Quote of the Quarter
____________________________________________

“The underpinning of our aviation system is having a redundant [navigation] system. The analyses that we have seen to date have shown that a backup system is necessary.” Jane Garvey, FAA Administrator.

Ion Council Votes On ION Fellows, Discusses Congressional Fellow
____________________________________________

The ION Council has approved a change in the bylaws establishing criteria for the future selection of ION Fellows.

At its meeting at the National Technical Meeting in Anaheim in January, the Council, top governing body of the ION, also voted to establish an ad hoc Congressional Fellows Selection Committee, discussed creation of a new award for space navigation, and approved the nominations of a list of new ION Fellows. The names of the new ION Fellows — 10 active, one honorary and nine posthumous — will be released at their formal induction at the combined IAIN World Congress/ION Annual Meeting in San Diego in June.

After submitting the names, Dr. Richard Greenspan, chair, Fellow Committee, suggested that in the future, nominating forms be made available at every ION meeting, and that the Committee meet each September at the annual GPS convention to start the selection process. Nominations would be made to the Council the following January, and indications at the summer ION Annual Meeting.

There was discussion on the reduction of the number of active or living Fellows to three per year, starting in 2002, and appointing only current Fellows to serve on the Selection Committee. The Council postponed action on these suggestions, directing the Awards Policy Committee instead to make recommendations at the next Council meeting in June on a percentage of ION members who should be Fellows continued on elected as Fellows each year, review the qualifications criteria and make suggestions on streamlining the process.

This is the second year of ION Fellows, identified as senior persons in their field who have made significant contributions to navigation science. The current program will continue for a third year, through 2001; any changes that may be adopted would take effect in 2002.

New Bylaw

After further discussion, the Council approved the following amendment to the bylaws, submitted by Bob Mitchell, chair, Bylaws Committee:

“Any individual who has made outstanding contributions to the advancement of navigation may be elected a fellow, in one of three classes, by a two thirds majority vote of the Council, which may also set other criteria for eligibility. First, a member in good standing may be elected a fellow of the Institute; a member so elected retains the right to vote and hold office. Second, a deceased person may be elected a fellow (posthumous). Third, a nonmember, such as a distinguished member of another national Institute of Navigation, may be elected an honorary fellow, but he or she does not thereby gain the right to vote or hold office. The Fellow Selection Committee shall recommend candidates in each class, if any, to the Council at its winter meeting. Newly elected fellows shall be announced at the next meeting of the Institute.”

Congressional Fellow

A comprehensive program presented by the Congressional Fellow Committee, chaired by Ken Holland, detailed the process of establishing a new annual ION fellowship for work and study in a congressional office. The Committee said resumes and interviews will be used to determine the most qualified candidate. An eightpoint criterion was established to assess each applicant.

The new annual oneyear fellowship is open to all applicants who are members of ION, e.g., young members entering the field, persons making a career change who want a period for planning and study, retired persons, university or institutional personnel on sabbatical, etc. Applicants are to be solicited through ION publications, by direct mailings and ION web page advertisements

Once selected, the Congressional Fellow will receive an indoctrination course run by the American Association for the Advancement of Science; the ION is an affiliate of the AAAS. The Fellow will receive a small salary, plus moving and incidental expenses, for one year of work on Capital Hill (ION headquarters has budgeted about $60,000 a year for the program).

The Council voted to established a Congressional Fellows Selection Committee to oversee the program, and subsequently named Dr. Greenspan as chair. Backers hope to name the first Congressional Fellow this year.

New Award

In other actions, the Council approved the concept of establishing a new award for the use of navigation in a space environment, such as guidance used by NASA in planetary probes of Mars and other missions or for satellite positioning, but asked that an updated version of the eligibility requirements be submitted to the June council meeting. The award would be named after the Danish astronomer, Tycho Brahe.

The Council agreed to cosponsor the sixth Kinematic International Symposium, June 48, 2001, to be held at the Banff Center in Alberta, Canada.

Budget Request Increases For GPS Modernization And NDGPS
____________________________________________

President Clinton is asking Congress for $66 million in the Department of Defense (DoD) budget next fiscal year for the civil downpayment on GPS modernization costs, seeking to restore funds slashed b y lawmakers last year, and regain momentum in the program.

The Administration’s budget also includes $18.7 million under the Coast Guard for continued growth of the National Differential GPS (NDGPS) system of broadcast reference stations located in the interior of the country. The system, capable of providing positioning to within less than 10 meters in most U.S. localities, ties into the Coast Guard’s existing coastal DGPS system and is integrated into NOAA’s base CORs (Continuously Operating Reference Stations) network.

Defense Sanctuary

The total of $66 million in ‘modernization’ funds would restore the entire $17 million for GPS cut by Congress in the current fiscal year (FY2000), as well as expand funding for second year costs of the program. The principle benefits of the proposed ‘modernization’ program are the addition of civil C/A codes to L2 and to a new L5 carrier, a new M or military code, along with new ground control facilities and other related facilities.

By putting the entire civil funding request in the DoD budget, federal civil agencies hope to find a haven from the hostile congressional committees that killed the first attempt, last year, to get funding through the Federal Aviation Agency for GPS modernization. Congressional committees handling transportation funding balked last year at burdening one agency — the FAA — with the costs of a program benefiting multiple civil departments and agencies. In contrast to the civil side, the military got most of the GPS money it requested last year from Congress.

