mean-square (rms) at Moon altitude, which is well above the typical accuracy that can be achieved with terrestrial radio ranging that involves the use of costly deep-space-station ground infrastructures.
Given the high interest in Moon exploration and colonization (more than 50 commercial and governmental missions have been announced between now and 2024), it is expected that this NAVIMOON receiver technology will play a significant role in the next decade not only on Earth-Moon transfer orbits, but also to provide enhanced PNT services for users on the Moon. Deployment of a lunar constellation will allow the provision of lunar navigation in Moon-obstructed areas.
For this project, SpacePNT will partner with EECL from the UK. EECL will work as a subcontractor and bring significant space expertise to the electronics design, manufacturing and qualification of the receiver.
IoTeX has selected Nordic Semiconductor’s nRF9160 low-power System-in-Package (SiP) with integrated LTE-M/NB-IoT modem and GPS receiver to provide the cellular internet of things (IoT) connectivity for its Pebble Tracker.
The Pebble Tracker provides trusted location, environment and motion-tracking data for global asset tracking and industrial supply chain applications.
Critical features strengthen security from hacking and data corruption, meeting the demand of applications that require strong data security and integrity protection throughout the supply chain, the company said.
There are two versions of Pebble Tracker. The first targets blockchain and IoT developers, while a second commercial version is designed for the asset tracking and industrial supply chain markets.
The product combines an environmental sensor, a motion sensor (gyroscope and accelerometer) and an ambient light sensor. It enables cellular network connectivity and integrated GPS support in a global version supporting precise, long-range tracking of asset data using established cellular infrastructure.
The nRF9160 syncs with the IoTeX blockchain, enabling large-scale, decentralized asset-tracking applications. It sends environmental and GPS data securely across global cellular networks to blockchain-based backend services and applications. There, the data is used to determine whether smart contracts have been satisfactorily fulfilled. For example, the trusted tracker data can reveal if, when, and where an asset has been mishandled.
Raytheon Intelligence & Space, a Raytheon Technologies business, delivered its 3,000th MAGR 2000-S24 GPS system to the U.S. Air Force. The MAGR2K is a secure, resilient GPS receiver that allows the warfighter to navigate the battlespace with protection against interference and jamming.
The MAGR2K is an upgrade to the legacy miniaturized airborne GPS receivers and is in service aboard 20 types of fixed-wing and rotary-wing platforms from Department of Defense and Foreign Military Sales customers.
“In the battlespace, disruptions to navigation are not an option,” said Eric Ditmars, vice president of Secure Sensor Solutions at RI&S. “Our MAGR2K GPS receivers enhance GPS acquisition and performance ensuring military forces reliable and assured GPS data they can act on. Delivery of the 3,000th unit is a significant milestone for our team.”
Raytheon Intelligence & Space continues to upgrade the MAGR2K technology to stay current with the evolving battlespace. Development is underway for the MAGR-2K-M, which uses the company’s M-code technology.
The first production readiness units are undergoing platform integration on the U.S. Air Force’s B-2 platform.
B-2 Spirit multi-role bomber capable of delivering both conventional and nuclear munitions. In December 2017, the Air Force completed a series of successful flight tests of M-code GPS using a Raytheon Company receiver on board a B-2 Spirit at Edwards Air Force Base, California. (Photo: U.S. Air Force/Bobby Garcia)
Flexible, resilient military PNT designed for every military environment
Orolia, through its Orolia Defense & Security business, has announced the availability of M-code military GPS receivers in its resilient PNT products and solutions, including M-code-enabled mobile mission timing and synchronization platforms.
M-code capabilities further enhance Orolia’s Versa mobile PNT platform for rugged, small SWaP-C requirements and Orolia’s flagship SecureSync resilient time and frequency reference solution — the first Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) approved time server.
M-code is a military signal used in the L1 and L2 GPS bands and is required by congressional mandate for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) military operations. It is designed to enhance positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) capabilities and improved resistance to existing and emerging GPS threats, such as jamming and spoofing.
M-code offers several operational benefits, including a higher power signal with improved resistance to jamming and interference; advanced security features to prevent unauthorized access or exploitation; and improved message formats and signal modulation techniques for faster and more accurate performance.
