GPS World

Author: Eric Gakstatter

  • Get It Surveyed (GIS)

    Ed. note: I originally published this article in 2010. I occasionally re-run it as it generally receives interesting reader response.

    Get It Surveyed (GIS) always brings out a small roar of laughter at the local RPLS chapter meeting. Hardee, har, har. The irony is that if you laugh at that joke, then you might as well wear a sign on your head that says “GIS Dummy.” GIS isn’t about accuracy. I’ve said it many times and I’m sure I’ll say it many more times. The fact is that the average land surveyor is only exposed to a small sliver of how GIS’s are used, namely parcel databases.

    Do you think when McDonald’s is planning (not building) a new restaurant that they care if the parcel accuracy is +/-  a tenth? Of course not, accuracy of tens of feet (or even hundreds of feet) suffices in the strategic planning phase. What they care about is a demographic analysis of the area, local competition, traffic behavior, etc. The power of GIS is that it can handle this sort of data and answer questions such as “show me all of the 3+ acre commercial parcels for sale within 500 ft. of Main St. and within 2000 ft. of the nearest Burger King.” Read this article that describes how a company is using GIS to find new restaurant sites. Do you think they care about pinpoint accuracy?

    Another GIS app that’s gaining momentum with the general public are predator GIS databases. You can check out Family Watchdog. Plug in your street address and have it perform a search. Do you think positional accuracy is important to users of this service? Having a correct address and other descriptive information is more important than +/- 10 feet positional accuracy.There are many thousands of GIS uses like the above that don’t require pinpoint accuracy. Would it be nice to have pinpoint accuracy in all GIS services? Of course, but financially speaking, it’s not realistic.

    The purpose of writing the above is to paint a picture of the scope of GIS. It’s much, much larger than what the average land surveyor is exposed to. It’s not just the part-time GIS technician at the local government office whose life goal seems to be making things difficult for you.

    As much as it may offend you (the typical land surveyor) to hear it, you can’t handle GIS. You can equate it to using Microsoft Word or Excel, you might use it daily and use some of its capabilities, but you really only use about 10 percent of what it’s capable of. So, the thought that a GIS professional should be “under the supervision” of an RPLS, from a broad perspective, is ridiculous. I know many RPLS’s and in trying to imagine some of them being in responsible charge of a GIS is an absolutely frightening thought.

    Ok, I’m not here to go on an RPLS-bashing tirade. In fact, the properly educated RPLS is vitally important to a GIS. Last Fall, I wrote a column emphasizing the importance of the RPLS and GISP collaborating together. I just want to put it in perspective because I hear from and read about land surveyors who complain about a GIS and about the incompetence of those running it, how land surveyors should be in responsible charge, etc. The fact is that most RPLS aren’t qualified.

    On the flip side, I’ve heard of a fair share of part-time (and full-time) GIS technicians who don’t understand the local statutes and who have no problem saying, with the utmost confidence, that “your survey is wrong.” These are the folks who “manage” the parcel database that the RPLS are used to dealing with. Not that this is always the case; in fact, there are many competent GISP, but those are primarily in the densely populated, metropolitan areas where there is a healthy tax base to support a full-time GIS team. Unfortunately, much of the U.S. is comprised of low-density (thus, low tax base) rural areas.

    Follow the Money

    As with trying to understand most processes in the U.S., the most effective way to find the answer is to follow the money trail. GIS is no different. Look at the Los Angeles County’s (California) Office of the Assessor’s GIS website. Pretty impressive. Now, look at the much less populated Modoc County (California) website with no GIS microsite.

    A discussion has been around for many years that promotes the idea of a nationwide parcel database so that the disparity between the quality of the Los Angeles County and Modoc County parcel GIS data is not so large. There’s even a book on the subject called “National Land Parcel Data: A Vision for the Future.” From its description, the book summarizes that “nationally integrated land parcel data is necessary, feasible and affordable.” However, the author goes on to admit that little progress has been made since 1980 when a National Research Council book called for such a national system. Why is that?

    Brent Jones (RPLS, PE) is the surveying/engineering/land administration industry manager at ESRI. He recently established a blog discussion on the website Spatialroundtable titled “National Parcel Land Data and Surveyors” and references the aforementioned book. There have been several comments on the blog from reputable industry people. It’s well worth reading the comments.

    I contend that, counter to the book’s conclusions, a national parcel database is not affordable…and I’m not talking about funding (necessarily), but culturally unaffordable. Case in point:

    Pat the RPLS files a plat with the county. Chris, the county GIS technician, reviews the plat and informs Pat that the boundary doesn’t match the county GIS so it will not be accepted as is. Of course, Pat blows a gasket, then re-checks the plat and verifies it’s correct. Pat then proceeds to educate Chris on the regional statute, thus establishing Pat’s authority. Chris bows and accepts the plat. Pat is fuming on the way back to the office because he doesn’t know who to charge the two hours of time spent educating Chris.

    Why does the story end here? I contend that land surveyors have boxed themselves into being short-term minded, extremely short-term minded….not quarterly, like corporate America, but even worse…hourly. How many times have you heard “I billed 110 percent of my hours this week?” spoken like they’ve earned a Bronze Star. Yes, it’s impressive to the boss and he/she may get a nice bonus at the end of the year, but it’s a very short-term attitude and part of the reason that land surveyors are trying to grab the wagging tail of the big GIS dog instead of walking shoulder-to-shoulder down the sidewalk.

    I’ve had several RPLS say to me “I’ve been actively looking for GIS work.” Translated: “I’m looking for someone to pay me to provide GIS services that I need to learn.” It’s not that easy. You didn’t get paid to go to school. The same is true here. The RPLS has to invest time into GIS. I’m not talking about just an online GIS course. It needs to be good ol’ OJT (on the job training). If I were Pat, I’d foster the relationship with Chris and have Chris show me how the GIS  works, what the procedures are, how the GIS data was created, how the GIS data is updated, what the plan is for updating, what Chris’s departments hot buttons are, how Chris’s budget is funded, etc. I’d even go the point of volunteering to enter some data to get a real feel for how the GIS works. This type of OJT is orders of magnitude more effective than reading a book or taking a class. During this OJT, Pat might also find out that he is weak in some areas important to GIS such as geodesy or database structure and needs to gear up in those areas.

    Hmmm… Just think if every RPLS association chapter reached out to its local city or county GIS department and started a collaborative effort to teach each other about the challenges that each faces in their jobs, both as RPLS and GISP. They would educate each other, understand each other better, and ultimately serve each other’s needs more effectively. Too simple-minded? I don’t think so. Which relationship do you think would be more effective when discussing collaborating on a National Parcel Database — meeting the local GIS department manager for the first time or meeting with Chris, with whom you’ve worked on a number of small, local GIS projects and already have a solid understanding of the GIS department needs, processes, strengths, and limitations?
    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • LightSquared: It’s Worse than You Think

    Tired of hearing about LightSquared? Think it’s a bunch of panicking journalists hungry for something to write about? Listen, it usually takes a lot to get the hairs standing up on the back of my neck. On the LightSquared issue, they are at full attention.

    Why?

    The GPS receivers that would likely be affected the most aren’t military, automobile, aviation, mobile phones, etc. The GPS receivers that would be affected the most are the ones you use, the high-precision GPS receiver!

    This means any receiver designed to produce accuracies at meter-level or better (submeter, decimeter, centimeter receivers). This means surveying, engineering, construction, bridge/dam/structure/seismic monitoring, GIS, precision agriculture, mining, utilities/telecom, transportation, environmental, disaster management, and all sorts of machine control across a vast number of industries.

    Do the Math

    LightSquared is planning to construct 40,000 ground-based transmitters broadcasting 1,500W each across the U.S. These are targeted at metropolitan areas with high-density population. The will pop-up like mobile phone towers. What do you think a map looks like with 40,000 LightSquared transmitters overlaid on the current infrastructure of CORS (1,500+ GPS receivers in the U.S.) and RTK networks (100+ consisting of several thousands of receivers in the U.S.)?

    Do you use OPUS? Do you use CORS? Do you use an RTK network? Do you use WAAS corrections? Do you use OmniSTAR? Do you use StarFire? Do you operate your own high-precision base station (real-time or post-processing)? I do not know one high-precision user who does not use one of the aforementioned technologies in their GPS operations. All of the above technologies are in jeopardy.

    I’m going to keep this simple. You, the high-precision GPS user, are likely going to be considered collateral damage.

