+Team Geo-Rangers Posted June 23, 2020 Share Posted June 23, 2020 There's an opportunity for Recreational GPS users to join the fight on the Hill to protect our GPS frequencies from an FCC decision. Now I don't think the Senators will let Signal testify to represent geocachers (good Photo Op and publicity), but perhaps Groundspeak should join this new advocacy coalition being formed? See article: https://spacenews.com/coalition-of-gps-user-groups-joins-fight-against-fccs-ligado-decision/ What do others on this forum think? Quote Link to comment
+colleda Posted June 23, 2020 Share Posted June 23, 2020 I read it but have no idea what it means. Is it US related or does it have a global effect? In layman's terms? Quote Link to comment
+Team Geo-Rangers Posted June 23, 2020 Author Share Posted June 23, 2020 Great question colleda. It seems like a real threat to Geocaching for receivers that rely on the current frequency allocation. If the FCC Decision allows Ligado to interfere with our commercially available signals, then our handheld receivers will not work for position, navigation and timing. Perhaps more DNFs or DNLs until a remedy is available ($$$)? Curious to know what others think about this, including Groundspeak? Quote Link to comment
+ecanderson Posted June 24, 2020 Share Posted June 24, 2020 46 minutes ago, colleda said: I read it but have no idea what it means. Is it US related or does it have a global effect? In layman's terms? It will impact any location where this new incarnation of an old bait-and-switch company places their ground-based facilities. This may seem like new news, but it's old news. Have a look at LightSquared + gps + interference in any search engine. You'll see this is an old battle. The company involved (both under its previous and current names) is attempting to utilize near-GPS frequencies with both satellite AND GROUND BASED systems, and the concern is that adjacent channel interference is going to swamp the front end of any consumer GPS receiver, and likely a good number of the commercial ones as well. 1 Quote Link to comment
+gsmX2 Posted June 24, 2020 Share Posted June 24, 2020 I will email both Senators Inhofe and Reed supporting this bill. It would put the onus on Ligado to be absolutely positive that their system does not interfere with GPS signals or face devastating financial consequences if it does. I don't want to do the research, but there was a similar issue a number of years ago when another communication company proposed using bandwidth adjacent to the GPS bandwidth. The FCC gave preliminary approval until GPS users let their voices be heard. OK...I did a little research to answer colleda's question. Here is the Ligado Networks page addressing the issue from their perspective.https://ligado5gfuture.com/ Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted June 24, 2020 Share Posted June 24, 2020 2 hours ago, ecanderson said: It will impact any location where this new incarnation of an old bait-and-switch company places their ground-based facilities. This may seem like new news, but it's old news. Have a look at LightSquared + gps + interference in any search engine. You'll see this is an old battle. The company involved (both under its previous and current names) is attempting to utilize near-GPS frequencies with both satellite AND GROUND BASED systems, and the concern is that adjacent channel interference is going to swamp the front end of any consumer GPS receiver, and likely a good number of the commercial ones as well. Thank you. Yep, that's what I was thinking of. Remembered there was a lot of reaction last time too. Nada happened... "Ligado Networks, formerly known as LightSquared, is an American satellite communications company." - They got out of bankruptcy and simply changed the name. Quote Link to comment
+carnyhunks Posted June 24, 2020 Share Posted June 24, 2020 2 hours ago, gsmX2 said: I will email both Senators Inhofe and Reed supporting this bill. It would put the onus on Ligado to be absolutely positive that their system does not interfere with GPS signals or face devastating financial consequences if it does. I don't want to do the research, but there was a similar issue a number of years ago when another communication company proposed using bandwidth adjacent to the GPS bandwidth. The FCC gave preliminary approval until GPS users let their voices be heard. OK...I did a little research to answer colleda's question. Here is the Ligado Networks page addressing the issue from their perspective.https://ligado5gfuture.com/ Ligado seems to be using 5G for their system. Would this mean that standalone GPS receivers be rendered obsolete? Would GPS on smartphones not be affected if they're on the 5G network? There are some remote areas that can't access cell networks. I can't imagine that the GPS bandwidth would be narrowed. 1 Quote Link to comment
+ecanderson Posted June 24, 2020 Share Posted June 24, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, gsmX2 said: I don't want to do the research, but there was a similar issue a number of years ago when another communication company proposed using bandwidth adjacent to the GPS bandwidth. The FCC gave preliminary approval until GPS users let their voices be heard. See post just a few above. It was LightSquared. They originally came in with one proposal, then insisted that they needed the bandwidth for terrestrial use as well. Ligado is the reincarnation of LightSquared. They're trying to pull the same trick that they did the last time around. The problem is that the 'front end' electronics of GPS receivers are VERY, VERY, VERY sensitive, and were never designed with filters capable of serious adjacent channel signal rejection because there wasn't supposed to BE any strong signals there. It's what LightSquared/Ligado has proposed that has everyone in the industry concerned. Yes, you could build equipment that could handle the problem, but you could also obsolete any device that already exists. Get too near one of their ground based facilities, and the concern is that the GPS receiver would go 'deaf' from the adjacent noise so close in the spectrum. Edited June 24, 2020 by ecanderson Quote Link to comment
