http://www.gpsworld.com/GNSS%20Syste...tsquared-12508

Ashton Carter, U.S. deputy secretary for defense, and John Porcari,
deputy secretary for transportation, have written an official letter to
the assistant secretary for commerce, stating that "there appear to be
no practical solutions or mitigations that would permit the LightSquared
broadband service." Carter and Porcari are co-chairs of the National
Executive Committee for Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing.
This represents the strongest intra-government statement to date on the
issue.

Their letter further states that "both LightSquared's original and
modified plans for its proposed mobile network would cause harmul
interference to many GPS receivers. Additionally, an analysis by the
Federal Aviation Administration has concluded that the LightSquared
proposals are not compatible with several GPS-dependent aircraft
safety-of-flight systems."

"No additional testing is warranted at this time," the authors conclude.

They further propose to "draft new GPS spectrum interference standards
that will help inform future proposals for non-space, commercial uses in
the bands adjacent to the GPS signals."

No response has emerged from either the Federal Communications
Commission or the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration, the two bodies charged with making a determination on
the issue. But the letter appears to signal a coming end to a conflict
that has occupied many, and tied up many resources and consumed many
millions of dollars, for the past year.

See:
http://www.gpsworld.com/GNSS%20Syste...m-letter-12507

On 2012-01-17 00:22 , Sam Wormley wrote:
> http://www.gpsworld.com/GNSS%20Syste...tsquared-12508
>
> No response has emerged from either the Federal Communications
> Commission or the National Telecommunications and Information
> Administration, the two bodies charged with making a determination on
> the issue. But the letter appears to signal a coming end to a conflict
> that has occupied many, and tied up many resources and consumed many
> millions of dollars, for the past year.

Cue the fat lady please.

>
> See:
> http://www.gpsworld.com/GNSS%20Syste...m-letter-12507

Love it!


--
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).

Lightsquared might be stopped but there is an underlying problem that
must be addressed. The Ancillary Terrestrial Component (ATC) concept
is still alive.

I've seen many comments that Lightsquared is attempting to use its
spectrum in a manner that's not authorized because the spectrum is
allocated for a space to ground service. That would have been
accurate before the FCC authorized ATC.

When ATC was authorized way back during the 2004 time frame, Mobile
Satellite Ventures held the license. A 2010 FCC order, in response
to SkyTerra, was issued adjusting the operating power for ATC base
stations to current levels.

What the testing has shown is ATC is itself is incompatible with GPS;
all past FCC orders that pertain to it must be rescinded.

--- CHAS

On 2012-01-18 07:32 , HIPAR wrote:
> Lightsquared might be stopped but there is an underlying problem that
> must be addressed. The Ancillary Terrestrial Component (ATC) concept
> is still alive.
>
> I've seen many comments that Lightsquared is attempting to use its
> spectrum in a manner that's not authorized because the spectrum is
> allocated for a space to ground service. That would have been
> accurate before the FCC authorized ATC.
>
> When ATC was authorized way back during the 2004 time frame, Mobile
> Satellite Ventures held the license. A 2010 FCC order, in response
> to SkyTerra, was issued adjusting the operating power for ATC base
> stations to current levels.
>
> What the testing has shown is ATC is itself is incompatible with GPS;
> all past FCC orders that pertain to it must be rescinded.
>
> --- CHAS

Yes. I think I suggested that (in the L^2 case) recently.

--
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).