    The military is going to be accommodated in the name of national security. The aviation industry is going to be accommodated in the name of safety-of-life. The auto navigation industry is going to be accommodated because they are high-profile. The high-precision user is going to be thrown under the bus because we are the most difficult to accommodate (technically) and don’t have a high profile nor are perceived as significant enough to accommodate.

    In other words, the high-precision user will be told to “deal with it.”

    What Does “Deal with It” Mean?

    It’s not clear at this point, but without any hardware modification, your receiver performance will likely be degraded (weakened or lost signal) in metropolitan areas, and to a lesser extent in rural areas. That totally depends on where LightSquared decides to place its towers. Very soon, with the final Working Group report due to the FCC (June 15), we will see how serious the interference will be.

    GPS receiver manufacturers would likely offer some sort of hardware upgrade, if possible. You can bet that they won’t support upgrading older hardware and it’s possible some newer hardware won’t be retrofittable, so the upgrade turns into a “trade-in” with a hefty price tag. But beware that a hardware upgrade doesn’t mean it will solve the problem, but rather minimize it.

    In order to have a chance of not being forgotten or dismissed as collateral damage, you need to jump loudly and with resolution to raise awareness with your congressperson and the FCC about the importance of GPS to your operations. If you’re an international user, write the FCC.

    You can view the list of submissions made to the FCC by clicking here. Deere & Co. as well as Fugro and many others provided very clear and concise comments.

    The Coalition to Save Our GPS has posted guidance on its website as to how to submit your comments. They are:

    Voice your concerns directly to Congressional Representatives

    To voice your concerns about GPS interference, you can send letters, emails, faxes, call or visit your Congressional representatives’ office in person to explain how you use GPS as a local business and what the impacts of interference would be to the local economy.

    Contact Your Local Senator

    Ask your Senator to support and co-sign the attached letter from Senators Roberts (R-KS) and Nelson (D-NE): explain how you use GPS in your state and what impact interference or any compromise of the GPS service would have on you and the local economy.

    United States Senate Letter from Pat Roberts (R-KS) and Ben Nelson (D-NE)

    Find Your Local Senator

    Write Your Representative

    Find Your U.S. House of Representatives

    Please include: “Coalition to Save Our GPS and FCC File No. SAT-MOD-20101118-00239” in your correspondence.

    Send your comments directly to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)

    Email the FCC: [email protected]

    For your ready reference, below are the actions the Coalition is seeking from the FCC:

    1. The FCC must make clear, and the NTIA must ensure, that LightSquared’s license modification is contingent on the outcome of the mandated study unequivocally demonstrating that there is no interference to GPS. The study must be comprehensive, objective, and based on correct assumptions about existing GPS uses rather than theoretical possibilities. Given the substantial pre-existing investment in GPS systems and infrastructure, and the critical nature of GPS applications, the results of studies must conclusively demonstrate that there is no risk of interference. If there is conflicting evidence, doubts must be resolved against the LightSquared terrestrial system. The views of LightSquared, as an interested party, are entitled to no special weight in this process.
    2. The FCC should make clear that LightSquared and its investors are proceeding at their own risk in advance of the FCC’s assessment of the working group’s analysis. While this is the FCC’s established policy, the Commission’s International Bureau failed to make this explicit in its order.
    3. Resolution of interference has to be the obligation of LightSquared, not the extensive GPS user community of millions of citizens. LightSquared must bear the costs of preventing interference emanating from their devices, and if there is no way to prevent interference, it should not be permitted to operate. GPS users or providers should not have to bear any of the consequences of LightSquared’s actions.
    4. This is a matter of critical national interest. There must be a reasonable opportunity for public comment of at least 45 days on the report produced by the working group and further FCC actions on the LightSquared modification order should take place with the approval of a majority of the commissioners, not at the bureau level.

     

    Lastly, following is the list of high-precision GPS receivers that the Working Group (consisting of US GPS Industry Council representatives and LightSquared representatives) have chosen to test:

    Hemisphere R320 (with A52 antenna)
    Hemisphere A320 (with Integral antenna)
    Deere iTC (with Integral antenna)
    Deere SF‐3000 (with Integral antenna)
    Deere SF‐3050 (with Aero antenn
    a)
    Trimble MS990
    Trimble MS992
    Trimble AgGPS 252
    Trimble AgGPS 262
    Trimble AgGPS 442
    Trimble AgGPS EZguide 500
    Trimble CFX 750
    Trimble FMX
    Trimble GeoExplorer 3000 series GeoXH
    Trimble GeoExplorer 3000 series GeoXT
    Trimble GeoExplorer 6000 series GeoXH
    Trimble GeoExplorer 6000 series GeoXT
    Trimble Juno SB
    Trimble NetR9 (with Zephyr 1 antenna)
    Trimble NetR9 (with Zephyr 2 antenna)
    Trimble R8 GNSS (with Integral antenna)
    Trimble 5800 (with Integral antenna)
    Trimble NetR5 (with Zephyr 1 antenna)
    Trimble NetR5 (with Zephyr 2 antenna)
    Leica SR530 (with AT502 antenna)
    Leica GX1200 Classic (with AX1202 antenna)
    Leica GX1230GG (with AX1202GG antenna)
    Leica GR10 (with AR10 antenna)
    Leica Uno (with GS05 antenna)
    Leica GS15 (with Intergral antenna)
    Topcon HiPer Ga
    Topcon HiPer II
    Topcon GR‐3 (with Integral (5/8) antenna)
    Topcon GR‐5 (with Integral (5/8) antenna)
    Topcon MC‐R3 (with MC‐A3/cabled (5/8) antenna)
    Topcon NET‐G3A (with CR‐G3/cabled (5/8) antenna)
    Topcon TruPath/AGI‐3 (with Integral (special mount) antenna)
    NovAtel PROPAK‐G2‐Plus (with GPS‐702/GPS‐701 antenna)
    NovAtel FLEXG2‐STAR (with GPS‐701GGL/GPS‐701 antenna)
    NovAtel FLEXPAK‐G2‐V1 (with GPS‐701GGL/GPS‐702 antenna)
    NovAtel FLEXPAK‐G2‐V2 (with GPS‐702GGL/GPS‐702 antenna)
    NovAtel PROPAK‐V3 (with GPS‐702GGL/GPS‐702 antenna)
    NovAtel DL‐V3
    NovAtel FLEXPAK6 (with GPS‐702GGL/GPS‐702 antenna)
    Septentri PolaRx3e (with PolaNt GG antenna)
    Septentrio AsteRx3 (with PolaNt G antenna)

     

    Thanks, and see you next time.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

     

     

     

     

     

  • The $25 Computer: Is it Real?

    Last December I wrote about the exponential growth of geospatial technology in an article titled “Will We Be a Billion Times More Geospatially Intelligent in Thirty Years?” This week, well-known game developer David Braben said he’s working on a computer that will cost only $25. This represents one of those growth technologies that might be exponential in bringing geospatial (and other) technology to a broader base of users.

    A $25 Computer?

    In a world where multi-gigahertz, multi-core processors, and gigabytes of memory are the standard, it’s easy to forget that there’s a lot of overhead that isn’t necessary. When you boil it down, a computer doesn’t need to be very big at all. In fact, all the components you need outside of a monitor and keyboard can fit inside a small USB stick. Not only small, but inexpensive, according to reknowned game developer David Braben. In a Youtube video, Braben describes how he’s designing the device for children who don’t have access to a computer at home or a mobile phone.

    “In theory, they could be given away to the child…”, said Braben.

    He’s hoping that it will help educated children in “understanding how you put together little scripts that might run on websites…we all look at things like Facebook, like Twitter, also e-mail that a lot of kids are disconnected from,” said Braben. “The wealthier kids in the class will have access to a computer at home. They ‘ll have access to a mobile phone, but a lot of kids won’t and this would hopefully fill the gap.”

    Called the Raspberry Pi, Braben says the computer on a USB stick will cost as little as £10-15 (about US $25) with one end consisting of a standard HDMI (High-Definition Multimedia Interface) port to connect to a display such as a television or monitor. The other end of the stick is a standard USB interface to connect to a keyboard.

    The Raspberry PI illustrates how much overhead is in the computers we purchase today. If you really boil a computer down to its core components, it is amazingly small, powerful, and inexpensive.

    Take a look at this short Youtube video (2m 30s) of Mr. Braben describing his device.

    Mind you, I don’t think Mr. Braben has any thoughts of how this technology can be applied to geospatial applications, but I can’t help envisioning a tiny GPS receiver, bluetooth transceiver, and some flash storage embedded in the device. A Bluetooth transceiver can interface to various input devices such as keyboards and microphones, and output to devices like 3D goggles and other emerging display technology.

