loped_index writes "IT Week reports that the U.S. GPS system is in a delicate state, and that full coverage could be lost if older satellites fail faster than the current rate. From the article: 'The system relies on a network of satellites, which cannot be repaired once launched and have a limited lifespan. Sixteen of the present 28 satellites were built to last seven and a half years, but are now between eight and 14 years old. Twenty-four satellites are required for full coverage.'" Doubts About Future GPS Reliability Log in/Create an Account | Top | 174 comments | Search Discussion Display Options Threshold: -1: 174 comments 0: 170 comments 1: 125 comments 2: 80 comments 3: 37 comments 4: 21 comments 5: 16 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way. Oh dear (Score:5, Funny) by Britissippi (565742) on Friday October 14, @05:15PM (#13793955) (Last Journal: Wednesday March 27, @10:41AM) We'll never find them when they fall then..? [ Reply to This1 reply beneath your current threshold. Always good to know... (Score:3, Funny) by Nom du Keyboard (633989) on Friday October 14, @05:15PM (#13793957) Always good to know I'll have something more to worry about this weekend. I was afraid I was going to run short. [ Reply to This Time to look backward for a backup (Score:2) by geomon (78680) on Friday October 14, @05:16PM (#13793961) (http://www.cato.org/ | Last Journal: Sunday April 17, @02:12AM) I guess we shouldn't have jettisoned WBS [nist.gov] so quickly. [ Reply to ThisRe:Time to look backward for a backup by jdigriz (Score:1) Friday October 14, @05:27PMRe:Time to look backward for a backup by geomon (Score:2) Friday October 14, @05:49PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. EU's Galileo (Score:3, Insightful) by innerewut (922977) on Friday October 14, @05:17PM (#13793974) (http://blog.innerewut.de/) So maybe the US will stop its attemps to prevent the European Galileo... [ Reply to ThisRe:EU's Galileo by Anonymous Coward (Score:3) Friday October 14, @05:38PMRe:EU's Galileo by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Friday October 14, @06:07PMRe:EU's Galileo by hey! (Score:1) Friday October 14, @06:04PM Re:EU's Galileo (Score:5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 14, @06:47PM (#13794572) Let me get this straight. You nearly praise the European nations and call the US incompetent, despite the EU-related solution is over 4 years off, not to mention have questionable delivery systems themselves.You take the word of a UK individual who, like folks anywhere in the world, gives talks to promote their opinion that are largely unsubstantiated unless they are privy to manufacturing data and known defects which allow him to, within reason, truly call into question satellite failure en masse. I doubt a UK RAF person will know the intimate details of the satellites. What we do know is their failure rate to date.It's not like nothing is being done with this problem and the problem is not unknown or being ignored; the US has known about this for some time now. Our delivery systems have had problems and huge delays (space shuttle, rockets blowing up), yet we still have been managing to replace the birds that do croak. And are replacing them next with longer lasting birds.You overlook the fact that many satellite systems are overbuilt and typically do last well beyond their expected lifetimes. Not all do, but a good number have (classic would be the Voyager; one still is running rather well). Until these systems start dropping rapidly faster than we can replace them, I don't see the issue. 4 of them could croak now, and you'd still get accurate info. If a 5th dies, we have one waiting to be launched already and would likely ramp up replacement schedules. If a 6th dies before all that, it depends on WHICH it dies and WHERE you are to determine if it may affect you directly.You trust this same Old World Europe at the expense of the US, yet look at the recent examples of them deliberately trying and "warning" regarding the domain system (which is something that could have occurred at any time prior anyways).You use this as an opportunity attack ad hominum US diplomacy, when that has little to do with satellite failure and more to do with their tactics of trying to get their own system (Galileo) up.I'm not a bible thumper. And yet even I know the problems with the proverb you quote and at the very least, it points to lack of real world experience on your part. Anytime I've spoken softly, the other person being receptive listened, but they weren't, I've watched people