“The Administration decided we have a better chance of attaining congressional support by putting the full request for civil GPS modernization into the Defense Department budget,” Joseph Canny, Department of Transportation (DoT) assistant secretary for navigation systems policy, told the ION Newsletter.

“The Defense authorization and appropriations committees are knowledgeable about GPS, they have been supportive of the military modernization efforts,” Canny explained. “Thus, based on that and the recognition that civilian committees have had questions about putting the full cost of civil modernization on either highways or aviation users, it just seemed that the more effective way was to put it all in the DoD budget.”

The civil portion of modernization amounts to a special transfer fund at the Pentagon. “Defense is being provided the extra money on top of their defense funding,” Canny assured. “It will not come out of defense funding.”

WAAS, LAAS Renewed

The Administration’s budget, submitted to Congress Feb. 7, also includes requests to sustain the FAA’s Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) and Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS).

For WAAS, Clinton asked for $113 million for FY2001; Congress last year cut the FAA’s FY2000 request from $111 million to $82 million. For LAAS, the Administration seeks $11 million, the same amount as in FY2000; Congress cut that last year to $2.9 million.

What It Buys

The modernization effort, for both civil and military users, promises dramatic improve-ments in GPS capabilities in the new centu-ry. DoD is considering various options. While upgrading the system for military users with a new M-code on L1 and L2 for the last 12 Block IIR satellites, the Pentagon plans to add the civil C/A code to L2 at the same time at relatively economical cost.

DoT and other civil agencies remain committed to the addition of a third civil frequency, L5, for the follow-on Block IIF generation of spacecraft. Pending resolution of funding issues, DoD is considering options of placing an L5 on the first space-craft in the series, or, optionally, starting with the seventh bird in the IIF series. The new M-code, and a C/A code on L2, are pro-grammed to be on the entire IIF series of spacecraft. Beyond this, the military wants to add a 20 db anti-jam spot beam on the IIFs; the initial funding request for this Navwar initiative is in the pending FY2001 Defense budget.

For the NDGPS program, the requested FY2001 funding is designed to help the Coast Guard “build up steam again,” according to Canny. Congress cut the NDGPS program in half for FY2000, from $10.7 million to about $5 million; the request for $18.7 million for FY2001 in operating and capital costs will restore some of the lost ground, and allow the construction of an estimated 25 additional reference stations, compared to only about 10 stations implemented in the current FY2000. The budget also covers costs for control site enhancements and related facilities.

Although GPS will be but a small part of the upcoming budget battles between a lame duck Administration and a GOP-con-trolled Congress in an election year, the funding issue is critical to the future viabil-ity of GPS in the face of competition from Europe’s Galileo initiative. The final fate of Federal financial support for GPS, however, won’t be known in full until fall.

From the Editor
The Lost And Found Department

____________________________________________

Ptting the money for civil ‘modernization’ costs of GPS in the military budget for next fiscal year (FY2001) may be what the British colloquially call a “one off,” merely a onetime event to get past a rough spot, not to be repeated. (As noted in Budget Request Increases for GPS Modernization and NDGPS, page 1, the Clinton Administration in its final year has requested $66 million in the Defense budget for civil improvements to GPS.)

The President proposes, the Congress disposes, as the cliche goes, so how this request will fare is not yet known. But it does serve to emphasize the sad state of GPS geopolitics in Washington. Funding for one of the nation’s most fundamental, most critical resources — accurate positioning and timing services based on GPS — looks to have perhaps found a temporary haven, but not a permanent home.

The government has a central GPS coordinating body. It is the Interagency GPS Executive Board (IGEB), composed of civil agencies with GPS interests and jointly run by the Departments of Defense and Transportation. Now, IGEB has filled the job of director for the IGEB executive secretariat (see article on Greg Finley, page 3). Still, each agency in IGEB will retain its own budget and management of GPS resources within that specific agency.

Since its creation in 1996, the IGEB has not provided effective management of GPS, nor resolved the funding issue that provoked Congress last year to zap all civil GPS modernization monies for the current FY2000. The IGEB never was able, for example, to decide what the GPS modernization package should be; it offered interesting options for a third civil frequency but couldn’t agree on a single consensus recommendation. And GPS narrowly dodged a fatal bullet when a move by mobile satellite communications operators to grab spectrum failed at the 11th hour at the WRC in Geneva in 1997. It was a Keystone Cops act: lack of central U.S. policy guidance. In short, the IGEB has been useful, providing coordination where none existed before, but fairly ineffective in establishing coherent national policy.

In contrast, the Pentagon appears to be a modern example of efficient management. It speaks with one voice on GPS policy and funding, its stewardship of the satellite system has been superb, the Air Force appointed Independent Review Team (IRT), a prestigious collection of GPS talents that is still functioning, came up with the signal and code structures for adding the civil signals to L2, and establishing the new L5 civil frequency. The IRT has consistently called for better GPS management structure, and it continues to do so today.

A number of ideas have been floated around the Mall to improve the management of GPS. A paper presented at the January ION Technical Meeting in Anaheim, entitled “A National GPtS Program Office: An Alternative to the Current GPS Management Structure,” explores some options. The authors — David A. Turner and George A. Paulikas of the Aerospace Corp., and Arnold E Donahue of the Natl. Academy of Public Administration — examined a number of different existing federal offices as models for a national GPtS office, such as the National Reconnaissance Office and the National Drug Czar. The paper raises the level of debate, but it makes no recommendations.

