Tag: GSS Monthly

Following my column last week about technology changing the future of automobile travel, resulting in safer travel, I received an e-mail from a software safety engineer. I’m sure some of you, or maybe many, share his view.

Pardon my cynicism, Erik:

But as a software safety engineer and one who has experienced the “tunnel vision” that arises when driving a car containing all the high-tech gadgetry modern autos have to offer, and…… having a boss that experienced a “runaway” Mercedes due to a computer failure (fortunately nobody was hurt), and…. having followed the Air France Airbus 340 that crashed in the Atlantic Ocean due to a confused computer, pardon me if I don’t share your enthusiasm. Yes, we all love high-tech gadgets but, personally, most people I know don’t want to have to read a 200-page book to figure out how to operate them and can never remember how to operate the lesser used features after a short hiatus. What you are talking about is probably going to be operating in background with little operator intervention, but I get weary [sic] of safety features controlled by software that cannot be disabled by the operator, and we are moving more in that direction. The other thing that bugs me is this Trans Core Gadget for infrastructure-less tolling. I’m all for easier toll paying but, these folks who invent things that ultimately allow big brother (state, local, federal governments) to poke their noses into my business (to see how fast I go and where I go and, ultimately, use that information to conjure up more “safety” laws telling me how, when, where to drive and, confiscating my money when I don’t drive the way the control freaks and politicians want) REALLY IRRITATE ME!  Please thank Trans Core for developing yet another Orwellian black box, and ask them if they could possibly develop something useful that does NOT promote more government intrusion into our lives next time!

True, I do ooze a bit of enthusiasm when seeing how technology can make our lives more efficient. That’s how I roll. But, I do see the points that he makes. I think it’s important to note that on the vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications demonstration that I took part in, it was all about situational awareness without taking any control from the driver. For example. if there is a vehicle in your blind spot, an indicator will illuminate if you activate your turn signal to change lanes in that direction. In another example, if you’re approaching an intersection and the V2V communications senses a vehicle approaching the intersection at such a speed that it’s unable to stop safely, an alarm will sound that gives you a warning. In still another example, one vehicle had an LCD panel on the dashboard that showed potential accidents. Take a look at the Youtube video I shot from the back seat of a car equipped with V2V communications at the ITS World 2011 conference in Orlando, Florida. It’s all about warning the driver of a potential collision, not taking control of the vehicle.

~8:13 minute video I shot from the back seat of a test car (outfitted with V2V communications) driven by a professional driver. You can see the indicator on the side mirrior when there’s a vehicle in the blind spot. You can also make out (sort of) the graphic LCD on the center-top of the dashboard showing the location of vehicles around ours. 

Regarding the smart car I wrote about last week that automatically comes to you when you press a button on the remote, that’s more futuristic. Of course, when you start talking about unmanned vehicles moving around, it better be a fool-proof system with back-ups upon back-ups. But with high-speed laser range-finders and other sensors, it’s possible to have multiple back-ups. I agree, however, that this technology must mature a lot before it is implemented.

Some other photos of the intelligent vehicle demonstration at the Disney World Speedway.

Walt Disney World Speedway is no longer used for racing

One of the “connected vehicles”

The demonstrations were conducted using professional drivers

Big Brother

Ah, yes, I guess I’m a bit more of an optimist. I’m willing to give a little to big brother to reap the benefits of spending less time at the toll booth. That’s just me. I’m of the same opinion when it comes to consumer LBS (location-based services) applications on my smart phone. There’s definitely a risk to using them, but for me there’s enough significant upside that it’s worth the risk. I’m not giving away access to my bank account, but I’m willing to risk giving up my location to my “personal network” in order to benefit from it.

I wrote quite a bit about location privacy quite a few months ago. You may want to take a look at the one I wrote entitled Location Privacy is Heating Up.

During various presentations over the years, I’ve mentioned how precision GPS is going to change the future of automobile transportation and that collisions will eventually be a something of the past. The ITS (Intelligent Transportation System) World Congress, held in Orlando, Florida, October 16-20, gives one a glimpse of the future.

BMW, Toyota, Honda on one side; Garmin and TomTom on the other.

The goal?

Making automobile travel safer and more efficient. The following photos I shot in the BMW booth begin to describe what I mean.

BMW’s Lane Departure Technology

BMW’s Lateral Collision Avoidance Technology

Following is a 30-second Youtube video showing a demonstration of BMW’s lateral collision avoidance technology.