get pushed around and one person punched. Anytime I've yelled at someone, they overwhelmingly back down or at the very least snap from the focus, if temporarily, from the object of their violence. I just choose to yell when the situation merits it and that's not often, only when I've or another has been physically threatened and do so then to try to avoid or head off fights.You attack the right, making no distinction between it and the religious right, just to be critical of the US, meanwhile the EU (multiple nations too) kisses the ass of some of the most suppressive fascist and religious states in the world. Freakin hypocrite. Anytime the Old World gets involved in diplomacy, nothing of substance positive comes about to improve the world order. It's not like the EU is doing this out of the goodness of their hearts either; they want the markets, a price cut, the membership, the money just as well if not more so than the US counterparts.There will always be those who read a story about "US companies do [questionable or suspected evil activity]" and say, damn, it's all the US's fault, never asking or researching the EU or any other nation's track record on that same matter. But if the EU ballerinas in and bends over before doing a twirl and says "all will be okay, we're here", you're more inclined to take their word for it.You want to doubt and disagree with the US government? Good. I'm with you. But don't think that because you do and can that the US government is worse than some other half-baked government out there; that's a totally different set of standards and questions which you certainly have not addressed yourself. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:EU's Galileo by quax (Score:2) Friday October 14, @09:44PMRe:EU's Galileo by quax (Score:2) Friday October 14, @11:21PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:EU's Galileo by drooling-dog (Score:1) Friday October 14, @11:03PM Re:EU's Galileo (Score:5, Interesting) by theLOUDroom (556455) on Friday October 14, @06:32PM (#13794461) So maybe the US will stop its attemps to prevent the European Galileo... Actually, it looks like this whole thing may be just misinformation to drum up support for Galileo. The satellites are lasting LONGER than expected, and we have plenty of spares. It appears the article may also have the number of necessary satellites wrong.As someone else has pointed out:Bonnor said launches of new satellites are "only just keeping up" with current losses of around two satellites per year.So we HAVE SPARES and we're REPLACING THE SPARES AS WE USE THEM. Sounds like it's working just dandy. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:EU's Galileo by sch1sm (Score:1) Friday October 14, @09:13PM Re:EU's Galileo (Score:4, Interesting) by theLOUDroom (556455) on Friday October 14, @07:18PM (#13794759) The implication is that the failure rate is going to accelerate beyond the replacement rate real soon now. So if that *actually* happens they'll increase the replacement rate. Are we now also worried that the US is suddenly only going to be capable of two satellite launches per year?My point is that this is all silly sensationalism. If the failure rate doubles, no big deal, we send up a few more. The system would still have 100% uptime. For the GPS system to actually become "unreliable", failure rates would have to increase by orders of magnitude. There is no data presented to suggest such an abrupt change might take place. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:EU's Galileo by addbo (Score:1) Friday October 14, @08:02PMRe:EU's Galileo by clodney (Score:3) Friday October 14, @08:06PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:EU's Galileo by defago (Score:1) Friday October 14, @07:40PM Re:EU's Galileo (Score:4, Insightful) by theLOUDroom (556455) on Friday October 14, @08:02PM (#13794985) Thus, being able to "just keep up" with the current failure rate will not be sufficient to prevent the system from collapsing. But the implication that we're only able to just keep up is false. We're only launching that number of satellites per year because that's how many we need to provide adequate redundancy, not because it's the best we can do. We could send up more, but it would be a waste of money.What several posts fail to understand (e.g., grand parent or a few posts in parallel threads) is that the failure rate of a system is not constant over time I understand this concept, but what you're failing to properly acknowedge is that:A) The system is redundantB) The failure rate to needs to