So, what’s the answer? The IGEB is circulating a proposal for a National GPS Plan. But it doesn’t fully address now the need for an effective central office, one that can speak with one voice on funding to a few knowledgeable congressional committees, instead of the sprawl of 22 committees now with some juris-diction over GPS. One perhaps linked to the White House that can coordinate national policy, and even U.S. policy initiatives abroad.

One that treats positioning and timing — not as a GPS satellite or a component in a sys-tem — but as a national/international service, an essential resource in the operation of power grids, telecommunications networks, navigation for trains/planes/ships/ cars, tim-ing for a banking transaction at your local ATM machine, the construction of highways and bridges, dispatch of emergency fire/ police/ambulance vehicles, even in the loca-tion of your secret fishing spot. And the need is urgent. Competition from abroad for spectrum and for global technological leadership in p&t (positioning & timing), along with the uncer-tainty of change in the U.S. Administration next year, make this an imperative case.

Part 2: Setting the Record Straight
What Made GPS Such a Success This Century?
By Roger Easton

____________________________________________

Roger Easton, an ION Fellow formerly with the Naval Research Laboratory, would like to set the record straight. He takes exception to parts of the article, “What Made GPS Such A Success This Century,” written by Dennis Galvin, Boeing, printed in the last issue of this newsletter (fall, p. 3). In the interest of open discussion, we print the bulk of Easton’s letter below.

“How can GPS be described? To me the critical ingredient is its use of passive ranging, i.e., it enables a user to find his position by measuring the range to several satellites without interrogating them. This passive ranging was patented at the Naval Research Laboratory and developed under the sponsorship of the Naval Air Systems Command. It was first demonstrated to the sponsor in October 1964.

“Other navigation systems were proposed but most used an interrogation of the satellite by a ground station.

“Another characteristic of GPS is that it uses about two dozen satellites in several orbital planes, all in circular orbits with subsynchronous periods. The use of passive ranging makes it necessary that all the satellite transmissions be synchronized—hence the need for highly stable frequency sources in the satellites.

“Now rubidium clocks enter the picture. But rather than being ‘found’ at Efratom in Costa Mesa, CA, by Richard Schwartz of Rockwell, as Mr. Galvin wrote, they were ‘found’ at Efratom, a company located in Munich, Germany, by Robert Kern and Arthur McCoubrey. They were flown in the third TIMATION satellite on June 14, 1974 after being modified by the NRL. This satellite was also known as NTS1, or Navigation Technology Satellite Number 1.

“In addition to ‘finding’ the Efratom units, Mr. Kern and company developed the first cesium units flown in the fourth TIMATION (also known as NTS2) on June 23, 1977, and most of the cesium units subsequently flown in GPS satellites.

“In summary, I feel Mr. Galvin ignored some of the early history of GPS, omitted its unique characteristic, and failed to state accurately how the atomic units were ‘found.’ On the other hand, Mr. Galvin should not feel too badly — the historical basis of GPS has been mangled by many writers who should know better.”

—Signed, Roger Easton, Fellow, ION

____________________________________________

____________________________________________

The DoD Support Center

OneStopShopping for Military GPS Users

By Ted Driver

I June 1999, the United States Space Command took formal steps to implement a support center for military and government Global Positioning System (GPS) users worldwide. The Center was created to meet three main objectives:

1. Detect, analyze and report anomalies, and facilitate their resolutions.
2. Monitor and report GPS performance.
3. Provide GPS status, constellation status, and tactical support.

In addition to describing these objectives in more detail, this article will outline the creation of the GPS Support Center (GSC) and discuss its products and services.

Creation of the GSC

U.S. Space Command is the official Department of Defense (DoD) focal point for all military operational space systems, including GPS. Specifically, Annex 3 of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the DoD and the Department of Transportation (DOT) establishes U.S. Space Command as the DoD focal point for all GPS service disruptions.

In 1998, the U.S. Air Force formed a quality review panel to discuss the GPS services being provided to both military and key government civil agencies. The decision was clear: DoD and Federal Agency users of the constellation required a single point of contact to address technical concerns, provide performance assessments and assist in anomaly detection and resolution. Furthermore, the “1800GPSHELP” line should serve as the single point for civil inputs requiring the attention of the DoD in its role as system service provider.

Numerous military and civil issues highlighted the immediate need for a single, consolidated GPS Support Center. In response to these issues, Secretary of Defense William Cohen tasked Gen. Estes, Commander in Chief of U.S. Space Command, to “establish a (GPS) reporting and resolution process.” While funding for the Support Center originally was allocated in FY 1998, the DoD’s extensive support requirements resulting from Hurricane Mitch caused a delay in funding until FY 1999.

Support Center Mission

The mission of the GPS Support Center is to:

1. Facilitate resolution of GPS service disruptions
2. Facilitate resolution of user equipment problems
3. Maintain the DoD GPS problem report database
4. Monitor system level performance
• Assure complicance with military and civil directives
5. Provide tactical support to military forces
• Exploitation of GPS in mission planning
• Assessments of GPS mission effectiveness As the DoD’s focal point for GPS operational

As the DoD’s focal point for GPS operational matters, the GSC serves as U.S. Space Command’s interface with the civilian community. The interface is established through the U.S. Coast Guard’s (USCG) Navigation Center (NAVCEN) and the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) National Operations Control Center (NOCC). Requests from the civilian community that require GPS performance analysis or additional information are forwarded from the NAVCEN to the GSC. Figure 1 depicts some of the organizations affected by the GPS Support Center.

