DeLorme has announced the launch of its newest product, the inReach SE (Screen Edition) satellite communication device. With 90 percent of the world’s surface lacking cell phone coverage, inReach SE is designed for the traveler or outdoor adventurer to keep them connected and safe anywhere in the world. The expanded standalone capabilities of inReach SE include a color screen, virtual keyboard, slim design and long-lasting internal lithium battery. In standalone mode, inReach SE provides free-form texting capabilities of up to 160 characters to any cell phone number, email address or social media page.
Using DeLorme’s Earthmate App, inReach SE pairs wirelessly with iPhone, iPad and iPod touch to access topographic maps and NOAA charts and to make text messaging more convenient. inReach SE is also compatible with Android devices.
With the ability to maintain satellite signal lock even in difficult GPS environments, inReach SE also offers global SOS capabilities, adjustable tracking intervals from 10 minutes to four hours, and remote real-time follow-me/find-me tracking and ping-me locating. In the event of an emergency, the interactive SOS capability of inReach automatically triggers remote tracking and allows users to describe and update their situation so proper resources can be deployed, DeLorme said.
“Whether you’re deep in the backwoods, floating on a remote lake, or simply traveling abroad, anyone can benefit from the comprehensive functionality of inReach SE,” said Michael
Heffron, DeLorme CEO. “Over the last two years we have been listening to customer feedback, so the next generation of inReach includes many new features based on their input. The internal rechargeable battery and the on-screen, free-form texting are especially beneficial, making on-the-go communications more convenient and delivering peace of mind to family and friends easier than ever before.”
inReach operates over the Iridium satellite network, providing global two-way satellite communications, high network reliability and low-latency data links (less than 60 second delivery of messages end-to-end) anywhere on Earth, with no gaps, fringe or weak signal areas, DeLorme said.
The follow me / find me tracking feature of inReach provides GPS position updates allowing family and friends to follow the user’s trip as it happens. Family and friends can log into a dedicated MapShare page to follow a detailed breadcrumb trail, ping a location, and send messages to the inReach owner. In the event of an emergency, the built-in SOS button can be activated to trigger a distress alert with delivery confirmation and it automatically activates the remote GPS tracking feature. GPS tracking assists search-and-rescue personnel with homing in on the user’s location, whether stationary or on the move.
Pairing the inReach SE via Bluetooth with the Earthmate App turns a mobile device into a global satellite communicator and navigation tool. Real-time GPS location, tracking and text messages are overlaid on the digital maps for easy navigation and position location. inReach owners get exclusive, unlimited access to DeLorme’s topographic maps and North American NOAA charts, which can be downloaded via an Internet connection prior to departure and remain available in the Earthmate App even when outside cellular coverage.
The U.S. Military relies on GPS to aid air, land and sea navigation. Like the GPS units in many automobiles today, a simple receiver and some processing power is all that is needed for accurate navigation. But, what if the GPS satellites suddenly became unavailable due to malfunction, enemy action or simple interference, such as driving into a tunnel? Unavailability of GPS would be inconvenient for drivers on the road, but could be disastrous for military missions. DARPA is working to protect against such a scenario, and an emerging solution is much smaller than the navigation instruments in today’s defense systems.
DARPA researchers at the University of Michigan report that they have made significant progress with a timing and inertial measurement unit (TIMU) that contains everything needed to aid navigation when GPS is temporarily unavailable. The single-chip TIMU prototype contains a six-axis IMU (three gyroscopes and three accelerometers) and integrates a highly-accurate master clock into a single miniature system, smaller than the size of a penny. This chip integrates devices (clocks, gyroscopes and accelerometers), materials and designs from DARPA’s Micro-Technology for Positioning, Navigation and Timing (Micro-PNT) program.
Three pieces of information are needed to navigate between known points A and B with precision: orientation, acceleration and time. This new chip integrates tiny devices that can measure all three simultaneously. The design is accomplished through new fabrication processes in high-quality materials for multi-layered, packaged inertial sensors and a timing unit, in a tiny 10-millimeter-square package. Each of the six microfabricated layers of the TIMU is only 50 microns thick, approximately the thickness of a human hair. Each layer has a different function, akin to floors in a building.
“Both the structural layer of the sensors and the integrated package are made of silica,” said Andrei Shkel, DARPA program manager. “The hardness and the high-performance material properties of silica make it the material of choice for integrating all of these devices into a miniature package. The resulting TIMU is small enough and should be robust enough for applications (when GPS is unavailable or limited for a short period of time) such as personnel tracking, handheld navigation, small diameter munitions and small airborne platforms.”
The goal of the Micro-Technology for Positioning, Navigation and Timing (Micro-PNT) program is to develop technology for self-contained, chip-scale inertial navigation and precision guidance. Other recent breakthroughs from Micro-PNT include new microfabrication methods and materials for inertial sensors.
Neither rain, sleet, snow, hail, wind, nor dark of night will deter…
Loosely Translated, Herodotus, Histories (8.98)
…attendees at the 29th National Space Symposium from their appointed rounds.
Seriously, folks, with apologies to postal workers everywhere, here in the Rocky Mountains it was 72 degrees on the eighth of April, the first day of the largest space symposium in the world. This morning, the ninth, the startled thermometer hovered around eleven degrees with snow, high winds and attendees searching for any outer wear they could find. And except for NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) personnel, everyone braved the weather and soldiered on.
NASA, of course, one of the few government agencies with space in its name, decided they did not need to attend the National Space Symposium this year. But that is NASA’s loss and a story for another time, because more than 9,000 other dedicated space professionals did attend, and more than 170 companies provided major exhibits that filled to capacity the largest pillar-less exhibition hall west of the Mississippi. Just writing this makes my feet hurt. And the best part is this all takes place at the five-star Broadmoor Resort in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains, hence Mother Nature’s raucous spring weather shenanigans.
This is truly a watershed event for the global space community, and it improves every year. I have had the honor of attending 25 of the 29 National Space Symposiums, and as usual there are always a few major topics of interest that everyone wants to discuss. This year I can literally not walk ten feet without someone stopping me to discuss:
The error-plagued GAO (Government Accountability Office) OCX (Next Generation GPS Operational Control System) report and subsequent regrettable sensationalized news reports
The actual status of the OCX program
Lockheed Martin’s GPS III program
NavSat – Nee Parkinson’s NibbleSat – real or imagined
Software-defined GPS receivers and GPS user equipment in general
When it comes to opinions, informed or otherwise, concerning each of these topics, the resulting litany reminds me of the old saw about asking three psychologists to comment on a patient’s diagnosis, and you will invariably wind up with four opinions. But have no fear: I spoke directly with the prime companies developing each of these programs, and the following is straight from the horse’s mouth, or some other part of their anatomy as the case may be. You be the judge.
GAO and OCX
The Government Accountability Office, which historically is anything but, released a report on March 28titled “Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs,” in which it seems to claim that the original $886 million GPS OCX program awarded to Raytheon Information Systems in Aurora, Colorado, in February 2010, has grown by 43 percent and ballooned to $3.695 billion. In fact, the report does not actually say that exactly, but you have to dig deep to determine that. Most readers won’t take the time to do that and will assume that the OCX program is grossly over budget. It is not. In fact, to reach that extraordinary number, OCX cost overruns would need to have grown by 43 percent for each year since it was awarded, and that is ludicrous. According to Raytheon VP and OCX Program Manager Ray Kolibaba, the $3.695 billion number probably comes from including “…programmatic costs beyond OCX development costs and pessimistic projections from the government” that in my experience no acquisition agency, nor Congress for that matter, would ever include when determining true program cost adherence parameters. Such ancillary costs would certainly never be included in a Nunn-McCurdy-Sarbanes-Oxley-Graham-Rudman-Harry Potter fiscal responsibility evaluation.
