The 864-channel TRE-3 receiver, just announced by JAVAD GNSS, can simultaneously access all current GNSS signals, with room to spare for multiple-channel tracking of select signals, according to the company. The new product offers many features, including:
Three ultra wide-band (100 MHz) fast sampling and processing, programmable digital filters and superior dynamic range. After 12-bit digital conversion, nine separate digital filters are shaped for each of the nine GPS L1/Galileo E1, GPS L2, GPS L5/Galileo E5A, GLONASS L1, GLONASS L2, Galileo E5B/BeiDou B2/GLONASS L3, Galileo altBoc, Galilee E6/BeiDouB3/QZSS LEX, and BeiDou B1 bands.
Each band consists of a combination of a digital cascaded integrator-comb (CIC) filter and a digital finite impulse response (FIR) filter (up to 60-th order) where signal selection is performed.
Two types of digital in-band anti-jamming filters (automatic 80-th order and “user selectable” 256-th order).
Multiple channels to acquire and track each satellite signal. For example, 20 channels can be assigned to acquire the GPS L1 signal, each spaced one millisecond apart. Up to 5 channels can be assigned to track each signal, each with different filter parameters and tracking strategies. This supports acquiring and tracking weaker signals in difficult conditions, especially under trees and canopy — potentially using up to the 864 channels available in the receiver! Several patents are pending.
80 dB out-of-band interference rejections: high dynamic range of wide RF bands and highly rectangular digital filters make the receiver much more resistant to out-of-band jamming.
High-speed high-dynamic automatic gain control (AGC) to respond to interferences and signal variations.
Programmable filter width (by commands).
Highly stable digital filters (band characteristics do not change with age, input voltages, or temperature).
Improved GLONASS inter-channel bias performance (due to a flat digital filter shape).
New multipath rejection technique.
60-MHZ-wide Galileo altBoc band takes advantage of the full benefit of this signal. Its multipath resistance is improved even beyond that of the company’s new multipath reduction technique, it asserts.
864 GNSS channels allow tracking all current and future satellite signals.
Three wide-band RF sections enable monitoring spectrums and interferences in three 100-MHz-wide bands.
TRE-3 can track and decode the QZSS LEX signal messages, making it a unique product on the market in this regard, according to the company.
Features for time -transfer applications: In time sources where the zero crossing of the input frequency defines the exact moment of the time second, the receiver monitors zero crossings and accurately defines the moment of the time second. An external time interval measurement unit is not required to measure zero crossing and 1-PPS offset.
Embedded calibrator measures phase and code delays of each of the nine bands in timing applications. External calibration is not required.
TRE-3 is form, pin-out, and command compatible with the company’s earlier TRE-G3T receiver. It uses 8-Watts of power, compared to 4-Watts of the TRE-G3T
JAVAD GNSS has published an invitation to professional land surveyors in the United States to submit resumés for consideration. The company says it seeks “talented” surveyors to advise on its customer support and to participate in evaluating product features and ideas.
JAVAD GNSS has launched a new version of the TRIUMPH GNSS receiver, which features 864 channels — more than any receiver it has yet offered. The TRIUMPH-LS land survey receiver offers, in addition to the 864 GNSS channels, three powerful processors, 256 I/O, 24 digital filters, 24 anti-jam filters and 14-MB program memory all in a single chip, which uses less power and makes the total system less expensive, according to the company.
The announcement was made at the ION GNSS+ Conference, being held this week in Nashville, Tennessee.
Javad Ashjaee, CEO and founder, explained the decision to incorporate 864 channels. “Some questioned the need for the 216 channels. They now realize the need for 440 channels. We assign multiple channels to each satellite for redundancy and reliability. We use more than 100 channels to scan GNSS bands for interference — 864 channels is the key to reliable performance.”
The TRIUMPH-LS provides visual stake-out, six parallel RTK engines, more than 3,000 coordinate conversions, advanced coordinate geometry features, and rich attribute tagging on a high-resolution 800 x 480 pixel display. When used in photogrammetry, offsets can be calculated using the internal camera for 10-centimeter accuracy, or an external camera for 5-centimenter accuracy. TRIUMPH-LS is the first JAVAD GNSS receiver to offer photogrammetry for land survey.
Other features include versatile attribute tagging, feature coding, automatic photo and voice documentation, and an interference monitoring and reporting feature.
