B: Applications

May 1, 2007

Ruth Neilan: The Global Grid Master

Ruth Neilan outside the history library at the GeoForschungsZentrum in Potsdam, Germany.

When Ruth Neilan was named director of what is now known as the Central Bureau of the International GNSS Service (IGS), she had an immense undertaking before her.

A voluntary civilian federation, the IGS compiles and analyzes GPS (and more recently, GLONASS) satellite data. From these, the IGS creates highly accurate products —such as precise satellite orbit and clock files — and makes them freely available to engineers, scientists, and researchers all over the world.

When Ruth Neilan was named director of what is now known as the Central Bureau of the International GNSS Service (IGS), she had an immense undertaking before her.

A voluntary civilian federation, the IGS compiles and analyzes GPS (and more recently, GLONASS) satellite data. From these, the IGS creates highly accurate products —such as precise satellite orbit and clock files — and makes them freely available to engineers, scientists, and researchers all over the world.

The latter folks use the IGS data to improve the accuracy of their own GNSS positioning and timing results based on observations from the same set of satellites, using IGS products in place of the broadcast data.

Originally known as the International GPS Service for Geodyanmics, the standardized global tracking network was initiated by NASA and NOAA in the late 1980s. Today, the IGS Central Bureau is managed by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) at Caltech in Pasadena, California, where Neilan has worked for nearly 25 years. IGS has 200 participating organizations —mostly public, government, and research agencies — with upwards of 400 permanent ground stations and data and analysis centers in more than 80 countries.

But in the early 1990s, all of that was far in the future. Neilan and the IGS had to create the building blocks themselves: setting standards, agreeing upon specific formats for data collection and processing, deciding how much to log to guarantee the precise results they needed. They succeeded in great part because of Neilan’s passion and optimism that GNSS technologies could — and do — bridge geopolitical boundaries.

“Through IGS, developing countries can join an international effort. People are very enthusiastic about contributing,” she said. “Off-the-shelf products have developed to such a point that they can leapfrog into the highest technology that’s available. The difficulty we have is getting enough resources to put their efforts on solid ground and ensure sustainability.”

Never Say “Never”

Neilan’s internationalist bent was established early in life.

She recalls crawling beneath the drafting tables in her father’s engineering firm in Somerset, a small Appalachian town in southwest Pennsylvania, and losing herself in books. She especially like the one with fascinating photographs of Asia and, in fact, went on to study Mandarin Chinese for five years.

As a child, she was convinced that she would “never” be an engineer. But blessed with a surefire sense of direction that she calls “Zen navigation,” Neilan loved reading maps and making precise measurements.

At college, she gravitated to The Pennsylvania State University’s engineering technology program, earned an associate’s degree, and became a surveyor. But she still wasn’t convinced that engineering should be her life’s work, so she took a detour.

A two-year globe-spanning tour started her on the path that combined her passion — Asia and the world — with what turned out to be her calling: engineering and the development of GNSS.

On her sojourn Neilan crossed Turkey and Afghanistan, worked as English editor for a Taipei magazine, climbed to the Mount Everest base camp, and attained an altitude of 19,200 feet— without oxygen — while crossing into the Rowalling Valley along the Tibetan border. Along the way, Neilan realized she was good at engineering.

She returned to the United States to earn a bachelor’s degree in civil and environmental engineering plus a minor in Asian studies, graduating with distinction from the University of Wisconsin at Madison in 1983.

Although the buzz about GPS began perking in the early 1980s, nothing was taught at the university level. After graduating, Neilan visited a friend at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory at California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, California. Hoping for nothing more than ideas for a thesis topic, Neilan arrived wearing flip-flops and shorts. She met with several people working on GPS and, by the end of the day, she had a job.

She put herself on what she laughingly refers to as the first in a series of “five-year plans,” working for JPL while pursuing her master’s degree. She finished her thesis, “An Experimental Investigation of the Effect of GPS Satellite Multipath,” in 1986.

Growing the Global Grid

Neilan’s first major project out of graduate school put her at the hub of the emerging GPS infrastructure. JPL assigned her to get the Deep Space Network’s first GPS receivers and meteorological instrumentation up and running. As that project unfolded, she also managed seminal projects measuring crustal deformation, tectonic motion, and earthquake fault monitoring using GPS techniques.

