Tag: Russian threat

  • Industry decries lack of leadership on GPS backup, China, Russia threats

    Industry decries lack of leadership on GPS backup, China, Russia threats

    Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg made a surprise appearance at the DOT roundtable on complementary PNT. (Screenshot: DOT)
    Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg made a surprise appearance at the DOT roundtable on complementary PNT. (Screenshot: DOT)

    “If this is a problem, the government should act like it.”

    Citing more than 10 years of government studies, warnings and promises, representatives from a wide variety of industries criticized the government recently for doing little to address an important national security problem.

    At issue was the need for national backup capabilities for GPS and the essential positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) signals it provides.

    GPS signals are weak and easy to block or imitate. At the same time the signals are used by most technologies including networks, telecommunications, electrical grids, broadcast, mobile radios, transportation, and other critical infrastructures.

    After Russia threatened to destroy all GPS satellites in 2021 in its run-up to invading Ukraine, a member of the White House National Security Council told a public meeting “GPS is still a single point of failure” for the nation.

    The government was criticized for inaction at a “Complementary PNT Roundtable” hosted by the Department of Transportation (DOT) in early August. The department is the federal lead for civil GPS and PNT issues.

    Eight attendees interviewed after the event reported a surprising unanimity of comments and concerns expressed by industry reps at the meeting.

    Enough with the studies

    A repeated theme was that the government has done enough studies to understand the problem and available technologies.

    “They have been studying this for over twenty years,” one attendee observed. “The Volpe [Transportation Systems Center] report came out in 2001. And there have been lots of studies since then. All have just been refinements of those original findings.”

    In 2021 DOT reported to Congress on a GPS backup demonstration project that included products and services from 11 different companies. It found that needed technologies were mature and could be had as commercial services.

    Industry Will Not Solve the Problem on its Own

    Another consistent theme was disdain for the idea that industry and the free market will solve the problem without government leadership and active support.

    “GPS is free,” said one attendee from a company that provides PNT services. “We can and do sell to meet niche demands, but it is laughable to suggest we can ever sell enough subscriptions to be enough of a backup for GPS.”

    A major telecommunications company rep echoed the sentiment. Wireless telecom is especially reliant on PNT. “We use GPS and would use Loran and low Earth orbit satellites if they were available, but we are not going to build it on our own. There is just no business case.”

    “We have a big list of things we could do that would increase our resilience and/or cut costs,” said another telecom provider. “There is no big driver for most, though. No competitive pressure, no government mandates.”

    Government must walk the walk

    “The government has been telling us for over a decade that this is a problem,” said one attendee. “If that’s true, why aren’t they acting like it? Transportation is critical infrastructure and needs a GPS backup, for example. So why hasn’t DOT done something?” Of all the criticisms expressed, this was predominant, according to interviewees.

    A 2021 Executive Order on responsible use of PNT services encouraged critical infrastructure providers to not rely on GPS.

    The government needing to be a lead customer was mentioned a number of times at the event. This would help raise awareness, set an example, and signal to users the issue is important enough to act on.

    Government action was also seen by users as key to creating confidence that a technology or service will be around for the long haul. This point seemed to resonate with many of the government representatives as well.

    “I am not going to go to the time and expense of adopting something unless I know it is going to be around for 20 years or more. The only way I can be assured of that is if one of the biggest users is the government.”

    Adversaries not idle

    Of particular concern to some was that America’s adversaries have better, more resilient PNT, and are constantly working against us.

    They are building PNT “…systems of systems. Space-based, ground-based, and everything in between-based. They are doing it. We need to get out in front and lead,” said one. China has been particularly active building multiple integrated PNT systems.

    “Our adversaries are not stupid” and are going to try to stay in the lead. “They will try to interfere with any frequency, system, or combination of systems selected. We must test and build something that is survivable and resilient.”

