GPS World

Tag: GPS III

  • The System: OCX, GPS III Show Launch Readiness

    Illustration: Lockheed Martin
    GPS III SATELLITE, artist’s rendering, courtesy Lockheed Martin.

    Raytheon Company and Lockheed Martin successfully completed the first launch readiness exercise for the U.S. Air Force’s next-generation GPS III satellites. The exercise is a key milestone demonstrating the team remains on schedule to achieve launch availability in 2014, the companies said.

    The Lockheed Martin-built GPS III satellites and the Raytheon-developed next generation GPS operational control system, known as OCX, are critical elements of the U.S. Air Force’s effort to affordably replace aging GPS satellites while improving capability to meet the evolving demands of military, commercial and civilian users worldwide. This is the first space and ground enterprise successfully building the ground control and space vehicles by two independent prime contractors.

    The launch readiness exercise, completed over a three-day period by mission operations personnel, validated the basic satellite command and control functions, tested the software and hardware interfaces and demonstrated basic on-console procedures required for space vehicle contacts during the launch and early orbit mission.  The event sets the stage for the first GPS III satellite’s mission readiness timeline, which includes five short-duration exercises and six, five-day mission rehearsals leading up tolaunch.

    To achieve first launch availability in the 2014 timeframe, the U.S. Air Force awarded Lockheed Martin and Raytheon contracts in January of this year to provide a Launch and Checkout Capability (LCC) for launch and early on-orbit testing of all GPS III satellites.  At the heart of the LCC is Raytheon’s Launch and Checkout System that will provide satellite command and control capability, an integral part of OCX’s  support of the first GPS III launch.

    Rockets on the Pad

    As this magazine goes to press on September 17, several GNSS satellite launches are pending, and may have already occurred by the time you read this. Launch dates this fall for GNSS satellites in the coming season are as follows, according to various, not always official, sources. Compilation courtesy of CANSPACE.

    Compass M2 and M5. September 18, 18:12 UTC (speculative).

    GSAT-10. Carrying a satellite-based augmentation system (SBAS) transponder for  the  GPS-aided geo-augmented navigation system (GAGAN), a planned implementation of a regional SBAS by the Indian government: September 21.

    Compass G6. No earlier than October 1.

    GPS IIF-3. October 4. Launch window: 12:10-12:29 UTC.

    Galileo IOV FM3 and FM4. October 10, 18:31 UTC.

    Luch-5B. For the Russian SBAS. Originally scheduled for October 15, launch has slipped to no earlier than November 1 due to an issue with the Briz-M upper stage, which caused the loss of the Telkom-3 and Ekspress-MD2 communication satellites during their launch on August 6.

    GLONASS-K1 (block K2s). November 14.

    Photo: Raoul Kieffer
    The fourth Galileo flight model satellite is unloaded at Cayenne Airport in French Guiana August 17. (ESA/EADS Astrium, Raoul Kieffer)

    JAVAD: Filters Protect GPS L1, L2, L5; GLONASS L1, L2; Galileo L1, L5

    Javad Ashjaee, founder and CEO of JAVAD GNSS, filed a September 7 letter with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) concerning his company’s development of technical possibilities in GNSS filter designs and components. He stated “I hope this will be helpful in establishing realistic guidelines for the characteristics of high-precision GNSS receivers that will be used in critical applications.”

    The letter reads, in part:

    “We have improved our previous L1 filter and have extended the design to include all commercial GNSS bands.”

    “Our filter . . . protects GPS L1, Galileo L1 and GLONASS L1 bands. It brings in all the useful signals intact and rejects out of band signals with the slope of about 12 dB/Mhz. Similarly . . . our filter . . . . protects GPS L2, GPS L5, GLONASS L2 and Galileo L5 and has slope of about 9 dB/Mhz.

    “These filters not only protect GNSS signals against all LightSquared signals (10L, 10H and 10R handsets) but also from all similar signals that may appear near all commercial GNSS bands in the future. We are proud that our filters help allow better usage of these precious bands, in particular for broadband wireless communication that our country desperately needs.

    “These filters apply to wideband high precision GNSS receivers and the cost is even less than earlier conventional filters. The case of narrow-band low precision receivers (e.g. Garmin) is much simpler, as has been demonstrated by GPS receivers in more than 300 million cell phones and mobile devices which are not affected by LightSquared signals. The low precision receivers (L1 C/A code only) require filter slopes 10 times less steep than those presented here and do not necessitate additional costs.”

    Galileo Headquarters Moves to Prague

    On September 6, the European GNSS Agency (GSA) inaugurated its new premises in Prague, Czech Republic. Previously headquartered in Brussels, the headquarters of the Galileo program moved its seat to Prague this summer, as agreed by the EU heads of state and government in December 2010.
    Galileo is expected to be partly operational by the end of 2014. Two in-orbit validation (IOV) satellites will be launched in October, bringing the total in space to four, sufficient for initial check-outs.  Beginning in 2013, four more Galileo satellites will be launched every six months until the network of 30 is completed in 2020.

    GSA ensures security of satellites and prepares ground for new GNSS products. The agency is responsible for a number of implementation tasks for the European Satellite Navigation programmes Galileo and  the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service (EGNOS), which are managed by the European Commission. Its two main tasks are:

    • Security accreditation of satellites, launchers, and sites, and the operation of the Galileo Security Monitoring Centre, and
    • Market development for the European satellite navigation systems, such as new products and services possible using Internet access to satellite navigation data, among others.

    Future Role. A European Commission (EC) proposal for revising the GNSS Regulation foresees that operational responsibility for the GNSS programmes will be gradually transferred from the EC to the GSA over the next multi-annual financial framework (2014-2020). This represents a reversal of an earlier move, or a restoration of a previous state; after delays and budget disputes with manufacturers during the tentative public-private partnership (PPP) phase, the European Commission took direct control of the Galileo program, effectively sidelining the GSA.