Starting in 1990, a planning group of five leaders — including Neilan and her mentor at JPL, Bill Melbourne — began meeting to plan the way forward for a global network. Neilan led implementation and operation of ground data systems for the GPS Ground Tracking Network. At about the same time, she also took on the separate task of coordinating the sub-network of six GPS tracking stations required for mission support of the GPS precise orbit determination experiment flown on the satellite TOPEX/Poseidon.

In 1992, she became GPS Operations Manager for the NASA/JPL global network and for scientific support of regional experiments, overseeing project management and technical direction of field engineering for NASA scientists and geodetic tasks at the University NAVSTAR Consortium (UNAVCO) in Boulder, Colorado.

One year later, she was named director of IGS.

The Global Grid and Beyond

Neilan’s serves on the advisory board of the U.S. Positioning, Navigation and Timing Executive Committee, which addresses such issues as policy, planning, management, services, capabilities, and funding.

“This board provides an additional assurance that there is a voice for users,” Neilan says. “The board includes international people, which emphasizes the global nature of GPS.” It also underscores the value that the executive committee places on the international community as part of the process, she adds

Since 2005 she also has served as vice chair of the Global Geodetic Observing System, which provides continuous, precise observations of the three fundamental geodetic observables and their variations: the Earth’s shape, gravity field, and rotational motion. She says a stable, sustainable global reference frame is crucial for all Earth observation and for practical applications ranging from agriculture to the dynamics of atmosphere and the oceans.

The system is beginning to help scientists get their arms around the complexities of seismic activity and climate variation. “Natural hazard detection and mitigation is a really important use of GPS and continuous networking,” Neilan says. “Less than a day after the earthquake that triggered the tsunamis in the Indian Ocean in 2004, we could see that our IGS station in Singapore had moved almost an inch. Our IGS stations in India also had moved.”

Neilan’s zest for travel makes her an ideal fit for her job, which requires frequent trips to developing countries. She lights up when talking about bringing Africa’s 50-plus nations into the grid. This effort, known as AFREF (which stands for unification of African Reference Frames) includes vertical data as well as gravity observations. However, she emphasizes that planning on a continental scale does not have to be “top down or all at once.” Instead, she focuses on assisting newcomers put in GPS systems that meet standards and follow conventions used by the rest of the world.

If Neilan had just one magic GNSS wish, it would that everyone understood the importance of tying into the global grid, known officially as the International Terrestrial Reference Frame. “It’s easy to remotely sense an area, but often contractors or consultants set up their own little local reference system,” she explains. “Then, when they try to link up or extend their project, it has no relationship to the country’s grid, much less the international grid. It’s been very hard to get this across to the mapping and GIS people.”

NASA’s return to space exploration opens up the possibility of extending GPS-like constellations to the Moon and to Mars. “We need to have a way of commonly and seamlessly referencing all the vehicles,” Neilan says. “An extended coordinate timing system would reduce errors.”

Neilan’s daily contacts with colleagues around the globe reinforce her optimism that GNSS technologies can bridge geopolitical boundaries.

“Open availability [of data] is seeding so much innovation and fostering better understanding of our world,” she says. “IGS is the global sandbox. Everybody can have fun and play.”

Neilan’s coordinates:
34° 12′ 5.7" N
118° 10′ 27.47" W
h = 372 meters

Ruth Neilan’s Many GNSS Hats

  • Vice Chair, Global Geodetic Observing System (GGOS) since 2005
  • Director, Central Bureau of the International GNSS Service (IGS), since 1993
  • Advisory board, US Positioning, Navigation and Timing (PNT) Executive Committee
  • Ad Hoc Strategic Committee on Information and Data (SCID), International Council for Science (ICSU)
  • International Committee on GNSS (ICG), representing the International Association of Geodesy (IAG)
  • Executive Committee, International Association of Geodesy
  • IGS website http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov

COMPASS POINTS

Engineering Specialties
Surveyor, geodetic surveying, and civil and environmental engineering.

GNSS Mentor
Bill Melbourne at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, a visionary who’s many accomplishments included leading GPS technology developments at JPL. “His support in shaping the GPS global network and working with our international partners laid the foundation for the IGS.”

Favorite Equation
Geoid Separation H=h-N

Heights that are given from GPS (h) are relative to the GPS ellipsoid WGS84. “To get the vertical position of a point, the separation between the geoid and the ellipsoid (N) must be known — with care. You can think of the geoid as the surface of the earth approximated by the mean sea level.”