“As threats against GPS increase, military forces will need M-code capabilities on mobile PNT systems to ensure continuous operations wherever they go,” said Hironori Sasaki, president of Orolia Defense & Security. “Orolia is proud to continue to support Department of Defense initiatives to ensure that warfighters have the most secure, reliable and accurate positioning, timing and synchronization solutions in any environment.”
From resilient PNT solutions to GPS/GNSS simulation, interference detection and mitigation, Orolia provides end-to-end NAVWAR and resilient PNT solutions to protect, augment and strengthen military systems for GPS-denied environments.
Triton Submarines — famous for underwater explorations including that of the Titanic — has replaced large, outdated computers onboard with rugged tablets. Each sub is equipped with two Panasonic Toughpad FZ-G1 tablets to monitor depth, light, voltage, gases and alarms, as well as input data and run analytic software. On the surface, a Toughbook 54 is used for tracking and communication.
Photo: Caladan Oceanic
Integrated GPS receivers simplify mapping, allowing teams to plot the location of a vessel in real time. “We use the GPS receiver inside the Toughbook 54 for positioning of the surface boat to aid in tracking of the sub,” said Patrick Lahey, president of Triton Submarines. “The GPS receiver works very well. The update rate, time to first fix, and accuracy allows the boat to have a good fix while moving, and for a quick restart during operations at sea.”
Photo: Caladan Oceanic
Once the sub is submerged, it loses all radio communications including GPS. An underwater positioning system based on acoustics is used instead, Lahey explained. The USBL system uses a surface base station mounted on a boat and GPS to determine its location. Then, using an array of acoustic transducers, it sends a ping to the sub and the sub pings back. The surface unit then measures the travel time to each transducer to find the sub’s position.
The world of mathematics has always been a mysterious one. It is universally loved by those who enjoy STEM-related fields and occupations, while being generally loathed by those who prefer the arts and humanities (similar to the argument with cats versus dogs, but let us not go down that rabbit hole). It would be easy to believe that if each side sticks to their side of the road, there would be peace and harmony in the world.
While I cannot speak for the art and humanities group, I can say with certainty that the STEM-related mathematics professions have been known to disagree with each other on various roles within the surveying and mapping world. While surveying has been around since the beginning of time, various forms of organized mapping systems began in earnest in the 1960s.
When attempts were made to bring the two professions together, each side bristled at being mentioned in the same breath as the other one. The surveyors were the outdoor cowboys with theodolites and tapes, measuring properties and improvements with low precision and accuracy. The mappers, now beginning to be known by the acronym GIS (geographical information system) technicians, were the office computer nerds with punch cards and slide rules.
Each side did not care much for the other — mostly because they did not understand each other’s role in creating the modern infrastructure database. This relationship would last for decades with no relief in sight.
Early (and unresolvable) differences
Each side brought a good argument to the table regarding why the other side was not as important to the authoritative role of map/plat making. For instance, here are the typical stances of each side in the 1970s, before the introduction of personal computers and electronic data collectors.
Surveyors worked on the ground and with actual monuments and improvements. They measured angles and distances to collect the pertinent data and drew by hand said information graphically on paper. Because of the accuracy and precision of the field measurements, adjustments were made to the calculations to resolve the unknown errors within the data collection.
GIS technicians used a combination of hand calculations, drafting and primitive computers to depict information obtained by existing maps and plats. Because the information being reviewed was not obtained through field methods, parcel lines were forced to fit, improvements to be shown with 90-degree corners, and ambiguities with most data issues to be dismissed.
Each side stood their ground (in the field or the office) and maintained the distance and differences until more technological revolutions began to infiltrate their vision. At first blush, one could assume these advancements would bring the two factions together; one would be wrong.
Would you like to play a game?
Photo: RyanJLane/E+/Getty Images
The 1980s are known for many things, but for the surveying and mapping communities, it brought a new way of reviewing and storing spatial data. The introduction of the personal computer and vector-based software in the early part of the decade set the pace for rapid and revolutionary upgrades to each profession.
It was now possible to see on a computer screen what had only been previously possible through manual computation and drafting. As the decade went on, computing speed and storage continued to increase along with the features of software packages.
However, these advancements did little to bring the surveying and mapping professions together; in fact, the technology has been blamed for causing even more of a divide between the two.