    The transfer of responsibility will start with EGNOS in 2014, and already a number of preparatory tasks have been allocated to the GSA, including the procurement for the future operations of EGNOS.

    To carry out these new functions, the GSA’s staff is expected to increase from about 60 today to more than 180 by the end of next financial framework in 2020.

    Budget. The GSA has an annual budget of about €12.75 million ($16.75 million) in 2012, plus €34.4 million ($45 million) for exploitation activities.
    According to European Commission calculations, a total budget of € 7 billion ($9.2 billion) is necessary to complete the deployment phase of the Galileo programmes and finance the exploitation phase of the GNSS programmes over the 2014-2020 period.

    Compass Energizes China’s Economy

    China’s Beidou/Compass system will spur the country’s economic development in the satellite-navigation industry, geoinformation, and location-based services, according to an article in China Daily. China’s civil navigation providers are likely to experience rapid growth during the 12th Five-Year Plan (2011-15) period.

    The deputy director-general of the National Administration of Surveying, Mapping and Geoinformation said the government is likely to introduce policies to help the geoinformation industry grow.

    “In addition, the nation’s self-developed satellite navigation network, the Beidou Navigation System, will come into commercial use by the end of this year, a move that may stimulate the development of the geoinformation industry in China.”

    Aviation NextGen May Show Slow ROI

    An inspector from the U.S. Department of Transportation testified in Congress that benefits from the GPS-based air traffic control system Next Gen may take longer to realize than had been expected. Although the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has improved its management of the modernization program, years of delays and cost over-runs have left airlines dragging their feet in turn over multibillion-dollar equipment upgrades needed for the new system to work.

    The inspector stated the investment will be worth the taxpayer cost in the long run, and will produce significant safety and scheduling benefits. U.S. air travel is expected to nearly double over the next two decades, bringing an unbearable burden onto the current air traffic control system, if not significantly upgraded.

    By 2020, the new system is expected to reduce delays by 38 percent compared with the current system; airlines, passengers, and taxpayers are estimated tosave $24 billion.

    The FAA plans to spend $2.4 billion over the next five years on a collection of six programs evolving from an outdated, radar-based system to one that uses GPS and telecommunications advances for precision tracking, making routes more direct, eliminating many weather delays, and enabling planes to fly safely at closer distances. Once fully in place, the modernization program will save 1.4 billion gallons of fuel and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 14 million metric tons, the FAA says.

    However, planes must be equipped with new equipment at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars per aircraft. NextGen doesn’t start yielding full benefits until a critical mass of planes have the new technology.

  • The System: British Patent Filings Threaten GPS III and Galileo Progress

    Two British technologists backed by the U.K. Ministry of Defense have filed patents on the future interoperable GPS and Galileo signal designs that severely disrupt modernization plans for both systems and suddenly, unexpectedly place receiver manufacturers in a highly uncertain and unfavorable situation. Some of the patents have been granted in the U.K. and in Europe, and applications are pending in U.S. patent court, with a ruling expected at any time.

    Companies in the United States and outside the country are being approached and asked to pay royalties, on the basis of the patent filings, for use of the European E1 Open Service signal and the modernized GPS L1C signal. Should such initiatives prevail, costs would presumably be passed along to end users of GPS and Galileo — the same taxpayers who have already paid once for the systems.

    The purveyor of the royalty solicitations is Jim Ashe, vice president for sales and intellectual property at Ploughshare Innovations Ltd., Hampshire, UK. The patents, if successfully used to collect fees from satellite manufacturers or receiver manufacturers, would have a chilling effect on the use of the new interoperable signals that all parties have labored so hard, for so long, to design. They could quite possibly lead to a return to a BOC(1,1) structure for these signals, losing the benefits of MBOC.

    “There’s quite an argument going on,” said one person familiar with the controversy. “Some of the methods of arguing have not been too kind.”

    The Background. A great deal of work was accomplished cooperatively between the United States and the European Union (EU) to develop the landmark 2004 signal agreement that emerged from the Galileo Signal Task Force, formalizing cooperation on satellite navigation between the United States and more than two dozen European countries, including the U.K. Part of that agreement concerned a common signal structure (spectrum) for the civilian signals for both the E1 Open Service (OS) signal — the Galileo equivalent of GPS L1 — and the new U.S. GPS L1C signal to be implemented on the GPS III satellites, coming as early as 2015.

    The EU said during that process, in effect, “Even though we have agreed on this, Europe wants to be able to optimize the E1 OS signal beyond the agreement on that civilian signal being a binary offset carrier BOC(1,1) signal.” Both international entities had agreed that would be the waveform or the spectrum of the new signal.

    The Europeans began to evaluate methods of optimizing their signal. They had some designs called composite binary coded symbols (CBCS), a mechanism of putting a higher frequency componenent into the signal structure, and also a version called CBCS*, meaning that they found there was a bias generated by that extra signal, and so they had to invert every other one of its repetitions.

    The signal structure that they were playing with was centered on a plus and a minus 5-MHz component. (Actually five times 1.023, because of the inherent clock of GPS, you can think of it as 1.023 MHz. Everyone in doing compatible or interoperable signals agreed upon that; when reference is made to 5 or 10 MHz, or an even 5 or an even 10, it means that number multiplied by 1.023).

    The Europeans were were putting an additional BOC signal on top of the BOC 1,1, and it would have plus or minus 5 MHz as the centers of those two BOC peaks, and then some kind of waveform to modulate that.

    The United States pushed back against that to some degree, and proposed adoption of the so-called MBOC waveform, in which case the U.S. signal was equally optimized with a concept called time-multiplexed BOC (TMBOC). The Europeans used the CBOC approach. So, very different ways of doing this. In the European way, they transmitted a continuous but very low-power BOC(6,1) term. The U.S approach transmits four BOC(6,1) chips out of every 33 chips of code (see “Future Wave” sidebar).

