Talk:Galileo (satellite navigation)

Legal issues

Two issues -

1) There was some talk of blocking GPS in Europe, to force users to pay a fee for using Galileo. Blocking a navigational system in peace time is iffy in law.

That sounds highly unlikely, probably was a bored journalist or politician making that claim. technically and politically/economically not viable.

2) If a navigational aid is being used by one side in a war, even if it is being provided by a third party, it is a legitimate target for the other side. This goes back to precendents regarding lighthouses which date back beyond the Napoleonic wars. If one side is using the Galileo system for targeting weapons, and the administrators of the system refuse to block this, then the system become a legitimate target. That is one reason why the US reserves the right to turn the GPS system off (partially or otherwise).

This means that in the event of war, Galileo may have to be turned off (probably partially). Otherwise a party being attacked by weapons guided by it may try to turn it off the hard way. ASAT is getting easier and cheaper all the time....

EGNOS

The article says that EGNOS "is a system of satellites and ground stations designed to increase the accuracy of the current GPS and GLONASS in Europe." Does it have anything to do with Galileo? If not, that sentence should be deleted.

No, EGNOS does not have anything to do with Galileo. I have deleted the paragraph.

EGNOS is the first step to an GNSS infrastructure of Europe. As such related to Galileo.

Effector feature of GNSS

Could someone explain to me what is meant with the following? I am having difficulty to understand what the author is trying to explain: As with GPS, Galileo is just a sensor system that supports locating, there is no effector feature that would justify the positioning. However, as with all satellite navigation systems, the effecting of the desired course of a vehicle or other object on ground, at sea or in the air is subject of a combination of such sensor systems in combination with inertial navigation systems and propulsion and steering control systems.

Correct me if I am wrong. I think, what the author is trying to explain, is that a GNSS ‘’’alone’’’ does not produce position information. A GNSS produces position information with help of other sensor systems. If this is what is meant with the statement above, in my opninion it, it is incorrect.

It is incorrect because a GNSS embodies, next to the space segment, both the user segment and the ground segment. I agree, the space segment of a GNSS, i.e. the satellite cluster, does not output position information directly. Instead, the user segment calculates the position information based upon the information provided by the ground segment and the space segment. The user segment and ground segment, in case of GPS, in fact belongs to the GPS system and technology. A GNSS in the end does provide position information. Jerry.bracke (talk) 09:32, 13 January 2009 (UTC) yes it does give additional information. Galileo would not be needed otherwise as GPS is there for positionning purposes. Galileo is much more than GPS. It has a database and links to flighttickets, mobile phones and stores 19 pieces of information to track European citizens for 13 years. It costs 3.4 billion euro and would not have been build if GPS was sufficient.

Location versus Position

I can't help but notice the big location versus position issue in many RFID/RTLS oriented literature. I have had several discussions with Rfid specialists, archaeologists, geologists, linguistic experts and have come to the following conclusions:

A position is a coordinate, a point inside a coordinate system. It is a spatial expression relative to a certain reference point. E.g: (1,2), 45° 15’ 50’’N, 20° 39’ 14’’W

A location is a certain place in space: on the mountain, zone 123, Room 76, … but also: (1,2); 45° 15’ 50’’N, 20° 39’ 14’’W Remark: a position is always a location, but a location isn’t always a position. Some experts prefer to use the term location because a position can have different meanings, e.g sexual position, strategic position, body position, ... Location is also a more generic term than position. Jerry.bracke (talk) 10:20, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Locating system versus Positioning system

Finally there exists a difference between a locating system and a positioning system.

A locating system is any system to which you can the question: Where is Xyz? e.g: “Where is defibrillator 123?” Examples of such systems are: Ekahau, Wherenet, Aeroscout, …

A positioning system is a system that simply assigns, or facilitates to assign a position to a particular object. As opposed to a locating system, you can't ask a positioning system the whereabouts of an object. You could say, locating systems use, or extend, positioning systems, e.g. GPS based locating systems. Remark: Most experts prefer locating system instead of location system. . Location is a noun, locating is an adverb. It is also commonly known to say/write Global Positioning System, instead of Global Position System Jerry.bracke (talk) 10:20, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure where you are going with these two arguments as you haven't really made any suggestions of where to improve things. As a result I may have misunderstood your intentions. If so then I apologise in advance.

Just because something is interpreted by people as one thing doesn't mean that it is defined as such. Position in this context is a "defined location" i.e. a set of coordinates. Defined is the important bit - you don't turn on your Sat-nav and expect to be told you are "in your car". It may well be your location, but not a very useful one. 94.13.113.160 (talk) 16:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Magnetic-North on Earth is continually shifting...

Magnetic-North on Earth is continually shifting will Galileo be able to handle this naturally ocurring situation and be able to correct itself somehow? CaribDigita (talk) 04:10, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Global navigation satellite systems aren't simple compasses. If they were, there would be no point in launching billion dollar satellite projects when a compass would communicate the same data. They work through triangulation based on transmissions from satellites, in known positions, and other geographic data.EDG161 (talk) 22:16, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Of course GNS systems use trilateration, not triangulation. Triangulation relies on having "line of sight" whereas trilateration does not. You could hold a gps receiver against the roof of your car so it couldnt "see" any satellites, but it would still work because the radio signals from the gps satellites would reach it by bouncing off the car bodywork etc, this would affect the accuracy hardly at all! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.183.140.48 (talk) 18:25, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Removal of 'Future Product' tag?

I think it is time to remove this tag from the article page, as Galileo is about to enter full deployment phase. 2 satellites are already in orbit, with the launch of 4 production satellites confirmed. As such, this programme can now be compared to the International Space Station, which is technically still under construction after more than 10 years. I will remove this tag in a few days if there is no disagreement. Savlonn (talk) 21:38, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree you should remove it. I am going to remove it from the list of emerging technologies article too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.86.48 (talk) 01:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Done. Tag removed. Savlonn (talk) 16:50, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Automate archiving?

Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days.--Oneiros (talk) 18:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done--Oneiros (talk) 20:55, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

wikileaks US diplomatic cable related to galileo

I suggest that the http://www.aftenposten.no/spesial/wikileaksdokumenter/article3985655.ece US cable released by wikileaks / Aftenpost

could usefully be referenced in this article, probably under the political controversy section. Given that the CEO of one of the major contractors allegedly considers the project "a gigantic waste of taxpayers money" and mostly being carried out for french military reasons. He was fired for it yesterday 12:21, 18 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballymichael (talk • contribs)

compatibility

Is Galileo compatible with existing GPS receivers? Nothing about that is mentioned... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.194.235.31 (talk) 22:37, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

• I don't think so, even though both systems transmit on 1575.42 MHz. Read the last paragraph here. SV1XV (talk) 13:27, 21 October 2011 (UTC)