The TRIUMPH-LS has a battery life of 25 hours in RTK rover mode with full screen brightness and UHF/GSM. Two hours of charge equals two days of surveying. The internal batteries are field serviceable and can be easily replaced by the user when needed.
The TRIUMPH-LS, including batteries and pole, is the lightest GNSS RTK receiver in its class, according to JAVAD GNSS. The total weight of the system — including radio, controller, pole and 25 hours of internal battery — is 2.5 kilograms.
Built on a tough magnesium alloy chassis, all connectors, SIM cards, and micro-SD cards are protected against harsh environmental conditions. The pole can be collapsed and the unit can easily fit in a car seat — there are no long poles and no separate controller or brackets to disassemble.
The TRIUMPH-LS automatically updates all firmware when connected to the Internet via Wi-Fi. The built-in GNSS full tracking antenna has a large ground place and excellent centering and rotational performance.
To learn more about the TRIUMPH-LS, stop by the JAVAD GNSS booth (Booth D) in the ION GNSS+ Exhibit Hall now through Friday.Presentation will be given Thursday at the conference room of the exhibition hall at 2:00 pm.
On day 53 (February 22) around 09:15 GPS Time, GLONASS 743 began transmitting on frequency channel 6 using almanac slot 8 (R08). It should replace GLONASS 701K (801) transmitting on frequency channel -5, previously using almanac slot 8. However, GLONASS 701K was not immediately switched off and/or did not switch slot numbers and continued to transmit on frequency channel -5 for several days, continuously identifying itself as a slot 8 satellite.
While most receivers were just tracking GLONASS 743, some tracked both GLONASS 743 and 701K. While 701K was not in the broadcast almanac, it was transmitting ephemeris records identifying itself as a satellite in slot 8. The net result was that RINEX observation files from certain stations had a mixture of GLONASS 743 and 701K data, with no indication of which satellite was which. Of course, one could use expected Doppler shift and/or code/carrier rate of change to figure out which data records correspond to which satellite.
Furthermore, the GLONASS navigation files from certain stations contained a mixture of ephemeris records from GLONASS 743 and 701K. For day 54, for example, GLONASS navigation files for 146 (non-MGEX) stations were available at CDDIS. A number of these did not contain any R08 entries, presumably because the corresponding receivers were set to not track unhealthy satellites. Some of the files contained R08 ephemeris records from earlier dates. These were ignored.
This left 82 files containing either GLONASS 701K and/or 743 ephemeris records for day 54. These files were parsed to determine, for each file, for which times ephemeris records were available for which satellites. The results are summarized in the following plot (PDF available):
Results of Glonass
The station numbers correspond to those in this table.
The navigation files from 29 stations contain both GLONASS 701K and 743 records. It seems that JAVAD GNSS and Topcon receivers were primarily affected.
Note that the CDDIS brdc***0.13g files on affected days have a mixture of GLONASS 743 and 701K ephemeris records, but at any one epoch, only one satellite is represented.
Files from days 53 through 56 are affected.
It appears that GLONASS 701K stopped identifying itself as a slot 8 satellite after about 15:15 GPS Time on day 56 and was not subsequently tracked by any station supplying data files to CDDIS.
See also IGSMail-6734, “Irregular GLONASS constellation change (for R08).
A Case History Using the New Galileo E6-B/C Signal
By Sergei Yudanov, JAVAD GNSS
A method of decoding an unknown pseudorandom noise code uses a conventional GNSS antenna and receiver with modified firmware. The method was verified using the signals from the Galileo In-Orbit Validation satellites.
Decoding an unknown GNSS pseudorandom noise (PRN) code can be rather easily done using a high-gain steerable dish antenna as was used, for example, in determine the BeiDou-M1 broadcast codes before they were publicly announced. The signal-to-noise ratio within one chip of the code is sufficient to determine its sign. This article describes a method of getting this information using a conventional GNSS antenna and receiver with modified firmware. The method was verified using the signals from the Galileo In-Orbit Validation (IOV) satellites. In spite of the fact that only pilot signal decoding seems to be possible at first glance, it is shown that in practice data signals can also be decoded.
Concept
The idea is to do coherent accumulation of each chip of an unknown signal during a rather long time interval. The interval may be as long as a full satellite pass; for medium Earth orbits, this could be up to six hours. One of the receiver’s channels is configured in the same way as for signal tracking. The I and Q signal components are accumulated during one chip length in the digital signal processor, and these values are added to an array cell, referenced by chip number, by the processor. Only a limited amount of information need be known about the signal: its RF frequency; the expected chip rate; the expected total code length; and the modulation method.