increase by orders of magnitude in order to outpace our ability to replace satellites.I highly doubt that the stastical data supports such claims.Go ahead fit the standard function to the availible data form the GPS satellites the have already failed. I bet it's going to agree with the course of action the the US is taking. Why? Because they can do the same math you can. As a matter of fact, I be they have even better data they don't publish.I am not trying to enter into the politcal side of this discussion, and I agree that the author of the article may have is own motives, but this is simply not relevant to the logic of his argumentation. There are gaping holes in his logic. Is it more likely that he's:A) incompetentB) pushing an adgenda? [ Reply to This | ParentRe:EU's Galileo by surprise_audit (Score:2) Saturday October 15, @12:36AM1 reply beneath your current threshold.1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:EU's Galileo by Poltras (Score:1) Friday October 14, @05:44PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. Well... (Score:2, Insightful) by Sheetrock (152993) on Friday October 14, @05:17PM (#13793975) (http://slashdot.org/...y&uid=442574&id=4236 | Last Journal: Thursday September 22, @05:18PM) Given that these things are about trying to figure out where you're going, we're close to the point where we don't need satellites for them anyway.When enough people have them, it'll be just as helpful to have the devices communicate with each other and work out amongst themselves where you're trying to go. Especially when you figure in the possibility of triangulating with cell towers.It's how the Internet works. [ Reply to This Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful) by merreborn (853723) on Friday October 14, @05:27PM (#13794046) we're close to the point where we don't need satellites That idea falls apart when you're in, say, the alps. Or the sahara. Or most of the planet. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Well... by $RANDOMLUSER (Score:2) Friday October 14, @05:30PMRe:Well... by robertjw (Score:2) Friday October 14, @06:01PMRe:Well... by scotch (Score:2) Friday October 14, @06:10PMRe:Well... by Detritus (Score:3) Friday October 14, @06:31PMRe:Well... by Asetilean (Score:2) Friday October 14, @06:42PMRe:Well... by WhiplashII (Score:2) Friday October 14, @08:37PMRe:Well... by camt (Score:2) Friday October 14, @05:29PMRe:Well... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Friday October 14, @05:41PMRe:Well... by meloneg (Score:1) Friday October 14, @06:17PMRe:Well... by Baricom (Score:2) Saturday October 15, @12:19AM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Well... by ptbarnett (Score:2) Friday October 14, @08:28PMRe:Well... by provolt (Score:2) Friday October 14, @11:14PMRe:Wrong! by Sheetrock (Score:2) Friday October 14, @05:43PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.2 replies beneath your current threshold. Well that sucks... (Score:1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 14, @05:19PM (#13793981) First the Internet, now this. :/ [ Reply to This1 reply beneath your current threshold. Yada yada (Score:5, Insightful) by Red Flayer (890720) on Friday October 14, @05:19PM (#13793984) Is it just me, or does everyone else also realize we're still capable of launching new satellites into orbit? Is there a concern about current GPS-enabled devices reading signals from new satellites? I'd be shocked if there is not money available in the Pentagon Budget, or elswhere, for replacement of needed satellites. Then again, cutting funding of absolutely necessary programs is a great way to dodge real budget cuts... since there will need to be a "special appropriation" to cover the shortfall. [ Reply to This Re:Yada yada (Score:4, Interesting) by Osiris Ani (230116) on Friday October 14, @05:27PM (#13794044) (http://www.osirisani.com/) Indeed, I'm sure I remember reading something somewhere [slashdot.org] about the US government recently launching newer, more accurate GPS satellites. Of course, what we need these days is more alarmist rhetoric, so I suppose this is apropos. [ Reply to This | Parent Re:Yada yada (Score:5, Insightful) by Rakishi (759894) on Friday October 14, @05:32PM (#13794080) Yeah, why replace them when they're still working fine. That would be a waste of money, extra sats which age and provide little benefit. I mean, unless 5 fail in the time it takes to get a new one up there is no problem. Given that only 2 fail per year I don't see that happening anytime soon.I mean, come on look at this