Speaking from personal experience, in 1990 I was appointed the very first Legislative Liaison Director for Headquarters Air Force Space Command. I had a small office and staff and spent most of my time on Capitol Hill meeting with congressmen and senators, where I advocated the latest space programs, and/or sat in on congressional hearings and then advised senior U.S. Air Force space officials on what budget and policy decisions they could expect from Congress. And I can tell you now, using the methods the GAO concocted to compile this report, I could cause any space program to come under close and unwarranted scrutiny. However, using time-tested congressional oversight rules of engagement (ROE), OCX has not come close to triggering any of the automated congressional watchdog cost overrun tripwires. The truth of the matter is OCX has grown in scope and schedule due in part to government change requests, mainly in the cyber and information assurance areas, along with affordability mandates due to schedule slips and sequestration. According to Stephen Moran, Raytheon mission solutions director, the true cost of OCX today is approximately $967 million, which means the total program cost to date has grown by approximately 10 percent, a far cry from the fictitious annualized 43 percent increase claimed by the GAO. While the GAO goes to great lengths to justify its inflated numbers, it is comparing or rather sensationalizing apples and oranges.
Some may say, so what? Who outside of Washington D.C. reads or believes GAO reports? Unfortunately, Congress, the congressional staff and congressional budgeters read these reports, since the GAO is officially the investigative arm of Congress. In fact the GAO is an independent, nonpartisan agency that works for Congress. Often called the “congressional watchdog,” GAO investigates how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars. And many times they do a great job. But in this case they are wide of the mark. It would be a shame if Congress cancelled OCX because of a flawed or, at a minimum, a poorly explained report.
Ray Kolibaba and Stephen Moran assured me during our talks at the 29th NSS that OCX was alive and well and on track to meet a re-baselined time and costs schedule. OCX Block One RTO should occur as planned in the first quarter of 2017 and will include the ability to launch and control GPS IIF and GPS III satellites and payloads, but not GPS IIA satellites and payloads. That mission, along with the responsibility for maintaining residual satellites, still falls to the LADO (Launch Anomaly and Disposal Operations) contractor Braxton Technologies, which is an OCX subcontractor to Raytheon.
The bottom line is the OCX schedule has slipped and the budget has grown, but within historically acceptable parameters; certainly, it is not even close to triggering congressional oversight. However, having said that, in this budget sequestration environment, the overall GPS budget has taken some significant hits so that even the slightest cost overrun is of concern. Still, let’s hope that Congress makes funding decisions using actual historically acceptable numbers and not overblown rhetoric.
LMCO and GPS III
Keoki Jackson
Let me say right up front that I really like Keoki Jackson and what he has accomplished on the GPS III program at Lockheed Martin. Keoki is the vice president of Navigation Systems, and as such heads the GPS III program. Keoki has an honest and open demeanor and just oozes integrity. He runs a very open program and, indeed, has extended an open invitation to me, wearing multiple hats, to visit the LMCO GPS III facility in Waterton, Colorado, to discuss GPS III anytime. Believe me, I have and will continue to take him up on his offer. To someone in my line of work, that confidence speaks volumes. Keoki obviously has supreme faith in his people, and is assured the GPS III program is on the path to success. I spoke with Keoki on Monday, April 8, as I toured the GPS III facility with him. He was like a father with pictures of his children. Happy, smiling, engaging — he could not wait to show off their latest accomplishments.
My bottom line is this is a rare attitude among senior execs and PMs on major space programs. And that may be because so many of them are under congressional scrutiny. Not the case for GPS III, however. The back-to-basics GPS III program is on schedule and budget, and is set to deliver GPS III SV-01in May 2014, exactly six years after program award. The USAF has said it may not launch the first GPS III until April 2015, but that is a separate ground support and commanding issue. It has nothing to do with the schedule and availability of the GPS III satellites.
Historically, LMCO-built satellites are some of the best in the world. According to LMCO statistics, and verified by yours truly, LMCO GPS satellite vehicles have accumulated more than 175 operational years on orbit with a reliability record better than 99.9 percent. Keoki also proudly pointed out that the Lockheed Martin heritage dates back to the production of the Oscar and Nova Transit satellites — programs that paved the way for the current GPS gold standard on orbit today.
Now, don’t let the back-to-basics approach fool you. That just means sound, solid, proven engineering and management practices are employed, but the technology is anything but basic. The kingpin of the LMCO GPS III approach is an artifact known as the GNST, or pathfinder spacecraft. The GPS III Non Flight Satellite Testbed (GNST) gives everyone confidence that Lockheed is on the right track. The pathfinder goes through all the rigorous steps a flight article goes through, only it completes them first and allows LMCO personnel to find all those schedule-busting, expensive glitches that show up in any program. As Keoki said, “Our endeavor is to find any anomalies now before the satellites and payloads are on orbit.” The GNST, along with cutting-edge 3-D motion studies with avatars (an amazing story and teaser for another time), will hopefully allow a smooth transition for SV-01 through SV-09 when the program plans to initiate programmatic and hardware changes to allow for the first-ever GPS dual launch.
This is a far different approach from the Boeing GPS IIF spacecraft and payloads, which experienced major anomalies on orbit for the first two SVs. Changes were made to subsequent ground space vehicles before launch, but the first two SVs on orbit are stuck with those anomalies. The LMCO approach hopes to eliminate or at least minimize that risk. If the full LMCO GPS III program comes to fruition, there could eventually be as many as 32 GPS III satellites in various configurations on orbit. Which means Keoki will probably be referring to GPS IIIs not as children but grandchildren, and he will need a much bigger scrapbook. Bottom line, GPS III is alive and well, on schedule and budget.
NavSat or NibbleSat
For those of you who have not heard about the NavSat or NibbleSat, it is a small GPS satellite endeavor by AFSPC, SMC, and AFRL to determine the feasibility of building a GPS-only small satellite, one without NDS, SAR, or any other auxiliary payloads. However, this is not solely a Weight Watchers program — it is about far more than a slimmed-down GPS. It addresses technological aspects of the GPS program as well as SWAP (size, weight, and power) issues that have plagued the GPS program since its inception.
Since 1978 when the very first GPS satellite was launched, the program has grown in complexity and size with ancillary payloads, more signals, more power, and more flexibility, which all add up to a heavier, more complex satellite — and in space, where weight and complexity equal greater costs. GPS III has finally reached the point that it will cost nearly $450 million to place a single GPS SV and payload in orbit.
As I said earlier, the GPS III payload may last 30 years, which equates to a sizeable return on your investment (ROE) for space assets, but in this constrained sequestration budget environment Congress is not looking down the road 30 years; it is barely able to consider the FYDP or the next five years’ development plan budget. So $450 million per GPS III on orbit is a big number. Even with dual launch, according to Lockheed’s Keoki Jackson (see above, “LMCO and GPS III”), from SV-09 forward the savings will only amount to about $70M per launch because it will require a larger launch vehicle. Certainly, $70 million is not a number to disregard, especially if you could build and launch a small GPS-only SV for that same amount. I know it sounds nearly impossible, but that is what the NavSat program hopes to achieve. To date, no less than 20 companies, U.S. and European, have expressed an interest in making NavSat happen. Most companies I spoke with are convinced it is not a technological issue, but a commitment and funding issue on behalf of the U.S. government. So what else is new? In my book, NavSat is a real possibility, and the recent plethora of BAAs (Broad Area Announcements) from SMC (Space and Missile Systems Center), AFRL (Air Force Research Laboratory), and SPAWAR (Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command) attest to that fact. Stay tuned for more.
GPS Payloads, Receivers: Software-Defined and Otherwise
It is a fact of life where GPS is concerned that when you talk about GPS technology, you are talking about ITT Exelis. There is not a single U.S. GPS payload on orbit today that was not built in whole or in part by ITT Exelis. There are few companies in the world today that can claim such a prestigious record for space assets that are arguable the best in the world. The ITT Exelis record of providing proven GPS payloads for 35 years is unequaled in the space arena, and the company continues to innovate and grow. So, it should come as no surprise that Exelis provided LMCO with the GPS payload for the GNST pathfinder mentioned earlier. The bottom line is, when it comes to GPS payloads, nobody does it better than ITT Exelis.
Therefore, I took the opportunity to sit down with Mark Pisani, a vice president and general manager in the geospatial systems business at ITT Exelis, to discuss the recent $2.15 million contract award from AFRL to research navigation payloads to support the current GPS program and the NavSat program specifically. Mark stated that the technologies being investigated could easily translate to the entire GPS program.