    Combining this micro-sized technology with augmented reality, which is just now gaining formidable traction, there are some really, really high-tech, highly productive and low-cost geospatial tools. For example, imagine a technican searching for an underground water pipe or natural gas line. By donning a pair of high-tech goggles with display technology built-in and an accurate as-built map of the underground infrastructure, the technician can “see” the pipe (and valves, fittings, etc.) buried underground before breaking ground with a shovel or backhoe.

    As a refresher or if you haven’t read my previous articles about augmented reality, it’s a really game-changing technology not only in the world of consumer electronics, but also in the world of geospatial technology. The following video was presented at a TED conference in early 2010 by Bing Maps architect Blaise Aguera y Arcas. It’s an eight minute video that’s entertaining and enlightening.

     

    While still under development by a team of volunteers, Mr. Braben says they hope to be shipping the device within a year. If you’re interested in the technical specifications:

    • ARM11 700 MHz processor
    • 128 MB RAM
    • OpenGL ES 2.0 graphics with 1080p output.
    • SD card slot
    • Linux operating system

    As we’re looking forward to where geospatial technology is heading, some really high-tech stuff is coming into view and within reach. Within reach not only wth respect to technology but also financially. Keep in mind that the vast majority of the world’s population has never used e-mail or browsed the web.

     

    Morocco next week. I’ll be attending the FIG conference in Marrakech, Morocco, next week. I look forward to meeting new friends in the geospatial world and reporting back to you what interesting stories I find.

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • Q&A from L5 and LightSquared Webinars

    In late March, I conducted a webinar titled “A Closer Look at L5: The Future of High-Precision GNSS,” in which I discussed the impact that the new GPS L5 signal/frequency may have on high-precision users. Then, in April I was part of a discussion panel-format webinar titled “LightSquared: Our Story So Far.” Many questions and comments arose from both webinars, and I’ll attempt to address those in this column.

    First of all, the day after the March 17 webinar, I published a summary with some links and illustrations. If you want to review it to refresh your memory or get a quick overview if you didn’t attend the webinar, click here.

    During the March 17 webinar, I conducted several polls. Following are the poll questions with accompanying pie charts to illustrate the results. I think polls are a great tool to gain a better understanding of what your colleagues are thinking.

    Poll #1: Does your organization use dual frequency GPS (L1/L2) receivers?

    Gakstatter comment: Nothing earth-shattering, but good to know most of the audience members polled are high-precision users.

    Poll #2: When do you plan on upgrading your GPS receivers to take advantage of the new L2C and L5 signals?

    Gakstatter comment: I think the large number of “I don’t know” answers is due to two major variables. #1 is the economy. If the economy was healthy, I think folks would be more inclined to take the risk upgrade to the latest technology. #2 is the unclear status of GPS and Galileo (and other GNSS). If there was a launch schedule that people knew they could count on and plan for, I think users would be more inclined to upgrade sooner rather than later.
    Poll #3: Do you believe that GPS and Galileo will meet their projected deployment dates of 2014/2015?
    Gakstatter comment: I understand the skepticism about GPS and Galileo staying on schedule. I don’t think the GPS schedule can push out too far because the FAA requires a full constellation of GPS satellites broadcasting L5 by 2019. The Galileo program is under a lot of pressure to deliver something to the user community. A very important milestone this year is the scheduled September launch of the first two operational Galileo satellites, followed by the launch of a second pair the first quarter of next year. This is an opportunity for the Galileo program to set a new tone and sense of urgency with the user community.
    Poll #4: How concerned are you that LightSquared’s initiative might interfere with your GPS operations?
    Gakstatter comment: Since the March 17 webinar, there’s been much more information released and published about LightSquared’s potential effect on GPS. In April, I participated in a webinar about LightSquared’s potential effect on GPS with my portion of the webinar specifically addressing high-precision users. I will discuss this later in this article. But, suffice to say that this is a serious issue for the U.S. high-precision GPS user community. LightSquared isn’t going to walk away from this without putting up a big fight, and they have enough of an argument that I could see the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) folding or trying to negotiate a compromise. However, any compromise is likely to have a negative effect on the high-precision GPS user community. Best case scenario, there would be a hit in signal strength. Worst case, you’ll need a hardware upgrade.
    As I normally do, a number of questions were raised during the webinar and I will address them here to the best of my ability. I’ll start with the L5 questions and then address some of the questions regarding LightSquared that were asked from both the March and April webinar.

    On to the Questions

    Question #1: What impact will L5 have on RTK networks?

    Gakstatter comment: Great question. There’s only upside in having another GPS frequency to work with. Since the premise behind RTK Networks relies heavily on atmospheric modeling, L5 is going to help. It’s further separated, with respect to frequency, from L1 than L2 and the signal is much stronger than L2. L5 will go a long way in mitigating the effects of the atmosphere on high-precision GPS positioning.

    They logistics of implementing L5, by the manufacturers, into RTK Networks may not be so easy. I’m not sure that L5 has been defined well enough in the RTCM specifications and even if it was, I’m not sure how fast manufacturers would implement it. Take, for example, L2C. Even though there are eight satellites broadcasting L2C, I’m not sure there are any RTK Networks taking advantage of it and transparency between different rover manufacturers. However, my gut tells me that manufacturers will be more willing to jump on the L5 bandwagon with a sense of urgency due to the potential significant increase in receiver performance.

    Question #2: What could be a better frequency combination in terms of acheiving higher sensitivities: L2C/L5 or L1/L5?

    Gakstatter comment: This is another great question. Technically speaking, I’m guessing that L2C/L5 would be a higher-performing combination due to the significantly-improved code structure of L2C (longer code and improved error-correcting methods), which allows
    the signal to be acquired and tracked better in tough GPS conditions such as under tree foliage.

    Question #3: If I toggle on L2C in my current Trimble GNSS; that would give me an extra 8 SV broadcasting

    Gakstatter comment: Good, creative thinking, but it doesn’t work that way. You are already using those eight satellites with L1 C/A and L2P. If you utilize L2C from those satellites, you’ll get some marginal gain in performance (assuming the reference station is broadcasting L2C info), but nothing like adding eight additional satellites.
    Question #4: What accuracy can be expected from single frequency L5?

    Gakstatter comment: It’s going to be better than L1 C/A due to the stronger signal strength (4 x more powerful than L2C) and much longer code structure (than even L2C). With SBAS corrections, we’re seeing about 60cm now with L1 C/A. It will probably be slightly better than that and definitely more robust positioning in marginal GPS conditions.

    Question #5: What sort of base line distances can we expect to get with L5?

    Gakstatter comment: Using L5 will definitely help with longer baselines, but baselines are already pretty long. Look at the distance between reference stations in RTK Networks today. Some are pushing 70-80km. Will they go longer than 100km? I’m not sure. That would be cool, lowering infrastructure costs of setting up and operating RTK Networks.

    Question #6: Using RTK corrections the bandwidth requirements will increase with all these extra satellites will there be more efficient correction broadcast techniques like CMRx?

    Gakstatter comment: I agree. I think there will need to be an efficient way of getting the data from reference network to rover. That either means using up more bandwidth on your mobile phone data plan (if you aren’t using UHF/VHF/Spread spectrum radios) or manufacturer’s inventing more efficient formats. 

    Questions Regarding LightSquared

     

    LS Question #1: LightSquared is going to filter their signal heavily until it will not interfere. They have too much invested to fail.

    Gakstatter comment: I agree that LightSquared is not going to walk away from their huge investment. But even if they heavily filter the base transmitters (40,000 of them), I still think there will be some interference. The nature of high-precision GNSS receivers is that they have a wideband RF front-end to take into account better code tracking and accomodate other signals such as OmniSTAR and Starfire. 
    Also, since LightSquared can’t control the design/production of the mobile phones that will use their system, each of the mobile phones can potentially be a “mobile GPS jammer”. It’s one thing to know the fixed location of each of the 40,000 transmitters, but how about the tens of thousand, hundreds of thousands or millions of mobile phones using the LightSquared infrastructure.

    LS Question #2: What do you see as the future for OmniSTAR?

    Gakstatter comment: Obviously, OmniSTAR and Starfire people must have major concerns since they are well within the LightSquared frequency spectrum. Ironically, OmniSTAR currently leases satellite bandwidth from LightSquared to broadcast their corrections.

    I’m sure they are working on a solution, but I’m not privy to what the options they are considering.

    Another option is another delivery method such as NTRIP over mobile phone networks.

    LS Question #3: If the signal effects high precision users, it will also effect casual users(hunters, fishermen, and also field technicians – forestry inventory and utility asset mapping – will w ALL need to change the GPS devises currently used today?