GSC Products and Services

The objectives listed above are described here, with the products and services of the GPS Support Center listed under each objective.

Objective 1: Detect, Analyze, Report and Facilitate the Resolution Of GPS Anomalies.

The GSC records anomalous events that affect user performance. Primary categories of anomalies the GSC receives are Control Segment and Space Segment failures, atmospheric aberrations and solar effects, receiver problems and radio frequency interference (RFI). The GSC has many sources of data available to it, but in most cases anomalies will be detected either by the 2nd Space Operations Squadron (2 SOPS) at Schriever AFB or, more likely, by a user experiencing substandard performance.

In order to manage reported anomalies properly, the GSC maintains a problem reporting database. This gives the GSC the ability to correlate problem reports that may have common causes, identify possible reasons for reported problems and identify the best agent to work the problem. This single repository for GPS anomaly information allows GSC analysts to quickly coordinate anomaly investigation efforts and assist U.S. Space Command in assessing the scope and ramifications of anomalies.

Objective 2: Monitor and Report GPS Performance.

This objective provides the GSC with the role of routinely collecting, analyzing and reporting Precise Positioning Service (PPS) performance on a global basis and regional assessments of Standard Positioning Service (SPS). There are a number of reasons for providing these capabilities: Performance trends can point out possible long term performance problems; Raw performance data provides a pointofdeparture for analyzing problem reports and removing possible candidate causes from consideration; and routine performance reporting provides military decision makers with better information on which to base operational decisions.

Meeting this objective requires the continuous collection of raw data from the GPS Control Segment and the processing of that data to generate global PPS assessments. Assessments for range, position and time parameters are routinely provided via the GSC’s classified and unclassified websites.

Another key piece of the performance assessment puzzle is the characterization of GPS PPS receiver performance to include acquisition, satellite selection strategies, thermal noise behaviors and cryptography implementation. This information is used in conjunction with Master Control Station data to estimate total PPS position and time error from a user’s perspective.

The data from these analyses can be used to determine compliance with military and civil directives for GPS performance.

Objective 3: Provide GPS Status, Constellation Status, and Tactical Support.

The GSC uses various means to provide GPS status, satellite constellation status and tactical support to the user communities so they can conduct mission operations. The GSC provides periodic reports, updated web page content, and tactical support for specific missions. All reports incorporate planned and actual satellite outages and orbit changes. In particular, the following products and services are currently provided:
• Anomaly resolution techniques and reports.
• GPS satellite visibility reports.
• GPS PPS performance projections (dilution of precision, accuracy, visibility) for standard and special areas of operation.
• Tactical support and mission planning.

These objectives provide a codification of the ideals set forth in Annex 3 of the MOA between the DoD and DoT. These objectives also meet the prevalent need for GPS support to military and government users. The GPS Support Center provides “onestopshopping” support for all U.S. military GPS users worldwide, providing answers to simple questions as well as tactical analysis for GPS specific missions. • Responses to general requests for information.

Contacting the GPS Support Center

Civilian users can contact the GPS Support Center for military and government issues through the U.S. Coast Guard’s Navigation Center. The NAVCEN can be reached via the following: Web: www.navcen.ucsg.mil Phone: (703) 3135900.

—Ted Driver is an Operations Analyst at the GSC. The author extends his thanks to John Lavrakas and Daniel Knezha, Overlook Systems Technologies, for their invaluable help in writing the article above.

____________________________________________

____________________________________________

Portney's Corner

Courtesy of Litton G&C Systems

The New Millennium Theme Park

This month’s Brain Game was inspired by a treatment of the challenge by Tom Logsdon in his fascinating book Orbital Mechanics and Theory Applications listed in the bibliography (who was assisted in the solution By Janis Indrikis). He also provided the derivation of the minimum time equations.

Question

The New Millennium Theme Park, on the fringes of the Santa Mountains, is conducting a competition for the design and installation of the fastest slide. The slides are coated with zeromu, a frictionless composite material. (Specification: both vertical fall and horizontal displacement are 100 feet).

Which one of the following proposed designs was selected?

A: Convex Solutions — a concave down shaped slide
B: Cyclex Systems — a cycloid shaped slide
C: Linear Mechanics — a flat shaped slide
D: Great Circle Travel Systems — an arc of a circle shaped slide

The minimum time path between two points in a constant one-g gravitational field (at different elevations) is a cycloid also known as the brachistochrone (shortest from the Greek) when concave up. The cyloid is the locus of a point on a circle (rim of a wheel) as the circle (or wheel) rolls along a smooth surface and the point the wheel returns back to its origin (one revolution through 2) as portrayed Figure 1. The solution of this path, as the optimal minimum time of travel in 1696, was made by Isaac Newton in less than a day in response to a challenge by the Bernoulli brothers (who had allowed up to six months for its solution). Also claimed with solving this challenge were Gottfried Leibnitz, Guillaume L’Hopital and the Bernoulli brothers themselves. This occurred 31 years aftter the discovery of calculus in 1665. The solution was not simple and required the development of the calculus of variations.

Inverting the cycloid of Figure 1 to concave up yields the brachistochrone.