On the in-dash navigation systems, Garmin and TomTom are trying to hold their own by forming relationships with carmakers.

Garmin “in-dash” Connected Nav Unit Suzuki Trip

TomTom “in-dash” Connected Nav Unit Renault

“Connected” is the name of the game and where the research effort is being spent. I don’t mean connected as in internet-connected, but connection between vehicles with a Wi-Fi-like wireless technology called Dedicated Short-Range Communications (DRSC). In 1999, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) allocated 75 MHz of spectrum in the 5.9 GHz band specifically for this purpose, intelligent transportation systems (ITS). Europe allocated 30 MHz of spectrum in the same band for ITS.

I attended the connected vehicle demonstration that was conducted at the Walt Disney World Speedway. It was a fantastic demonstration of connected vehicle technology that really demonstrated how much more safe driving is going to be in the future. The situational awareness was amazing. We could “see” when a car was in our blind spot. We got a warning if a car was stopped in the distance in front of us that was ahead of the car directly in front of us. The system would warn you if you try to pass and it detected an oncoming car. At an intersection, it warned us of a car approaching the intersection at a rate of speed where it couldn’t stop. It’s called Intersection Movement Assist (IMA) technology.

I shot several videos during the demonstration. Following is one of a demonstration of the IMA technology.

Another hot topic at ITS that was unrelated to vehicle safety, in a way, was infrastructureless tolling. Where I’m from, we don’t have any road toll booths. My wife is from Chicago. I HATE the toll booths in Chicago. Orlando and Houston, two other places I traveled during this trip, also have road tolls. Let me be clear, I’m not against user fees for roads. I think users should pay to use roads. However, toll booths are a hazard and a waste of money because of their high overhead. There are many infrastructure-less tolling systems in use today, especially in Europe. During the conference, TransCore introduced a small device that you plug into the OBD port on your car (the “check engine” plug underneath your dashboard). This device supports automatic tolling based on GPS/GNSS technology. It has lower infrastructure costs than even SunPass or iPass or whatever radio device you buy for the system you use. Since it uses GPS/GNSS technology, it doesn’t need an RF-ID reader on the tollway. It needs nothing that you would see on the road unless the transportation department wanted to post signage to make you aware. Cool stuff.

More later on this exciting topic…

This week, I’m pleased to present to you an essay by Earl F. Burkholder, educator, professional land surveyor and professional engineer. Earl and I have been sharing thoughts since we had a chance to sit down and talk at the 2010 ACSM/GITA annual meeting in Phoenix, AZ.

By way of background, Earl is a surveying engineering educator who retired in July 2010. Licensed both as a professional engineer and as a professional surveyor, his career includes five years working for an international engineering firm, 13 years teaching at Oregon’s Institute of Technology, 12 years at New Mexico State University, and being self-employed for five years during which time he incorporated Global COGO, Inc. to promote use of 3-D digital spatial data via the global spatial data model (GSDM). He wrote a book, “The 3-D Global Spatial Data Model: Foundation of the Spatial Data Infrastructure” which was published by CRC Press in April 2008.

His education includes a BSCE from the University of Michigan, a MSCE from Purdue University, and sabbatical study at the University of Maine, Orono. He served two 4-year (non-consecutive) terms as Editor of the ASCE Journal of Surveying Engineering and has been involved in the ABET accreditation process since the early 1990s. He was Chair of the ABET Related Accreditation Commission (now known as the Applied Science Accreditation Commission) in 2000-2001. He is currently Secretary of the ASCE Geomatics Division (GMD) Executive Committee and will become Chair of the GMD on October 1, 2011.

Is Education Failing Society?

Our lives are enriched to the extent we understand the reasons for and the consequences of our decisions.  My assumption has long been that education is the foundation upon which we build that understanding.  Listening to the recent ongoing debate of LightSquared’s impact on GPS signals has given me reason to question that assumption.

I agree with those who believe that education is essential for the survival and continued viability of the surveying profession.  Nonetheless, challenges remain. In my opinion, two of the most pressing challenges facing the surveying profession are:

• Thirty nine (39) of the state boards of licensure for surveyors in the United States do NOT require a college degree as a prerequisite for licensure (Thompson 2011).
• The onslaught of technology and the pervasive use of 3-D digital spatial data have out-paced the ability of many practicing surveyors (myself included) to keep up – except by using technology in a rote manner and relying on manuals and vendors for training and/or support.