    Gakstatter comment: It won’t affect casual users as much as high-precision users due to the inherent design of the receivers. But, you’re right about forest inventory, utility mapping, etc. which typically use high-precision receivers. If LightSquared is allowed to continue on their desired path, it’s possible that each high-precision receiver would need to be upgraded (or traded in). That’s the worst-case scenario.

    LS Question #4: Would better filters on the GPS receiver front-ends improve the concerns?

    Gakstatter comment: Yes, but it’s not clear if high-precision receivers would perform as well with such filters designed into the receiver.

     

    LS Question #5: Is the transmitter the cell phone or Lightsquare base station?

    Gakstatter comment: This is a bit outside of my area, but both are transmitters. The LightSquared base stations are designed to broadcast at 1,500 watts while the mobile phone’s highest transmission power is probably 1-3 watts while it’s first connecting to the network. The base stations are transmitting at the band adjacent to GPS on the lower end while the mobile phones transmit in the adjacent band above the GPS. I look forward to reviewing the data in the next working group report to the FCC which includes interference testing from both base station transmitters as well as mobile phones.

    LS Quest
    ion #6:     How does LightSquared affect L2C, if at all?

    Gakstatter comment: From what I know and have read, I don’t think it would have any direct affect on L2 since L2 is at 1227MHz, far from LightSquared’s frequency spectrum of 1525MHz to 1559MHz. Indirectly, it would have an affect on L2P as L1/L2 receivers need L1 to utilize L2P. That’s not the case with L2C, but remember there are only eight satellites broadcasting L2C at this time.

    Obviously, there is more to discuss. I didn’t touch on the affect on GLONASS receivers (yes, there is a potential problem too). The feedback I received from the LightSquared webinar is that many of you would like to have a webinar that is focused on LightSquared as it relates to the high-precision user (surveying, mapping, engineering, GIS, etc.). I plan to conduct such a webinar in early June. Stayed tuned for the announcement. Hopefully, I’ll have some interesting new data to present from the report due to the FCC on May 15.

    Lastly, I attended NOAA’s Space Weather Workshop last week in Boulder, Colorado. I plan on a more comprehensive write-up, but in the mean-time you can check out my Geospatial Solutions Weekly newsletter with some info on my visit there. I’m still working on a GPS space weather notification system I wrote about last summer. I’m getting closer to having something for you.

    Thanks, and see you next time.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • GIS on a Sphere

    In the past 20+ years, I’ve seen a lot of really fantastic GIS technology in many parts of the world. However, during my trip to the Denver, Colorado, area last week, I saw something that was truly mesmerizing. My concern is that I won’t be able to adequately describe it for you.

    Before the cool stuff, I want to briefly tell you my visit last week of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Space Weather Prediction Center (SWPC) in Boulder. SWPC is the world’s leading facility for forecasting and issuing space weather alerts. If you think that your local weather reporter on television has a hard time delivering accuracte forecasts, folks at the SWPC say that forecasting space weather is about 50 years behind the local weatherperson forecasting temperature and preciptation on earth.

     

     

    Behind the glass window is a room about the size of an average meeting room. Space weather forecasting is on the left. It is staffed during daytime hours and issues a forecast once per day (soon to be increased to three times per day). The right side of the room are the space weather monitoring people. It is staffed all the time (24/7). They are the ones that issue alerts/warnings of sun activity events within minutes of when they occur.

    Why is it important to be aware of space weather?

    Significant space weather events (solar storms) can have a significant impact on our infrastructure (power, telecommunications, navigation, etc.). In 1989, there was a geomagnetic storm that caused six million people in eastern Canada to lose power for nine hours. The world’s electrical power infrastructure is relatively fragile with respect to solar events. A big question that no one has the answer to is what would happen when an extreme event like the Carrington storm of 1859 occurs again. The Carrington storm was the largest geomagnetic storm in recorded history.

    Of course, in 1859 there wasn’t much electonic technology around to be affected outside of telegraph systems, which were disabled in many parts of the world.

    Is the Smart Grid smart enough to handle the sun?

    With the introduction of the digital electronic age (computers, internet, cell phones, satellites, television, widely available electricity), we rely heavily on technology, which relies completely on electricity. It’s really hard to imagine the potential impact that an event like the 1859 Carrington storm would have in today’s world.

    Last week at the Space Weather Workshop in Boulder, Colorado, Jim Caverly from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security suggested that society and public/commercial enterprises are woefully unaware of the impact of a significant geomagnetic event. As a exericse, he suggested (tongue-in-cheek) “what would happen if we turned off GPS for two days?”

     

    GIS on a Sphere

    With last week’s attention being focused on space weather, the last thing I expected to experience was the most fascinating GIS visulization tool I’ve seen in recent memory. Part of our the tour of the Space Weather Prediction Center included, to my surprise, including a demonstration of NOAA’s Science on a Sphere, which I’ve promptly renamed GIS on a Sphere.

    Science on a Sphere is a 6 foot diameter ball, suspended approximately 7 feet off of the ground, on which color geographic data can be projected from four ceiling-mounted projectors spaced evenly around the “globe”.

    The exhibit I saw was very much like the image in the upper right corner of the graphic above. The fantastic part about it is that the operator can display an unlimited number of datasets on the globe. In fact, the globe doesn’t even have to be the Earth. It could be the Earth’s moon, Saturn, Mars or even our Sun.

    The operator for our tour, NOAA Meterologist Sara Summers, projected a number of maps on the globe, one being a map showing the tsunami’s, created by the March 11, 2011 earthquake off of the coast of Japan, as they move across the Pacific Ocean and bounce off of other continents. Another fascinating map was one of Facebook users across the globe, with a large blank area exactly the shape of China. One more map dataset illustrated commercial air traffic over the globe showing the tracers of each airliner. The visual presentation is absolutely mesmerizing and miles above any 2D display of geographic data I’ve ever seen.

    My attempts to record a video of the Sara’s presentation failed miserably. Fortunately, there are several good videos on Youtube to select from.

    The first Youtube video (34 seconds) is a promotional one from the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry (OMSI) which have installed a system. In fact, over 60 of the systems have been installed around the world by NOAA.

     

     

    The next video is a timelapse video of a Science on a Sphere system being setup at an exhibit for the California Department of Water Resources. I wanted to give you an idea of what the complete system consists of (1m 04s).

     

     

    For those of you who are interested in the engineering behind the Science on a Sphere, following is an interesting short video (1m 40s) describing the technology.

     

     

    Lastly, I would be remiss in not including a video of NOAA scientist and Science on a Sphere inventor Dr. Sandy MacDonald. According to Sara, Dr. MacDonald developed Science on a Sphere in his garage in the mid-1990’s. The NOAA website reports that a patent was awarded to NOAA in August 2005, crediting Dr. MacDonald as the inventor. There are over 60 Science on a Sphere systems installed around the world (visit one near you). If you’d like one for yourself, NOAA will provide all the hardware, software, installation, training, support and documentation for around US$150,000 if you’re located within the U.S. and US$200,000 if located outside of the U.S. I commented to Sara that if I happen to win the lottery, I’ll be purchasing one. She responded “me too”.

    The following video hosted by Dr. MacDonald is ~14 minutes.

     

     

     

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • A Free GIS Tool Just Got Better

    A few months ago, I wrote a little about ArcGIS Explorer (AE), a free GIS viewer from Esri. It’s a nice tool for non-GIS users who want to view GIS data. Looks like another feature is creeping into AE to make it a bit more powerful. Bern Szukalski, product strategist and evangelist at Esri, blogged earlier this week about new functionality in AE that will allow direct GPS support. In other words, you can connect a GPS receiver (Bluetooth or otherwise) to a device running AE and be able to visualize and record GPS data as its tracking.

    Borrowing from Bern’s Blog, following is a 2D map as he was driving, showing the waypoints and tracks as he was moving. He said he set AE to collect a GPS point every 10 seconds, centering the map as he moved. GPS waypoints and tracks are stored as notes.

    (Click to enlarge.)

     

    The next screen shot shows his path in 3D. Green represents GPS points/paths collected by mouse click. Yellow represents GPS points/paths collected at 10-second intervals.


    (Click to enlarge.)

     

    Bern blogged that he was using a borrowed $18 USB GPS receiver in this example. Don’t pay much attention to the accuracy (or inaccuracy) of the GPS positioning. He could have just as easily connected a sub-meter or centimeter-level GPS receiver (outputing NMEA 0183 messages) and had enough precision to accurately position the center of a 6-inch water meter cover plate on the sidewalk. That’s where this is headed, folks.