    “If China, Russia, and Iran had the ability to protect themselves from nuclear attack,” said one attendee, “we would be frantically trying to get the same capability. Yet those countries have backup and complementary systems for PNT, and the United States does not. And we’re not doing anything,” said a participant reflecting upon the event.

    Hopeful signs

    Several attendees said there were signs the event might not have been “just another government meeting.”

    As part of his opening remarks, the event host, DOT Deputy Assistant Secretary Dr. Robert Hampshire, mentioned the bipartisan infrastructure law and affirmed that PNT is infrastructure. This led some to believe funding from the infrastructure legislation could be immediately available if the government decided to act.

    Others were cheered by DOT Secretary Buttigieg’s cameo appearance and comments at the event. One remarked it was the first time they had heard a DOT Secretary say “PNT” in over 20 years.

    Uncertain outcome

    Despite the consistent messaging and potentially hopeful signs, some attendees questioned whether anything would change because of the two-and-a-half-hour event.

    “There were about 120 people from industry and a wide variety of government agencies, but what was the point?” asked one. “We all told the government the same things we’ve told them before, often in writing.”

    Another was concerned that the event didn’t discuss the most important questions.

    “We were talking about individual systems and critical infrastructures,” this person said. “This is a strategic national security issue. We need to get the bullseye off GPS and ensure the United States can’t be blackmailed by having GPS held hostage.”

    “And what if there is a major coronal mass ejection? China will come out much better than us because they have survivable PNT. The United States will become a second-rate power to China in an instant. We keep talking about the trees and ignoring the forest!”

    One attendee whose company has a very active government relations program reported they hoped the event would help sway those in government still opposed to action.

    “It is pretty clear to us that almost everyone in the departments who understand the issues is in favor of doing something as soon as possible. The same with Congress. But even though the National Security Council is worried about this, there are some folks in the Office of Management and Budget who have opposed action for over a decade.”

    While some came away buoyed by what they saw as an action-oriented tone to the event, others doubted much would change. “It remains to be seen whether criticism from industry and threats from China and Russia are enough to get the government to finally do something.”


    Dana A. Goward is President of the Resilient Navigation and Timing Foundation and serves on the President’s National Space-based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Advisory Board.

  • Editorial Advisory Board Q&A: Russian threats to GPS

    Editorial Advisory Board Q&A: Russian threats to GPS

    Photo: Stanislav Ostranitsa/iStock/Getty Images Plus/Getty Images
    Photo: Stanislav Ostranitsa/iStock/Getty Images Plus/Getty Images

    Is Russia’s recent threat to destroy GPS satellites technically realistic? Specifically, how many satellites would it have to destroy to essentially incapacitate GPS-dependent U.S. weapons systems? Would the 1,100-km separation between the orbits of GPS and GLONASS satellites spare the latter from the debris field?

    Ellen Hall
    Ellen Hall

    “It appears technically possible because they destroyed one of their own retired Soviet satellites on Nov. 15 with anti-satellite technology. Russia threatened to destroy up to 32 satellites, which would incapacitate GPS-dependent weapons and create a virtual mine field of debris with little ability to project trajectories of debris fallout. It is imperative that LEO and ground-based sensor alternatives be developed that will make an enemy attack less likely to be incapacitating.”
    — Ellen Hall, Spirent Federal Systems


    Photo: Mitch Narins“Some still appear to believe that the number of satellites and their orbital height offer some level of protection. They refuse to look to the ground for resilient solutions using proven and highly reliable technology — which, coincidently, both Russia and China continue to operate as their resilient PNT solutions. The United States and its allies cannot continue to be dictated to by financial analysts who resist these solutions for fear of exposing the poor decisions they supported in the past and continue to support regarding a solution with a higher power and low frequency.”
    — Mitch Narins, consultant