Mr. Pisani stated that over the next 18 months, the company will conduct research into potential methods to reduce payload size, weight, and power, and improve GPS signal strength and reception for disadvantaged users, especially warfighters, in either urban canyons or mountainous terrain. ITT Exelis is also working on new methods of tamper-proofing for its GPS reference and monitor receivers, which will deployed around the globe to ensure GPS accuracy for all global users. So it appears that where GPS is concerned, you name it and ITT Exelis is working some aspect of the program.
NSS Wrap-up
Space Foundation Leadership Team.
NSS 29 is still in full swing as I write this. Indeed, my old friend and colleague in uniform, General William (Willie) Shelton, just gave his state-of-the-military-space-community address, and he did it in his usual exemplary manner. Few generals can match his grace and style. But to paraphrase Robert Frost, “…deadlines, time and tides wait for no man,” so I will wrap up with a few personal observations.
As many of you have heard me say, year after year, the National Space Symposium is like no other space event in the world. It gets bigger and better every year, and this year events extended all the way to LMCO in Denver and to Broadmoor properties that have never been used for this event previously. The NSS agenda and speakers are top notch and international in nature. Just a sampling are George Nield, associate administrator for commercial space transportation at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Jean-Jacques Dordain, director general of the European Space Agency (ESA), and Yasushi Horikawa, chairman of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. Officials from commercial space leaders such as LMCO, SpaceX, Boeing, XCOR Aerospace, Sierra Nevada Space Systems, and others will also speak, while actress Sigourney Weaver, star of the Alien films among others, is the featured speaker at the Space Technology Hall of Fame gala tomorrow night. So there is literally something for everyone.
Sigourney Weaver
I have known Elliot Holokauahi (yes, it is a mouthful) Pulham (CEO), Chief Chuck Zimkas (USAF, Ret) who serves as president of the Space Foundation, and Holly Roberts, the CFO, for many, many years, and they are always striving to make the National Space Symposium better every year; in my book, they have succeeded beyond anyone’s wildest dreams. Their zeal is combined with the dedicated support of Steve Bartolin, CEO and president of the Broadmoor. I first met Steve more than 25 years ago when he ran the famed Greenbriar Resort in White Sulphir Springs, West Virginia, the playground of congressmen and senators. Steve has always had a penchant for living in places that ended in Springs, as well as for perfect service, while going to great lengths to make sure his employees are happy and enjoy their work. It shows at the Broadmoor, which is a Triple AAA Five Diamond Resort, and has been for more than 20 years. Together, Steve’s commitment to perfection and the vision of the Space Foundation make the National Space Symposium not only the world’s largest but by far the best space symposium in the world today.
Braxton Technologies Sets the Example
Personally, I enjoy the exhibit hall and tend to spend most of my time there. The event along with the Cyber presentations lasts for four full days, but you cannot see and do everything in that time, which leads me a personal observation. Many of the vendors and exhibitors in the past several years have begun to offer refreshments in their booth space, to help draw in the huge crowds always roaming the exhibition floor. Some offer ice cream, coffee, even beer and pretzels, but personally I like what Braxton Technologies has developed. Remember, this is a Space Symposium, so Braxton decided to mount small-scale full working models of various satellites above their booth space and allow attendees to actually send wireless commands to control the satellites. You can sit at one of their control stations, see a real spacecraft commanding (TT&C) screen, send commands to the scale-model satellites, and watch the satellites react in real time.
Now, Fred (I call him the model builder and engineer extraordinaire) is the one who built the majority of the models, and they are an excellent example of fine craftsmanship. Indeed, the first night there were some issues with one of the older models, and Fred stayed in the booth working the problem from closing time on Monday evening until 0700 on Tuesday morning. And his hard work paid off, because there is always a crowd around the Braxton booth waiting to control or just watch the satellites respond. The Braxton folks are very good at and very proud of what they do, and it shows. They automated GPS scheduling, on their own nickel last year, and this year offer a glimpse at the future of GPS mission planning. Plus, they have an application for unimproved aircraft landing sites around the world that is simply amazing.
But, in the end it is watching the children, the future space operators and astronauts, who gather in huge crowds around the Braxton booth, waiting with thinly veiled anticipation to send a command to a satellite. It has been a long time since I was a child, but you should have seen the smile on my face when Fred allowed me to send a command and I could see the satellite model respond. Both Frank Backes, Braxton CEO, and Kenny O’Neil, Braxton president, and most of the Braxton employees are former space operators, and they have not forgotten the thrill of actually commanding satellites. Now they have made that thrill available for our future space operators. I think they hit it out of the park.
There’s still time. Drop by the Braxton booth, speak with Fred, and send a command to a satellite. Oh, and you are allowed to smile!
Until next time, happy navigating, and go fly a satellite!
ITT Exelis is offering the Signal Sentry 1000, a proprietary product that detects, geolocates, and characterizes sources of intentional and unintentional interference to the U.S. GPS signals, and provides actionable intelligence to the user.
The system leverages GNSS signal domain knowledge, and is based upon patented technology developed through the company’s history of designing and fielding electronic intelligence systems, ITT Exelis said.
Leveraging Exelis GNSS signal domain knowledge, the system is implemented using commercially available GPS receiver and computer server/data technology. Actionable intelligence is available in the form of pin mapping of interference sources in addition to longitude/latitude/altitude data, all available through a web-enabled graphical user interface.
Signal Sentry 1000 can assist efforts to ensure GPS spectrum integrity and aid in law enforcement operations that require GPS availability. Benefits for users include:
Instantaneous identification and geolocation of jamming sources, improving situational awareness.
Skyhook Wireless, a provider of location positioning, announced a partnership to integrate Skyhook’s hybrid location platform into Comodo’s Anti-Theft app for Android devices.
Comodo’s Anti-Theft for Android is a new service that enables customers to remotely locate, lock and recover a lost or stolen Android smartphone or tablet. The app can remotely capture and upload photos of whoever is operating the missing device to aid authorities in their recovery efforts and also in identifying the thief. The product is designed to address the security, monitoring, and management needs of users with limited time and IT support.
“Comodo selected Skyhook’s leading hybrid location service because of its precision, speed, and power efficiency, all of which are critical to Comodo in our mission to locate, track, and recover lost or stolen devices,” said Melih Abdulhayoglu of Comodo.
Comodo Anti-Theft for Android is free and available at the Android Play Store. Skyhook provides an SDK for developers across most platforms.
eLORAN Initial Operational Capability at the Port of Dover
An overview of the work of the General Lighthouse Authorities of the United Kingdom and Ireland on the implementation of Enhanced Loran Initial Operational Capability (IOC) in the waters around Great Britain. eLoran is the latest in the longstanding and proven series of low-frequency, LOng-RAnge Navigation systems. It evolved from Loran-C in response to the 2001 Volpe Report on GPS vulnerability. It vastly improves upon previous Loran systems with updated equipment, signals, and operating procedures.
By Paul Williams and Chris Hargreaves
GPS/GNSS is everywhere! It is used in many ship’s systems (Figure 1), but it is vulnerable to interference both intentional and unintentional.
Its output is displayed on the electronic chart display and information system; is transmitted to other vessels using the Automatic Identification System (AIS); is used to calibrate the gyro compass; is used in the radar; is connected to the digital selective calling, its reported position transmitted at the push of the emergency button for search-and-rescue; is in the vessel data recorder, the dynamic positioning system, surveying equipment, the ship’s entertainment system for aiming the satellite dish; and it even synchronizes the ship’s clocks!
28 days worth of ship-traffic data for the Strait of Dover.
GNSS is also used in marine Aids-to-Navigation (AtoN) provision, for deploying buoys and lights, AIS transponders, and AtoN position monitoring, and its precise timing capabilities are used to synchronise the lights along an approach channel to improve conspicuity.
GNSS (effectively GPS) has become the primary Aid-to-Navigation (AtoN) used by all professional and most other mariners. The vulnerability of GNSS to space weather and interference (unintentional and criminal jamming) means that a backup system is needed to achieve resilient Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) for e-Navigation. Though the probability of losing GNSS may be low, the consequential impact could be very high, and maintaining an appropriate balance of physical and radionavigation AtoNs is vital for e-Navigation.
Figure 1. GPS is used in many ship’s systems.
The International Maritime Organisation seeks to develop a strategic vision for e-Navigation, integrating existing and new navigational tools in an all-embracing system, contributing to enhanced navigational safety and environmental protection, while reducing the burden on the navigator. One of IMO’s requirements for e-Navigation is that it should be resilient — robust, reliable and dependable.