    A Quick Note on the Annual GITA Conference

    I didn’t attend the annual GITA (Geospatial Infrastructure Technology Association) conference this year, but I received several reports that this was the last GITA annual conference. That’s pretty sobering (but not surprising), given that it was the 34th such conference that started in the late 1970s. I blogged last year that I thought this years was going to be a really tough one because it wasn’t co-locating with another conference as it was last year with ACSM (American Congress on Surveying and Mapping). Although the demise of the GITA annual conference was predictable, it’s still sad to see it go. Last year, I thought the technical presentations were quite good and clearly demonstrated a need for continuing promoting and developing geospatial apps in the world of infrastructure. Without the GITA conference, I wonder where these folks will go to share their knowledge and experiences. I’d like to reiterate that there are too many niche conferences related to GIS. GIS folks can’t afford the time or expense, and neither can GIS sponsors/vendors, to attend three different small GIS conferences in a 90-day window. What I wrote a year ago is just as relevant today.

    Let’s discuss conferences for a minute

    As good as the content was for both the GITA and ACSM conferences, the attendance was horrible. If there were 1,000 people there (for both), I’d be surprised. At this pace of decline, something’s got to give. I attended the annual GITA conference in Seattle in 2008. If I recall correctly, there were about 1,400 attendees. This year, in 2010, there were maybe half of that including exhibitors. Next year, the GITA conference is operating as a stand-alone conference in a suburb of Dallas, Texas. I predict it might be even worse than this year. The ACSM annual conference is not doing any better, but rumor has it will co-locate in 2011. The two conferences won’t be co-located next year. It’s a time for conferences to start working together.
    Size Matters

    It’s a vicious cycle. The fewer attendees there are, the less interested vendors are in exhibiting and sponsoring the event. Each year, attendance erodes until it doesn’t make sense any longer. Now is the time for conference consolidation, especially in the GIS industry. GIS is tough to segment because it stretches across so many industry boundaries. In April alone, there was the GIS-T (GIS in Transportation) conference in West Virginia, the GITA/ACSM co-located conference in Phoenix and the ASPRS (American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing) conference in San Diego. All of these are small conferences that are becoming increasingly difficult to justify, financially, for both the operators and the attendees. I can safely say that attendees and vendors certainly would prefer to attend one conference in one location that includes GIS-T, GITA and ASPRS rather than three separate conferences spread out all over the US. They need to consolidate at the same time in a single location.

     

    I suppose the demise of the annual GITA conference is part of the consolidation I wrote about. Being accelerated by the current economy, people will just stop attending some conferences and pick/choose the conference(s) they feel fit their needs the best.

     

    Upcoming Events/Publications:

    Following are a few upcoming events you might be interested in:

    Webinar: April 21st. “LightSquared and GPS: Our Story So Far”. I’ll be participating in a moderated discussion about this issue. If your organization relies on GPS, I strongly encourage you to register. If you aren’t available during that time, register anyway and you’ll be provided a link to view the webinar at a time that’s convenient to you.

    Space Weather Workshop: April 26-29. I’ll be presenting at this conference and blogging about what I hear in order to keep you informed about space weather as the next solar cycle warms up.

    Western Forester: April issue. Look for my article and accompanying articles on Lidar, laser rangefinders, GPS and other emerging technologies that concern the forester and other natural resource professionals.

     

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • GPS Surveying/Mapping Current Events

    Trimble Navigation has made a fair number of strategic acquisitions in the past ten years. Spectra-Precision and Tripod Data Systems were acquired early last decade. Applanix, Seco Manufacturing are some you’ve heard of, but there’s been a fair number of companies that you’ve never heard of, typically ones that allow Trimble to entrench themselves deeper into their core vertical markets (engineering, construction, GIS, MRM, etc.). Trimble has always strived at providing a complete solution (hardware, software, sensors, etc.) and it’s one of the reasons they’ve been so successful.

    Within the past 30 days, they announced two acquisitions that are higher profile and you may have noticed.

    The first acquisition was Measurement Devices, a UK-based company specializing in laser rangefinders. The acquisition is not surprising as the ground-based (terrestrial) laser scanning business is growing. Actually, I should clarify, I’m not sure it was an acquisition or what kind of acquisition it was since there’s been no press announcement on it that I’ve seen, but it doesn’t matter. Obviously, something happened because this week Trimble announced the Trimble LaserAce 1000 handheld laser rangefinder, which is clearly based on MDL technology.

    Trimble LaserAce 1000

    The second acquisition was a bit more surprising to me and some of you, but probably a smart move on Trimble’s part. Trimble announced they acquired certain assets of OmniSTAR’s land applications business. OmniSTAR also has a significant offshore client base (oil & gas) so apparently that wasn’t included in the sale. The acquisition does include OmniSTAR’s land business for North/South America, Europe/North Africa/Middle East/India, Asia Pacific, and South Africa.

    The OmniSTAR acquisition is pretty smart, at least for the medium-term. Trimble has been quietly (until now) growing their GPS correction service business. Their VRS Now service, a subscription-based RTK Network, provides both RTK and decimeter corrections in many parts of the world already. OmniSTAR will only enhance Trimble’s subscription offering. In the short-term, they will have a strong portfolio in the real-time corrections business with Deere/Navcom being the only other major player offering satellite-based world-wide subscription services. However, the Deere/Navcom system (StarFire) is focus on agriculture and doesn’t have much support from receiver manufacturers/integrators outside of the agriculture market like OmniSTAR does. With Trimble’s acquisition of OmniSTAR’s land business, Deere/Navcom might look at the non-ag markets differently. It will be interesting to watch.

    The longer-term competition for real-time decimeter correction are the public (free) SBAS such as WAAS (North America), EGNOS(Western Europe/No Africa), MSAS (Japan), and GAGAN (India). They are all slated to implement the new civil L5 signal. Once that happens, albeit 5-10 years from now, decimeter accuracy will be at your fingertips, free of charge, if you’re using an L1/L5 capable receiver and in an SBAS coverage area.

    Speaking of Deere/Navcom, just this week they showed signs of non-agriculture life by taking a step to enter markets outside of agriculture with the introduction of their pole-mount SF-3040 GNSS receiver. Although somewhat of a “me too” product, it does include the capability of accessing their StarFire network, which makes it unique.

    Deere/Navcom’s SF-3040 Pole-Mount GNSS Receiver

     

    Seeing how OmniSTAR seems to be a popular subject this week, newcomer Geneq added another OmniSTAR receiver to their product like this week. Claiming to be the smallest GPS L1/L2 OmniSTAR receiver in the world, they introduced the SXBlue III-L GPS that’s able to use OmniSTAR’s HP and XP corrections services. If you recall, a few months ago, Mike Whitehead and I collected 24 hrs. of OmniSTAR HP-corrected data as part of some experimenting we did for the January webinar. I ran the data through a rigorous statistical software program that randomly tested the accuracy of the data. The horizontal accuracy (at the NSSDA 95% confidence level) was 9cm.

    Geneq SXBlue III-L GPS

     

    LightSquared Saga

    I feel I need to keep you up-to-date on what’s going on with LightSquared. As crazy as it sounds, I could see the FCC pushing this through unless the GPS community makes a lot of noise. Bear in mind, I don’t think it’s an ‘all or nothing” deal. LightSquared is not going to rollover. For sure, the testing will show it jams GPS to some extent. I’m confident of that. At the end of the day, I think they will push for some sort of compromise, a compromise that would likely mean that GPS functionality would be degraded, possibly signal strength degradation. The high-precision users (sub-meter and below) will take the hit because those receivers try to squeeze as much from GPS as possible, so a few dB of signal strength is very important.

    On April 21, we are hosting a free webinar entitled “LightSquared and GPS: Our Story So Far”. I’ll be on the webinar dicussion panel as well as some people who are a lot more intelligent than me. My role is to bring a high-precision user community perspective to the discussion. If you want to gear up on the LightSquared issue, the webinar is a good opportunity.

    To help visualize the issue, following is a graphic I lifted from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) website. I’ve inserted the GPS center frequencies (L1, L2, L5) as well as frequencies that LightSquared wants to use. If radios worked with nice, clean lines, we’d be in good shape. LightSquared would stay below 1559 MHz and GPS would stay above 1559 MHz. But it doesn’t work that way. High-precision GPS receivers use a wide radio front-end for improved performance. It can be as much as 25 MHz wide. 1575 MHz (GPS L1 center frequency) minus 25 MHz = 1550 MHz. LightSquared base stations are broadcasting at 1,500 watts. A certain amount of noise is going to invade the 1559-1610 MHz range that GPS uses. Furthermore, mobile devices built to use LightSquared’s signal may also invade the 1559-1610 MHz range. The water starts to become muddy very quickly. Bear that in mind when viewing the chart below.