Solving the two parametric equations for the value of (a) the radius and q the rotation angle through a horizontal and vertical distance of 100 feet on the cycloid is obtained by simple iteration of simultaneous equations: x = 100 = a(qsinq) y = 100 = a(1cosq) Which gives: a = 57.2925 and q = 138.2°.

The time for the player to complete the descent (derivation shown at the end) on the slide is

and the path equation x = a(qsinq), y = a(1cosq) is differentiated and substituted in the integral of the time of descent for the slide shown in Figure 2. t = 3.23 sec.

For a flat slide, the slope = dy/dx= m from y= mx, substitute m for y’ and mx for y in the time equation when m = 1 (since slope is 45°) the time of descent is t = 3.53 sec and for an arc of a circle slide the time of descent is t = 3.27 sec.

The derivation of the minimum time path shown is: the ordinary derivative

as contrasted by variation


To minimize I in finding the optimum path, the calculus of variations is employed


This function will achieve a minimum value when its first variation is zero and its second variation becomes positive. This parallels determining the minimum slope when the first derivative is zero and the second derivative is positive in differential calculus.

In minimizing I, the second order differential equation is solved using the EulerLaGrange Method.


The time equation is then written as:

Applying the EulerLaGrange Equation

Implying

an arbitrary constant

squaring and rearranging terms

then

The physics for the sliding board deals with the exchange of energy for kinetic energy at any distance y 1/2 mv = mgy solving for velocity yields v = [ 2gy]

The time of descent for the player is therefore

differentiating the parametric equations x=a(qsinq), y= a(1cos) dx=a(1cos)dq, dy = asindqdq, thus dy/dx = sinq/(1cosq) = y’ and 1 + y’ = 1 + [sinq/(1cos )] 2 = 2/(1cosq) by substitution in the time integral: (note that g º = g = 32 fps 2 )

t = 3.23
For the flat board, the slope is

Then

where m = 1 results in

Performance comparisons of the flat board, cycloid and circular arc slides are depicted in Figure 3. If the horizontal displacement were increased to 160 feet, the advantage of the cycloid would be more pronounced: flat board 4.64 sec, cycloid 3.91 sec and circular arc 4.54 sec.

Commentary on the cycloid/ brachistochrone:
• Minimum time path
• Pendulum using brach istochrone would have equal periods regardless of amplitude
• Regardless of position on path a particle would come to rest at the same time and position (isochronous)
• Used in gear design to minimize slippage
• Ascent trajectory of Space Shuttle conforms to this curve to minimize travel time and energy

Bibliography

Hartog J.P. Mechanics. New York: Dover Publications Inc., 1961

Logsdon, Tom. Orbital Mechanics Theory and Applications. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1998

Misner, Charles W., Kip S. Thorne and John A. Wheeler. Gravitation. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1970

Solkolnikoff, I. S. and R. M. Redheffer. Mathematics of Physics and Modern Engineering. New York: McGrawHill Book Company, Inc., 1958

Tenenbaum, Morris and Harry Pollard. Ordinary Differential Equations.New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1985

A dynamic demonstration of the brachistochrone can be viewed at http://galileo.imss.firenze.it/museo/a/brachi.avi

CALENDAR

____________________________________________

MARCH 2000
13-16:
Position Location and Navigation Symposium (PLANS) Paradise Point Hotel, San Diego, CA
Contact: Plans 2000
Web site: http://www.plansieee.org
Tel: 6129517600

MAY 2000
1-4:
GNSS 2000; Edinburgh International Conference Centre Edinburgh, Scotland
Contact: Conference Secretariat, In Conference Ltd.,
Tel: 44(0)131 556 9245
Fax: 44(0) 131 556 9638
Email: info@inconference.org.uk

7-12: 2000
RTCM Annual Assembly Meeting; Paradise Point Hotel San Diego, CA
Contact: W. T. Adams, RTCM
Tel: 7036844481
Fax: 7038364229

29-31:
7th Saint Petersburg International Conference on Integrated Navigation Systems;
St. Petersburg, Russia Contact: Dr. George Schmidt, Draper Laboratory
Email: gschmidt@draper.com or
Prof. V. Peshekhonov, Russian Academy of Navigation and Motion Control,
Email: elprib@erbi.spb.su

JUNE 2000
26-28:
IAIN World Congress in association with the U.S. ION Annual Meeting;
Catamaran Hotel San Diego, CA, USA Contact: ION,
Tel: 7036837101
Fax: 7036837105
Web site: http://www.ion.org

SEPTEMBER 2000
19-22:
ION GPS 2000 Salt Palace Convention Center,
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA Contact: ION,
Tel: 7036837101
Fax: 7036837105 Web site: http://www.ion.org

____________________________________________

____________________________________________

Section News

ROCKY MOUNTAIN SECTION. William Hoffman of Colorado Space briefed attendees on the goals of his organiza tion during the Jan. 20th meeting of the Section. Hoffman urged the Section to become a member of Colorado Space, an umbrella group formed to promote development of spacebased businesses in Colorado. A decision is pending. The Section is continuing its program, called “Academic Achievement in Navigation,” to provide instruction to students in local schools in the science of navigation. The evolving program of study, for all grade levels, will culminate in a judging and awards ceremony. New officers unani mously elected for the coming year: Ted Driver, chair; Pat Sharrett, vicechair; Bill Brooks, treasurer, and Garth Powell, secretary. Information provided by Ted Driver.