    A chip in this case means a part of the spreading code, so each signal has its spreading codes, just like the C/A code is a spreading code, meaning a pseudorandom code modulating the carrier. L1C and E1 OS have a pseudorandom spreading code.

    The U.S. approach does not put BOC(6,1) components onto the data; that’s what is commonly called MBOC. The U.S. approach is TMBOC, on the pilot carrier only, not on the data component. The European system is like two separate signals, the BOC(1,1) signal having both pilot and data, and a BOC(6,1) signal having both pilot and data. They’ve put the (6,1) into both data and pilot components.

    Cue the Antagonists. Part of the task force from Europe and the United States considering the future signals’ make-up were Tony Pratt and John Owen, who works for the U.K. Ministry of Defense and whose office sponsored Pratt’s work. The two participated heavily in all these signal discussions. They stated in early meetings they planned to file patents in some areas.

    “Frankly,” states one source, “people should have paid more attention when they said that, and asked ‘What do you mean, and how’s it going to work, etcetera?’ And secondly, there probably should have been a written agreement between parties that nobody will take advantage or patent any of these ideas that we are developing.”

    Pratt and Owen filed a number of patents domestically, in the U.K., and and in the European Union, in 2003 and in 2006, and in other places around the world, such as Japan, Canada, and in the United States as well. Some of the U.K. and European patents have been granted. The first of some of those U.S. patents may be issued in the near future.

    The original patent filings were later amended to include new claims. The new claims were much more specifically oriented toward TMBOC and CBOC, whereas the original claims were more generally oriented toward modulated methods. The claims have been modified over the years; this is fairly standard patent practice.

    As a result, the original 2003 patent doesn’t necessarily read on a particular signal, but its early filing date has precedence. The claims have been updated and modified, and if the patent office issues those, as a true patent, then the new claims apply. Plenty of big patent battles have been fought over just such issues.

    Once the patent is issued, a satellite or receiver  manufacturer must assume that it is valid, and has only two responses to make, other than acquiescing to royalty claims. The manufacturer can either say, if building a product, “No, my product does not infringe, and I will prove that it doesn’t.’” The other choice for manufacturers is to go back into the patent office and sue the patent filer (and grantee) in the patent courts and prove that the patent was invalid in the first place that the patentee should not have been granted it.

    The United States and others were taken off-guard when the U.K. company Ploughshare, which is owned and controlled by a part of the British MoD called Defense Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL), started making claims on manufacturers. The DSTL is similar to the U.S. Defense Advance Research Products Agency (DARPA), which is credited with inventing the Internet. If taxpayer money goes into something new and interesting, it is considered in some circles legitimate to file patents on those and attempt to recover taxpayer money through royalties on that taxpayer investment. That concept is not being challenged. Questions as to whether the patents are legitimate are very much in discussion.

    Ploughshare has contacted companies, saying, “If you use these signals coming from either the European satellites or the U.S. satellites, we will go after companies using these signals.” There are different patents issued, one by the European Patent Office, applying to most of the EU countries, that applies directly to the TMBOC signal, the E1 OS signal, and possibly also to Europe’s E5 signal, which is E5a and E5b; and there is also a patent for GPS III, the L1C signal.

    The Devil. For details on the various patents, see Application 10594128 and Application 12305401. See also European patent specification EP 1 664 827 B1, and International Application WO2007/148081. These are examples; there are other applications as well. It is to be argued in some future court as to how those patents are to be interpreted.

    “If you take the patent that hits TMBOC, and you take the broadest possible interpretation of that patent against receiver companies, it says: if you bring into your antenna and process that signal, whether you use all parts of it or not, for instance if you use the BOC(1,1) and not the BOC(6,1) part — then you infringe the patent. Others argue that if you don’t use both components, you don’t infringe.

    “But the claim is written broadly enough that it would apply to any receiver receiving and processing the signal. Nobody says what processing means. The patent says if you receive and process the TMBOC signal, as defined in the prior claim, you infringe the patent.

    “There is confusion as to whether that will apply or not apply — some people expect that it doesn’t and some people think that it might. That’s up in the air.”

    George Is Getting Upset. Various factions in the United States are upset by and trying to figure out what to do about the impasse. From a government point of view, there are three paths that the U.S. government can follow:

    • Put pressure on the U.K. diplomatically. That would be up to the State Department to put pressure on the EU or the U.K. in particular. The EU and the continental Europeans are equally furious at the British for doing this, as far as parties in the U.S. understand. This can’t be stated as a fact but is widely understood and thought to be the case. The diplomatic approach has its limits, obviously.
    • Go into Europe and fight the patents in European patent court and try to prove them invalid, to invalidate the patents. Companies could do the same thing, go into various courts, whether they be U.S. or European or Japanese, and say: “Our receivers don’t infringe,” and then have to prove that to the court; or say “The whole patent should not have been allowed, and I’ll fight the legitimacy of the patent.”
    • Some believe — and there is controversy and anger on this point — that, just as Galileo’s IOV satellites have the capability to transmit without the BOC(6,1) component, the United States should be able to do that with the GPS III satellites as well. Because if the signal is not there, and if the receivers are therefore not designed to process the signals that are not there, then the patent no longer has any relevance.

    “If we are to turn off the BOC(6,1) term for a period of time until the legal or diplomatic or other approaches worked, then we would be able to turn the BOC(6,10) term back on again, and return to the original agreed MBOC and TMBOC signals. That requires some coordination between the United States and Europe, and it requires some work to make that possible in the GPS III satellites, putting a switch in the GPS III satellites to permit the operators to turn that (6,1)BOC on and off. This is being hotly debated.”

    Some parties object, stating that L1C is too important a signal to mess with, and this proposal runs the risk of slowing down the program, and/or making it more expensive. They believe strongly that the off/on switch is not the best or most far-sighted option: why should the United States be forced to change its signal design due to an illegitimate patent, and in the end wind up with a less capable system?