idiotic statement:'Bonnor said launches of new satellites are "only just keeping up" with current losses of around two satellites per year.'What they hell is the US supposed to do, send up more satellites than they lose and waste money keeping up sats when only 24 are needed (+ a few redundant ones)? [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Preventive vs Curative ? by Rakishi (Score:2) Saturday October 15, @12:06AM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Yada yada by Vellmont (Score:2) Friday October 14, @05:48PMRe:Yada yada by GileadGreene (Score:2) Friday October 14, @06:41PMRe:Yada yada by Vellmont (Score:2) Friday October 14, @07:48PM Working at the GPS hub (Score:5, Informative) by iamweezman (648494) on Friday October 14, @05:55PM (#13794239) (http://www.3c2.us/) As an active duty Air Force tech controller I work almost daily with the satellite operators that "fly" the GPS satellites. Some of their systems are more than antiquated, but still function with adequate redundancy built in. Although the lifespan might have been eclipsed the telemetry data recieved by the operators give them the state of health of the satellites which allows them to plan for future launches.In fact, a newer GPS satellite was just launched weeks ago. As stated before, the DOD has a special spot in their hearts for GPS. The GPS operators get treated extra special because of the US military's reliance on them. There are already plans in place for each satellite to be super-orbited when the time comes and for a new launch to follow.In other words, if the military isn't worried about it, neither should we be. [ Reply to This | Parent Absolutely (Score:5, Insightful) by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Friday October 14, @06:59PM (#13794661) People seem to forget that GPS is a military system, developed for military purposes. They opened it up for civilian use and that's wonderful, it's been a massive boon, but it was developed for the US Military alone. It is also the prime location system for just about all military units, from individual soliders up to large ships these days. While I'm sure the military COULD function without it, it would seriously screw things up.It's a strategic asset, and they aren't going to let it fail. If it was all private run, ok maybe then there'd be a worry that someone would decide to cut costs on it and let it slide, but it's the military's toy and there's no way in hell they are letting it fail.All the military implications aside, US commercial intrests rely very heavily on GPS these days and letting it fail would also not be in the economic intrest of the US government. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Absolutely by fluffy99 (Score:1) Friday October 14, @10:48PMRe:Working at the GPS hub by Phronesis (Score:2) Friday October 14, @10:38PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. who pays for this... (Score:1) by vasanth (908280) on Friday October 14, @05:20PM (#13793985) who will be paying for this.. the military, gps receiver manufacturers?? [ Reply to ThisRe:who pays for this... by oringo (Score:1) Friday October 14, @06:05PMRe:who pays for this... by scotch (Score:2) Friday October 14, @06:16PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. oops (GPS goes out) (Score:4, Funny) by pmike_bauer (763028) on Friday October 14, @05:20PM (#13793986) Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore. [ Reply to ThisRe:oops (GPS goes out) by geomon (Score:1) Friday October 14, @05:21PM There is only one solution... (Score:3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 14, @05:21PM (#13793992) We MUST hand over ALL CONTROL of the GPS system to the UN, to save it from destroying itself... [ Reply to This Re:There is only one solution... (Score:5, Funny) by amliebsch (724858) on Friday October 14, @05:50PM (#13794205) (Last Journal: Sunday June 26, @05:07PM) Exactly! Sure, the US invented the system, launched all the satellites, and bears the maintenance cost, but everybody else in the world depends on it, so it's obviously right that the UN control it! [ Reply to This | ParentOblig. Futurama by Xarius (Score:1) Friday October 14, @05:59PMRe:There is only one solution... by drsquare (Score:1) Friday October 14, @06:29PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:There is only one solution... by Just Some Guy (Score:2) Friday October 14, @06:11PM Not Good (Score:1) by Paul Pierce (739303) on Friday October 14, @05:21PM (#13793997) How will I find my wallet? [ Reply to This1 reply beneath your current