The decoding of binary-phase-shift-keying (BPSK) signals (as most often used) is the subject of this article. It appears that the decoding of more complicated signals is possible too, but this should be proved. A limitation of this method (in common with that of the dish method) is the maximum total code length that can be handled: for lengths greater than one second and bitrates higher than 10,000 kilobits per second, the receiver’s resources may not be sufficient to deal with the signal.
Reconstructing the Signal’s Phase
This method requires coherency. During the full accumulation period, the phase difference between the real signal phase and the phase of the signal generated by the receiver’s channel should be much less than one cycle of the carrier frequency. Depending on the GNSS’s available signals, different approaches may be used. The simplest case is reconstruction of a third signal while two other signals on different frequencies are of known structure and can be tracked.
The main (and possibly the only significant) disturbing factor is the ionosphere. The ionospheric delay (or, more correctly, the variation of ionospheric delay) is calculated using the two known tracked signals, then the phase of the third signal, as affected by the ionosphere, is predicted.
The final formula (the calculations are trivial and are widely available in the literature) is:
where:
φ1 , f1 are the phase and frequency of the first signal in cycles and Hz, respectively
φ2 , f2 are the phase and frequency of the second signal in cycles and Hz, respectively
φ3 , f3 are the phase and frequency of the third signal in cycles and Hz, respectively.
It was confirmed that for all pass periods (elevation angles less than 10 degrees were not tested), the difference between the calculated phase and real phase was always less than one-tenth of a cycle. GPS Block IIF satellites PRN 1 and PRN 25 were used to prove this: the L1 C/A-code and L5 signals were used as the first and second signals, with the L2C signal as the third unknown.
If two known signals are not available, and the ionospheric delay cannot be precisely calculated, it is theoretically possible to obtain an estimate of the delay from one or more neighboring satellites with two signals available. Calculations and estimations should be carried out to investigate the expected precision.
The Experiment
The Galileo E6-B/C signal as currently transmitted by the IOV satellites was selected for the experiment, as its structure has not been published. The E6 signal has three components: E6-A, E6-B and E6-C. The E6-A component is part of the Galileo Public Regulated Service, while the two other components will serve the Galileo Commercial Service. The E6-B component carries a data signal, while the E6-C component is a pilot signal.
From open sources, it is known that the carrier frequency of the E6 signal is 1278.75 MHz and that the E6-B and E6-C components use BPSK modulation at 5,115 chips per millisecond with a primary code length of one millisecond. E6-B’s data rate is 1,000 bits per second and the total length of the pilot code is 100 milliseconds (a secondary code of 100 bits over 100 milliseconds is also present in the E6-C signal, which aids in signal acquisition).
A slightly modified commercial high-precision multi-GNSS receiver, with the E6 band and without the GLONASS L2 band, was used for this experiment. The receiver was connected to a conventional GNSS antenna, placed on a roof and was configured as described above. The E1 signal was used as the first signal and E5a as the second signal. The E6 code tracking (using 5,115 chip values of zero) was 100 percent guided from the E1 code tracking (the changing of the code delay in the ionosphere was ignored). The E6 phase was guided from E1 and E5a using the above equation. Two arrays for 511,500 I and Q samples were organized in firmware. The integration period was set to one chip (200 nanoseconds).
Galileo IOV satellite PRN 11 (also variously known as E11, ProtoFlight Model and GSAT0101) was used initially, and the experiment started when the satellite’s elevation angle was about 60 degrees and lasted for only about 30 minutes. Then the I and Q vectors were downloaded to a PC and analyzed.
Decoding of Pilot Signal (E6-C)
Decoding of the pilot signal is made under the assumption that any possible influence of the data signal is small because the number of ones and zeros of E6-B in each of 511,500 chips of the 100-millisecond integration interval is about the same. First, the secondary code was obtained. Figure 1 shows the correlation of the first 5,115 chips with 5,115 chips shifted by 0 to 511,500 chips. Because the initial phase of the E6 signal is unknown, two hypotheses for computing the amplitude or signal level were checked: [A] = [I] + [Q] and [A] = [I] – [Q], and the combination with the higher correlation value was selected for all further analysis.