Wikipedia states, “Education is the process by which society transmits its accumulated knowledge, skills, and values from one generation to another.” I remain convinced that education deserves an unconditional commitment and that education is an important part of addressing the challenges facing the surveying profession.

But, in an attempt to look at the bigger picture and to view the challenges from another perspective I offer the some comments and questions. Whether personal, business, governmental, or other – decisions and/or actions are based upon some combination of knowledge, ability, and authority. But the question is, “does the ability/authority to do something justify doing it?” That question could be asked regarding stem cell research or building atomic bombs. I’d rather look at it in terms of the LightSquared debate.

“The Curious Capitalist” (Foroohar 2011) is a column in the April 4, 2011, issue of Time magazine which notes that Wall Street hires more science and engineering graduates than are hired by traditional high-tech industries. One Wall Street mathematician-turned-trader is quoted as asking why he should work on new high-tech products at Bell Lab when he could make five times as much crafting 12-dimensional models of the stock-buying and -selling behavior of the average Joe.  Foroohar observes that while expansion of the U.S. economy depends upon innovation, Wall Street would have us believe that they are “the grease on the wheels of the real economy.” This position has been weakened by recent studies showing that “the financial sector is sucking talent and entrepreneurial energy from more socially beneficial sectors of the economy.” Foroohar makes several other relevant points and closes by saying, “Bankers will undoubtedly continue to push the story line that they are funding innovation. The question is whether it’s the kind that’s real or the kind that’s synthetic.” I see the Light Squared-GPS interference debate as a case in point.

According to LightSquared’s website, “LightSquared was established in mid-2010 by an experienced team of global communications executives and investors with the vision of revolutionizing the wireless experience in the United States.”  The referenced web site also highlights the background and experience of nine LightSquared executives.  The Management Team is truly an impressive collection of talent and they have laid out an ambitious vision for providing extensive wholesale wireless service throughout the United States. Information on the investors in LightSquared is found under the “our investors” tab of the LightSquared web site leading to information on Harbinger Capital Partners. The Wikipedia web page description of Harbinger Capital Partners lists an abundance of additional interesting information. LightSquared certainly has the ambition, knowledge, ability, and, with the FCC license, the authority to construct an impressive wireless network. Is such a project justified? Of course it is. Consumers are convinced that wireless is a good thing and that everyone deserves unlimited wireless access. Not so fast, larger issues need to be identified, debated, and resolved. This is the first of several articles devoted to larger issues.

In addition to others, my suggestion is that there are lessons here for the surveying profession. In addition to the wireless network issue; GPS, laser scanning (both terrestrial and aerial), and cloud computing technologies are or will be available for our use – to what end?  In order to remain productive and to stay in business the prudent business professional will invest in the new technologies and will participate in more and more rote processes that will ultimately be as productive as the dog chasing his own tail.  The point was made (seriously) at the March 2011 SPAR Conference that the incremental cost per point of spatial data collection is asymptotically approaching zero. An extrapolation of that trend leads to the implication that traditional surveying will die, will be handled by others, or will become economically unviable. In other words, a surveyor will not be able to earn a decent living. I am leading up the point that the “values” part of our educational system needs immediate and careful attention.

How many of the best surveying graduates (typically scholarship recipients) pursue a career with a manufacturer or a large corporation?  They are certainly entitled to do so and some who go that route do make significant contributions to our profession. Having taught surveying at the college level for 25 years, I know a number of surveying graduates who took that route and are now leaders in surveying profession. They have established a solid professional reputation and I am proud of their accomplishments. But, like Foroohar, somehow I get the feeling that surveying is one of those more beneficial sectors of our economy th
at is getting shortchanged.

I do not take exception to our democratic form of government where the economy is regulated by the government and ‘run’ by the banking industry. Within this environment, businesses and corporations operate according to capitalistic principles and fidelity to the stockholders is paramount. I fully support the right of businesses to pursue innovation, to develop a competitive edge, and to profit from efficient execution of a well-crafted business plan. Regretfully, I am also naïve enough to believe that each person (and business/organization/government entity) should act responsibly (some do, many don’t). I am also sufficiently tolerant to recognize that legitimate differences of opinion will be the basis of spirited discussions. Although I place much faith in such discussions, I am bothered by the apparent attitude that the ability or authority to do something (as long as it is legal) seemingly takes precedence over accomplishing something within the broader professional scope of what is the “right” or ethical thing to do.