NEW ENGLAND SECTION. The Section’s 14th meeting featured a presentation by Avram Tetewsky, Draper Laboratory, on the use of GPS simulators. Typical tests can be performed to measure signal jamming, the effects of SA on accuracy, ionospheric/tropospheric delays and mul tipath effect, a receiver’s timetofirstfix versus GPS carriertonoise ratios, RAIM algorithm effectiveness, and other parameters. Computer Software Technology, Inc. demonstrated one of their GPS simulator products at the meeting, held at the Volpe Center Jan. 12.

ALBERTA SECTION. The January 20 meeting of the Section at the Sheraton Cavalier in Calgary drew an audience of 37 that heard a presentation by Dr. Susan Skone, University of Calgary, concerning ionospheric effects on GPS. Dr. Skone noted that the solar max, scheduled around the middle of 2000, does not now look to be as severe as predicted earlier. Ron Earle of Trimble demonstrated the Trimble geomatics office PC software. Section officers: Dr. Gerard Lachapelle, chair; John Schleppe, vice chair; Jonathan Auld, treasurer, and Scott McCarron, secretary. Information provided by Scott McCarron.

News in Brief
____________________________________________

Michigan authorities in Detroit and the suburban counties of Wayne, Ma comb and Oakland are equipping 40 snowplows with a GPSbased automatic vehicle location (avl) system to track and improve management of their winter maintenance fleet. The avl equipment for the demonstration program is Orbital Science Corp.’s ORBTRAC100 system.

Two new cruise ships being built in Italy for the Princess Cruises line will carry differential GPS systems. The 3,300passenger ships will receive DGPS data via the Fugro SeaSTAR worldwide network that broadcasts the error correc tions through the global Inmarsat satellite system.

A unit composed of GPS and a solid state (digital) gyro, packaged by Beeline Navigator of Fresno, CA, provides handsfree guidance for farm and heavy equipment machinery, says the manufacturer. Meanwhile, Trimble introduced a new GPSbased autopilot system that connects to a farm tractor’s power steering system to automatically steer tractors within inches of crop rows. This may be taking us closer to the farmer’s ultimate dream: to sit under a shade tree while an unmanned machine plows the field.

The Inmarsat Board has approved a $1.4 billion fourth generation satellite system of three multibeam spacecraft, each weighing in excess of 5 tons, and associated ground network equipment. Services to lightweight mobile units will include internetbased ebusiness, video conferencing, and telephone. The high bandwidth system is envisioned as a natural extension to third generation multimedia terrestrial cellular systems, says Inmarsat. One narrow beam will be able to provide 144432 Kbps service, from double to more than six times the highdata rate now available. The satellites are to be in service by the end of 2004.

For gadgetminded travelers who own one of the popular Palm pock et organizers, Rand McNally offers a portable mapping and navigation unit that plugs into Palm III and Palm V organizers. Called Streetfinder, it includes a GPS receiver and mapping software and retails for under $200.

Receiver news. NovAtel Inc. has introduced its GPS 600 Series antenna, an aperture coupled slot array, that the company claims achieves less than 1 mm offset between L1 and L2 phase centers without the aid of a choke ring. Leica unveiled its apMK31 that contains a 12 channel GPS receiver and a twochannel DGPS receiver for marine radiobroad casts, all sealed in a single fiberglass radome. Communication Systems International (CSI) of Calgary says it has the answer to auto makers’ objec tions of adding an antenna to every car for GPS. It is an antenna splitter that uses the standard AM/FM car radio antenna to receive DGPS sig nals. CSI says the playingcard size splitter unit has a connector that plugs into CSI’s DGPS receiver.

The Difinitive
____________________________________________

Source 1999 Federal Radionavigation Plan is Published
By Michael E. Shaw and James V. Carroll

The Secretaries of Transportation and Defense recently approved the 1999 Federal Radionavigation Plan, commonly known as the FRP. The FRP is the definitive source for U.S. government policy and plans for radionavigation services provided by the U.S. government. Following several delays due to a number of significant radionavigation budgetary and policy developments discussed below, the 1998 Federal Radionavigation Plan (FRP) — renamed the 1999 Federal Radionavigation Plan — has now been approved and published.

1999 FRP Highlights The FRP covers developments in GPS and its augmentations, radiobeacons, ILS, VOR/DME, LoranC, and TACAN. Recent FRPs reflect the greatly expanding use of GPS and its various augmentations. The augmentations include the FAA Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) and Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS), the USCG maritime DGPS (MDGPS) system, and the Nationwide DGPS system.

Developments included in the FRP: implementation of two new civil GPS frequencies, continuance of LoranC for the short term, delay in the operation of the initial phase of WAAS, and delay in the planned phase down of many groundbased aeronautical navigation systems.

The GPS system will be undergoing a major modernization. The 1999 FRP reiterates the March 1998 announcement by Vice President Gore that a second nonsafetycritical CAcoded civil signal will be provided at the GPS L2 frequency (1227.60 MHz), and that a third signal for safetyoflife applications would be identified and implemented. In January 1999, the Vice President announced the selection of the third civil signal (designated the L5) at 1176.45 MHz, part of the spectrum allocated for aeronautical radio navigation services. These new signals are expected to begin to be launched around the 2005 timeframe.