Her Compass Points
Neilan credits her family first – her “brilliant” jazz pianist husband, “terrific” kids, and parents who “are always there, even for GPS observations in American Samoa, Easter Island, and remote areas of Mexico.” Her other compass points are “the wonderful IGS/GNSS community of colleagues and friends,” and “The great game — soccer!”

Fell in love with GPS when . . .
. . . she realized that this revolutionary technology could provide precise position and navigation aids for anyone, anywhere, anytime. “(This) levels the playing field to an extent — especially in the developing countries.”

Knew GNSS had arrived when. . .
. . .
CASA UNO ’88 deployed the first civilian global tracking network for orbit improvements to monitor crustal deformation at many stations in Central and South America. “This was the first large-scale study of crustal deformation. Now it is done continuously for hundreds of stations around the globe.”

Influences of Engineering on her Private Life
“Time motion studies in the kitchen!”

Popular Notions about GNSS that Most Annoy
“That GPS will operate according to specifications when actually it is far, far better than that. We need to develop the notion of performance-based capabilities and delivery of services.”

What’s next?
For Neilan and IGS, this includes integrating the upcoming signals from GALILEO, COMPASS and other new GNSSes into the mix. They are aiming for seamless incorporation to take advantage of the signals “so that we can use this technology over several decades in order to better understand our changing world.” And, as always, IGS’s on-going effort to promote dialog and a forum for the international use of GNSS.

Human Engineering is a regular feature that highlights some of the personalities behind the technologies, products, and programs of the GNSS community. We welcome readers’ recommendations for future profiles. Contact Glen Gibbons, gl**@********ss.com.

By
April 6, 2007

Two for One: Tracking Galileo CBOC Signal with TMBOC

On-going discussions are taking place between U.S. and European Union (EU) experts concerning the future GPSIII L1C and Galileo E1 OS civil signals. An agreement on a common power spectral density (PSD) known as multiplexed binary offset carrier (MBOC) recently emerged as a solid candidate to replace the current baseline: BOC(1,1).

On-going discussions are taking place between U.S. and European Union (EU) experts concerning the future GPSIII L1C and Galileo E1 OS civil signals. An agreement on a common power spectral density (PSD) known as multiplexed binary offset carrier (MBOC) recently emerged as a solid candidate to replace the current baseline: BOC(1,1).

In order to comply with the MBOC PSD, two candidate implementations, known as time-multiplexed BOC (TMBOC) and composite BOC (CBOC) modulations, have been proposed. If fully exploited, these implementations will provide improved performance but require a more complex receiver architecture than a BOC(1,1) receiver.

Increased complexity and associated higher costs, however, might be detrimental for a GNSS receiver manufacturer that would like to use MBOC, but with limited modifications to their receivers — particularly for those companies producing equipment for mass consumer markets. This article aims at evaluating a new CBOC receiver architecture using locally generated TMBOC-like signals that will result in a simpler architecture comparable to a BOC receiver.

The normalized MBOC PSD includes the whole of GPSIII L1C or Galileo E1 OS civil signals, which means both their data and pilot components.

Because the MBOC is defined only in the frequency domain, a variety of compliant temporal modulations can be used. In the literature, two different modulations were proposed to implement the MBOC:
• TMBOC, which multiplexes in the time domain BOC(1,1) and BOC(6,1) sub-carriers and seems likely to become the main candidate used by the future GPSIII L1C signal, and
• CBOC, which linearly combines BOC(1,1) and BOC(6,1) sub-carriers (both components being present at all times), and appears to be the leading candidate for the Galileo E1 OS signal.

The Additional Resources section lists papers by G. Hein et al, J. Betz et al, and J.-A. Avila-Rodriguez et al, which introduce and discuss TMBOC and CBOC in detail. (Available in the downloadable PDF, above.)

The philosophy behind these two modulations is very different, and, although they would theoretically produce equivalent tracking when used with a TMBOC or CBOC receiver (considering pilot and data channels), they can result in different performances in other configurations (for instance, considering the pilot channel only).

A major difference between the TMBOC and CBOC modulations is that the CBOC sub-carrier, as the weighted sum of two squared-wave sub-carriers, will have four different levels. Consequently, this means that an optimal CBOC receiver has to generate a local replica that also has four levels, resulting in a local replica encoded on more than just one bit. This could complicate the CBOC receiver architecture and might prove detrimental to the widespread use of this modulation for certain types of receiver, if retained as the Galileo E1 OS modulation.