+NYPaddleCacher Posted June 24, 2020 Share Posted June 24, 2020 7 hours ago, carnyhunks said: Ligado seems to be using 5G for their system. Would this mean that standalone GPS receivers be rendered obsolete? Would GPS on smartphones not be affected if they're on the 5G network? There are some remote areas that can't access cell networks. I can't imagine that the GPS bandwidth would be narrowed. 5G is cellular data. GPS uses satellites, and it doesn't matter of the GPS receiver is a standalone device or in a smart phone. The only time a smart phone uses cellular data for *location* services is when employing assisted GPS (aGPS), which is only used for obtaining an estimate location that reduces the time to get a fix on the GPS satellites. If you can't access networks you won't have real time access to map data (or any other data from the internet) but it has no effect on the GPS. Quote Link to comment
+Tahoe Skier5000 Posted June 24, 2020 Share Posted June 24, 2020 (edited) The statements made by some of these companies are just disturbing... Quote “It is problematic; to say the least, that receive-only devices such as GPS receivers can establish prior-use rights in bands that are not allocated to their use. In other contexts, this is referred to as “squatting,” and is considered akin to theft. In the present instance, the highest quality GPS receivers have long been implemented with the widest band frontend filters that inevitably have the least selectivity and are now seen as having the greatest sensitivity to interference from the changing use of nearby spectrum. This has obviously placed the FCC in the awkward position of having to essentially grant squatter’s rights to tens of millions of GPS users, particularly to safety of life users with the most sensitive devices.” https://ligado5gfuture.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/comments_report_8.21.18-1.pdf Edited June 24, 2020 by Tahoe Skier5000 Quote Link to comment
+tom4props Posted June 24, 2020 Share Posted June 24, 2020 (edited) Sounds like the time for support... gsmX2 suggested, emailing both SASC Chairman Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Ranking Member Jack Reed (D-R.I.), in support of the following bill... Recognizing and Ensuring Taxpayer Access to Infrastructure Necessary for GPS and Satellite Communications Act The Inhofe-Reed legislation would force Ligado to pay the costs incurred by businesses and consumers as a result of the FCC’s decision. Edited June 24, 2020 by tom4props 1 Quote Link to comment
+tom4props Posted June 24, 2020 Share Posted June 24, 2020 Make your voice heard regarding the... Recognizing and Ensuring Taxpayer Access to Infrastructure Necessary for GPS and Satellite Communications Act Contact Jim Inhofe https://www.inhofe.senate.gov/contact Contact Jack Reed https://www.reed.senate.gov/contact/ 1 Quote Link to comment
+RocTheCacheBox Posted June 24, 2020 Share Posted June 24, 2020 18 hours ago, Team Geo-Rangers said: What do others on this forum think? I don't think it will hurt at all. But reality is that the transportation, agricultural, mining, construction, surveying and countless other industries that rely on GPS will be listened to and shape what happens long before the GPS hobbyists are ever listened to. 2 1 Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted June 24, 2020 Share Posted June 24, 2020 25 minutes ago, tom4props said: Make your voice heard... Done. Quote Link to comment
+JL_HSTRE Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 17 hours ago, RocTheCacheBox said: I don't think it will hurt at all. But reality is that the transportation, agricultural, mining, construction, surveying and countless other industries that rely on GPS will be listened to and shape what happens long before the GPS hobbyists are ever listened to. One would think the military, who makes extensive use of GPS, would immediately shut down any potential interference with GPS reception. Quote Link to comment
+ecanderson Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 6 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said: One would think the military, who makes extensive use of GPS, would immediately shut down any potential interference with GPS reception. They had plenty to say the last time around. Here's a pretty good article with those comments included >> https://www.tvtechnology.com/news/general-says-fixing-lightsquared-interference-to-military-gps-ops-could-take-10-years The military has been equally vociferous this time around, but Idjit ... er ... Ajit Pai describes their concerns as 'fearmongering'. Quote Link to comment
+humboldt flier Posted July 3, 2020 Share Posted July 3, 2020 On 6/23/2020 at 4:26 PM, Team Geo-Rangers said: There's an opportunity for Recreational GPS users to join the fight on the Hill to protect our GPS frequencies from an FCC decision. Now I don't think the Senators will let Signal testify to represent geocachers (good Photo Op and publicity), but perhaps Groundspeak should join this new advocacy coalition being formed? See article: https://spacenews.com/coalition-of-gps-user-groups-joins-fight-against-fccs-ligado-decision/ What do others on this forum think? A similar battle exists in the amateur radio world >> "Ham Radio" KF6YQR Quote Link to comment
+ecanderson Posted July 3, 2020 Share Posted July 3, 2020 Fair enough, but we're talking the most serious QRP game in the world right now! Makes it even worse. Can't just bop down to 40m. Quote Link to comment
+humboldt flier Posted July 3, 2020 Share Posted July 3, 2020 5 minutes ago, ecanderson said: Fair enough, but we're talking the most serious QRP game in the world right now! Makes it even worse. Can't just bop down to 40m. Snnnnooorrrrrtttttt, LOL, LOL don't be starting a war now EC ... best to you and yours. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.