The General Lighthouse Authorities of the United Kingdom and Ireland (GLAs) have the statutory responsibility to provide marine AtoNs around the coast of England, Wales, Ireland, and Scotland. It has become clear over recent years that if the GLA chose to implement eLoran, it could rationalize its physical AtoN infrastructure, removing some lights and other physical aids, and on balance actually reduce costs by implementing eLoran. Indeed, compared to other possible resilient PNT options such as GNSS hardening, radar absolute positioning, increasing physical AtoN provision, eLoran would save the GLAs £25.6M over a nominal system lifespan of 10 years from the introduction of e-Navigation services in 2018 to 2028.
Not So Old-Fashioned. How does the new eLoran differ from the old, outdated, Loran-C system? The core signal of eLoran is pretty much the same as Loran-C, but tolerances have been tightened up. Things like carrier zero crossing points, half-cycle peaks, ECDs, transmission timing, signal power, signal availability, power supply resilience have all been upgraded, taking advantage of improvements in technology allowing us to better appease the so-called four horsemen of navigation: accuracy, availability, continuity, and integrity.
SAM control is a thing of the past, and eLoran transmitters are synchronised directly to UTC. This means that their times of transmission can be predicted. Having stations independently synchronised to UTC means that the mariner no longer has to rely on old-fashioned hyperbolic navigation. Charts with hyperbolic lines of position on them are also a thing of the past. A modern eLoran receiver works just like a GPS receiver, employing signals from all available transmitters in its position solution. With GPS those transmitters are moving in space; in eLoran the transmitters are fixed onto the surface of the Earth.
Reelektronika LORADD receiver, only 3 centimeters tall.
Modern receivers are small (photo). They use off-the-shelf, high-performance processors, and the receiver is written in software, allowing a lot of flexibility.
Three transmitters are sufficient to give you position; four or preferably five signals are better for integrity. But for timing and frequency applications you only need one transmitter. The Anthorn station in the UK can cover the entire UK and Ireland with a radio signal that has stability enough to satisfy the Stratum 1 frequency source requirement for steering the clocks of telecom networks, and Anthorn has not even been upgraded to full eLoran standard yet!
One of the big differences between Loran-C and eLoran is that eLoran now has a data channel. Some of the Loran pulses of each pulse group are modulated so that data can be sent over the 100kHz signal. This allows service providers to send integrity alerts, and application-specific data, like UTC time, and differential-Loran (DLoran) and DGPS corrections. In Europe this is implemented by the already internationally standardised Eurofix system.
A parallel can be drawn with GPS signals, which contain a navigation component (pseudorandom noise code and/or carrier phase) and modulated data. Some options for data channel technology are still evolving with 1500 bits per second demonstrated, and 3000 bps possible. That may not sound very much to salt-of-the-earth communications engineers, but for Loran it’s pretty impressive, especially when you consider prototype attempts at Loran data communications in the past have been limited to 30 to 250 bps.
Maritime Applications Services
How do we apply eLoran to something like the maritime application of port approach? It is important to remember that the receiver operates by measuring how long it takes a groundwave radio signal to travel over the surface of the earth. An eLoran receiver assumes that the world is made entirely of seawater, for which it has a very accurate propagation model built in. The receiver does not, and indeed cannot, know about any land along the propagation path; and land slows the signal down, perhaps by as much as a few microseconds, over typical propagation distances.
So the service provider must survey the effects of the land masses in the area of coverage. The Additional Secondary Factors (ASFs) of all the stations across the proposed service area are therefore mapped. The ASF survey is a once-and-for-all task, but it needs to be done and the ASFs published. In the old days, hyperbolic lines would be “grid warped,” or tables would be published on paper for the navigator to enter values manually. But with modern eLoran receivers containing large amounts of memory, quite detailed ASF maps can be stored in the mariner’s receiver.
ASFs depend on the electrical conductivity of the surface over which the eLoran signal travels. The conductivity changes with the constitution and moisture content of the earth. This means that the ASF along a path varies over a period of time —perhaps by as much as a few hundred nanoseconds over a year. Because the ASFs in a receiver are fixed, a method is needed to correct for this temporal ASF variation. In order to monitor this variation, a reference station is installed close to the harbor or point of use of the eLoran service. This DLoran reference station measures the temporal changes in the signals’ arrival times due to changing ASFs, transmitter variations, and weather effects.
The phrase “reference station” conjures up images of expensive buildings, amenities, and hordes of personnel and associated support services. However, a DLoran reference station is a small box sitting in the corner of a room connected to a small eLoran receive antenna on the roof, and to the Internet. It sends differential corrections over the Internet to an eLoran transmitter, which then broadcasts them to the mariner’s receiver over the Loran Data Channel, for example Eurofix.
Note that a DLoran reference station does not transmit a radio signal. It does not need a transmitter itself; it uses the Internet and the eLoran signal to disseminate its real time data. The mariner uses the same eLoran receiver to receive both the navigation signal AND the differential corrections.
So the process is: map ASFs once; run a reference station; and broadcast corrections. That’s it! With good signal-to-noise ratio and transmitter geometry, 10-meter or better accuracy can be obtained.
Measuring ASFs
The GLA have had the ability to measure ASFs for several years, using a combination of commercial hardware and proprietary software (Figure 2).
Figure 2. GLA-produced software for ASF survey, processing, and validation.
The software, written in Matlab, shows a real-time plot of the survey as it progresses. The ASF values are color-coded according to magnitude. The software can also process the ASF data once it has been measured, to get the best performance out of it. The real-time capabilities of the software allow the determination of the quality of the data while aboard the ship, rather than having to wait until back in the laboratory. Statistical analysis of the data can also show where the ship should go to gather more data in a particular area.
Once the survey is complete, the software can be used to generate interpolated grids of ASF data — the most convenient and accurate form of ASF data storage.
It is important with any scientific or engineering measurement to establish the error on that measurement. The same can be said of ASFs, and so the software can calculate the error bounds on ASF measurements. This “ASF error” data can again be published in grid form alongside the ASF database. This allows it to be used as one component of an Integrity Equation, implemented within the mariner’s receiver, to calculate Horizontal Protection Level (HPL).
After processing, the ASF data should be validated by performing a harbor approach or other maneuver that requires a particular positioning accuracy. For this, the software can be switched to “Validation” mode. Once the validation is successful, the data can be output in a publication format (RTCM SC-127 format for example).
The plot in Figure 2 shows part of an ASF database for Harwich and Felixstowe, major ports on the east coast of the UK. Using this data and DLoran in the Harwich and Felixstowe approach provides 10-meter (95 percent) positioning accuracy.
UK eLoran Prototype
This prototype eLoran system works alongside GPS. It has been in operation 24 hours a day since May 2010. It is “prototype” because it demonstrates the concept of eLoran using signals from existing Loran-C stations in Norway, the Faroe Islands, Germany, and France plus the UK’s station at Anthorn; see Figure 3.
Figure 3. Relevant European Loran-C stations for prototype eLoran.
These stations, together with ASF measurements and DLoran, can deliver a high-precision eLoran service in ports where 10-20 meter accuracy is needed, across the area enclosed by the green contour in Figure 4.
Figure 4. Coverage of prototype eLoran over the UK and Ireland.
It is very impressive, yet the full availability and accuracy benefits of eLoran are still to come as these stations are eventually upgraded to full eLoran capability. And for the last year or so, the GLA have begun to move beyond the confines of the Harwich and Felixstowe approaches and implement initial eLoran services in other regions around the GLA service area.
The GLA aim to do this in two stages. In the first stage Initial Operational Capability (IOC) service will be installed by mid-2014, with the second stage Full Operational Capability (FOC) service covering all major ports in the UK and Ireland, plus Traffic Separation Schemes, installed by 2019 or so in time for e-Navigation.
Initial Operational Capability
IOC involves upgrading the installation at Harwich and Felixstowe and new installations in the approaches to another six of the busiest ports in the UK: Aberdeen, Grangemouth, Middlesbrough, Immingham, Tilbury, and Dover. For each of these areas an ASF survey and a DLoran reference station will be required.