This article describes an innovative technique that only requires a 1-bit local replica, very similar to a TMBOC waveform, to track CBOC signals. This method is particularly interesting because, despite its simple implementation, it has only limited losses in tracking performance with respect to traditional CBOC or TMBOC receivers. Moreover, it shows excellent performance when compared to the previous GPS/Galileo L1 baseline signal, the BOC(1,1).

The first part of this article describes the possible CBOC and TMBOC candidates for Galileo E1 OS and GPS III L1C modulations. The second part looks at the traditional tracking performances of these two modulations in terms of thermal noise and multipath-induced errors.

Finally, we introduce the new 1-bit tracking technique and compare it against optimal CBOC and TMBOC tracking in terms of tracking noise and multipath resistance.

Conclusions
Following the US/EU MBOC agreement, the current main candidates for the GPSIII L1C and Galileo E1 OS have been introduced. In particular, the pilot channels have been analyzed with their use of the new CBOC and TMBOC modulations.

Although adding a very small amount of BOC(6,1) to the previous BOC(1,1) baseline, it has been shown that the tracking performances of these future signals are significantly improved compared to pure BOC(1,1) tracking. In particular, tracking noise is reduced by 2.4 to 3 dBs in terms of equivalent C/N0, and multipath mitigation is significantly improved.

Focusing on the CBOC modulation, its multi-level waveform could result in more challenging receiver architecture. In order to keep a simple receiver design to receive a CBOC signal, a new tracking technique, referred to as TM61, has been proposed to allow tracking of the CBOC modulation with a 1-bit only locally generated replica. This method uses time-multiplexing of BOC(1,1) and BOC(6,1) sub-carrier on the same model as the TMBOC modulation.

A preferred implementation of TM61 is the use of a pure BOC(1,1) sub-carrier for the prompt correlators and a pure BOC(6,1) sub-carrier for the early and late correlators (a DP discriminator being assumed). This yields a much simpler receiver architecture since it requires only pure sub-carriers with no-multiplexing (different from TMBOC receivers), 1-bit local replicas (unlike a CBOC local replica) and a minimum of correlators. Please note it is also possible to use another implementation of the TM61 tracking methods with time-multiplexing.

In its preferred implementation, TM61 brings only a slight post-correlation SNR degradation (about 0.35 dBs for the selected CBOC main candidate for Galileo pilot channel), enabling good phase tracking. TM61 code tracking noise performance is degraded with respect to traditional CBOC tracking by approximately 2.4 dBs. However, this has to be put into perspective considering the substantial reduction in receiver complexity with TM61 and the fact that thermal noise might not be the main source of error for many applications.

Finally, the TM61 tracking technique has been demonstrated to provide, in its preferred implementation, a better multipath resistance compared to traditional CBOC tracking. In any case, the use of TM61 to receive a CBOC signal has been shown to significantly outperform the traditional reception of a pure BOC(1,1) with equivalent power, thus supporting the use of the modernized CBOC signal. Consequently, it seems to be a very good tracking technique for implementation in future CBOC receivers.

For the full article, including graphs, figures, and additional resources, download the PDF above.

By

Enhancing the Future of Civil GPS: Overview of the L1C Signal

The Global Positioning System is undergoing continual modernization, providing ongoing improvements for users worldwide. Although various enhancements in system features have been under development since the mid-1990s, modernization first benefited civil users when Selective Availability — a security-motivated technique for “dithering” the open L1 signal to reduce positioning accuracy — was set to zero in May 2000.

The Global Positioning System is undergoing continual modernization, providing ongoing improvements for users worldwide. Although various enhancements in system features have been under development since the mid-1990s, modernization first benefited civil users when Selective Availability — a security-motivated technique for “dithering” the open L1 signal to reduce positioning accuracy — was set to zero in May 2000.

Subsequently, other improvements in accuracy have been obtained through enhancements to the capabilities and operation of the control and space segments, still based on the original set of GPS signals.

The launch of the IIR-14(M) (modernized replenishment satellite) in 2005 began a new era with transmission of the L2 civil (L2C) signal, along with the modernized military M-code signal. A third civil signal, called L5, will be transmitted from Block IIF satellites.