Again, each side has their reasons for maintaining their hold on being recognized as the authority on the creation of the cadaster layer.
Surveyors continued to insist because they worked on the ground and with actual monuments and improvements, the process of putting the data into a computerized format only solidified their position.
GIS technicians continued to insist that the refinement of their previous calculations of drafting and mapping into a computerized version further extended their expertise in the mapping world. Also, because many in GIS were specifically trained on computers in college, the work being produced by these members was superior to surveyors.
Even with the improvements in technology from computers, the divide between the two grew. The relationship between surveying and mapping was at an all-time low, so there must be nowhere to go but up, right? Not so fast.
GPS + spatial = data custody battle?
Photo: Magellan
Through the 1990s and beyond, the introduction and subsequent rapid implementation of GPS/GNSS gave new meaning to a previous but rarely used term: geospatial data. Only geodesists and higher-end scientists truly worked with geospatial data because of their professional environment and expertise, but now anyone with a GPS receiver became a geospatial data collector.
Previously, surveyors would measure on a global scale (latitude/longitude and/or state plane coordinates), but this would typically consist of solar and lunar observations under ideal conditions. GIS technicians could only rely on data provided to fit within the location parameters of their projects, which has usually scaled from quadrangle maps.
However, this new technology was being used with data collectors programmed for almost anyone to use with little to no geodesy experience. Turn it on, press a button and voila — a geospatial location in a variety of coordinate systems. No more sun shots, lengthy traverses from obscure NGS monuments, or scaling from the quad sheets.
Finally, the surveying and mapping communities have common ground to work on! It would be easy to assume that walls came down and the two professions mended their fences. The short answer is no; they once again did not. Here is each side’s general take on geospatial abilities:
Surveyors (once again!) continued to insist that because they worked on the ground and with actual monuments and improvements (though now with improved positioning), the process of putting the data into a georeferenced format only solidified their position.
GIS technicians now contended that they, too, could collect the necessary field data using GPS and bypass the need for surveyors. Also, because many in the GIS field were specifically educated to work with spatial data, the information being produced by these members was superior to surveyors’ data.
We now find ourselves flipping the calendar pages well into the 2020s, with little movement on resolving this relationship. But we can change that if we introduce a little friendlier dialogue.
In this corner, the surveyor. In the opposite corner, the GIS technician
When it comes to high accuracy/high-precision data collection for locating existing properties and improvements, there will be little argument that this role is strictly designated to the surveying profession. Technological improvements have made our work more precise and accurate; all while being collected in a georeferenced system. The relationship between the surveyor and geospatial data was previously discussed to demonstrate the importance of our work and determining existing conditions, (see GPS World July 2020 column). The surveyor’s ability to be able to collect an enormous amount of geospatial data for surveying purposes is not being questioned, but the line to where the work encroaches into GIS territory. Spoiler alert: Practically everything the surveyor collects can be considered GIS information as well.
Let us look at the relationship from the GIS perspective. The input and oversight of the parcel layer must rely on the licensed land surveyor to provide, while the GIS community is charged to collect necessary information to include into their database. It would make sense to update existing infrastructure information using current technology or historical archives in which the position of the data can be verified. Either way, it is now going to be referenced by its geospatial position rather than a relationship to a parcel line.
Also, the GIS technicians have the same or better capability to utilize data collectors with GNSS receivers for locating existing improvements for inclusion into their system. Most of these technicians have access to the same sources providing the GNSS equipment and coupled with their education and skills, they can collect the data as well as any survey crew. B
ut does this data collection by a GIS technician fall under most state statutes for surveying without a license? Spoiler alert: The short answer is yes, it does if any data collection includes parcel monumentation and could depict a relationship to a parcel line.
The whole is greater than the sum of its parts
Before both parties of this discussion get their pitchforks and torches to have a “talk” with this author, let us take a step back and reassess where we are today with technology and looking toward a future together. The common element here is the data, but how each party uses the data does vary.
The surveyor typically uses geospatial data for several applications; boundary determination, existing planimetric and topographical conditions, and physical depiction of proposed improvements. The surveyor’s data should be considered as a snapshot in time of the conditions of a particular site or project area.