My plan is to discuss the following issues in more detail in subsequent articles.

1. A summary article in which ethics/morality (value-based decisions) will be compared to legal issues (authority-based decisions).  What does it mean to say that morality cannot be legislated?
2. Are there really two sets of rules for decision making – one for individuals (values and ethics based) and one for business/government (legal and authority based)?  Is it desirable or possible to reconcile the two?
3. Bureaucrats, business, and courts preside over the “legal” decision making process while professional, religious, and civic organizations preside over the “ethical” decision making process.  Is it reasonable to expect that the U.S. Congress has the ability to act as an impartial arbitrator in passing legislation?  What is the influence of lobbyists and big business in Congress compared with the voice of professional associations and others representing “values” based decision processes?  Hopefully the LightSquared debate will provide some insight and answers.
4. Checks and balances – independent professional boards of licensure exist in most states “to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public against incompetent (unethical) practice.”  Is there a comparable system of checks and balances at the national and/or global level to provide safeguards against unwarranted economic exploitation of “the masses”?  From the grass-roots perspective, it appears that the current national (even global) economic crisis was brought on, in part, by “the fox guarding the henhouse.”  I need to listen to those representing a broader perspective but, so far, I remain convinced that the logic in “too big to fail” is faulty.
5. Proposal – Professional associations need to sponsor and promote serious discussions involving the basis of ethical decisions at all levels of business, corporate, and governmental.  Many such ethics courses exist for individuals but what is the source of ethics enforcement for businesses, corporations, and governments?  Why are existing efforts so ineffective?

REFERENCES

Hopefully, you’ve missed my Geospatial Solutions Weekly column which I haven’t written in two months. This past eight weeks, I’ve traveled 20,000 airline miles, driven 5,500 miles, and ridden 300 miles by rail and 300 miles by bus, all through three continents, five countries, and 11 U.S. states. On top of that, I’ve been somewhat consumed by a serious issue you need to know about.

If you or your organization use GPS, you need to know about what is going on with the FCC and a company called LightSquared. There is a very real possibility that your GPS receiver(s) may become obsolete within one year, unless you speak up today. The last day that the FCC will accept comments on this issue is this Saturday, July 30. If you or your organization uses GPS receivers for mobile GIS, you are in the crosshairs of LightSquared and need to speak up to prevent your GPS equipment being rendered obsolete nxt year.

It only takes five minutes of your time to submit your comments to the FCC. You don’t need to write an essay. Here’s what you need to make the FCC aware of:

1. What you (or the organization you work for) use GPS for.
2. How much (approximately) your organization has invested in GPS equipment/software.
3. How much your organization (business or public entity) depends on GPS.
4. How it would affect your organization (business or public entity) if GPS was interfered with.

If you are worried about not getting approval in time from your department, etc., just keep your comments generic and don’t mention your organization name. The value is the story you tell about how important GPS is to you and your organization, not the specific names.

I suggest composing your comments in a word processor (Word, WordPad, Notepad, etc.) first, then copy/paste to the FCC form so you don’t lose your work in case something goes sideways with the FCC website while you are typing.

Here are simple instructions to submit your comments:

Go to the FCC comment submission website by clicking here.

Type in the following information:

Proceeding Number: 11-109

Name of Filer: Enter your name

Address Line 1: Enter your street address

City: Enter your city

State: Enter your state

Zip: Enter your zip code

Type in or paste your brief comments: Copy/paste your comments

That’s it. Five minutes and you’re done.

If you’d like to peruse the 2,000+ comments that have already been submitted by your peers, you can click here and type in Proceeding# 11-109.

DO NOT take this lightly. I wouldn’t ask you to spend your time on something trivial. DO NOT assume that others are looking out for your best interest; they aren’t. If the FCC approves LightSquared’s application, the high-precision GPS industry, sub-meter to centimeter accurate GPS receivers, will suffer interference from LightSquared’s system.

If you want to read up on this, I’ve written a series of articles you can read.