All the while, improvements in monitoring, satellite technology (for example, the on-board atomic clocks) and operations yield continuing increases in accuracy. The United States plans to continue providing these capabilities free of user fees. It will continue to complement this pricing policy by providing free and open signal descriptions and other technical information needed for development of receivers and services using civil signals.

In the meantime, development of the next generation of satellites, called GPS III, and a modernized control segment (OCX) continues, which will lead to greatly enhanced capabilities beginning early in the next decade. An integral part of the GPS III capabilities being developed is a new civil signal, called L1C, which will be transmitted on the L1 carrier frequency in addition to current signals.

Approximately one year ago, the U.S. Air Force released the initial draft of Interface Specification IS-GPS-800, describing L1C. Novel characteristics of the optimized L1C signal design provide advanced capabilities while offering to receiver designers considerable flexibility in how to use these capabilities.

The development of L1C represents a new stage in international GNSS: not only is the signal being designed for transmission from GPS satellites, its design also seeks to maximize interoperability with Galileo’s Open Service signal. Further, Japan’s Quazi-Zenith Satellite System (QZSS) will transmit a signal with virtually the same design as L1C.

L1C has been designed to take advantage of many unique opportunities. Its center frequency of 1575.42 MHz is the pre-eminent GNSS frequency for a variety of reasons, including the extensive existing use of GPS C/A code, the lower ionospheric error at L1 band relative to lower frequencies, spectrum protection of the L1 band, and the use of this same center frequency by GPS, Galileo, QZSS, and satellite-based augmentation system (SBAS) signals for open access service and safety-of-life applications.

Other unique opportunities that the L1C design leverages include advances in signal design knowledge, improvements in receiver processing techniques, developments in circuit technologies, and enhancements in supporting services such as communications. The L1C design has been optimized to provide superior performance, while providing compatibility and interoperability with other signals in the L1 band.

L1C provides a number of advanced features, including: 75 percent of power in a pilot component for enhanced signal tracking, advanced Weil-based spreading codes, an overlay code on the pilot that provides data message synchronization, support for improved reading of clock and ephemeris by combining message symbols across messages, advanced forward error control coding, and data symbol interleaving to combat fading.

The resulting design offers receiver designers the opportunity to obtain unmatched performance in many ways.This article will give an overview of the L1C signal design, highlighting the features that will benefit receiver designers and, ultimately, end users. The following section provides background on L1C and its design process, from its beginnings in 2003.

Subsequent sections then provide an overview of the signal structure, details of the signal’s spreading codes and overlay codes, spreading modulation, data message structure, and encoding and decoding of message information.

Summary of Benefits
Although more complete details are provided in IS-GPS-800, we will outline the most significant characteristics here.

L1C has been designed with unique, innovative, and powerful new features to enhance its robustness for all users, especially in difficult environments.

The signal structure alone, with the spreading code and the overlay code, provides exact GPS time, modulo 18 seconds. Alignment to the spreading code provides bit synchronization and alignment to the overlay code provide frame synchronization, making these receiver functions simple and robust.

For high-precision (e.g., survey) use, the pilot carrier removes the half cycle phase ambiguity, and the larger RMS bandwidth of the new spreading modulation has the potential to improve tracking performance, especially multipath mitigation. With the combination of improved carrier tracking of the pilot component, segmentation of clock and ephemeris in the data message, and FEC design, an autonomous navigator can demodulate the satellite clock and ephemeris whenever the signal can be tracked.

The improved cross-correlation of the new codes will also improve the performance of high-sensitivity receivers. Performance will also improve as a result of the new message format that allows code combining across satellites for the TOI and code combining of the near constant sub-frame 2 ephemeris data across multiple frames. International collaboration and outreach have assisted in producing a truly international signal with capabilities that will serve users for decades to come.

For the full article, including figures, graphs, and additional resources, download the PDF above.

By
[uam_ad id="183541"]
March 2, 2007

More Perils for Galileo . . . and Other GNSS Dramas

A convergence of developments over the past few months has brought Europe’s Galileo program to the most critical passage of its history — at least, since final approval of the GNSS initiative by the European Space Agency (ESA) and the European Union (EU) in 2003 and 2004, respectively.