    It is not publicly known whether the Air Force is or is not looking into that option.

    During the week of June 25 there was Working Group-A meeting in Washington D.C. followed by a plenary meeting between the EU and United States. The patent controversy was presumably discussed in some fashion, but whether formally addressed or lurking in the background is unknown at this time.

    “There is some naivete around this,” said the magazine’s soure. “It’s a serious threat. People think maybe they’ll only go after the high-end receivers, and maybe the royalties won’t be so bad. Ploughshare is trying to lull people into a false sense of security. The impact of this will be great unless it is defeated.”

    Future Wave

    Excerpted from the “Future Wave” article on L1C, GPS World, April 2011:

    “The L1C waveform originally was to have been a pure BOC(1,1) (a 1.023 MHz square wave modulated by a 1.023 MHz spreading code). Negotiations between the U.S. and the European Union (EU) at that time resulted in an agreement that both GPS and Galileo would use a baseline BOC(1,1) signal. However, the EU reserved the right to further optimize their signal within certain bounds. Some of the optimization proposals were known as CBCS and CBCS*. However, in further EU/US discussions it was decided that L1C and the Galileo E1 open service signal should have identically the same spectrum. This was a significant challenge because of different baseline signal structures and existing designs.

    “The breakthrough came when [U.S. representative] John Betz proposed what is called MBOC. The MBOC waveform has 10/11th of its power in BOC(1,1) and 1/11th in BOC(6,1). However, L1C and E1 OS achieve this result in very different ways. The Galileo technique is called CBOC. The GPS technique is called TMBOC. Whereas Galileo has a 50/50 power split between pilot and data and includes the BOC(6,1) component in each, GPS includes the BOC(6,1) waveform only in the pilot component by modulating four of every 33 spreading code chips with a 6 MHz square wave and 31 chips with a 1 MHz square wave. With 75 percent of the power in the pilot, the result is 3/4 x 4/33 or 1/11, as required. It is likely the BOC(6,1) signal component will be ignored by consumer-grade GNSS receivers where a narrow RF bandwidth is preferred. Fortunately that is a loss of only 12 percent (0.56 dB) of the L1C pilot power. However, for commercial and professional grade receivers, the extra waveform transitions (wider Gabor bandwidth) can be used to improve code tracking signal-to-noise ratio, and with certain advanced techniques it should be possible to improve multipath mitigation. This final point depends on careful control or calibration of the transmitted code timing and symmetry.”

    EGNOS and Galileo IOV Satellites Shift Right

    The next EGNOS satellite, originally scheduled for a June 18 launch, now has a rise date of July 7 from Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. The launch was delayed by a problem with a first-stage subsystem on the Proton rocket. SES-5 is also known as Sirius 5, stemming from the development of the Sirius satellite constellation by Nordic Satellite AB, now owned by Luxembourg’s SES.

    The satellite carries a transponder for the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service (EGNOS). The transponder is intended to eventually replace or one of those on the currently used EGNOS satellites (Inmarsat 3-F2 at 15.5 degrees west using PRN 120, Artemis at 21.5 degrees east using PRN124, and Inmarsat-4-F2 at 25 degrees east using PRN 126 and designated for industry tests).

    Unlike the present L1-only EGNOS satellites, SES-5 will have transponders on both L1 and E5 frequencies similar to the Wide Area Augmentation System satellites, which broadcast on L1 and L5.

    SES-5 is to be stationed at 5 degrees east longtiude.

    A second SES satellite with EGNOS transponders is under construction. The SES Astra 5B satellite is scheduled for launch in the second quarter of 2013 and will be positioned at SES Astra’s 31.5 degrees east orbital position.

    Role Switch. On March 22 and 23, Inmarsat-4-F2 at 25 degrees east using PRN126 and Artemis at 21.5 degrees east using PRN124 switched roles. PRN126 became an EGNOS operational signal-in-space satellite, while PRN124 became the test satellite, transmitting message type 0. PRN120 and PRN126 returned to service around 17:00 UTC on Tuesday, June 26.

    According to an EGNOS service announcement dated April 3, the switch was due to the aging state of the Artemis satellite.

    Galileo October Birds. According to a usually reliable source, the launch date for the second set of Galileo IOV satellites, previously announced as September 28, has been pushed back a couple of weeks to October 12.

  • Lockheed Martin Completes Navigation Payload Milestone for GPS III Prototype

    The Lockheed Martin team developing the next generation Global Positioning System III satellites has completed a major integration and test event on the program’s satellite pathfinder, known as the GPS III Non-Flight Satellite Testbed (GNST). The milestone is a key indication that the GPS III team is on track to deliver the first satellite for launch availability in 2014.

    In Lockheed Martin’s new GPS Processing Facility (GPF), engineers successfully powered on the GNST with major elements of its navigation payload to include advanced atomic clocks for improved GPS accuracy, and the mission data unit, the heart of the GPS III navigation payload. The test was completed in advance of integrating the full navigation payload element, which is scheduled for delivery to the GPF this fall.

    The GPS III program will replace aging GPS satellites while improving capability to meet the evolving demands of military, commercial and civilian users worldwide. GPS III satellites are expected to deliver better accuracy and improved anti-jamming power, while enhancing the spacecraft’s design life and adding a new civil signal designed to be interoperable with international global navigation satellite systems.

    Incorporating lessons learned from previous GPS programs, the Air Force initiated a “back-to-basics” acquisition approach for GPS III. The strategy emphasizes early investments in rigorous systems engineering and industry-leading parts standards to significantly reduce risk, improve production predictability, increase mission assurance and lower overall program costs. These investments early in the GPS III program are designed to prevent the types of engineering issues discovered on other programs late in the manufacturing process or even on orbit.