LightSquared: It’s Worse than You Think (May 2011)

Test Data Shows that LightSquared Slams Medium and High-Precision GPS Receivers (June 2011)

LightSquared: High-Precision Receivers Are Collateral Damage (June 2011)

LightSquared: 1, High-Precision GPS: 0 (July 2011)

LightSquared: Comments I Submitted to the FCC (July 2011)

While I’m eager to write about the places and conferences I’ve been to over the past eight weeks, we need to tend to this very important issue today before it’s too late. If you’re interested in reading my comments to the FCC, the following is what I submitted to the FCC yesterday. Feel free to copy/paste parts you agree with and incorporate them into your comments if you choose.

July 27, 2011

Dear Ms. Dortch,

I have serious concerns about LightSquared’s proposal for a nationwide 4G LTE system. I’m afraid that neither LightSquared nor the FCC fully understand the impact of LightSquared’s proposed system on GPS receivers, America’s small businesses, and America’s economy.

As a Contributing Editor to GPS World magazine, my specialty is high-precision GPS receivers, of which I’ve been involved with for more than 20 years as a product developer, power user, and consultant. I’m in touch with tens of thousands of high-precision GPS users from around the world through my newsletter articles (bi-weekly), webinars, and my attendance at technical conferences. I consider myself and I’m considered by others to be an advocate for the high-precision GPS community.

Hundreds of thousands of high-precision GPS receivers in the U.S. are used across many market segments including civil/environmental engineering, construction, land surveying, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), agriculture, forestry, road/rail/airport, hydrography, environmental, water/gas/electric/oil/telecom utilities, mining, bridge/dam monitoring, emergency management, defense & intelligence, higher education, and all levels of Fed/State/Local government.

To illustrate, allow me to describe some examples of how high-p
recision GPS is being used.

In road construction, high-precision GPS offers a 5-to-1 efficiency advantage over legacy construction equipment. Can you imagine the delays if road construction projects took five times longer to complete? California’s Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) currently has 846 construction projects ongoing with construction costs of ~$10.5 billion. High-precision GPS receivers are a critical component of these projects. Projects such as the widening project pictured below, are completed way ahead of schedule. For this reason, CALTRANS has invested in 250 high-precision GPS receivers valued at ~$5 million (~$20,000 per receiver).

It’s not just large, high-precision GPS receiver deployments that matter. GPS also keeps the public safe.

In Florida, the 5.5 mile Sunshine Skyway Bridge spanning Tampa Bay has five high-precision GPS receivers permanently mounted on it so engineers can monitor the health of the structure. On an annual basis, more than 18 million vehicles travel over the bridge. High-precision GPS is a core technology that ensures the safety of those 18 million vehicles.

It’s not just thousands of public entities that are invested in high-precision GPS technology. Tens of thousands of U.S. small businesses rely on high-precision GPS technology in their daily operations.

A small land surveying firm owner in Virginia says:

“I have relied on GPS for survey grade data for at least 15 years. We use GPS every day for all projects. If GPS becomes unavailable or unreliable it will just about put us out of business. Our $500,000 investment would become worthless.”

 

A four-person agricultural drainage firm owner states:

“I am president of a small business that relies solely on high accuracy GPS. We do GPS Ag drainage (I and three other employees) we set a base on site all over the state because close proximity RTK correction is the only way to get the vertical accuracy required to do what we do.  Any GPS interference immediately closes my business and puts four people out of work.”

 

Another small land surveying firm says:

“High-precision GPS allows us to obtain measurements between monuments which are miles apart to control land boundaries … in a couple of hours that 20 years ago would required 20 to 30 hours of field crew time. The change in technology comes with our investment of approximately $100,000 which is very significant for a small firm like ours. If we are to wake up here in the next year and find our equipment useless for high-precision GPS, the effects would be devastating to us and our clients in both private development and public infrastructure.”

 

Finally, high-precision GPS users rely on a complex infrastructure of 7,000+ high-precision, fixed-mount GPS base stations deployed nationwide. The infrastructure began with a few receivers in the early 1990s and has been built upon over the past 18 years by the GPS user community volunteering time, money, equipment, and expertise. It would be impossible to replace all of these receivers since the ownership is so disparate. Many are publicly owned and the rest are commercially owned by businesses and used by people in all the market segments I listed above. To illustrate, one such network consisting of more than 875 high-precision GPS receivers is located in the western United States managed by UNAVCO, a university-governed consortium which is sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

UNAVCO uses this massive network of high-precision GPS receivers to, among other things, monitor the earth’s crustal plate movement (think earthquake montoring).