Figure 1. Un-normalized autocorrelation of E6-C signal chips.
In Figure 1, the secondary code is highly visible: we see a sequence of 100 positive and negative correlation peaks (11100000001111 …; interpreting the negative peaks as zeros).This code is the exact complement (all bits reversed) of the published E5a pilot secondary code for this satellite. More will be said about the derived codes and their complements later. It appears that, for all of the IOV satellites, the E6-C secondary codes are the same as the E5a secondary codes.
After obtaining the secondary code, it is possible to coherently add all 100 milliseconds of the integration interval with the secondary code sign to increase the energy in each chip by 100 times. Proceeding, we now have 5,115 chips of the pilot signal — the E6-C primary code.
To understand the correctness of the procedure and to check its results, we need to confirm that there is enough signal energy in each chip. To this end, a histogram of the pilot signal chip amplitudes can be plotted (see Figure 2). We see that there is nothing in the middle of the plot. This means that all 5,115 chips are correct, and there is no chance that even one bit is wrong.
Figure 2. Histogram of pilot signal chip amplitude in arbitrary units.
But there is one effect that seems strange at first glance: instead of two peaks we have four (two near each other). We will shortly see that this phenomenon results from the influence of the E6-B data signal and it may be decoded also.
Decoding the Data Signal
The presence of four peaks in the histogram of Figure 2 was not understood initially, so a plot of all 511,500 signal code chips was made (see Figure 3).
Interestingly, each millisecond of the signal has its own distribution, and milliseconds can be found where the distribution is close to that when two signals with the same chip rate are present. In this case, there should be three peaks in the energy (signal strength) spectrum: –2E, 0, and +2E, where E is the energy of one signal (assuming the B and C signals have the same strength).
Figure 3. Plot of 511,500 signal code chip amplitudes in arbitrary units.
One such time interval (starting at millisecond 92 and ending at millisecond 97) is shown in Figure 4. The middle of the plot (milliseconds 93 to 96) shows the described behavior. Figure 5 is a histogram of signal code chip amplitude for the signal from milliseconds 93 to 96.
Figure 4. Plot of signal code chip amplitude in arbitrary units from milliseconds 93 to 96.
Then we collect all such samples (milliseconds) with the same data sign together to increase the signal level. Finally, 5,115 values are obtained. Their distribution is shown in Figure 6.
The central peak is divided into two peaks (because of the presence of the pilot signal), but a gap between the central and side peaks (unlike the case of Figure 5) is achieved. This allows us to get the correct sign of all data signal chips. Subtracting the already known pilot signal chips, we get the 5,115 chips of the data signal — the E6-B primary code. This method works when there are at least some samples (milliseconds) where the number of chips with the same data bit in the data signal is significantly more than half.
Figure 5. Histogram of signal code chip amplitude.Figure 6. Histogram of the signed sum of milliseconds chip amplitude with a noticeable presence of the data signal.
Proving the Codes
The experimentally determined E6-B and E6-C primary codes and the E6-C secondary codes for all four IOVsatellites (PRNs 11, 12, 19, and 20) were put in the receiver firmware. The receiver was then able to autonomously track the E6-B and E6-C signals of the satellites.
Initial decoding of E6-B navigation data has been performed. It appears that the data has the same preamble (the 16-bit synchronization word) as that given for the E6-B signal in the GIOVE Interface Control Document (ICD). Convolutional encoding for forward error correction is applied as described in the Galileo Open Service ICD, and 24-bit cyclic redundancy check error detection (CRC-24) is used. At the time of the analysis, all four IOV satellites transmitted the same constant navigation data message.
Plots of PRN 11 E6 signal tracking are shown in Figure 7 and in Figure 8. The determined codes may be found at env-gpsworld-integration.kinsta.cloud/galileo-E6-codes. Some of these codes may be the exact complement of the official codes since the code-determination technique has a one-half cycle carrier-phase ambiguity resulting in an initial chip value ambiguity. But from the point of view of receiver tracking, this is immaterial.
Figure 7. Signal-to-noise-density ratio of E1 (red), E5a (magenta), E5b (blue), and E6 (green) code tracking of Galileo IOV satellite PRN 11 on December 21–22, 2012.Figure 8. Pseudorange minus carrier phase (in units of meters) of E1 (red), E5a (magenta), E5b (blue), and E6 (green) code tracking of Galileo IOV satellite PRN 11 on December 21–22, 2012.