     

    Source: FCC

     

    Click here
    to view the latest article from GPS World on LigthtSquared and GPS.

    Lastly, it’s not too late to take action. Following is a response I received from Oregon U.S. Senator Jeff Merkley after contacting his office about my concerns.

    I haven’t heard anything more since I received this letter on March 25, 2011, but I trust Mr. Merkley’s staff is querying the FCC about this. The more attention we draw to the issue, the better.

    Thanks, and see you next time.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

     

  • New Technology in Forestry: Are You Ready?

    In the early 1990s, I recall being tasked with training a group of foresters on how to use a new-fangled handheld data collector the company I worked for had developed, along with various pieces of software on it for traversing, timber cruising, vegetation surveys, profiling, etc. Being fairly young and somewhat inexperienced, I didn’t fully understand the challenge of trying to convince a group of seasoned foresters to put away their pencils and “Rite in the Rain” tally cards and pick up an electronic gizmo in which they punched in their cruise plot info, traverse bearings, and various other pieces of field data. Of course, being involved in the development of the new-fangled handheld data collector, I thought it was the best thing since sliced bread. Who could deny the value of error-checking to check for typos, graphic plot of traverses, and no transcribing back in the office?

    It’s too bad none (of mostly none) of the foresters in the room felt the same way.

    “I see how it will help the office people, but what’s in it for me?” questioned one.

    “It takes longer for me to punch it in the data collector than it does to write it down,” argued another.

    Upon sensing the building resentment, the HFIC (Head Forester In Charge) stood up in front of the room full of 40 or so foresters and said, “Well, folks, this is the direction we are going, so you need to get with the program.”

    Eventually, most of them adopted the new technology and some even embraced it. But some of the more technologically-resistant folks would go as far as using “Rite in the Rain” paper to record data in the woods only to return to their truck and enter it into the data collector. However, I believe after a period of time they became quite adept at data entry in their truck, so much so that the data collector eventually made its way into the woods with them.

    That was 20 years ago. The 80386 was the mainstream computer CPU, e-mail was still a novelty, websites were few and far between, and a mobile phone was about the size of lunch box.

    DuraRite “Rite in the Rain” Pocket Notebook

    Since that time, it seems like the forester has been bombarded with one mind-bending technology after another.

    Sorry to break the news to you, but technology is not settling down anytime soon. Following is a taste of where I think some of the technology is heading. In this issue, you’ll also read from my colleagues their take on the various technologies they work with on a regular basis.
    GPS

    Of course, GPS is close to my heart as I have written for GPS World magazine for many years and have been involved with GPS for more than 20 years. My first 10 years in GPS were spent developing GPS mapping products while the past 10 years have been spent as a power user of all sizes and shapes of GPS receivers, from ultra-miniature receivers giving mediocre accuracy to some of the highest -precision receivers ever made.

    Since GPS has been around a long time, you may think that is has reached a level of technological maturity. In some respects, you would be right. It’s been used by foresters since the late 1980s, albeit it has evolved significantly since then.

    In the early 1990s, GPS mapping receivers used for forestry were backpack configurations with handheld data recorders. WAAS didn’t exist, DGPS/beacons didn’t exist, Bluetooth didn’t exist, RTK Networks didn’t exist, and Selective Availability (SA) was active. SA meant that GPS autonomous accuracy (without any sort of correction) was about 100 meters. To improve accuracy, users had to post-process their GPS data using GPS base-station data. Public GPS base stations were virtually non-existent, and the Internet access was not commonplace, so most folks had to install, manage, and maintain their own GPS base stations.

    In May 2000, one of the most significant events in GPS history took place. The U.S. Government turned off SA. Overnight, the autonomous accuracy of GPS receivers increased ten-fold. It was never turned on again, and years later it was announced the feature wouldn’t be designed into future GPS satellites. It is gone forever.

    Since then, GPS availability and accuracy has increased due to a number of GPS system advancements as well as GPS receiver advancements. The price of GPS receivers have also dropped significantly. In 1990, a GPS receiver designed for 2-5 meter accurate mapping was priced at more than $10,000. Today, a sub-meter accurate GPS receiver can be purchased for under $2,000. That trend is going to continue. In fact, GPS is going to change a lot more in the next 10 years than it has in the last 10 years.

    Last year, the U.S. government launched a new generation satellite (model IIF) that adds another signal for civilians called L5. Once enough satellites are in orbit broadcasting L5 (as soon as 2015), you’ll likely see very inexpensive, high-accuracy GPS receivers.

    The beauty of the L5 signal is that it’s supported by other GPS-like systems such as Europe’s Galileo. The European Union is scheduled to launch its first two operational satellites this summer with the second pair scheduled for launch in early 2012. The first 18 Galileo satellites are projected to be in orbit by 2015. Since Galileo satellites use the same L1 and L5 frequencies as GPS satellites, a receiver designed for GPS is easily designed for Galileo, too. One advantage of a GPS/Galileo receiver is that you’ll have more satellites in view, and for foresters working under tree canopy or on steep terrain, this will make mapping a lot easier and quicker. For example, today you might have 6-7 GPS satellites in view while you’re in the woods. With future GPS and Galileo satellites, you might have 12 or 13 satellites in view.

    GPS receivers are becoming cheaper, better, and faster. Similar to personal computers, GPS receivers have declined in price and will continue to decline in price. Don’t be surprised if you see high-precision GPS receivers for mapping being sold for $100-200 in the future. WAAS is going to support L5, too. Today, the best accuracy you can get from WAAS is around two feet. Once WAAS supports L5 (around 2020), it will be able to provide accuracy of around four inches to inexpensive L1/L5 dual-frequency receivers.

    The Russian satellite system (GLONASS) has brought a lot to the table for surveyors and engineers in the past 10 years. In 2000, it seemed the GLONASS program was dead in the water and heading for extinction. The Russian Federation has done a fantastic job of revitalizing GLONASS to the point that GLONASS has become a standard feature on high-accuracy GNSS receivers across the surveying and engineering industries. The value of GLONASS is not accuracy, but rather availability. If you’re in the woods and having trouble tracking enough GPS satellites, GLONASS can add another 5-6 satellite signals, which can be the difference between getting a shot or not in dense tree canopy.

    While GLONASS used to be a feature only offered in high-accuracy surveying receivers due to its complex design, you will start to see mid-range GPS mapping receivers utilizing GLONASS. It’s also likely you’ll see consumer GPS receivers offering GLONASS as well because in the past couple of months, two of the GPS chipset companies introduced GPS/GLONASS chips for the consumer market.

    Bottom line: GPS receivers are going to get significantly more accurate, cheaper, and work in more places than they do today.
    Satellite Imagery

    At the Esri conference la
    st summer, Lawrie Jordan, Esri’s director of Imagery Solutions and founder of ERDAS, said this is the most exciting time to be involved in imagery in his 40-year career.

    Commercial satellite imagery quality and availability is the best it’s ever been. It wasn’t that long ago that five-year-old, three-meter-pixel resolution, black/white satellite imagery was the norm. Today, GeoEye, DigitalGlobe, RapidEye, and Spot Image are delivering an amazing amount of digital imagery at even more amazing resolutions on a regular basis. Jordan predicts that in less than five years, every square inch of the Earth will be imaged (by satellites) constantly. He said we are already half-way there.

    There is no better technology than satellite imagery for capturing the devastating impact of large-scale natural disasters such as the March 11, 2011, earthquake/tsunami in Japan.

    The following image (half-meter resolution) of Miniami Sanriku Cho, Japan, was captured by the GeoEye-1 satellite on November 15, 2009, prior to the earthquake/tsunami.

    Courtesy: GeoEye

    The next image (one-meter resolution) was taken on March 12, 2011, a day after the fifth strongest earthquake in recorded history struck off the coast of Japan, creating a massive tsunami that caused devastating flooding and resulted in extensive infrastructure damage and loss of life.

    Courtesy: GeoEye

    The following one-meter resolution image was shot by GeoEye’s IKONOS satellite on March 23, 2011. According to GeoEye, this is the Indian Gulch fire burning near Golden, Colorado. As of March 24, the fire had consumed 1,500 acres and was 25 percent contained. GeoEye says this type of imagery may be used to assess and measure damage to forest and other types of land cover — especially when compared to a false-color image of the same area.