Each dot represents a permanently-mounted high-precision GPS receiver that continuously monitors the Earth’s crustal plate movement

 

Another type of high-precision GPS network is called an RTK networ
k. It delivers real-time, high-precision corrections to engineers, surveyors, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) specialists, construction specialists, and others. This particular network, owned by Keystone Precision Instruments, consists of 178 fixed-mount, high-precision GPS receivers and delivers high-precision GPS corrections to users in New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Delaware, New Jersey, Connecticut, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and Maine.

Like the UNAVCO network, the Keystone Precision Instrument RTK Network is a multi-million dollar investment in high-precision GPS infrastructure.

 

Keystone Precision Instruments’ RTK Network diagram showing 178 fixed-mount, high-precision GPS receivers that provide high-precision GPS corrections to high-precision GPS users in the northeastern U.S.

 

Recommendations

I’m grateful for this 30-day public comment period as I think it will give the FCC and LightSquared a new perspective on the impact that disrupting high-precision GPS receivers would have on the GPS user community and America’s economy.

Although I’m in favor of a nationwide 4G LTE system, I’m opposed to LightSquared’s proposed plan for the following reasons:

1. The GPS user community knew this was coming and chose to do nothing. This is false. Contrary to what LightSquared asserts, the GPS user community did not know anything about this potential interference until November 2010. LightSquared and the FCC incorrectly assumed that communicating/negotiating with the U.S. GPS Industry Council (USGIC) was the equivalent of communicating/negotiating with the GPS user community. That is a false assumption. The USGIC does not communicate directly with the GPS user community and never has. That’s not its role. I’ve been personally involved in the high-precision GPS industry for 20+ years and writing a monthly newsletter on high-precision GPS technology for GPS World magazine for the past five years. I attend almost every major GPS conference and high-precision GPS market segment conference in the U.S. and some abroad. The first I’d heard about the LightSquared interference issue was November 2010.

Furthermore, there is a clear precedent already set that demonstrates how to handle a case very similar to the current LightSquared situation. In 2008, the U.S. Air Force proposed to discontinue supporting the semicodeless technique that is used by virtually every civilian L1/L2 high-precision GPS receiver in existence. It was the first time in history that an action would render several hundred thousand high-precision GPS receivers obsolete, a scale which is very similar to the impact of the LightSquared system.

There was no industry coalition formed to engage the Air Force. There was no industry outcry. A public/private technical working group was not formed to test the effects on receivers if semicodeless was not supported. Why is that?

The answer is very simple. The U.S. Air Force, to its credit, did a fantastic job of communicating directly with the GPS user community along with the Department of Commerce. It issued public statements describing the impact the action would have on high-precision GPS receivers.

The U.S. Air Force did its homework. At the end of the day, it set a sunset date of December 31, 2020, to discontinue supporting the semicodeless technique. It correctly determined that 12 years is about the amount of time that would allow a smooth transition with a manageable financial impact to the high-precision GPS user community.

Imagine if the U.S. Air Force had set a period of one year to transition away from using the semicodeless technique. That action would have destroyed the high-precision GPS user community resulting in billions of dollars in losses and widespread small business closure. Fortunately, they did their homework, understood the impact, and made the correct decision.

LightSquared, on the other hand, either didn’t do its homework or intentionally kept quiet in order to fly under the radar and push its initiative through before the GPS user community (and others) knew what was happening. In either case, the GPS user community shouldn’t be held accountable in paying for the FCC’s and LightSquared’s lack of communication/notification.

2. The FCC needs to consider future GPS signals as well as satellite signals from other satellite navigation systems. The FCC needs to investigate the effect of the LightSquared system on the future GPS L1C signal as well as GLONASS L1 (Russia), Galileo L1 (Europe), and Compass L1 (Chinese) to understand the effect on receivers of today and of the future. GPS L1C, Galileo L1, and Compass L1 all use wider bandwidth than today’s GPS L1, which makes them even more susceptible to interference from LightSquared’s system.

L1 and L5 are the GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, and Compass signals of the future. Those signals will drive hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue because they will bring high-precision accuracy to our everyday lives, which is something only available on very expensive GPS receivers today.

Again, precedence has been set. Look at what happened to GPS navigation after Selective Availability (SA) was turned off in May 2000. Overnight, GPS accuracy improved from 100 meters to 10 meters, and subsequently the multi-billion dollar market f
or GPS automobile navigation devices was launched. Companies like TomTom grew from zero revenue to multi-billion dollar corporations.