The corrections for these reference stations will be broadcast using the Anthorn Loran Data Channel. There is also the need for a Monitoring and Control System for the network of DLoran Reference Stations, and it is envisaged that this will be based in Harwich. Figure 5 illustrates the architecture of the Initial Operational Capability system. The diagram shows the major components: eLoran transmitter, DLoran reference station network, monitor, and control system. Also shown are the interfaces between the components, which provide not only operational data but also include the ability to monitor the integrity of the system. Also note that the Loran Data Channel is capable of supporting third-party messaging applications using a client “logon” facility. This is already being done at Anthorn.
Figure 5. The architecture of the UK GLA’s eLoran Initial Operational Capability.
The European tender process for seven operational reference stations and the control system is almost complete.
The aim of IOC is to provide areas for demonstrations and trials, so that the mariner can gain experience of the system and its capabilities and provide feedback to the GLA on its performance.
eLoran at the Port of Dover
In the absence of the final operational reference stations, the GLA decided to perform an early implementation using prototype equipment that was already available at the GLA. The choice for this implementation was obvious: the iconic Port of Dover, a major port on the southeast coast of the UK and the Dover Strait, one of the busiest seaways in the world. Some 500-plus vessels travel through the Strait each day on their way to or from the North Sea region; see Opening Figure.
The GLA have, with the agreement of Port of Dover Operations, installed a prototype DLoran Reference Station within the port’s Terminal Control building. The roof of the building is an ideal location for the reference station receiver antenna as the location demonstrates low noise in the eLoran band and has easy access to mains power, cable runs, antenna mounts, and Internet access.
The ASF survey took place in March 2012, and covers the area outlined by the yellow polygon in Figure 6.
Figure 6. Area of March 2012 ASF survey.
Accuracy Performance Validation
Once the ASFs had been measured and the prototype reference station installed, the performance needed to be tested. This was accomplished through a validation run of the vessel through the area.
Figure 7 shows a screenshot of the GLA ASF measurement software running in validation mode. The colored track shows the path of the vessel, with the color indicating the positioning error compared to differential GPS. The vessel travels through an area of extrapolated and interpolated ASF data, so the positioning error at the northern end of the track is higher than the lower end of the track.
Figure 7. Screenshot of GLA ASF measurement software running in validation mode.
Figure 8 shows a comparison of eLoran positioning against DGPS positioning along the route as a scatter plot. The associated Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) is shown on the right of the diagram. From this it can be seen that the positioning accuracy obtained along this particular route was 12.5 meters (95 percent).
Figure 8. eLoran positioning accuracy scatter plot and cumulative distribution function of positioning error. Accuracy: 12.5 m (95%)
Dover to Calais Ferry Installation. Further validation and demonstrations will take place aboard a cross-Channel ferry. P&O Ferries in the UK has installed a receiver aboard their vessel, The Spirit of Britain. This relatively new vessel is one of the largest passenger ships to operate along the iconic Dover to Calais route. Data will be collected and feedback obtained on the eLoran service’s performance over the coming months.
Other Areas
The GLA continue their work towards IOC-level eLoran. Dover was the first port of call for the GLA eLoran Initial Operational Capability — the ASFs have been mapped and a prototype DLoran reference station has been installed. The final operational DLoran reference stations should be available this time next year.
The next area the GLA have concentrated upon is the Thames Estuary up to Tilbury. Although the GLA have not yet installed a permanent DLoran reference station, the ASF survey was performed in November 2012 using a temporary reference station installed at Medway. Along the route shown in Figure 9, a validation trial demonstrated 8.3 meters (95 percent) accuracy (Figure 10). The GLA have also recently surveyed the River Humber, including its approaches, up to the port of Hull. The data is currently in the process of being validated.
Figure 9. ASF map validation route from the port of Medway heading out of the River Thames estuary.Figure 10. eLoran positioning accuracy scatter plot and cumulative distribution function of positioning error. Accuracy: 8.3 m (95%).
Status and Next Steps
The next steps are to continue the implementation of IOC eLoran at the remaining port approaches for this phase. It is the aim that all ASF surveys will have been performed by the middle of 2014 in readiness for the installation of the operational DLoran reference stations at each candidate port. Licence agreements are being established with the various port authorities involved in order to allow this.
All ports that have been approached are positive and are keen to assist in the GLA eLoran implementations. eLoran noise surveys have been performed at all ports and locations for all DLoran reference stations have been found.
The Port of Dover has prototype eLoran up and running and has demonstrated 12.5-meter (95 percent) accuracy during the limited validation performed so far; however, further validation continues aboard the Spirit of Britain ferry.
The Thames Estuary ASF Survey has been performed, and 8-meter (95 percent) accuracy has been demonstrated in the area. The River Humber and its approaches have also been surveyed with validation in progress.
IOC-level DLoran reference stations should be available mid-2014, ready for installation.
The methods and processes employed during this work will be proposed for inclusion within the next version of the eLoran receiver Minimum Performance Specification as determined by Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services (RTCM) Special Committee 27. These include techniques and algorithms used for ASF measurement processing, the preferred ASF file format, guidelines on the usage of ASF data, and integrity computation.
Acknowledgments
The GLA acknowledge the assistance of the crew of THV Alert, the Dover Harbour Board, Peel Ports (Medway), Associated British Ports (Humber), Aberdeen Harbour Authority, Forth Ports, PD Ports (Middlesbrough).
This article is based on a presentation made at the Institute of Navigation International Technical Meeting, January 2013, in San Diego, California.
Paul Williams is a principal development engineer with the Research and Radionavigation Directorate of the GLA, and technical lead of the GLA’s eLoran Work Programme, responsible for the ongoing roll-out of the GLA’s eLoran Initial Operational Capability (IOC). He holds a Ph.D. in electronic engineering from the University of Wales.
Chris Hargreaves is is a research and development engineer with the Research and Radionavigation Directorate Directorate of the GLA. His work focuses on eLoran in measurement trials, software development, and data analysis. He holds a masters’ degrees in mathematics and physics from the University of Durham and in navigation technology from the University of Nottingham.
Dr. Bradford W. Parkinson, professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics Emeritus at Stanford University will discuss “GPS for Humanity — The Stealth Utility” at a special Smithsonian event Thursday, March 21.
In the 1970s, Parkinson was the chief architect and original program director for GPS. In his lecture, he will present the history, applications, and future of GPS and the GNSS. Central to operation of GPS is the relationship between time and navigation, and GPS will be explored in the Time and Navigation exhibit.
A few months ago, many of you may remember that I wrote about an encounter with a rather well-known female journalist who, after listening to one of my GPS presentations, said something like this, “I came here today to learn more about GPS and so far all you have talked about is atomic reference systems…what the heck do those *&@# atomic clocks have to do with GPS…?”
I mentioned at the time how incredulous I was at the question, but that I answered it with a straight face. Now, while professional courtesy prevents me from ever revealing the name of the female journalist, I will say that she evidently started an uncomfortable trend. Much of my correspondence lately has concerned the connections between time and position and/or navigation and why we are so concerned about time.
I won’t bore my more sophisticated readers with GPS 101, or certainly not Time and Frequency Metrology 101, but I will tell you that I think we (this is not the royal “we” but includes all of us who work with and promote GPS on a daily basis) need to do a better job describing just how GPS works and more importantly how critical precise time and frequency is to position and navigation solutions, whether GPS is utilized or not. And I don’t have the time here to take up the argument concerning how important GPS is to our critical national infrastructure. Indeed, a topic and column for another time.
I am sure my time and frequency metrology friends and colleagues at NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology in Boulder, Colorado) and USNO (U.S. Naval Observatory — read as UTC — home of Coordinated Universal Time and the Master Clock) would probably go about this differently. They tend to approach these problems strictly from a metrology viewpoint. While there is nothing wrong with that perspective, I hope to give you a more hands-on operational view of time and how it relates to position and navigation.
Here are a few quick Smithsonian facts, with commentary added, for those who want to visit and learn just what time has to do with GPS and navigation in general:
What: The Relationship Between Time and Navigation
When: Opens in April 2013.
Where: The Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum, Independence Avenue at Sixth Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.
Responsibility: “Time and Navigation — The Untold Story of Getting From Here to There” is being produced jointly by the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum and the National Museum of American History. This is one of the few times, if not the first, that two museums have jointly produced a major exhibit of this importance.