    “The GNST is the cornerstone of the Air Force’s back-to-basics acquisition approach, and this milestone demonstrates that GPS III is on track and the acquisition strategy is working,” said Keoki Jackson, vice president of Lockheed Martin’s Navigation Systems mission area. “The Air Force’s early investment in meticulous parts standards and rigorous systems engineering will significantly reduce per unit production costs and ensure mission success.”

    As production progresses on the first GPS III satellite, the team has already benefited from lessons learned on the GNST. Early efficiencies identified include:

    • 50-80 percent reductions in labor hours and defect rates between similar activities on the GNST and the first space vehicle.
    • Identification of tens of millions of dollars in cost savings for the production satellites based on process improvements recognized during GNST integration and test.

    “As we continue learning lessons on the GNST and move into full scale satellite production, we expect to continually streamline our processes and reduce per unit costs,” Jackson said.

    In 2008, Lockheed Martin was awarded the contract for the design, development, and production of the GPS III Non-Flight Satellite Testbed (GNST) and the first two GPS III satellites, with priced options for up to 10 additional satellites. In early 2012, the Air Force exercised a $238 million option for production of the next two satellites, GPS III space vehicles three and four. The Air Force plans to purchase up to 32 GPS III satellites.

    The GPS III team is led by the Global Positioning Systems Directorate at the U.S. Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center. Lockheed Martin is the GPS III prime contractor with teammates ITT Exelis, General Dynamics, Infinity Systems Engineering, Honeywell, ATK and other subcontractors. Air Force Space Command’s 2nd Space Operations Squadron (2SOPS), based at Schriever Air Force Base, Colo., manages and operates the GPS constellation for both civil and military users.

  • The System: GPS III Endures Bad Press, IIAs an OCX Concern

    GPS III Endures Bad Press, IIAs an OCX Concern

    Reports in daily news media such as the Washington Post and Denver Post that “Lockheed Martin will lose its entire fee of about $70 million to defray an 18 percent cost overrun” on GPS III satellites misconstrue the facts.

    Don Jewell, contributing editor for GPS World, said after informal talks with key Lockheed executives, “This is a good story, but it has been sensationalized.”

    Lockheed Martin’s fee is 5 percent of the target cost, which includes one-time engineering tasks, test equipment, and satellite assembly, according to the Air Force.

    The first GPS III satellite remains on schedule to be available for launch in 2014, Lockheed Martin spokesman Michael Friedman said via email.

    “While we have encountered challenges associated with higher standards for parts testing and first-time technical issues, the program is on firm footing and our cost estimate remains within the original Air Force budget,” Friedman stated, adding that the company doesn’t discuss specifics of fees.

    “In their defense,” Jewell reports, “the program was initially identified as stable with no government change request allowed, to keep it on schedule and budget. The recent budget furor has introduced chaos into the requirements process and contributed significantly to the increased costs.”

    Lockheed Martin is using a full-sized prototype to identify and solve many assembly issues “that would have cost more and presented more risk if they had been discovered later in production,” Lockheed’s Friedman said.

    “We have identified tens of millions of dollars in cost savings for the production satellites and in some cases we are seeing 50 to 80 percent reductions in labor costs,” he added.

    Ground Control to Aged Birds

    By Don Jewell

    One of the long-standing issues for support of IIA vehicles after the future GPS Operational Ground Control Segment’s (OCX’s) ready-to-operate (RTO) date, which should fall in December 2016 at the latest, is what ground command-and-control (C2)system will steer GPS IIA satellites, do navigation uploads, and so on. The issue is that AEP, the current C2 system, will no longer be available once the transition to OCX takes place, and OCX has no requirement to control IIA satellites.

    The OCX program, which struggled early, is now under new program leadership within Raytheon Space Systems, and while Ray Kolibaba, the new OCX program manager, is making great progress, OCX does not need to be burdened with additional requirements at this stage of the program.

    Just how big an issue is GPS IIA C2? Initially the Aerospace projections were that there would only be one or two GPS IIAs left on orbit in 2017, and it was not worth the costs to include the C2 software for the legacy system in the new software code. However, I have long maintained that Aerospace and Space Missile Systems Command (SMC) neglected to count the residual satellites, maintained by Launch, Anomaly, and Disposal Operations (LADO), which might very well actually amount to 3–4 additional IIAs. Added to the two IIAs on orbit, this could amount to six IIA SVs that need to be maintained.

    The solution announced during the week at the National Space Symposium (NSS, April 16–19) by General William Shelton, the four-star chief of Air Force Space Command, is to fund the current LADO operator, Braxton Technologies, to build in this support for the IIAs. This is significant for several reasons: One, of course, is that it solves the IIA C2 issues, it does it now, and at a relatively modest cost, and it utilizes more of the capabilities of the Braxton Technologies’ LADO software. Additionally it provides a true backup capability for assets on orbit that become increasingly valuable as the number of available launch slots for GPS decreases.

    Braxton Technologies initially demonstrated this capability years ago in a lifeboat drill during the transition to AEP, but the navigation upload capability was never maintained for LADO after the successful transition. This is certainly a step in the right direction and provides a simple solution to a vexing problem that has plagued the GPS program for the last several years.

    Dual Launch. I asked General Shelton if he would support an approach that would allow the United States to go to dual launch of GPS III on vehicles 5–6 instead of waiting until 8–9 as planned today. He said the Air Force would certainly support that, and is looking at making it possible with vehicle 7 currently. That will come even sooner if the program advances with glitches.

    I also asked him about the gap between GPS III launch and OCX RTO. The gap seems to be getting wider, not narrower, and he agreed that OCX could probably not move to the left, and GPS III has moved significantly to the left, so this is still an issue that needs to be addressed. There are plans in place, but the recent budget activity has caused some uncertainty.

    Sequestration. On the subject of sequestration — a highly charged Congressional effort to force another $500 billion-plus in additional defense cuts — General Shelton said it would come on top of the approximately $487 billion already cut from programs, and that many space programs might be unsustainable in their current mode if that occurs.