Acknowledgments
Special thanks to JAVAD GNSS’s DSP system developers. The system is flexible so it allows us to do tricks like setting the integration period to one chip, and powerful enough to be able to do required jobs within a 200-nanosecond cycle. This article was prepared for publication by Richard Langley.
Manufacturers
A JAVAD GNSS TRE-G3T-E OEM receiver, a modification of the TRE-G3T receiver, was used in the experiment, connected to a conventional JAVAD GNSS antenna. Plots of E6 code tracking of all four IOV satellites may be found on the company’s website.
Sergei Yudanov is a senior firmware developer at JAVAD GNSS, Moscow.
Original Broadcast Date: Thursday, January 31, 2013
Summary:
Highway Patrols monitor highways and catch those who violate speed limits. There is no serious monitoring of GNSS bands. GNSS bands are routinely intentionally or un-intentionally violated. This webinar focuses on GNSS interference awareness and how to defend, monitor, and report such interferences.
Javad Ashjaee
Speaker: Javad Ashjaee
President and CEO, JAVAD GNSS
Javad Ashjaee received his Ph.D. in electrical engineering from the University of Iowa. He was chairman of the Computer Engineering Department, Tehran University of Technology, 1976-1981. He began his GPS engineering career at Trimble Navigation, 1981–1986. Founder and president of Ashtech Inc., 1986–1995, the company that produced the first integrated GPS-GLONASS receivers; founder and CEO of Javad Positioning Systems, 1996–2000, which he sold to Topcon Corporation. He founded JAVAD GNSS in 2007, and is currently president and CEO. In 2010, the company introduced the integrated geodetic receiver TRIUMPH-VS, with a GNSS Interference Analyzer, capable of tracking current and next-generation signals of GPS, GLONASS, QZSS, and Galileo signals. In 2011, the company introduced a LightSquared-compatible GNSS receiver.
On December 29, two days after the Compass Interface Control Document (ICD) was made publicly available, JAVAD GNSS announced that it had tracked “B3 signal from all launched Compass satellites, using TRE-G3T-E E6-band capable receiver. Graphs shows SNR and ‘code-minus-phase’ combination of GEO svn #5 (sat #215 on graph), IGSO svn #8 (sat #218) and MEO svn #14 (sat #224). ‘C/A’ stands for B1, ‘L5’ for B2, ‘CL2’ for B3.”
An announcement on the JAVAD GNSS website states “On December 21, 2012, we have tracked E6 B/C signal from all launched Galileo satellites, using TRE-G3T-E E6-band capable receiver.
“The following graphs shows SNR and ‘code-minus-phase’ combination of svn #11 (sat #81 on graph), svn #12 (sat #82) , svn #19 (sat #89) and svn #20 (sat #90). C/A stands for E1, P2 for E5B, CL2 for E6, L5 for E5A.”
The announcement includes a link to a short article describing how these codes were found. The Galileo E6 codes have not been published by the European Space Agency.
A Proactive Approach for More Efficient Spectrum Use
In my vision of the future of GNSS, I see a pressing need to manage radio-frequency spectrum more efficiently. This will drive the creation of official standards for GNSS receivers, and better design of those receivers with better filters at lower cost, to protect against out-of-band and near-band interference. This in turn will enable user to undertake widespread monitoring and reporting of in-band interference, and create the freedom for many technologies to explore wider and more productive use of all bands of the radio-frequency spectrum.
Spectrum Management
As a consequence of unprecedented technological development on all fronts and in many fields, the radio-frequency spectrum is very congested. All countries, and the United States in particular, must find ways to use this spectrum more efficiently. Licenses for spectrum bands are very expensive, and special interest groups do all they can to secure ownership of any part of the spectrum and to prevent others from competing with them. There is an intense struggle going on, both behind the scenes and in the public arena; it has been called “the spectrum wars.” These involve big companies, very high stakes, politicians, and special interest groups. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) seems caught, powerless, in the crossfire between these powerhouses.
GNSS Interference
GNSS interference exists everywhere and comes from many different sources, identified and unidentified, intentional or unintentional. The 1-dB effect on GNSS of the proposed LightSquared signal is negligible compared to what already exists. The reason that the LightSquared plan encountered so much opposition was not because of its effect on GNSS. It was because of its effect on the competing business models of large companies and special interest groups.
