By Glen Gibbons
The Global Positioning System has provided more than a few ironies in its relatively short existence: A system so accurate that, until last year, government policy required operators to degrade the quality of the open C/A-code signal. A navigation instrument more accurate than the maps across which navigators plotted their courses. Early GPS-based car guidance systems that displayed vehicle location in the middle of buildings or lakes.
But, as with so many other aspects of daily life, what may have seemed funny before September 11 is no longer a laughing matter..
The need for a better correspondence of location information is underscored by the urgency being given to the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC’s) five-year-old mandate for enhanced 911 (E911) services. E911 provides mobile telephone users with the same automatic location information (ALI) of emergency calls now en-joyed by users of wireline phones at fixed sites. The benefits of ALI for getting police, firefighters, and ambulances to an emergency quickly are obvious..
The first phase of E911 implementation — identifying the nearest cell site from which a call comes — only covers less than half of the U.S. population. Implementation of Phase II, which requires much more accurate real-time positioning, was scheduled to begin October 1. Last month, however, the FCC granted extensions to five national wireless carriers for initiating their Phase II plans. The agency still expects carriers to provide all mobile phone users with E911 coverage by the end of 2005..
Three wireless carriers will employ handset-based assisted-GPS techniques in providing ALI that must be twice as accurate (50 meters versus 100 meters) as the “network-based” positioning that the other carriers have selected. (This should prove interesting in the marketplace. Because the E911 capability imposes no direct cost on customers, why would consumers choose non-GPS equipment and carriers offering substantially less accurate service?).
Little of the E911 delay stems from unavailability of GPS technology. Upgrading software at switching servers is the primary cause for postponements sought for handset-based systems. Even with the lower accuracy standards, however, carriers with network-based solutions pleaded for more time to get their positioning technology to work..
After the communications and positioning kinks are worked out of the E911 systems, public safety and commercial location-based service providers will still face an operational dilemma. That is the mismatch between positioning techniques and mapbases and differences among maps discussed earlier. Cartographers have long understood that variations among coordinate systems and datums can make the same latitude/longitude mean different things to different people. But until GPS came along, navigation and tracking techniques were so much cruder that such cartographic variations disappeared inside the error ellipse of the positioning systems..
Under Phase II, emergency call centers (public safety answering points or PSAPs, in FCC parlance), public safety agencies, and E911 callers need to be on the same page. Use of proprietary mapbases with incompatible grid designs in either paper or electronic format is a recipe for disaster. It will create coverage ambiguities near PSAP boundaries (Which agency should handle the call?) and lead rescuers tens or even hundreds of meters away from injured or imperiled callers. Yet a distinctive reference grid seems like a much less important proprietary feature for competing map vendors than the other information and cartographic design built into their products..
The Public X-Y Mapping Project has proposed one solution to this mishmash of maps: adoption of a U.S. National Grid (USNG) for Spatial Addressing. The USNG would effectively match up with the Military Grid Reference System (MGRS), taking advantage of that public domain systemyy?s use of the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) grid. MGRS is one of the most common datums residing within GPS receivers and could be made the default mode for E911 calls, according to Jules McNeff, one of the mapping project’s principals and a well-known GPS advocate.
Agreement between civilian and military mapping standards in these days of homeland security concerns probably wouldn’t be a bad idea. And the benefits, of course, would carry over into the commercial realm of value-added location-based services, too..
The interagency Federal Geographic Data Committee’s standards working group recently recommended adoption of USNG as a preferred national standard. “Effective implementation of USNG on maps and in GPS receivers is the single most important thing [that we] can do to improve emergency response operations nationwide almost immediately,” says McNeff. Readers interested in exploring the USNG proposal can find more details on-line at and.
Whether it’s USNG or another universal reference system, GPS manufacturers, public safety agencies, commercial service providers, mapmakers, and the general public have a common interest in achieving a GPS-friendly national spatial standard.