The same is expected to happen again when mainstream GPS accuracy improves from 10 meters to well under a meter using the L1 and L5 signals, but that will only occur if the GPS L1, GLONASS L1, Galileo L1, and Compass L1 signals are protected. Some say that L2 can be used instead of L1 in the future. While that’s true for GPS, L1 and L5 have become the international standard while L2 is not supported by the international community.

3. LightSquared mobile devices are potentially portable GPS jammers. The FCC needs to seriously investigate the interference impact of LightSquared mobile handsets (1626.5-1660.5 Mhz) on GPS receivers. It is already known that Inmarsat (1626.5-1660.5 MHz) devices and Iridium (1616-1626.5 MHz) devices interfere with each other, but Iridium devices are only used in remote areas so it’s not a widespread problem. It is also known that these devices interfere with the GLONASS L1 signal (1597-1605 MHz). We don’t know the extent of the effect that LightSquared mobile devices will have on GLONASS L1, GPS L1, Galileo L1, or Compass L1 signals. The problem is that no LightSquared mobile phones are available to test. Yes, lab simulations can be performed, but LightSquared devices will be made in Asia, among other places, where the designers won’t care one bit about GPS interference. There is not an acceptable design margin, if any, to allow for sloppy LightSquared device designs.

The consequence of LightSquared mobile devices interfering with GPS L1, GLONASS L1, Galileo L1, and Compass L1 is hard to imagine and might be worse than interference from the 40,000 LightSquared towers. Although the LightSquared mobile devices are much lower power (2-3 watts vs. 1,500 watts), LightSquared has announced they intend to deploy more than 250 million mobile devices, which could behave like portable GPS jammers.

Please pay attention this important technical issue that many have chose to ignore.

4. LightSquared needs to permanently abandon using the upper frequency spectrum (1545-1555 MHz) for terrestrial broadcasting. The idea of LightSquared using its licensed upper frequency spectrum (1545-1555 MHz) for terrestrial purpose needs to be permanently abandoned. It’s clear from the test results that this causes widespread GPS interference no matter which class of GPS is used.

Finally, I would like to emphasize that the GPS user community should bear no cost as a result of any interference from LightSquared’s system. The GPS user community was blindsided in November 2010. While you can debate about the communication between the FCC, MSV/Skyterra/LightSquared, and the U.S. GPS Industry Council, no case can be made that the GPS user community knew of MSV/Skyterra/LightSquared’s intentions earlier than late last year, yet the FCC and LightSquared expect the GPS user community to bear the cost of interference caused by LightSquared’s system?

Furthermore, far too little testing has been completed in order to fully understand the impact of LightSquared’s system on GPS receivers. Yes, we have a rough idea of the scale of interference from the test reports submitted in June 2011, but the devil is in the details.

Even if LightSquared only uses the licensed lower spectrum (1526-1536 MHz), as it has proposed as an alternative, the number of high-precision receivers affected would be at least 200,000 at an estimated replacement cost of $10,000 per unit which equates to a total equipment replacement cost of $2 billion dollars. That does not include the cost of removal/installation, lost productivity, required software upgrades, and training. Does the FCC expect the GPS user community to bear that cost?

For the above reasons, I recommend that the FCC deny LightSquared’s request to proceed and encouraged them to use spectrum outside of the MSS band. The resources expended by federal/state/local governments and private corporations to vet LightSquared’s proposal to use the MSS band has run into the tens of millions of dollars, if not more than a one hundred million dollars. I’m afraid the cost of further vetting will double or triple the expenditure as well as result in tremendous opportunity cost as significant resources are expended by public and commercial entities to continue this debate.

Thank you for your attention. If you feel that further testimony is needed, I’m more than happy to oblige.

Sincerely,

/S/ Eric Gakstatter

Eric Gakstatter

Principal – Discovery Management Group LLC

Editor – GPS World Magazine Survey Scene enewsletter

Editor – Geospatial Solutions

PO Box 663

West Linn, OR 97068

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

A $25 Computer?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks, and see you next week.

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

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

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

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

Why is it important to be aware of space weather?

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

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

Is the Smart Grid smart enough to handle the sun?

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

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

GIS on a Sphere

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks, and see you next week.

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