LoranC Extended Regarding the status and future use of LoranC, the 1999 FRP incorporates the recent decision that the Administration will continue to operate LoranC in the short term while continuing to evaluate the longterm need for its continuation. Impetus for retention of LoranC beyond the previous 2000 termination date came in part from a BoozAllen and Hamilton costbenefit analysis. In addition, an FAA Satnav investment analysis completed in September 1999 included LoranC in a list of systems that would be retained at least until WAAS and LAAS demonstrate necessary performance and reliability goals. According to the 1999 FRP, the initial operating capability of WAAS is now expected by the end of 2000. The WAAS full operating capability consequently has slipped to the year 2006, provided that WAAS achieves system performance criteria.

The 1999 FRP now anticipates a phasedown of the groundbased aids (VOR/DME, ILS, and the military version of VOR/DME, TACAN) to begin in 2008. This date also is tied to WAAS performance. Under the plan, the phasedown will leave a basic backup network of several hundred VOR/DME facilities, some Category I ILS, and all Category II/III ILS facilities, to serve primarily the busiest airports for all flight phases, in the case of satellite disruption. In addition to the FAA groundbased aids, backup systems could include inertial navigation systems, a barometric altimeter/GPS combination (which may be able to meet navigation requirements through nonprecision approach for GPS unaugmented by WAAS or LAAS), LoranC, or a combination of systems.

In other areas, the U.S. Coast Guard declared full operational capability of the MDGPS service in March 1999. The MDGPS system uses upgraded Coast Guard directional beacons that broadcast DGPS corrections in the 285325 kHz maritime radiobeacon band. In support of Positive Train Control and other applications, the MDGPS also is being expanded to a Nationwide DGPS service to provide coverage for all areas of the United States not presently covered by MDGPS. NDGPS is expected to provide single station broadcast coverage of the continental U.S. by the end of 2002, and dual coverage of all of the U.S. except portions of Alaska

and Hawaii by December 31, 2003. NDGPS uses the same broadcast band as MDGPS.

1999 FRP Availability The 1999 FRP is available on the internet through the USCG Navigation Information Service, (703) 3135900, or http://www.navcen. uscg.mil. Printed documents are free of charge and should be available by the end of March. (Fax request to J. Carroll, Volpe Center for Navigation, (617) 4942628.)

—Michael Shaw is with the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, Washington, D.C.; and James Carroll is with the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, MA.

GPS Civil Forum Set For March
____________________________________________

The Civil GPS Service Interface Committee (CGSIC) will hold a threeday meeting in suburban Washington, D.C., at the Fair Oaks Holiday Inn in Fairfax, VA, March 28–30.

A condensed meeting agenda is listed below. Thursday afternoon will be devoted to discussion by all users, government and industry, of issues involved in the preparation of the next biannual Federal Radio navigation Plan—the definitive policy document for all federal radionavigation services. Systems covered in the FRP include GPS; differential GPS and other GPS aug mentations; LoranC; VOR/ DME; TACAN; Radiobeacons; and ILS/MLS. On March 28, CGSIC speakers will outline federal policies concerning these systems so there will be no need to repeat the information at the FRP meet ing on March 30. The complete agenda is available at www.navcen.uscg.mil.

Tuesday, March 28
Meeting Welcome and Opening
Capt. Thomas Rice, USCG NAVCEN

Policy Update
Joseph Canny, Dep. Asst. Secretary, DoT/OST

FRP/Loran Report
Mike Shaw, DoT/OST

Nationwide DGPS
Cdr. John Macaluso, DoT/OST
FAA Satellite Navigation Programs – FAA
Coast Guard Navigation Programs – USCG

DoD Policy Update
GPS Modernization
Constellation Health and Sustainment
GPS Operational Control Segment (OCS)
Interference Reporting/ Processing/Tracking

General Session
GPS Spectrum Issues, Sally Frodge, DoT/OST
WRC Preparations, TBD
CGSIC Report, Capt. Thomas Rice

Wednesday, March 29
International Session
Mike Savill, Chair. (See Navcen Web site for speakers)

Timing Subcommittee
W. Lewandowski, BIPM, Chair
(See Navcen Web site for speakers)

Thursday, March 30
U.S. States and Localities
James A. Arnold, FHWA, and Rudy Persaud, SD
DOT (See Navcen Web site for speakers)
Open Discussion and Conference Close
Afternoon: FRP User Conference

From the ION Historian
____________________________________________

One of a Series of Columns
By ION Historian Marvin May
Fifty Years Ago ...

With all the hoopla over the new century and millennium, we easily lose appreciation over how much has changed in only 50 years.

A few trivia questions exemplify the scope of the changes. Can you imagine life today without copying machines? The first Xerox machine was produced in 1950. When was the last time you saw an elevator operator? The first selfservice elevator was installed 50 years ago by Otis Elevator in Dallas.

Traveling to Europe? On September 1, 1950, Col. David C. Schilling (USAF) made the first nonstop transatlantic jet flight in 10 hours and 1 minute. Are you a college basketball aficionado? The City College of New York, that perennial college basketball powerhouse, won both the NCAA and NIT tournament championships. Need to snail mail a few letters? The cost of a firstclass postage stamp was three cents. Trying to keep your kids entertained? Saturday morning TV children’s programming first began. Trying to keep yourself entertained? Broadway classic “Guys and Dolls” began the first of its 1200 performances and Charles Schulz’s “Peanuts” comics strip was introduced.

In world events, the Korean War began when North Korean Communist forces invaded South Korea.