Read More >

By Inside GNSS
March 1, 2007

The Promise of MEMS to the Navigation Community

GPS clearly dominates the current market in positioning and navigation (POS/NAV). Besides being globally available, it provides the whole range of navigation accuracies at very low cost. GPS is also highly portable, has low power consumption, and is well suited for integration with other sensors, communication links, and databases.

GPS clearly dominates the current market in positioning and navigation (POS/NAV). Besides being globally available, it provides the whole range of navigation accuracies at very low cost. GPS is also highly portable, has low power consumption, and is well suited for integration with other sensors, communication links, and databases.

At this point in the development of navigation technology, the need for alternative positioning systems only arises because GPS does not work in all environments. Current GPS receiver chips are reaching a unit price of about $5, and the predictions are that this figure will drop to about $1 when, most likely, it will level off.

Module cost is not equivalent to system cost, but the recent development of receivers at a price of $100 shows clearly that module costs are an important factor, not only in consumer mass markets, but also for high-volume commercial products, such as asset and container tracking.

Even more important is the fact that with unit cost that low, GPS is becoming a commodity, comparable to a Sony Walkman, pocket calculators, or a digital wristwatch. Thus, personal GPS devices will drive the module market and provide navigation receivers of high versatility at even lower cost.

Considering these price trends, can any POS/NAV technology be competitive with GPS?

At this point the answer is clearly in the negative. Therefore, other navigation technologies would typically be developed for “non-GPS” environments, that is, for environments in which GPS does not function at all (underground, underwater, in buildings) or where it performs poorly (forested areas, urban environments). Although a substantial navigation market for operating in “non-GPS” environments exists, it is much smaller than the one predicted for GPS.

In the portion of the market where GPS is only available for part of the time, the question will be, “How much is the user willing to pay for a continuous navigation solution?” This obviously will depend on the specific application, and it might be possible that niche markets will develop around such applications.

In such applications, integrated solutions will be of high interest and may involve sensor integration as well as data base integration for techniques such as map matching. In those applications where GPS does not work at all, the search for cost-effective alternatives will continue.

One promising development is the emergence of micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) technology (also known as micromachined technology). MEMS is an enabling technology with a massive global market volume worth $12 billion in 2004 and is expected to reach $25 billion in 2009 (Source: “NEXUS Market Analysis for MEMS and Microsystems III, 2005-2009”). This means that, overall, MEMS technology will be much larger than the market size of GPS at that time.

A small portion of this MEMS market will support inertial sensor technology. Yole development estimated that the world markets for MEMS-based inertial sensors have reached almost $0.7 billion in 2004 and will exceed $1 billion in 2008. The major growth opportunities will come from automotive and consumer application markets, with a steady growth of the industrial and defense business, too. (Source: World MEMS Inertial Sensor Markets, Research Report # YD4264, Yole Development, April 2005).

Since INS technology is capable of working in all environments where GPS has difficulties, MEMS inertial technology is seen as both a possible complement of GPS technology and a potential alternative to GPS is market volumes develop in the way anticipated. The idea of an “inertial measurement unit (IMU) on a chip” and unit cost as low as GPS modules are anticipated in the very near future.

(For the rest of story, tables, graphs and formulas, please download the complete article using the PDF link above.)

By
[uam_ad id="183541"]
January 31, 2007

Trimble Acquires @Road, Spacient

Trimble of Sunnyvale, California, has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire publicly held @Road, Inc. of Fremont, California, and has purchased privately held Spacient Technologies, Inc. of Long Beach, California.

Read More >

By Inside GNSS

GPS Block III Contracts

The U.S. Air Force has awarded two $50 million contracts to Boeing and Lockheed Martin to execute a system design review for the next-generation GPS space segment program, GPS Block III.

The contracts come on the heels of both companies successfully completing system requirements reviews in November 2006. Those reviews, part of a $10 million follow-on order to a Phase A Concept Development Contract awarded in 2004, assessed Boeing’s and Lockheed’s ability to mitigate development and delivery risks associated with building the Block III satellites.

Read More >

By Inside GNSS

RTK Precise Positioning

Calgary, Alberta, Canada’s NovAtel Inc. offers a new real-time kinematic (RTK) positioning solution, known as AdVance RTK, designed to enhance the precision and performance of the company’s OEMV family of GNSS receiver boards.

Read More >

By Inside GNSS
January 1, 2007

Rescue Mission: GPS Applications in an Airborne Maritime Surveillance System

Maritime search and rescue (SAR) operations do not fit the usual and customary operational modes for aircraft operations. Consequently, neither do their navigation and flight management system (FMS) requirements.