Sponsors: The exhibition is made possible through the generous contributions ofNorthrop Grumman; Exelis Inc.; Honeywell; National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency; U.S. Department of Transportation; Magellan; National Coordination Office for Space-Based Positioning, Navigation and Timing; Rockwell Collins; and ION the Institute of Navigation. Note: The sponsors are listed in order of the amount they gave to present the exhibition, but it should be noted that ION was among the first contributors, making the museums’ decision to go ahead with the exhibit a more comfortable one. More on that and why it is significant later.
The USS Alabama.
Artifacts: (Don’t you just love the word artifact? Indeed, someone once told me, and not unkindly, that I resemble that word.) The time exhibition features 144 artifacts, drawn primarily from the collections of the participating museums. Highlights of the exhibition include a representation of a 19th-century ship from the U.S. Exploring Expedition; the first sea-going marine chronometer made in the United States; the submarine navigation system for the USS Alabama; a TRANSIT navigation satellite (a major naval predecessor to GPS); Wiley Post’s airplane, the Winnie Mae; and Stanley, originally from the Stanford University Racing Team and written about many times by yours truly in GPS World. Stanley is a robotic vehicle that can drive itself. Stanley is a 2005 Volkswagen Touareg, which has been considerably modified to navigate without remote control and without a human driver onboard. Stanley handily won the 2005 DARPA Grand Challenge (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), a robotic vehicle race. Stanley successfully navigated 212 kilometers (132 miles) across desert terrain and has had his (here we go, anthropomorphizing automobiles) own robotic exhibit at the Smithsonian since 2009.
An official DARPA photograph of Stanley at the 2005 DARPA Grand Challenge. Stanley, created by the Stanford University Racing Team, won the race.
Organization: The current time exhibition is organized into five sections: Navigation for Everyone; Navigating at Sea; Navigating in the Air; Navigating in Space; and Inventing Satellite Navigation.
Theme: If you want to know where you are, you need an accurate clock. In other words, you need to know when you are. About 250 years ago, sailors first used accurate clocks, later known as chronometers, to navigate the oceans. Today, we locate ourselves on the globe with synchronized atomic clocks in orbiting satellites (GPS is the primary method today). Among the many challenges facing navigation from then to now, one stands out: keeping accurate time.
For centuries, nations have invested enormous resources to determine time and place for geopolitical reasons, and their research has changed people’s view of the world. Advanced technology that was once available only to the military has become commonplace and downloadable to cell phones, iPADS and computers. Instead of unfolding a map or stopping at a gas station to ask for directions, drivers can now consult their car’s GPS (Global Positioning) system. The new gallery examines the cultural and technological history of precise timekeeping and navigation at sea, in the air, and in space and the impact of satellite navigation on our everyday lives. Which of course are also the missions of the Institute of Navigation and GPS World magazine.
When Am I?
Many of you have heard the old saw about those who don’t know history being doomed to repeat it, and if you don’t know where you have been, how can you know where you are? There are probably numerous maxims that fit the bill when it comes to the history of time and navigation, and the Smithsonian Exhibit certainly does a great job of hitting all the high points, but beyond that, they will take you into about as much detail as you can stand. If possible, plan on attending the exhibit several times and delving into each of the five major themes. But if you can’t visit Washington, D.C., and the Smithsonian exhibit, then visit virtually on their excellent website.
For our purposes, suffice it to say that you can’t really know where you are unless you know when you are. That requires a clock, the more precise the better, and consequently the more accurate your position.
History Lesson
More than 200 years ago, sailors sailing between Europe and the New World knew where they were only in relationship to their latitude, but had no idea other than dead reckoning of their longitude.
Enter Boston clockmaker William Cranch Bond who, although he was not the first, constructed a specialized timepiece, which later became known as the Bond Chronometer, which sailors used to determine longitude at sea. But still there were problems. Sailors used a maritime sextant and chronometer to determine position, but both devices depended on the other. On cloudy or foggy days, either the horizon or the sun and stars or both were unavailable, and positioning/navigation was relegated to, in all seriousness, dead reckoning with a dubious magnetic compass, a rock and a rope. The problem being, of course, that dead reckoning made many mariners resemble the first word in that very unfortunate navigational phrase.
Time and Air Navigation
Fast forward almost a century (1903), and aeroplanes are now on the scene along with all the problems attendant in navigating a machine easily traveling ten times faster than most ships. But of course the U.S. Navy rationalized that if a watch and a sextant were good enough for navigating maritime ships, then they were good enough for ships of the air — even if the horizon was often obscured or moved around a great deal, or turbulence made balancing a sextant difficult.
The result was most aviators gave up on the sextant, especially solo aviators, and just used a watch and, you guessed it, dead reckoning, which is exactly what happened to many aviators in 1927 who attempted to win the Raymond Orteig $25,000 prize for being the first solo aviator to cross the Atlantic nonstop from the East Coast of the U.S. — in fact, it had to be New York to Paris, France. For you trivia buffs, it had to be New York to Paris because the person offering the prize, Monsieur Raymond Ortieg, was an emigrant from France who did well for himself and went from a penniless restaurant busboy to owning two of the most prestigious hotels in New York City at the time. Hence the connection between New York and Paris. But I digress.
Charles Lindbergh (left) and Raymond Orteig.
Enter Lindbergh
As most of you are aware, then captain, later colonel, Charles Lindbergh took up that dare and won the Orteig-prize on the 21 of May, 1927, when he landed in Paris after a grueling 33½-hour solo flight across the Atlantic. When Lindbergh hit land after being “feet wet” for more than 30 hours and 3500+ miles, he was less than three miles from his intended European entry point, a feat that would be hard to duplicate today without GPS, as even with an unaided inertial system the drift can sometimes be as high as one kilometer per hour.
One part I always find amusing about the Lindbergh transatlantic saga is that after flying with “dead reckoning” as his only means of navigation for 30 hours across the Atlantic, he followed the Seine river all the way to Paris, so he essentially converted from VFR (Visual Flight Rules) to the IFR or “I fly rivers” navigation method for the last part of his journey.
Meteorologists and the sealed barometric equipment Lindbergh carried on board — to prove he never landed enroute or that it was indeed a non-stop flight — would not only verify that fact but also verify that he navigated the Atlantic in what we might call today The Perfect Calm. Indeed, Lucky Lindy picked the perfect 48-hour period for his flight. For those of you who read the book, saw the movie, or were there, will remember that in New York the weather during the night preceding his historic takeoff from the dirt-churned-into-mud runway at Roosevelt Field, Long Island, New York, was less than cooperative. There was a major thunderstorm with lots of lightning and several inches of rain; consequently, many counseled Captain Lindbergh to postpone his flight. But he would have none of it and the rest is history.
The most interesting part of the story, however, is that the entire flight was accomplished with “dead reckoning,” a compass and a watch, the very same tools that Captain Lindbergh used during his tenure as a U.S. Mail pilot. So, in fact, Lucky Lindy actually knew very little about navigating an airplane or avigation, as many called it at the time. Indeed, according to Roger Connor from the National Air and Space Museum and his wonderful article in this month’s Smithsonian Air & Space magazine, Even Lindbergh Got Lost, Captain Lindbergh did not learn to properly navigate with a sextant, chronometer and star charts until more than a year after his famous flight to Paris.
I won’t spoil the story for you, but he learned to navigate as did his famous wife, Ann Morrow Lindbergh, from then Lieutenant Commander Philip V.H. Weems of the U.S. Navy. LCDR Weems set up the nation’s first independent navigation school, and went on to instruct such notables as General Curtis LeMay, the Commander of Strategic Air Command (SAC), who went on to serve as the Chief of Staff of the USAF. Most people are not aware, but General LeMay was dual-qualified as a pilot and a navigator in the USAF. As the Commander in Chief of SAC or CINCSAC, he mandated that all SAC flight crews be able to navigate from Point A to Point B using only passive means that were always available and did not involve transmitting a signal outside the aircraft. In other words, celestial navigation, using a sextant, chronometer, special plotter and star charts, much as was taught by LCDR Weems.