During February 1950, an obscure Senator from Wisconsin, Joseph McCarthy, gained national attention when he charged that the State Department had been infiltrated by Communists. Although a Senate investigating committee exonerated the State Department and branded the charges a fraud and a hoax, McCarthy continued to wield great power as he repeated his claims in a series of radio and television appearances. McCarthy’s indiscriminate attacks gave rise to the term “McCarthyism,” which denotes similar assaults characterized by sensationalist tactics and unsubstantiated accusations. McCarthyism is now looked on not through the image of one man but as a period of anticommunist hysteria that preceded and survived McCarthy himself. The legacy of this Cold War period for the United States was the abandonment of a flexible foreign policy in favor of a simplistic bipolar view of good (capitalism) vs. evil (Communism).

The influence of the Cold War was pervasive. The ION Journal, which was only four years old at the time, also reflected the mood of the times. The ION President’s message in the Journal of September 1950 was entitled “Navigational Science and National Security.” President Paul Rosenberg expounded the theme that: “In our times navigational science is no longer a simple peacetime study to be pursued leisurely for profit, safety, or pleasure. Navigation has become a vital factor in the military preparation for our country.” The message concluded: “Thus navigation and navigational science have become part of the sinews of war. And it becomes our responsibility, as navigators, as scientists, and as member of the ION, to do all in our power to furnish these sinews, and to strengthen them, to the end that we may increase the defenses of our country, insure our national security, and safeguard our freedom.”

Corresponding to the Cold War temperament, the influence of the Federal Government in navigation was omnipresent. The entire summer 1950 ION Journal was devoted to the role of the Federal Government in navigation. The President of the Institute stated: “As we advance the art and science of navigation, we look to our Government to exercise the necessary supervision.” Included in this volume were articles by now extinct or renamed Federal Agencies such as the Hydrographic Office, the Nautical Almanac Office, the Bureau of Aeronautics, the Research and Development Board, the Civil Aeronautics Board, the Bureau of Maritime Services, and the Bureau of Ships. The same consolidation megatrend which has revamped the Federal bureaucracy over the last fifty years, also has affected the navigation industry. Fifty years ago, advertising in the ION Journal was encouraged, and company names such as Link Aviation, Servo Corporation of America, Sperry Gyroscope Company, Square D Company, and Weems Systems of Navigation were prominent.

In 2000, the isolation and paranoia associated with McCarthyism has largely vanished. In navigation, GPS, now the dominant Federal system, is no longer controlled only by DoD, but by an Interagency Executive Board. A further step towards internationalism of the technology is the potential formation of the Global Navigation Satellite System.

Corporate Profile
____________________________________________

U.S. Coast Guard R&D Center

The Research and Development (R&D) Center is the Coast Guard’s sole facility performing research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) in support of the Coast Guard’s major missions of Maritime Law Enforcement, Maritime Safety, Marine Environmental Protection and National Security. These efforts are broad and varied, and manifest themselves by supporting the acquisition and regulatory processes, and improving the efficiency and effectiveness of Coast Guard operations and resources.

The R&D Center is located in Groton, Connecticut, on the grounds of the University of Connecticut, Avery Point campus.

The Research and Development Program is comprised of scientists, engineers, and support personnel who are uniquely qualified and positioned to introduce science and technology into the Coast Guard.

Research and Development personnel have both expertise on, and experience with, the business practices (missions, policies, plans and processes) of the operational and support personnel accomplishing the missions of the Coast Guard, as well as the knowledge of existing and emerging science and technology.

The R&D Center uses these strengths to help the Coast Guard improve through technology and become an essential element of the Coast Guard performance improvement.

National Technical Meeting Draws a Crowd
____________________________________________

A ttendance at the National Technical Meeting in January neared the 500 mark. More than 140 quality technical papers were on the program at the threeday meeting, called 2000: Navigating into the New Millennium, held at the Pacific Hotel Disneyland, January 26 – 28.

The technical program was high lighted by both a Plenary Session that provided uptodate perspec tives on GPS JPO Modernization, Positioning and Timing, and the GPS Galileo Industry, as well as two well attended classified sessions on GPS Modernization and Navigation Warfare.

Jim Doherty, Institute for Defense Analysis, was General Chair, and Dan Crouch, USAF, 746th Test Squadron, served as Program Chair.

Special thanks to the following companies that sponsored table top displays.
Applanix H Seatex, Inc.
Dynamics Research Corporation
GPS World Magazine
Cast, Inc. H 746th Test Squadron
Allen Osborne Associates, Inc.
American GNC
Quartzlock (UK)
Litton Systems, Inc. H NAWCAD
Raytheon Systems Co.

Correction Notice

The ION regrets that the following GPS ’99 papers were inadvertently omitted from the GPS ’99 Proceedings. These papers will be included in the soon to be published National Technical Meeting 2000 Proceedings. Copies can also be obtained by contacting the ION Publication Department.

LAMOS-BOHSAITM: Landslide Monitoring System Based On High-speed Sequential Analysis for Inclination, I. Petrovski, S. Kawaguchi, H. Torimoto, M. Asako, T. Chachin, K. Okano, DX Antenna Co., Ltd. (Geodesy, Engineering & Deformation Monitoring Session)

SAASM Rockwell Collins’ Next Generation GPS Receiver Design, J. Nielson, J. Keefer, B. McCullough, Rockwell Collins Government Systems (Military Applications & Anti-Jam Technologies Session)

_______________________________________________________________ ______________________________

Close Window / Return to ION Website