    However, the U.S. Armed Services have been informed by the White House Office of Management and Budget not to make plans for sequestration. So right now, the services and other agencies of the U.S. government have been forbidden to make programmatic decisions based on a possible sequestration. Interesting.

    By the way, attendance at NSS this year surpassed 9,000.

    Galileo Launches Accelerated, First Payload Shipped

    Javier Benedicto, head of the Galileo Project Office for the European Space Agency (ESA), set an aggressive schedule for launching some Galileo satellites as many as four at a time in 2014 and 2015, to meet a target provision date of Galileo initial services in 2014 and full services in 2015. The announcement came at the Munich Summit, March 14.

    The hurry-up to carry 22 satellites into orbit proceeds with dual-satellite launches aboard Russian Soyuz rockets, as was the case for the most recent in-orbit validation (IOV) launch in October 2011. There will be three Soyuz launches in 2013, for a total of six new satellites in orbit, and two Soyuz launches in 2014, adding four more. Then the burden will shift to European rockets from Arianespace, according to a contract signed in February of this year. One Ariane 5 rocket is slated to carry four Galileo satellites aloft in 2014, bringing the projected total of IOV and eventually operational Galileo satellites in space to 16 by the end of 2014. ESA had ealier aired plans for further Soyuz IOV launches in 2012, but the Munich statement did not mention these.

    In 2015, two more Ariane 5 launches will add eight satellites, for a total on orbit of 24, estimated to be sufficient for Galileo full operational capability (FOC).

    In subsequent talks with European satellite manufacturers OHB Systems and Astrium, GPS World contributing editor Don Jewell was told that the future launch schedule is “subject to change.”

    ESA headquarters has made no official announcement of a detailed launch schedule; inquiries regarding the Benedicto remarks were referred to the February contract statement, cited above.

    Payloads. Meanwhile, Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd. (SSTL) delivered the first of 14 FOC satellite payloads to prime contractor OHB System AG, for mechanical integration of the payload with the satellite platform and the beginning of overall vehicle assembly, integration, and testing for what will eventually become the fifth satellite in the Galileo constellation.

    Compass on the Grow

    Discussions in Internet forums indicate that the next BeiDou-2/Compass launch will take place on or about April 28, after this magazine goes to press. The launch purportedly will place two mid-Earth orbit satellites into space: BeiDou M3 and BeiDou M4. Sometime in June, plans call for BeiDou M2 and BeiDou M5 to be launched.

  • GPS III Endures Bad Press

    Reports in daily news media such as the Washington Post and Denver Post that “Lockheed Martin will lose its entire fee of about $70 million to defray an 18 percent cost overrun” on GPS III satellites misconstrue the facts.

    Don Jewell, contributing editor for GPS World, said after informal talks with key Lockheed executives, “This is a good story, but it has been sensationalized.” Lockheed Martin’s fee is 5 percent of the target cost, which includes one-time engineering tasks, test equipment and satellite assembly, according to the Air Force.

    The first GPS III satellite remains on schedule to be available for launch in 2014, Lockheed Martin spokesman Michael Friedman said via e-mail. “While we have encountered challenges associated with higher standards for parts testing and first-time technical issues, the program is on firm footing and our cost estimate remains within the original Air Force budget,” Friedman stated, adding that the company doesn’t discuss specifics of fees.

    “In [Lockheed’s] defense,” Jewell reports, “the program was initially identified as stable with no government change request allowed, to keep it on schedule and budget. The recent budget furor has introduced chaos into the requirements process and contributed significantly to the increased costs.”

    Lockheed Martin is using a full-sized prototype to identify and solve many assembly issues “that would have cost more and presented more risk if they had been discovered later in production,” Lockheed’s Friedman said.

    “We have identified tens of millions of dollars in cost savings for the production satellites and in some cases we are seeing 50 to 80 percent reductions in labor costs,” he added.

  • Lockheed to Lose Fee on GPS III Satellites from Cost Overrun

    The U.S. Air Force says defense contractor Lockheed Martin will lose its entire fee of about $70 million to defray an 18 percent cost overrun on the first of its newly designed GPS III satellites, the Washington Post reported.

    Lockheed had estimated that it would cost $1.5 billion to develop, test and build the first two GPS III satellites, but Air Force spokeswoman Vicki Stein said the cost had risen to $1.62 billion.

    The new GPS III satellites are designed to deliver more accuracy, an anti-jamming capability and a civilian signal that can operate with Europe’s Galileo system.

  • U.S. Air Force Awards Contract to Lockheed Martin for GPS III Launch, Checkout

    The U.S. Air Force has awarded Lockheed Martin a $21.5 million contract to provide a Launch and Checkout Capability (LCC) to command and control all GPS III satellites from launch through early on-orbit testing.

    The LCC, which will be integrated into the Raytheon-developed Next Generation Operational Control System (OCX), will ensure launch availability for the first GPS III satellite in 2014. The LCC includes trained satellite operators and engineering solutions in partnership with OCX to support launch, early orbit operations and checkout of all GPS III satellites before the spacecraft are turned over to Air Force Space Command for operations.

    “Achieving initial launch capability in 2014 is critical to introducing new GPS capabilities on time and will  enable the GPS III program to continue its production pace, maximize efficiencies and reduce long term costs for the GPS enterprise as a whole,” said Colonel Bernard Gruber, director of the U.S. Air Force’s Global Positioning Systems Directorate. “The Launch and Checkout Capability will ensure we can launch in 2014, effectively closing the time gap between GPS III and the Next Generation Operational Control System.”

    The GPS III program will replace aging GPS satellites while improving capability to meet the evolving needs of military, commercial and civilian users worldwide. The satellites will deliver better accuracy and improved anti-jamming power while enhancing the spacecraft’s design life and adding a new civil signal designed to be interoperable with international global navigation satellite systems, according to Lockheed Martin.