I was one of the lucky SAC flight crew members who learned to navigate with those basic instruments. And checking my logbooks, I find that I made just short of 200 flights (99 round-trips) across the big pond, the Pacific that is, using those basic instruments. I mentioned this to a group of USAF aircrews recently during a speech, and when I asked how many of them could accomplish that feat if required to do so today, I was informed that sextants are no longer carried on USAF aircraft and most do not even have sextant ports. In other words, it is a lost art among flight crews today, and it is a shame, but it is also a topic for another time.
The important fact concerning navigation and time is that time — indeed, precise time — is and always has been critical to accurate navigation, especially aircraft navigation, no matter whether you are flying from New York to Paris, Texas, or New York to Paris, France. And GPS Atomic Reference Systems (Atomic Clocks) on orbit today, which deliver time accurate to millionths of a second, are even more critical since they are the heart of the system. So I would say to my journalist enquirer, GPS and atomic clocks are one and the same. You can’t navigate accurately without precise time.
Weems Legacy
Now, to bring this full circle, I first heard about the proposed Smithsonian Time Exhibit about two years ago from a friend and professional colleague, James Doherty, Captain, USCG retired. Jim, who once served as the Commander of the United States Coast Guard Navigation Center, is a past President of ION (Institute of Navigation), one of the few U.S. members of the Royal Institute of Navigation (RIN) in London, England, and now serves as the Chairman of the newly created Military Division at ION. And for full disclosure purposes, I must say that I have been a proud member of ION for more than 30 years.
Jim, who was serving on a Smithsonian panel as a subject-matter expert on navigation, told me that the Smithsonian had the idea for the time exhibit, but was looking for support, and the first organization to pledge support was indeed ION. The Institute of Navigation certainly does not have the deep pockets of Northrop and Exelis or the other major sponsors, but they are very serious about navigation and they are always looking for ways to promote their vision. This was the perfect opportunity.
And just in case you were wondering, the legacy that Captain, U.S. Navy, V.H. Weems left the world is a method of celestial navigation that persisted as the primary means, especially in the U.S. military and military forces around the world, for more than 60 years and is still the only reliable means of navigation available to us when everything else goes away. For with the Weems Method, as long as you have a sextant and an accurate clock, you can navigate anywhere.
Oh, and one other legacy: Captain V.H. Weems was the founder of the Institute of Navigation, which is the leading society devoted to the advancement of navigation in the world today. And for you trivia fans, the ION predates the RIN by two years.
Sequestration and Cancellations
Normally I would wrap it up here and say grab your sextant and happy navigating, but just as I wrap this up I have been told by informed sources at SMC and AFCEA that the GPS Partnership Council scheduled for May this year has been postponed. Sources at ION tell me that ION/JNC in Orlando has been cancelled for this year due to the restrictions on travel for U.S. government and military officials. In other words, more victims of sequestration and a Congress that can’t make the decisions we elect and pay them to make.
At ION they have always had the mantra, do it right or don’t bother doing it at all, and this year the travel restrictions are just too great. Certainly Jim Doherty and I were in the process of setting up another great Warrior Panel for the classified day, but that will have to wait for another time. However, I am assured by ION Executive Director Lisa Beaty that the ION GNSS meeting from September 16-20 at the Nashville Convention Center is definitely a go, so I look forward to seeing everyone there. Stop by the GPS World booth and say hello. Plus, I hope to see many of you at the 29th Annual National Space Symposium in Colorado Springs from April 8-11, 2013.
Until then, Happy Navigating – blow the dust off your sextant and give it a shot.
The Institute of Navigation (ION) Military Division has canceled this year’s Joint Navigation Conference (JNC), which was scheduled to take place in Orlando, Florida, June 10-13.
“This decision has not been taken lightly but due to the DOD’s recent policies detailing actions to be taken to prepare for drastic budget cuts, the curtailment of travel, fallout from a scandal with GSA conferences this past year, the current sequestration, and possible furloughs for federal employees, it is no longer possible for ION to ensure the JNC will be able to maintain a high-quality technical program and sufficient networking opportunities that makes the JNC so valuable to DOD/DHS employees and their supporting organizations,” wrote Lisa Beaty, ION executive director, in a statement.
“While it is impossible for us to predict the duration of the current federal climate, the ION is committed to keeping the Institute on a sure and steady track,” Beaty wrote. The 2014 JNC is still scheduled for June 16-19, 2014, at the Renaissance Orlando at SeaWorld, Orlando, Florida, with the classified session and warfighter panel being held at Shades of Green at Walt Disney World Resort on June 19.
All JNC 2013 registered attendees, exhibitors, and sponsors will receive a full refund of fees paid. Registrants and exhibitors are reminded that they are responsible for cancelling their own hotel reservations, and other travel-related arrangements. To cancel reservations at the Renaissance Orlando at SeaWorld, call 1-407-351-5555 or 1-800-327-6677, or cancel your reservation online.
New technology from product development firm Cambridge Consultants can accurately detect someone’s location indoors when GPS drops out. A number of sensors and a custom algorithm determine the location, with an accuracy of within approximately 1 percent of the distance traveled.
The technology uses low-power, low-cost sensors and the device concept is small enough to clip on a belt. It also doesn’t need any existing internal infrastructure.
“We are excited about the many possibilities this cutting-edge technology opens up and the impact it can have in many different situations,” said Geoff Smithson, technology director, sensing systems, at Cambridge Consultants. “It could be used to help locate firefighters in smoke-filled buildings, for example, or to pinpoint the closest doctor in a hospital during an emergency — or to track offenders during home curfews. We are just starting to see the potential of this approach and the diverse demand for this type of low-energy, highly accurate system.”
Indoor tracking systems, which process data from one or more sources of location information to estimate where a person or object is located, are not new. But they often rely on RF signals from Wi-Fi access points or custom infrastructure, poor-quality GPS signals or expensive, high-quality sensors. The availability of low-cost smartphone components — including accelerometers, gyroscopes, magnetometers and pressure sensors — has enabled a new generation of location devices and applications, when combined with a tailored Bayesian algorithm to fuse the information.
The new technology platform can be embedded in an existing design or operate as a stand-alone unit, with options to compute the location locally or transmit the information to a remote system that can process the data before visualizing it on a smartphone app.
“Our biggest challenges were developing an algorithm which optimally combines the data from GPS and the other sensors, and overcoming the issues of using such low-cost sensors in a system without any absolute location reference,” said Smithson.
Cambridge Consultants specializes in developing low-cost, low-power connected devices for clients with a team of experts with sensing, wireless and software engineering expertise. The latest technology builds on the company’s tracking and location systems experience in a variety of market sectors ranging from defense and security to consumer, industrial, and oil and gas.
Swedish-based Handheld, maker of mobile computers designed for extreme environments, has integrated u-blox’ GPS modules in four of its most popular products: the Algiz 7 and Algiz 10X tablets, Algiz XRW notebook, and Nautiz X1 smartphone. These tough computers are designed for and used in demanding environments such as polar expeditions, marine exploration, and rescue operations, as well as outdoor industrial applications such as utility maintenance and logistics. The devices depend on u‑blox’ LEA, NEO, and AMY families of compact, high-performance GPS modules to provide reliable navigation and positioning in challenging conditions.
“Handheld is proud to have achieved an industry-leading position for dependable, ruggedized mobile computers that can be trusted to work in the most hostile environments” said Jerker Hellström, CEO Handheld Group, “To achieve this extremely high-level of performance, we only select components with the highest reliability on the market. GPS positioning is one of the most important functionalities of our products. For this mission-critical feature, we chose u-blox.”
Handheld’s lineup of rugged PDAs and mobile computers is specifically developed for use in tough environments in industries such as geomatics, logistics, forestry, public transportation, construction, mining, field service, utilities, maintenance, public safety, military and security.
Every time I see a headline or read an article concerning BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) from a government source, where that source details only the risk associated with BYOD, especially where GPS/PNT (position, navigation and timing) is concerned, I am incredulous. Consider these recent BYOD headlines:
BYOD – Disaster Waiting for Government Networks
BYOD – Bring Your Own Disaster to the Government Enterprise
BYOD – Are the Military Networks Ready?
BYOD – Bring Your Own Destruction
BYOD – A Huge Security Risk?
BYOD – A Smart Choice or a Cyber Disaster?
