Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Team Geo-Rangers

Protect Signal

Recommended Posts

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?

Share this post


Link to post

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?

 

Share this post


Link to post

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?  

Share this post


Link to post
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.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

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/

Share this post


Link to post
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.        :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (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 by ecanderson

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (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 by Tahoe Skier5000

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (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 by tom4props
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

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/

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, tom4props said:

Make your voice heard...

 

Done.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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'.

 

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post

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.

 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

×
×
  • Create New...