threshold. They'll launch more (Score:2) by Frangible (881728) on Friday October 14, @05:22PM (#13794007) Everything dies, why is this news? GPS is an important and critical system, it will be maintained through new satellites. [ Reply to This I think I'm still OK (Score:5, Funny) by $RANDOMLUSER (804576) on Friday October 14, @05:22PM (#13794008) I use one of these [wikipedia.org] as my GPS. [ Reply to ThisRe:I think I'm still OK by stimpleton (Score:2) Friday October 14, @07:14PMRe:I think I'm still OK by Christopher_G_Lewis (Score:2) Friday October 14, @07:55PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. Backup Satellites (Score:3, Informative) by g4n0n (659895) on Friday October 14, @05:23PM (#13794015) They fail to mention that there are a number of backup satellites sitting up there, waiting to go into the consellation if any fail. [ Reply to This May not be that important, really.... (Score:3, Funny) by ip_freely_2000 (577249) on Friday October 14, @05:24PM (#13794025) "Twenty-four satellites are required for full coverage As long as the satellites fail over someplace unimportant like Europe, why should we care?Please be gentle with my karma! [ Reply to ThisRe:May not be that important, really.... by fred fleenblat (Score:2) Friday October 14, @05:33PMRe:May not be that important, really.... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Friday October 14, @05:52PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.2 replies beneath your current threshold. No news here (Score:5, Insightful) by adsl (595429) on Friday October 14, @05:28PM (#13794056) If you put up satellites at a quicker rate then you have too much redunancy in the skies and too much junk in space. It's all a balance, as it should be.Another timely "This is why Europe should run everything" spin story. Be good if Europe invented something really new and useful, for American's to play with (for free).... [ Reply to ThisRe:No news here by Darius Jedburgh (Score:1) Friday October 14, @05:33PMRe:No news here by Lehk228 (Score:2) Friday October 14, @05:55PMRe:No news here by LnxAddct (Score:1) Friday October 14, @05:42PMRe:No news here by Xarius (Score:1) Friday October 14, @06:02PMRe:No news here by dhakbar (Score:1) Friday October 14, @06:10PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:No news here by tarp (Score:1) Friday October 14, @06:32PM Re:No news here (Score:5, Informative) by IvyKing (732111) on Friday October 14, @06:36PM (#13794507) I mean one country (England) in Europe only invented the steam engine, locomotive, Hmmm, lessee. Seem to recall that the first steam engine was built by a Greek named Hero, although the first useful one was built by Newcomen. The first self propelled vehicle was built by Cugnot of France, another Frenchman built the first steamboat (and that was acknowledged by Fulton). The first high pressure steam engines were built by Trevithick of England and Oliver Evans of the US. Trevithick also built the first steam locomotive. While the first locomotives in the US were imported from England, the US became a net exporter of steam locomotives by the mid-1830's. The first elecric locomotive (albeit model sized) was built by Thomas Davenport of Vermont in 1834.the telephone Huh? I would believe "The telegraph" (Wheatstone).internal combustion Funny, the names for the two most common ICE cycles are Otto and Diesel - sounds suspiciously German to me.the jet engine Which was devloped from turbocharger technology - ISTR was a Swiss development. The Swiss had a working gas turbine in 1940.One thing you did leave out, the steam turbine was developed by an Englishman by the name of Parsons. [ Reply to This | ParentLot of old stuff you've listed there by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Friday October 14, @08:54PMjets didn't come from turbochargers by YesIAmAScript (Score:3) Friday October 14, @09:46PMRe:jets didn't come from turbochargers by IvyKing (Score:2) Friday October 14, @10:07PMRe:jets didn't come from turbochargers by Lord Haha (Score:2) Friday October 14, @11:31PMRe:No news here by nhstar (Score:1) Friday October 14, @06:48PMRe:No news here by wmorrow (Score:1) Friday October 14, @09:02PMRe:No news here by KeensMustard (Score:1) Friday October 14, @09:20PM2 replies beneath your current threshold. Why this scare tactic? (Score:3, Insightful) by rolfwind (528248) on Friday October 14, @05:28PM (#13794059) The US government/military has a humongous interest in keeping the system up - why be scared about it? It will keep plodding along.Or am I missing something here?