Historical Perspective
The naiveté of the authors that penned these stories astounds me, as frankly they are out of step with the times by about 2,000 years. BYOD and the military go hand in hand. During Roman times, except for conscripts or slaves, Roman soldiers were expected to furnish their own supplies, their own weapons, their own horses and their own support. Often they brought their own slaves/servants to care for them in camp. In our (U.S.) Revolutionary War, many of the ragtag regiments were formed from state volunteers and local militias who were commanded by officers who, having paid for their commissions, supported the soldiers they brought to the fight, with food and uniforms; many were even expected to bring their own weapons and ammunition. The same applies to our (U.S.) Civil War, the War Between the States or the War of Northern Aggression, as my Southern colleagues are wont to constantly remind me.
Since warfare began, warfighters have supplied their own equipment (BYOD), and today’s warfighters are no different, especially when it comes to personal electronic equipment, even though antiquated DoD (Department of Defense) regulations frown on such behavior. Hopefully you can see where I am going with this, especially as it relates to GPS/PNT user equipment. Unfortunately, DoD regulations also specify our warfighters in all services must utilize the government-supplied GPS equipment known as MUE (Military User Equipment), and even specifies the consequences of not adhering to that inane policy. Consequently, warfighters generally have the GPS MUE readily available if it is embedded, thereby avoiding the horrendous user interface, but they invariably also have their own personal GPS/PNT devices close at hand.
These BYO-GPS-D are, without a doubt, more useful, certainly more user friendly, and actually provide a modicum of situational awareness, with such incredible features as actual moving color maps, annotated roads and rivers, up-to-date geographical features and even voice guided navigation — all features not available on the GPS MUE as a stand-alone unit today. Some PNT devices answer verbal inquiries from their users. Can you say, “Hi Siri, where am I?”
Fast Forward: First Gulf War
Consider the first Gulf War in 1990, which in GPS lore is touted in military aviation circles as the turning point for GPS transitioning from just another en route navigation system to a weapons systems multiplier and situational awareness tool that made believers of even the most jaded fighter pilots and land warriors. Suddenly fighter pilots and weapons systems operators were scoring “shacks” or direct hits on targets, on every sortie. Instead of using four bombs to hit one target, four bombs now equaled a direct hit on four targets — a phenomenal increase in accuracy, with minimal collateral damage, all due to the Global Positioning System.
For land warriors, the famous “left hook” strategy, employed during the midst of a major, once-a-decade sandstorm that placed American warriors behind the Iraqi forces occupying Kuwait, was widely credited with bringing the ground war to a close in just four days, and it could never have been accomplished without GPS. However, the part of this story that often gets misinterpreted is the sudden appearance of BYOD GPS devices during that extremely short duration conflict (August 2, 1990, until February 28, 1991).
Newspapers and military magazines carried numerous pictures of commercial/civil GPS devices taped to military vehicle windshields, windows on ships bridges, in fighter cockpits, inside tanks and fighting vehicles — and of course carried by individual warfighters, despite regulations to the contrary.
I Don’t Know Where It Came From Sir…It Just Magically Appeared!
What we tend to overlook is that these BYOD or personal PNT devices, despite warfighter protestations to the contrary (“Methinks thou dost protest too much…”) did not just appear overnight. Warfighters carried them in flight-suit pockets and briefcases for years. They saw minimal use, and then the U.S. decided to fight a war on and over a featureless desert. And I can confirm first-hand that navigating over a featureless desert without any external navigation aids is particularly troublesome. No landmarks, no ground-based navigation aids, no radar returns, and frequent sandstorms that obscure everything in sight and radically change the landscape make life a real challenge for warfighters prosecuting a war. Navigation in this environment is challenging at the best of times; add the fog of war and it becomes a nightmare. General William Tecumseh Sherman said “War is hell!” and while it can certainly never be a walk in the park, add GPS and precise navigation along with precision targeting/bombing becomes infinitely doable.
Personal Experience
I sat in my first aircraft cockpit and took my first flight more than 50 years ago. Contrary to popular belief, neither Orville or Wilbur Wright were my first flight instructors, just close friends, but I did learn a great deal from Charles Lindberg. Seriously, I can tell you that in the “good ol’ days” an inordinate amount of airborne time was spent determining your position/location, airspeed, altitude and heading to your destination or next waypoint, often with wildly varying degrees of accuracy. Ask any aviator hailing from that era and they will tell you we really had to work at it. It was a constant struggle where IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) frequently equated to “I Fly Roads.” Certainly it was gratifying when it all worked out, but also extremely frustrating when it did not, and there was no alternative.
Nature of the Beast
Fighter pilots by nature tend to be vain and querulous creatures that by definition are the best at what they do. Did you ever meet one who wasn’t? Just ask them and they will be quick to tell you they are the best fighter pilot in the world, every one of them. And they hate to ask for directions or admit they are lost, male and female alike, hence the old adage, “You can always tell a fighter pilot, but you can’t tell them much.” Indeed, just ask any fighter pilot worth their wings and they will invoke the Daniel Boone response when asked about being lost. When asked if he had ever been lost, that great woodsman, statesman and explorer replied, “Lost? No I can truly say that I have never been lost… I was mighty bewildered once for about four days, but never lost.”
Unfortunately pilots and/or navigators don’t have the luxury of pulling over and checking for moss on the south side of trees. But one glance at a GPS device in flight (it does not have to be an aviation-grade receiver) will tell you your current heading, time and desired heading to your next waypoint and final destination, speed along the ground, altitude, and of course current position down to a meter or better. This wonderful device leaves the intrepid aviator with time to concentrate on putting weapons on target, which, if they are also GPS guided, is almost a cinch.
Now you understand why aviators were among the first warfighters to embrace BYO-GPS, and why they seemed to just “pop-up” during the first Gulf war. Today’s ultra modern jets, such as the F-22 and F-35, have built-in GPS/PNT systems with redundant inertial systems, Doppler systems, and of course radars that are all tightly integrated. Some smart weapons even have their own GPS and laser systems on board. But you can bet your next paycheck there is a backup civil/commercial battery-operated BYO-GPS in a flight-suit pocket or helmet bag, just in case, as fighter pilots also have a great sense of self-preservation.
Warfighter GPS Equipment Database
I have personally compiled a “Warfighter GPS Equipment Database” over the last 10 years, since we have been at war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The database is comprised of more than 8000 entries from warfighters from all services, U.S. and allies alike. Only 1 in 40 warfighters utilize issued GPS MUE as a stand-alone handheld device, but every single warfighter (that’s 100 percent, a rare event in statistics) in the database proudly possessed and freely spoke about their own personal BYO-GPS device, with the majority of them being various iterations of a Garmin device, with Trimble devices and iPhones coming in a close second and third; although the iPhone and other smartphones are rapidly gaining ground on all the PNT devices in theater. So the bottom line is when it comes to BYOD, GPS is alive and well and has been for the last 23+ years with no end in sight.
BYOD Here to Stay
While thousands of warfighters have written me to say, “I love my Garmin, Trimble, iPhone, etc.” I do not have a single letter or email saying I love my PLGR or DAGR (precision lightweight and defense advanced GPS receivers or MUE). However, I will and must caveat my BYOD position by stating, as I always do, that while the PLGR and DAGR are, in my opinion, woefully inadequate as handheld PNT devices, they are extremely functional and sometimes the best/only option warfighters currently have as an embedded device, especially in a GPS-denied environment. Anything that improves on the display, battery life and user interface of the current GPS MUE is to be applauded.
So to be clear, I would never advise a warfighter not to utilize the GPS MUE issued to them, but would certainly encourage them to have a backup or two. Fortunately that encouragement is totally superfluous as I have yet to meet a warfighter who did not have at least one civil/commercial PNT receiver as a backup, even in the cockpit. During a recent visit to a local firefighting C-130 squadron, the navigator utilized the on-board, original equipment MAGR GPS unit, a Trimble unit, Velcroed to the navigation console, and two laptops with different independent GPS capabilities, such as color real-time moving map displays, and the navigator had a BYOD Garmin in his flight suit pocket. QED!
BYOD is here to stay!
Let’s embrace the technology of the 21st century, stop asking if our warfighters, government employees and government contractors should be allowed to use their own PNT, computer and communication devices, and begin incorporating the smartest and best devices in the world into our networks and enterprise infrastructures. For all the hype to the contrary, there really is no alternative.
Until next time, don’t forget to BYOD and happy navigating!