    The GPS III team is led by the Global Positioning Systems Directorate at the U.S. Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center. Lockheed Martin is the GPS III prime contractor with teammates ITT Exelis, General Dynamics, Infinity Systems Engineering, Honeywell, ATK and other subcontractors. Air Force Space Command’s 2nd Space Operations Squadron (2SOPS), based at Schriever Air Force Base, Colo., manages and operates the GPS constellation for both civil and military users.

  • Air Force to Respond to GAO Report on GPS

    Global Positioning System experts from Air Force Space Command and the Space and Missile Systems Center will hold a media roundtable teleconference tomorrow, September 24, at 2:30 p.m. Mountain Time (4:30 p.m. Eastern Time) to discuss the recent GAO report titled “Global Positioning System: Challenges in Sustaining and Upgrading Capabilities Persist.” Colonel David Buckman, AFSPC command lead for positioning, navigation and timing, and Colonel Bernard Gruber, commander of the Global Positioning System Wing at Los Angeles Air Force Base, will participate in the teleconference.

    Air Force Space Command, which has responsibility for sustaining and maintaining the Global Positioning System, feels that the GAO report is overly pessimistic and doesn’t adequately acknowledge what AFSPC has done to address constellation sustainment, according to a press release issued from the Air Force, Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado. “The Air Force has created the largest, most accurate constellation, with the greatest capability, in the history of GPS, with 31 operational satellites currently on orbit,” stated the press release. “This is well above the 24 minimum satellites needed for a full constellation and to meet constellation performance standards. Since 1995, GPS has never failed to exceed performance standards.”

    The release continued, “AFSPC is working to mitigate the challenges identified by the GAO through a number of activities, including: applying a ‘back-to-basics’ approach to acquisition, continuing to identify additional ways to maximize the life of our operational satellites, implementing robust mission assurance processes, and transforming our launch enterprise.”

    The first GPS IIF satellite completed on-orbit testing and checkout and was set operational on August 26 as planned, the Air Force said, The GPS IIF program is ready for full rate production and continues to build confidence in its production line.  Through the institution of robust mission assurance processes, AFSPC is confident in the future of the GPS IIF program.

    The follow-on program, GPS IIIA, recently completed critical design review, two months ahead of schedule, the Air Force said. “AFSPC is optimistic that its ‘back-to-basics’ approach, including stable requirements, mature technologies, and more government oversight, will ensure a successful program, providing the GPS IIIA and its ground segment, OCX, within a timeframe that maintains a robust GPS constellation and supports GPS users.”

  • Raytheon Awarded Next-Generation Control Segment Contract (OCX)

    The next-generation GPS ground-control system, known as OCX.
    The next-generation GPS ground-control system, known as OCX.

    Officials from the Space and Missile Systems Center’s Global Positioning Systems Wing announced today the award of the Next-Generation GPS Control Segment (OCX) contract to Raytheon Company, Intelligence and Information Systems, Aurora, Colorado.

    The OCX development contract will be 73 months in duration and with option years for sustainment worth $1,535,147,916. The contract will include development and installation of hardware and software at GPS control stations at Schriever Air Force Base in Colorado and Vandenberg AFB in California, deployment of advanced monitor stations at remote sites, and initial contractor support with sustainment options for five years.

    Defense PNT Editor Don Jewell provides commentary and additional information on the  award.

    OCX will replace the current GPS Operational Control System, maintaining backwards compatibility with the Block IIR and IIR-M constellation, providing command and control of the new GPS IIF and GPS III families of satellites, and enabling new modernized signal capabilities.

    “OCX is urgently needed not only to enable new warfighter capabilities but also to put the new GPS III space vehicles into mission operations,” said Col. Dave Madden, commander, GPSW. “OCX will have a flexible architecture that can rapidly adapt to the changing needs of today’s warfighter and will connect to the Global Information Grid so that warfighters around the globe have immediate access to GPS data and constellation status.”

    “OCX will allow AFSPC to effectively and efficiently plan and control full-spectrum precision position, navigation and timing information for all GPS user communities,” Madden said. “OCX will achieve this vision by implementing an incremental development approach that supports the evolving military operational environment, while enabling civil and international users who are employing GPS in innovative applications like transportation.”

    The Air Force Space Command’s Space and Missile Systems Center, located at Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, is the U.S. Air Force’s center of acquisition excellence for acquiring and developing military space systems including six wings and three groups responsible for GPS, military satellite communications, defense meteorological satellites, space launch and range systems, satellite control network, space-based infrared systems, intercontinental ballistic missile systems, and space situational awareness capabilities.

  • Parkinson Prescribes Remedy for GAO Report Alarm

    Brad Parkinson, the first GPS Program Office Director, chief architect and advocate for GPS, submitted written testimony to Congress on mitigation options for possible GPS brownouts. His presentation comes in reference to the recent GAO report highlighting the risk that the GPS constellation may fall below the minimum level of 24 satellites required for full operational capability.  In his opening, Parkinson states that “GAO correctly points out the possibility that the GPS constellation will be reduced to less than the current number of 30 to 32 satellites.  In fact, it is possible that the constellation will be at a level of less than 24 satellites. I would like to focus on the options that would help reduce this risk.”

    Parkinson chides those who may not have been paying attention over the last two years, at least. “It should be noted that the risk of brownouts has been repeatedly pointed out by the independent review teams,” he states, referencing the the Defense Science Board, the GPS Independent Review Team, and the Pos-Nav Timing Advisory Board, who have all stated all that “30 satellites is the correct number.” He points out that the European Galileo program and the Chinese Compass system have also arrived at that number.

    “Although brownouts would only be ‘officially’ declared at levels below 24, anything below the current level of 30 satellites is a cause for concern. The potential economic impact if the number were below 24 may be quite serious.”