Because of emerging technology, it is not just manually collected survey points using conventional equipment; it can be point clouds and 3D photographs not possible 20 years ago. The surveyor can be considered a high-tech record keeper and can update information as sites change. All because the collected geospatial data is timestamped and memorialized in a digital database.
GIS professionals, on the other hand, require similar information but for many different purposes. Attributes play a much bigger role in the geospatial data requirements than surveyors because the information found within tells them an important story.
Photo: aydinmutlu/E+/Getty Images
The biggest improvement because of the increasing accuracy of the data is infrastructure. As aging utilities require replacement, locating old facilities can be difficult based upon old mapping. Geospatial data collection provides more reliable locations once old facilities are found, existing conditions are reported, and crucial information about its lifespan is collected for future consideration.
Newly installed utilities will have the luxury of significant attribute data applied to each structure to help with future monitoring and maintenance. These are some of the factor that apply to effective asset management and can be applicable to both public and private clients.
While the surveyor and the mapper use geospatial data for similar yet different uses, the product is generally the same. But this discussion is not just about merging data into one big global database; we need to dig a little deeper on how to grow each side of our professions together.
Growth is never by mere chance; it is the result of forces working together
The surveying and mapping professions have been at a crossroad for some time and both sides continue to ignore each other. Both believe that geospatial data is theirs to control, and they both are right. However, each have a different stake in this geospatial data discussion and need to learn to respect each other’s role. Each side brings a different perspective how to grow and advance our world through effective and efficient surveying and mapping, but they must start talking to realize how much they can grow together.
With a little more focus and education of each other’s roles on both sides, an overlap of responsibilities could mean faster approach to modernizing many aspects of our respective professions. For instance:
Cross training of surveyors in GIS software, data collection requirements, parcel modules, and layer nomenclature
Encourage surveyors to apply for GISCI Certified GIS Professional (GISP) testing
Cross training of GIS professionals and technicians with survey technician programs
Encourage GIS personnel to apply for NSPS Certified Survey Technician (CST) testing
Both surveyors and mappers cross training with data collection systems capable of collecting geospatial data containing specific positional information and attributes
Identifying limitations of various equipment and techniques (i.e. using the right “tool” for the job)
Understanding of positional tolerance (precision versus accuracy) and metadata
Comprehension of coordinate systems and zones, including low distortion projections (LDP)
Distinguishing between surveying and mapping data collection (i.e. boundary/right-of-way determination versus infrastructure collection for inventory)
Light at the end of the tunnel
Technology has introduced our world to many advances not thought possible for our entire existence. The Fourth Industrial Revolution (see GPS World July 2019 column) is now taking aim at industries like surveying and mapping through automation and artificial intelligence capability.
Data is crucial to everything and our respective professions are in the center of the revolution. 2020 and our worldwide pandemic of COVID-19 has been (unfortunately) perfect example of how data affects our world in real time. The more critical and accurate data that is collected, the better we can make assessments of situations.
Surveyors and mappers are doing the same thing with data; survey data helps design our world through establishing accurate conditions, while GIS data helps to evaluate our current conditions and plan for future situations. Both professions rely heavily on data, collected in similar methods, but for separate but similar uses. Each has their strengths to bring to the collective table and can increase the effectiveness of digital modeling going forward.
Photo: PeopleImages/E+/Getty Images
Let’s make a plan
The world is moving toward digital twins, augmented and virtual reality along with autonomous travel; it would be in our best interest that the data used to identify the surroundings for those advancements be correct and seamless from all sources. Let us begin by dropping all the delusions of grandeur for our respective professions and formulate a plan to move forward together. The clock is ticking, and time continues to march on.
Technology continues, and soon Generation Z will be trying to do our work with their laptops and smartphones from the coffee shops without our help. Because they can. See, it is important, isn’t it?
I spent much of the 1980s working for Magnavox Government & Industrial Electronics Company, which held a number of patents on the GPS system and also developed prototype GPS user sets for the military. I, and others at the company, often gave presentations to industry groups talking about the many commercial and consumer applications for which GPS would be used as the cost and size of GPS receivers declined. By the early 2000s, the applications we had envisioned had been far surpassed.