    Bernard Gruber
    Bernard Gruber

    “Yes, it is technically realistic, but this act of war against a truly worldwide utility would be politically and economically disastrous. GPS IOC was based upon 24 MEO satellites that offered full, but not overlapping, worldwide coverage with spares — there are now 31 satellites that can be utilized through the control segment. The GPS constellation is ~1,100-km deeper than GLONASS. As made evident by the now-destroyed Kosmos 1408 debris cloud simulations, and the actual debris cloud spread by the Chinese 2007 ASAT test that now encompasses most of the LEO regime, the debris field will expand, thus increasing risk to GPS satellite placement and possibly risking physical damage to currently orbited satellites.”
    — Bernie Gruber, Northrop Grumman

  • NSC director: GPS ‘Still a Single Point of Failure’

    NSC director: GPS ‘Still a Single Point of Failure’

    Photo: Caitlin Durkovich
    Photo: Caitlin Durkovich

    The Global Positioning System (GPS) is “still a significant single point of failure in our country,” said Caitlin Durkovich, National Security Council director for Response and Resilience.

    Her remarks were made at the Dec. 9 meeting of the president’s National Space-based Positioning, Navigation and Timing (PNT) Advisory Board.

    The meeting was held shortly after Russia’s successful anti-satellite test and threat to “blind NATO and the U.S.” by shooting down all GPS satellites.

    Durkovich’s remarks were made in the context of a larger national resilience message. She cited recent incidents such as Hurricane Ida, the Colonial Pipeline hack, the winter failure of the Texas electrical grid, and disrupted supply chains. She said everyone is responsible to ensure they, their systems and the nation are able to safely weather adverse events and bounce back better than before.

    The interconnectedness of so many vital services such as electrical power and other vital systems like PNT make a holistic approach necessary. The administration is developing a set of resilience principles to support that, she said. It is also ensuring as funds go out to states and localities from the infrastructure bill that making American infrastructure more resilient to climate change and “all hazards” is a priority.

    Because “positioning, navigation and timing is foundational to our life,” she said, “resilience is more important now than ever.” Disruptions could lead to “cascading effects.”

    Durkovich cited the administration’s Space Priorities Framework as evidence of White House concern. Released this month, it says in part:

    “Space systems are an essential component of U.S. critical infrastructure — by directly providing important services and by enabling other critical infrastructure sectors and industries. The United States will enhance the security and resilience of space systems that provide or support U.S. critical infrastructure from malicious activities and natural hazards.”

    She also indicated that the Biden administration was following through on two Trump administration policies as important steps to resilience.

    Executive Order 13905, “Strengthening National Resilience Through Responsible Use of Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Services,” among other things, calls on all users to avoid over-reliance on GPS. It also calls for the federal government to require PNT resilience to be considered when selecting contractors.

    Space Policy Directive 7 “The United States Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Policy” outlines a number of research and other efforts. It also says the nation will:

    “Invest in domestic capabilities and support international activities to detect, mitigate, and increase resilience to harmful disruption or manipulation of GPS, and identify and implement, as appropriate, alternative sources of PNT for critical infrastructure, key resources, and mission-essential functions.”

    Several board members asked about the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) order authorizing Ligado Networks to broadcast in frequencies adjacent to those used by GPS. She said the administration was concerned and both the National Economic Council and National Security Council were in discussion. Engagement with the FCC, though, may pend confirmation of a full board of commissioners.

    One of the board members asking about the Ligado issue followed up with a comment that adjacent-band concerns pale in comparison to recent Russian threats to GPS satellites. Durkovich responded that there wasn’t much she could say on that topic in public except that it had the attention of the president and his senior advisors.

    Durkovich was also asked about the administration’s commitment to execute the 2018 National Timing Resilience and Security Act. The law’s requirement to establish a terrestrial, wireless source of coordinated universal time to back up GPS signals by December 2020 was ignored by the Trump administration.

    Her reply was to reaffirm her earlier statement that “assuring positioning, navigation and timing, and the economic and strategic benefits it brings to this nation, is a priority for this administration.”

    Video of the entire advisory board meeting is available on YouTube. MS Durkovich’s remarks begin at approximately 1:37:00. A link to the video is also posted as part of the agenda on the board’s website.