    To rectify the situation, Parkinson first gives a history lesson. The first GPS satellite went from contract award to launch in 44 months. “The keys to success were a streamlined approval chain (all the way up the OSD chain), severe restrictions on any contract changes, and an integrated product team.” He believes that GPS IIIA can achieve the same — given the same playing conditions.

    Spartan. He does throw in one twist not currently in the plans: “To develop a simplified GPS IIIA based design, Spartan satellite (IIIS) that would not include the extra payloads, and, once designed, could be built quickly and launched into space with two satellites on a booster.  This would be done in parallel with the current program.”

    Parkinson appears to advocate complete abandonment of the IIF line. “The reason is simply that the satellite design is old and relies on parts that are no longer available.  In addition, the satellite, while providing the older signals, does not meet current requirements.”

    He closes with a final admonition. “Above all, the senior decision making chain has to become a part of the solution. This means that they do everything in their power to help the program office achieve the needed schedule.”

    Click here for the full Powerpoint file of Brad Parkinson’s presentation, including detailed notes.

    Footage of live testimony given at the Congressional hearing is also online.

     

  • Lockheed Martin GPS III Team on Schedule in Design Review Stage

    The Lockheed Martin team developing GPS III, the next-generation GPS spacecraft, is progressing on-schedule, achieving key milestones in the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) phase with the U.S. Air Force, according to Lockheed Martin.

    GPS III will improve position, navigation and timing services and provide advanced anti-jam capabilities yielding superior system security, accuracy and reliability. The first block of the new generation satellites, known as GPS IIIA, will deliver significant enhancements over current GPS space vehicles, including a new international civil signal (L1C), and increased M-Code anti-jam power with full earth coverage for military users.

    GPS IIIA also incorporates an aggressive capability insertion program that lowers technology and integration risks associated with the capabilities planned for future GPS III satellites. The capability insertion program will ensure a graceful growth path, minimizing re-design of the GPS IIIA satellites that are necessary to reach the full set of GPS III warfighter capabilities in future increments.

    “The joint government-industry team is off to a robust start validating our requirements for this important program,” said Lt. Col. Donald Frew, the U.S. Air Force GPS III program manager. “Our back-to-basics approach in the execution of GPS III is already yielding excellent results and we look forward to achieving a successful segment-level review in May.”

    Lockheed Martin Space Systems (Newtown, Pennsylvania), along with industry partners ITT (Clifton, New Jersey) and General Dynamics (Gilbert, Arizona), have successfully completed 19 out of 71 PDRs for key GPS III spacecraft subsystems and assemblies. These include L-Band transmitters, antennas, solar arrays, power regulation unit, all attitude control assemblies, as well as the Tracking Telemetry and Command (TT&C) subsystem and all TT&C assemblies. This effort will culminate in an overall GPS III Segment PDR in May to ensure the preliminary design meets warfighter and civil requirements prior to advancing into the Critical Design Review phase.

    “Our progress in the preliminary design review stage is the result of an integrated government-industry team focused on achieving operational excellence and mission success,” said Dave Podlesney, Lockheed Martin’s GPS III program director. “We look forward to completing a comprehensive and efficient PDR phase to ensure a seamless transition to the critical design review phase for the vitally important program.”

    The team is working under a $1.4 billion Development and Production contract awarded in May 2008 by the Global Positioning Systems Wing, Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, to produce the first two GPS IIIA satellites, with first launch projected for 2014. The contract also includes options for up to 10 additional spacecraft.

    The GPS constellation provides critical situational awareness and precision weapon guidance for the military and supports a wide range of civil, scientific and commercial functions — from air traffic control to the Internet — with precision location and timing information. Air Force Space Command’s 2nd Space Operations Squadron (2SOPS), based at Schriever Air Force Base, Colorado, manages and operates the GPS constellation for both civil and military users.

  • Lockheed Gets the Nod for GPS III

    The U.S. Air Force finally made it official and confirmed the rumor mill: Lockheed Martin has beat out rival satellite contractor Boeing for the contract to build the first eight GPS III satellites.

    Secretary of the Air Force Michael Wynne and the Global Positioning Systems Wing, Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, Calif. made the announcement regarding the GPS III development and production contract late Thursday, May 15. In retrospect it was not exactly a well-kept secret; rumors had swirled for at least a month if not longer that Lockheed would get the nod, and two days earlier on May 13 the Wall Street Journal reported as fact that Lockheed had won, citing unnamed sources.

    Under the $1.4 billion contract, the team of Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co., ITT Corp., and General Dynamics will produce eight GPS IIIA satellites, with the first launch projected for 2014, Lockheed said. The development contract will result in approximately 500 new jobs for Lockheed Martin.

    Eight GPS IIIB and 16 GPS IIIC satellites are planned for later increments, with each increment including additional capabilities based on technical maturity. Taken as a whole, all of the GPS III contracts could be worth more than approximately $3.5 billion. When fully deployed, the GPS III constellation will feature a cross-linked command and control architecture, allowing the entire GPS constellation to be updated simultaneously from a single ground station, according to Lockheed. Additionally, a new spot beam capability for enhanced military (M-Code) coverage and increased resistance to hostile jamming, as well as new civilian signals, will be incorporated.

    Lockheed Martin of course isn’t new to the GPS program; it designed and built 21 GPS IIR satellites for the Air Force and subsequently modernized eight of those spacecraft, designated GPS IIR-M. For GPS III, Lockheed Martin’s program management and spacecraft development effort will occur at its facilities in Newtown, Penn., with final assembly, integration and test located in Denver, according to the company. Its Sunnyvale, Calif., operations will provide various spacecraft components and a launch support team will be based at Cape Canaveral, Fla. Lockheed Martin’s flight-proven A2100 bus will serve as the GPS III spacecraft platform.

    ITT, based in Clifton, N.J. will provide the navigation payload, and General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems, Gilbert, Ariz., will provide the Network Communications Element (NCE) which includes the UHF Crosslink and Tracking Telemetry & Command (TT&C) subsystems.