In the early 1990s, I spent several years at Teletrac, now Teletrac Navman, which was beginning to market a vehicle tracking solution based on its own proprietary time-difference-of-arrival (TDOA) technology, using in-vehicle devices and metro-area-based receiving/transmitting towers. One day, the co-founder and chairman of the company roamed into my office for an update on sales and marketing progress. I changed the subject and, at some risk to my job, said “Dennis, the future of location technology is GPS. It will not just be used to locate vehicles, but even cellular phones. With teams of talented engineers focused on reducing the size and cost of receivers and adapting them to specific applications, ‘the sky is the limit’.” He didn’t fire me, but spent the rest of our discussion telling me why I was wrong — that GPS receivers would always be too large, too expensive, too susceptible to signal blockage, and other limitations.
Thirty years later, the applications I had envisioned for GPS have been greatly surpassed and are constantly expanding. In recent years, my primary focus has been on researching the growth and trends of the commercial telematics market in the U.S. and abroad. Today, in the U.S. alone, some 16 million GPS devices are being used to monitor fleet vehicles and assets, such as trailers and heavy construction equipment. Even in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, the market remains stable and is on track to grow for the year.
In the future, GPS will play an essential role in the deployment of autonomous vehicles, with help from other technologies needed to optimize location accuracy and reliability. My hat is off to the founding fathers of GPS who include some of the most brilliant technologists of this era.
Terry Moore, professor emeritus, University of Nottingham
The end of July was quite a momentous occasion for me as I accepted the offer of voluntary redundancy from the University of Nottingham after almost 35 years of employment. If I then add the six years I spent at Nottingham as an undergraduate and then as a postgraduate student, that totals almost 41 years of my life spent at the university.
I guess it is not surprising that recently I have spent some time reflecting on those years and the changes that have occurred in positioning and navigation throughout that long period. My first degree was in civil engineering, although I did specialize in land surveying in the final year.
Professor Ashkenazi. My first contact with satellite navigation was early in 1981, when Professor Vidal Ashkenazi, later my mentor and good friend, brought a JMR-1 Transit Doppler NAVSAT receiver into our second-year surveying lectures. That gentle repetitive beep as the receiver tracked the Transit satellites had me hooked for life. I don’t think I realized then that navigation and positioning would be the focus of my working life, but I was fascinated by the technology and prospects, and it really was one of those life-changing moments.
1984: Texas Instruments TI-4100. (Photo: NOAA National Geodetic Survey)
My Ph.D. continued in surveying and geodesy, and the focus was on the precise orbit determination of the LAGEOS geodetic satellite using Satellite Laser Ranging measurements. The goal was to investigate the determination of Earth Rotation Parameters (the Polar Motion and diurnal spin of the Earth) as part of an international collaboration known as Project MERIT.
Using Transit. I remember taking a Magnavox MX 1502 Transit receiver down to a conference at Herstmonceux Castle, and over the weekend I set up the instrument in my parent’s back garden in Sheffield, much to their amazement.
2020: Garmin Fenix6 smartwatch. (Photo: Garmin)
I did not start working on GPS until 1985, through my post-doc research position, sponsored by British Petroleum. This was investigating the first uses of GPS within the oil-and-gas sector for precise offshore positioning on platforms and survey vessels. The early GPS receivers we used were the Texas Instruments TI-4100 receivers, of which we borrowed five for the first long survey campaign to measure precise heights down the East Coast of England and Scotland. What a “pleasure” they were to use. I remember manually typing in the elements of the almanac for the receiver to acquire one satellite at a time.
Soon after we bought our first two Wild-Magnavox WM-101 receivers, which looked to be masquerading as Samsonite luggage. And now here I sit typing this article with GNSS receivers in the Garmin watch on my wrist and the Samsung phone beside me on the desk.
Last weekend, I was walking in the Lake District of England with my wife and daughter, and I did a quick count of our GNSS receivers. We had eight GNSS receivers (in watches, phones and handheld receivers) between the three of us, and of course there were others in our cars and the cycling GNSS receivers all nearby. How things have changed and how could we have imagined such as staggering growth in the ubiquity of GPS, and now GNSS, over those past 35 years.
Collins Aerospace’s Mike Shepherd discusses the company’s MPE-M Type II GPS receiver at ION GNSS+ 2019. According to the company, it is now accepting orders for the receiver, which received security certification in the spring.