    Courtesy: GeoEye

    Bottom line: Commercial satellite imagery is becoming more readily available and at higher resolutions than ever before. Look for that trend to continue.

     

    Lidar

    Lidar (Light Detection and Ranging) is a remote sensing technology that is sometimes referred to as 3D scanning. Traditionally, LiDAR is thought of as an airborne technology with a scanner mounted in an aircraft that can map huge swaths of ground, collecting elevation data in order to create a digital elevation model (DEM) for topographic surveys and other types of analysis. While collecting the data is relatively quick (albeit expensive), a huge amount of data is collected and must be processed.

    According to the US Geological Survey (USGS), two problems have hindered Lidar for scientific applications beyond creating bare-earth DEMs.

    1. The high cost of collecting Lidar data.
    2. The steep learning curve on research and understanding how to use the entire point cloud.

    While airborne Lidar has been around for quite some time, terrestrial (land-based) Lidar has made a strong push in recent years, and has even made its appearance on mainstream television (Crime Scene Investigation – CSI on CBS, 2005). Working on the same concept of 3D scanning, terrestrial Lidar is not used from thousands of feet in the air looking down, but rather on a tripod scanning a room, or scanning a bridge from 200 feet in the distance.

    Courtesy: Wikipedia

    Personally, I coordinated a 3D scanning project many years to create a 3D model of a wrecked SAAB 9000 as part of an accident reconstruction project. The process of scanning was very quick. It was completed within a couple of hours. The process of creating a deliverable (this was circa. 2003), however, was another story. It was a very labor-intensive project that took weeks. Today, software to create a deliverable from these big “point cloud” files has improved dramatically and more increasingly, third party software developers are creating software tools that assist users in working with these data sets.

     

    Terrestrial 3D scanners first started making their appearance in the land surveying and civil engineering professions. 3D scanners are an efficient way to create complex as-built maps such as in refineries.

    Courtesy: Wikipedia

    They still have somewhat of a steep price tag today, but they were especially expensive when they were first introduced, well over $100,000 at that time.

    But terrestrial 3D scanning is hitting its stride and finding its way into other industries besides surveying and engineering. Yes, even forestry. Albeit in its early stages of development, 3D scanners are being hauled into the woods.

    Take a look at the following illustration courtesy of TreeMetrics of Ireland.

    Courtesy: TreeMetrics Ltd

    According to TreeMetrics, millions of points are collected with each 30 meter scan. After downloading the scan data, software filters irrelevant data and creates a 3D profile of each tree. The DBH, height, taper, straightness and volume are calculated for each tree. Trees that weren’t scanned due to heavy branches or other obstructions are modeled. Stem data files are then produced from which simulation models can be developed that will be used to estimate the product value before a tree is harvested. If harvesting is not done at that time, data is recorded and can be compared to future scans to monitor growth and health.

    Bottom line: 3D scanning, especially terrestrial 3D scanning, is a technology you’ll see in the not-so-distant future, maybe even in the woods. Prices of 3D scanning equipment will continue to decline while software to handle the massive point clouds will continue to become more powerful.

    GPS, satellite imagery, and Lidar are only three of a number of advancing technologies that foresters will see working their way into their toolkit. Mobile phones are also advancing at a rapid pace, becoming significantly more powerful and performing many more tasks than just a phone. The more advanced mobile phones have a GPS chip built inside as well as street maps and aerial photos a la Google and Microsoft. If you look back at mobile phones 10 years ago and compare them to today’s phone, it’s hard to imagine where they will be 10 years from now. They could quite possibly be the central piece of office equipment for all your communications and document management.

     

     

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • GIS In Action 2011 Conference

    I spent a day at the GIS In Action 2011 in Portland, OR this week. While it was a relatively small conference (~200 attendees), the former Governor of Wyoming and current Esri Director of Policy & Public Sector Strategy, Jim Geringer, was the keynote speaker who had a interesting perspective.

    The most interesting part of Mr. Geringer’s keynote was not really about GIS, at least not technically. He posed the question “If you had 10 minutes at the top, what would you talk about?”

    It’s an interesting question. What if you had your 10 minutes at the top? What would you talk about? The “top” may be your state Governor or it could be your organization’s IT department chief, Budget Director, or anyone else with little knowledge about GIS but who makes policy and/or budget decisions that affect your department’s GIS.

    Mr. Geringer, undoubtedly one who was on the receiving end of many of these 10 minute lightning talks, emphasized that you’ve got to make your talk relevant to something that is on that person’s list of current topics. Following is a slide that Mr. Geringer displayed when talking about this subject.

     

     

    For example, if there’s a severe drought in your state, it might be in the Governor’s Top 10 list of concerns. In that case, you might emphasize the importance of GIS in analyzing the water resource problem and how it might help develop solutions. Another example might be criminal activity in your city. If you were to have 10 minutes with your City Mayor, you could explain how GIS could be (or is) used to analyze trends in criminal activity so that crime-fighting resources might be more efficiently allocated.

    I think the Governor’s point well-taken. It’s very easy (I’m guilty of it as much as anyone) to get caught up in our own world of technology and forget how to explain to people outside of our geospatial industry how important geography is in most challenges we face.

    Another interesting subject the former governor discussing were the top 10 issues facing state government, from his perspective.

     

     

    His point is well-made that all of these issues have a geographic element to them.

    To emphasize the #1 issue facing U.S. state governments, he presented the following slide.

     

    And, of course, a conversation about GIS trends would not be complete without a discussion about the explosion of mobile devices.

     

     

    Another presentation I attended at the conference was one from Jon Aschenbach who discussed a snowboarding half-pipe mapping project on Mount Hood in Oregon.

    The problem was that the operator didn’t know exactly where to position the half-pipe during the fall before the snow fell. If they didn’t position it correctly, they would have to move it mid-season, due to lack of snow, at a cost of $10,000+.

     

    The elevation difference from the top of the half-pipe to the bottom of the half-pipe is nearly 1,000 feet.

     

     

    The crew collected topographic data when the snow was largely melted to understand the best placement for the half-pipe. If they place the half-pipe optimally, they will avoid rocks emerging in the late spring as the snow begins to melt and enjoy a longer season and avoid having to move the half-pipe.

     

    During the winter, the crew took measurements to understand the depth of the snow at certain locations on the half-pipe.

     

     

    One of the challenges was finding a solid surface to locate the GPS base station and also to optimize the range of the spread-spectrum RTK radios.

     

     

    According to the presentation, Mount Hood receives an average of 550 inches of snowfall each year. It’s high elevation helps retain snow into the summer. It’s a world-class area for skiing and snowboarding. Olympic snow ski and snowboard teams train at Mount Hood during the summer.

     

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • Japanese Earthquake GIS and Locator Tools

    Our hearts go out to our Japanese friends in the aftermath of the devastating March 11 earthquake and tsunami. Following are some tools, GIS information, and other information related to the earthquake.

     

    Google Person Finder (click on image) – Google has released a Japanese-language Person Finder to help families and friends locate one another. According to the Person Finder tool, 329,000 people are registered in the database.

     

    Japan Earthquake Incident Map (click on image) – From Esri, this map pulls in social media related to the recent events in Japan. In the Social Media box, you can change the search term for YouTube and Flickr by hovering over the name of the feed, and then typing a new word into the displayed box.

     

    Japan Earthquake Crisis map from Google (click on image).

     

    American Geophysical Union blog post about the liquefaction from the March 11, 2011 Japan earthquake. “It shows liquefaction occurring in real time in Tokyo Central Park.  It is quite, quite remarkable.  Do watch beyond the first minute, when it appears that not much is happening – the real action starts about halfway through the recording”

     

    USGS March 11, 2011 Japan Earthquake Details (click on image). According to the U.S. Geological Survey, this was the fourth largest earthquake since 1900. The magnitude was updated to 9.0.

     

    USGS March 11, 2011 Japan Earthquake Shakemap (click on image).

    .

     

    NOAA Tsunami Observations from March 2011 Japan earthquake (click on image). This shows tsunami data as a result of the March 11 earthquake in Japan.

     

    Thanks, and see you next week.

     

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • I’m Buying A New RTK Receiver. What Should I get?

    In light of this weeks webinar, A Closer Look at L5: The Future of High-Precision GNSS, and spurred by an email from a reader about how to sift through all the GPS/GNSS receiver choices, following are my thoughts if you’re looking to purchase an RTK receiver today.