Maritime search and rescue (SAR) operations do not fit the usual and customary operational modes for aircraft operations. Consequently, neither do their navigation and flight management system (FMS) requirements.

SAR missisions are not based on schedules but rather on ad hoc events and flights. Once the mission control center receives word of an accident (ship disaster, aircraft crash, etc.), an aircraft receives a mission order and begins a high-speed ferry flight to the area of concern. After arrival in the area of the incident, the aircraft typically performs a low-altitude (500 to 1,500 feet), low-speed search flight to locate survivors and the vessel.

In executing this search, the crew employs a suite of surveillance radars, electro-optical sensor, and scanning and direction finding equipment to localize  transmissions of emergency beacons that may have been activated during the accident. Once the target (person, ship, aircraft) is found, the crew drops needed equipment, such as life rafts or pumps, out of the aircraft.

The target position and other details are reported to the mission control center in order to initiate further rescue activities. All of these activities require precise navigation and sensor control, which may be obtained by a number of GNSS/GPS applications on board the aircraft.

This article describes an airborne surveillance system, AeroMission, developed by Aerodata AG, and the GPS/inertial navigation system (INS) that supports its operation.

In addition to SAR missions, AeroMission is also suitable for maritime surveillance, border and anti-smuggling patrols, pollution detection and mapping, fishery control, offshore oil field monitoring, and research applications.

System Overview
AeroMission has been developed to provide high reliability, redundancy, and efficiency. It was designed using modular architecture and state of the art technology.

In supporting AeroMission, an integrated GPS/IMU navigation system — AeroNav — combines the GPS advantages of long-term stability and absolute accuracy with those of inertial navigation — short-term accuracy during phases of high dynamics in which GPS positioning may be lost or degraded.

A separate GPS/INS system also provides attitude reference by using strapdown algorithms providing position and velocity solutions. Turn rates and accelerations given by the IMU are corrected by the GPS pseudorange measurements. These corrections are calculated by a Kalman filter.

The basic system components include:
•    surveillance radar (using the separate GPS-supported INS)
•    forward-looking infrared (FLIR) sensor (using GPS services provided through AeroNav)
•    infrared/ultraviolet (IR/UV) scanner (using a dedicated GPS-supported INS)
•    Mission management and guidance system (using GPS services through AeroNav)
•    SAR Homing Device
•    HF, VHF, UHF, and satellite communication
•    Intercom including communication relay
•    Photo/video camera
•    Ergonomic operator work stations

Other sensors such as side-looking airborne radar or microwave radiometer can be integrated as options into the suite.

. . .

Sensor Suite
In addition to the navigation system, moving map display, system software, and databases, AeroMission incorporates a number of additional sensors to aid its surveillance and reporting functions.

  • Surveillance Radar . . .
  • Electro-optical/infrared sensor . . .
  • AIS and direction finding . . .

. . .

Mission Management
TheAeroMission management suite is an integrated solution that consists of equipment and software for sensor operation and control; sensor data gathering, storage, and evaluation; mission reporting, and communications control and recording.

. . .

Flight Deck Interface
The mission system has a number of interfaces to the flight deck in order to support the mission and decrease the work load of both the cabin crew and the flight deck crew.

. . .

System Qualification and Certification
The qualification and certification process for the project was quite challenging. All modifications of the airframe have been certified through a Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) approved by European Aviation Safety Agency.

. . .

Operational Experiences
During the test flights and also during the first 10 months of operations, AeroMission installed in a DO 328 aircraft has demonstrated its reliability and efficiency with an overall service availability of more than 99 percent . . .

For the complete story, including figures, graphs, and images, please download the PDF of the article, above.

By

GPS: Launches of Satellites and Institutional Initiatives

Successful launch of the second modernized Block IIR satellite, IIR-15(M2), on September 25 and scheduling of another IIR-M launch on November 14 underlines recent progress in the GPS program.

IIR-15(M2), also identified by its space vehicle number (SVN58) and pseudorandom code number (PRN31), will be placed into orbital plane A, slot 2. The U.S. Air Force has designated the satellite to be launched in November as GPS IIR-16/M3, PRN15/SVN55.

Read More >

By Inside GNSS
IGM_e-news_subscribe