With the tools that we have created and embedded in our receivers, everyone can easily see that widespread interference already exists in most places, especially in cities, and that interferences can easily be monitored and automatically reported. It seems no organization has ownership of regularly monitoring interferences on these bands and taking corrective actions. This is partly because the tools to easily monitor and report interferences did not exist earlier.
GNSS Receivers
Current GNSS receivers on the market and in use around the world rely on inadequate designs. The technology does in fact exist to overcome out-of-band interference problems such as LightSquared and many others commonly encountered in today’s congested radio-frequency environment. There is no reason to prohibit others from using bands near GNSS; this just makes spectrum use inefficient. Continued shipping of inadequate, inefficient receivers by current manufacturers only increases and compounds the problems encountered by users.
There are standards for manufacturing countless industrial goods — for example, something as ordinary as car tires or — but there is no standard for building GNSS receivers that will be used in critical applications.
So far, the FCC has been silent on this topic, and has not established guidelines for GNSS receivers that are used in critical applications. The civilian users of GNSS, such as the U.S. National Geodetic Survey, the U.S. Geological Survey, the Federal Aviation Administration, and so on, have criteria for all sorts of little equipment, but there is no criteria for GNSS receivers that they claim are so important for their job.
Instead of taking the proactive and productive approach of putting filters into the receivers that they use, these organizations advocate keeping spectrum bands adjacent to GNSS off-limits to other users. Manufacturers do not see any reason to make better receivers while such a powerful lobby protects them.
Interference monitoring and reporting is strongly desirable for places such as GNSS reference stations, or for users to see the interferences before they start a jog that they are tracking on their GPS-enabled personal training device — just as pilots check the weather before they take off.
Special Interest Groups, Politics, and Blind Followers
The problem that LightSquared encountered was that its proposal impacted the business models of special interest groups. Although we — that is, JAVAD GNSS in presentations before the FCC in Washington DC — showed that other interferences exist in cities, the FCC did not care, and GNSS magazine editors did not care. They just blindly followed what the special interest groups had planned for them.
Brad Parkinson, in his article “PNT for the Nation: Three Key Attributes and Nine Druthers” in the October issue of GPS World, did not even hint at guidelines for building GNSS receivers. This is similar to formulating guideline on how to build and clean the roads while having no guidelines on how to build tires that are going to ride on the roads.
In Parkinson’s long list of recommendations, there was no mention at all that we need to build better GNSS receivers and be able to monitor interferences. There are guidelines and standards for how build every little item, but none for GNSS receivers that are claimed to be so essential for our security and prosperity.
Military GPS receivers do not have protection against even one particular type of interference such as that posed by LightSquared — and the suggested approach was to bomb such interferences, which most admit that of course cannot be done. This is a bad attitude. The cost of a filter in a receiver is almost nothing. A precision bomb costs millions if you factor in development costs, and deployment and delivery puts the full cost even higher.
The case is similar for GNSS receivers used in commercial airplanes. Instead of pushing for a better GNSS receiver design, the FAA simply hopes that interference does not happen.
Conclusion
These are my predictions — and my strongest possible recommendations — for the future of GNSS.
The FCC will create standards for GNSS receivers.
GNSS manufacturers will be forced to build better receivers.
GNSS users will benefit from better receivers at a lower cost.
Interference monitoring and reporting will become a desirable feature of GNSS receivers.
Bands near the GNSS spectrum will be freed for more efficient use by all types of productive technology.
I am proud to be a part of the efforts to make these happen, against all odds.
Javad Ashjaee received his Ph.D. in electrical engineering from the University of Iowa. He was chairman of the Computer Engineering Department, Tehran University of Technology, 1976-1981. He began his GPS engineering career at Trimble Navigation, 1981–1986. Founder and president of Ashtech Inc., 1986–1995, the company that produced the first integrated GPS-GLONASS receivers; founder and CEO of Javad Positioning Systems, 1996–2000, which he sold to Topcon Corporation. He founded JAVAD GNSS in 2007, and is currently president and CEO. In 2010, the company introduced the integrated geodetic receiver TRIUMPH-VS, with a GNSS Interference Analyzer, capable of tracking current and next-generation signals of GPS, GLONASS, QZSS, and Galileo signals. In 2011, the company introduced a LightSquared-compatible GNSS receiver.