    First of all, an email from a reader succinctly sums up the challenge:

    I currently utilize static GPS / GLONASS receivers in my day to day operations and I am looking at buying a couple more receivers (an RTK setup). To be honest, I am totally confused as to what technology I should buy.
    Specifically, I don’t know whether or not it is worth buying receivers that have L2C and L5 capabilities. It seems that vendors are not very well educated on what these options can do for you, and how many satellites are up and running that provide these signals. It is my understanding that L2C is simply a civilian code that is carried on the L2 frequency, and that it provides an almanac and atmospheric correction information. I don’t even know if receiving L2C will help me as a surveyor, or if it is more designed for autonomous use in navigation. It sounds like L5 will be of great advantage once the constellation has enough SVs that broadcast it.  It also seems like Galileo will be extremely helpful for surveyors, but who knows when that will be available. Basically, I don’t want to spend thousands of extra dollars for “bells and whistles” that are not yet operational from a practical standpoint, and that won’t be in the near future.

     

    He’s right. There are a lot of moving parts these days in the world of GPS/GNSS. Not only are GPS/GNSS receivers steadily improving (better, smaller, faster, cheaper), but the GNSS themselves (GPS, GLONASS, SBAS) are changing too. Making a decision of which “bells and whistles” to pay for and which ones to pass up is not so easy.

    Let’s break it down and see if we can clear things up.

    It used to be that when looking to purchase a dual frequency GPS receiver, the choice was simple because RTK receivers came in one flavor, L1/L2.

    Do I want RTK (real-time centimeter positioning) or am I satisfied with post-processing the GPS data?

    Either way you went, it was an straight-forward decision.

    Today, that is not the case. If you choose RTK, there are many options available:

    -GPS L1 or GPS L1/L2?

    -add GLONASS?

    -add L2C?

    -add L5?

    -add Galileo?

    The pricing of these options can be substantial. The reader’s letter goes on…

     

    I have a vendor that is pushing an L2C capable receiver on me for more money than a standard dual frequency dual constellation receiver.  The other option is to spend about $13K more and get the L2C, L5, and Galileo ready receiver.

    If you look at what the manufacturer’s are offering for GPS/GNSS RTK receivers, it seems there are generally four choices:

    1. GPS L1

    2. GPS L1/L2

    3. GPS L1/L2 + GLONASS

    4. GPS L1/L2 + GLONASS + L2C + L5 + Galileo

     

    GPS L1

    longer initialization (issue when working around trees)

    short baseline length

    Really should have the same base/rover receiver (SBAS), not really suited for RTK Network usage.

     

    GPS L1/L2

    Legacy, proven technology.

    Upside…less expensive, entry level dual frequency RTK

    Downside…GPS “brownouts”, susecptible to semi-codeless sunset

     

    GPS L1/L2 + GLONASS

    Eliminates the GPS “brownout” problem.

    Increased cost, although some manufacturers include it.

    Doesn’t support future signals

    Suscpetible to semi-codeless sunset.

     

    GPS L1/L2 + GLONASS + L2C + L5 + Galileo

    Eliminates the GPS “brownout” problem.

    Ready for future signals

    downside…future singals aren’t available yet.

    Increased cost

     

  • As Data Collection Technology Advances, So Does BIM

    My fellow geospatial editor, Art Kalinski, wrote about BIM (building information modeling) earlier this week in the GeoIntelligence Insider newsletter. I’ve touched on the subject before. All too often we think of GIS as it relates to outdoor infrastructure: street maps, utility systems, parcel maps, timber harvesting, land management, environmental management, etc.

    Last summer at the Esri Surveying and Engineering Summit, I attended a talk presented by Stuart Rich, chief technology officer of Penobscot Bay Media, LLC. He presented on understanding, documenting, and building systems to support spatial data infrastructure’s security requirements as well as initiatives to move GIS inside the building footprint.

    He said he was involved in using terrestrial LiDAR inside buildings to collect massive amounts of data. So much, in fact, that “the value of measurement is trending very close to zero” using very high-volume data collection at 250,000 points/second.

    Stuart’s Factoid: Only 16% of cities are mapped, with a big vacuum being building interior maps in urban areas.

    He also discussed the lack of attention to underground infrastructure mapping.

    Another example of BIM detail, as provided in Art’s article, is a building wall which, in most GIS, if it exists at all, is a single polyline, maybe two polylines in rare cases. Thinking in a GIS sort of way, a building wall ”could contain more than six layers of data: paint, drywall, framing, blocking, fire stops, insulation, etc.” Think about this for a minute. Imagine how the quality of decisions would improve if the building owner was considering renovating his building and had this sort of information and software tools available. The decisions about which walls to leave or take down and future layout, for instance, would likely change if this information was readily available.

    Honestly, for building design, and most kinds of design for that matter, CAD isn’t the right tool if you think about it. It doesn’t have the database or analysis tools behind the various points, lines, and polygons to make the best decisions. This is the foundation of the GeoDesign concept being promoted these days.

    Although I didn’t set out to write about GeoDesign, it’s very fitting. According to Wikipedia, “GeoDesign brings geographic analysis into the design process, where initial design sketches are instantly vetted for suitability against a myriad of database layers describing a variety of physical and social factors for the spatial extent of the project. This on-the-fly suitability analysis provides a framework for design, giving land-use planners, engineers, transportation planners, and others involved with design the tools to leverage geographic information within their design workflows.”

    Of course, as Stuart mentions and as I’ve written about before, a highly related topic is underground infrastructure (sewer, water, electric, gas, telecom). That’s a whole other subject and one that I’m close to as I spend quite a bit of time working with landscape architects who deal with underground infrstructure on a daily basis in their projects. For them, as opposed to “what’s inside the wall,” a landscape architect has to ask “what’s under the ground.” If he or she doesn’t know until the construction crew starts tearing down and digging, then the project risk increases substantially.

    A good example and story I read this week was a short interview that Directions magazine published about the San Bruno gas pipeline explosion which killed nine people. You can read the interview here. Essentially, it’s a lesson in spatial data management with respect to underground infrastructure, with spatial data accuracy being the primary theme.

    Data, Data, Data

    In the world of real estate, it is said the three most important features of real-estate property are location, location, and location. I think you can say that the three most important feature of a GIS are data, data, and data. It’s not the software tools we are lacking, it’s the data. That’s why revenue from GIS data over the past eight years has grown at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of ~15 percent, while GIS software has grown considerably less, according to research firm Daratech, Inc.

    Where Is the Data Coming From?

    Data collection technology is changing rapidly. Look at two key sources of geospatial data: remote sensing and GPS. Remote sensining, in particular, is well-suited for building interior data collection.

    At the same Esri Surveying and Engineering conference I mentioned above, Lawrie Jordan, director of Imagery at Esri, said that this is the most exciting time to be involved in imagery during his 40-year career.

    Commercial satellite imagery quality and availability is the best it’s ever been. It wasn’t that long ago that three-year-old, one-meter-pixel resolution, black/white imagery was the norm. Today, GeoEye, DigitalGlobe, RapidEye, and Spot Image are delivering an amazing amount of digital imagery at even more amazing resolutions. Jordan stated that in less than five years, every square inch of the Earth will be imaged (by satellites) constantly. He said we are already half-way there.

    Another form of remote sensing that’s busting at the seams is 3D scanning (terrestrial LiDAR). We’ve seen a lot of development in 3D scanning over the past 10 years. The equipment used to be pretty expensive, but the prices are coming down as the technology gains acceptance. I recall using the technology a number of years ago (circa 2003). I was tasked with an accident reconstruction project. Part of the task was to create a 3D model of a wrecked automobile. Traditionally, one would use a surveying total station and measure shot-by-shot at key points on the automobile. Even measuring 1,000 points on the automobile wouldn’t result in enough data points to create a reasonable 3D model. We decided to use a 3D scanner. We were able to scan the automobile in under two hours and collect a tremendous amount of detailed data.

    The good news is that we had a tremendous amount of detailed data to work with. The bad news was the same, we had a tremendous amount of detailed data to work with. I think it took us four weeks to produce a deliverable from the data. However, keep in mind that this was nearly eight years ago and software tools have come a long way since then (Safe Software, Leica Geosystems, Trimble, Topcon, all have software tools for dealing with 3D scan data), so the process in producing a deliverable today is more efficient.

    I’ve written and said this many times over: geospatial data fuels the GIS software engine. Esri and other GIS software developers are making very powerful GIS engines. In fact, the GIS software engines far exceed the quality of the geoespatial data we have to work with. BIM is a great example of that. There’s a substantial lack of BIM data, but with 3D scanning and other geospatial data collection technology advancing rapidly today
    , that will change. GIS will move indoors.

    Thanks, and see you next week.

    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric