Online registration is open for the fourth International Summer School on Global Navigation Satellite systems. The 10-day course will take place at the GPS Center at Aalborg University in Slettestrand, Denmark from Wednesday afternoon, September 1 through Saturday morning, September 11.

Held for the first two years at University FAF Munich, it now takes place in Denmark with two new lead sponsors, the European Space Agency and Nokia.

Online registration is open for the fourth International Summer School on Global Navigation Satellite systems. The 10-day course will take place at the GPS Center at Aalborg University in Slettestrand, Denmark from Wednesday afternoon, September 1 through Saturday morning, September 11.

Held for the first two years at University FAF Munich, it now takes place in Denmark with two new lead sponsors, the European Space Agency and Nokia.

Enrollment is limited to 50 graduate students, postdoctoral researchers and young professionals. Register online at www.munich-satellite-navigation-summerschool.org

Each year, the summer school offers a comprehensive overview on the design, development, and applications of satellite navigation systems with the theme of “A Worldwide Utility.”

In addition to the fundamentals, visiting lecturers well-recognized in the field will discuss GPS, Galileo, GLONASS, Compass /Beidou and regional and augmentation systems such as the Japanese Quasi-Zenith Satellite System and the Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System (IRNSS).

Lecturers include these GNSS leaders and experts from the EU and the
USA: Kai Borre, Danish GPS Center; Michel Bousquet, ISAE,
France; Bernd Eissfeller, UniBW, Germany; Per Enge,
Stanford University, USA; Guenter Hein, ESA, France ; Bernhard
Hoffman, TU Graz, Austria; René Oosterlinck, ESA D/GAL,
France; Tony Pratt, Orbstar Consultants, UK; Frank van
Diggelen, Broadcom Corporation, USA and Javier Ventura-Traveset,
ESA ESAC, Spain.

The course topics are:
Communications Techniques
Satellite Communications Systems and Applications
GNSS Algorithms and Laboratory Exercises
Modern GNSS Receivers
Ionospheric and Tropospheric Effects for GNSS
Regional Augmentation Systems
GNSS Space Receivers
Reconfigurable GNSS Receivers
GNSS and Interference
Security for and from GNSS
GNSS Indoor Positioning
GNSS/INS Sensor Fusion
Perspectives of the Future
Quo Vadis – Where we are going in Satellite Navigation?

Cost is €1,250, which includes lectures and program materials, room,
board and social events. For information, contact Ms. Antje Tucci at in**@**************************************ol.org or by telephone at +49 (0) 89 6004-3425 (Germany).

The post ESA Sponsors GNSS Summer School this September in Denmark appeared first on Inside GNSS - Global Navigation Satellite Systems Engineering, Policy, and Design.

The European Space Agency (ESA) has appointed Prof. Dr. Günter Hein to serve as Head of Galileo Operations and Evolution with duties in Noordwijk, Netherlands, and Paris, France.

With an initial four-year term beginning December 1, Hein will report directly to René Oosterlinck, ESA’s director of the Galileo program and navigation-related activities (D/GAL).

The European Space Agency (ESA) has appointed Prof. Dr. Günter Hein to serve as Head of Galileo Operations and Evolution with duties in Noordwijk, Netherlands, and Paris, France.

With an initial four-year term beginning December 1, Hein will report directly to René Oosterlinck, ESA’s director of the Galileo program and navigation-related activities (D/GAL).

Nominated for the post by the German government, Hein will share responsibility for the evolution of the Galileo system, the relation and interoperability of Galileo and EGNOS to other GNSSs, preparation of the future operational phase of the Galileo infrastructure, implementation the related “technology actions,” and associated activities.

Hein took up his new responsibilities quickly, joining European Commission representatives on a mission to Beijing to negotiate with the Chinese Technical Working Group on Compass regarding the problem of signals and frequencies of Galileo and the Chinese GNSS system. Among other issues, China is proposing to transmit Compass signals in RF spectra that overlap the Galileo public regulated service (PRS) signals at E6 around 1268 MHz and E1(lower L1) around 1561 MHz.

Hein has been a full professor and director of the Institute of Geodesy and Navigation (IGN) at Germany’s University FAF Munich since 1983. He will take a leave of absence from the university, retaining all the rights as professor. Bernd Eissfeller, formerly IGN’s vice-director and since 2000 a full professor of navigation at the University FAF Munich, is now heading now the institute.

Hein has been a member of the European Commission’s Galileo Signal Task Force and is the organizer of the annual Munich Satellite Navigation Summit. He has also been a contributing editor to Inside GNSS, coordinating the Working Papers column.

The post European Space Agency Names Günter Hein to Galileo Post appeared first on Inside GNSS - Global Navigation Satellite Systems Engineering, Policy, and Design.

Passage of a new regulation on Galileo sets the stage for the next phase of the €3.4-billion satellite navigation system’s development under a public procurement but leaves many details to be worked out among the key players: the European Commission (EC), the European Council, the European Parliament, and the European Space Agency (ESA).

Meeting in Strasbourg, France, the parliament adopted the measure on April 22 with 607 votes in favor, 36 votes against, and 8 abstentions.

“Things are looking up, finally, for the European GNSS programs,” Paul Verhoef, head of the Galileo unit in the EC’s Directorate-General for Transport and Energy, told an April 23 plenary session of the European Navigation Conference 2008 in Toulouse, France.

Passage of a new regulation on Galileo sets the stage for the next phase of the €3.4-billion satellite navigation system’s development under a public procurement but leaves many details to be worked out among the key players: the European Commission (EC), the European Council, the European Parliament, and the European Space Agency (ESA).

Meeting in Strasbourg, France, the parliament adopted the measure on April 22 with 607 votes in favor, 36 votes against, and 8 abstentions.

“Things are looking up, finally, for the European GNSS programs,” Paul Verhoef, head of the Galileo unit in the EC’s Directorate-General for Transport and Energy, told an April 23 plenary session of the European Navigation Conference 2008 in Toulouse, France.

The new Galileo regulation puts the EC firmly in control of program management, adds a post-deployment “exploitation phase” to the plan, provides broad outlines of responsibilities among European organizations, but leaves many aspects subject to further refinement.

These details include establishing the legal framework for operation of the system, regulatory measures, intellectual property rights (IPR), and liability regimes for the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service (EGNOS) and Galileo itself.

The EC must also complete a delegation agreement with ESA to serve as the prime contractor, outlining responsibilities and guidelines for the procurement process.

The regulation targets the 2008–2013 time frame for completion of the deployment phase of Galileo, and Verhoef acknowledged that there is “a lot of pressure to stick to the timetable and budget.” However, the realities of developing a satellite navigation system are substantial, he added, “And we cannot overfly those realities as if they don’t exist.”

Verhoef said the program has to complete the procurement process before a more solid schedule can be determined, because the contracts with vendors will have a real timeline for commitment of deliverables.

Finalizing a Galileo Signal in Space Interface Control Document (SIS ICD) remains a priority so that private companies can begin designing and selling Galileo-capable equipment. The size and nature of non-European companies’ participation in the contracts to build the system also must be worked out in practical terms.

Other unresolved issues include the role of the European GNSS Supervisory Authority (GSA) in regards to EGNOS and ESA, as well as technical matters, including Galileo-related R&D projects under the 7th Framework Program (7FP).

The amount of money available for those projects also needs to be determined, given the new deployment plan’s reprogramming of $400 million from the 7FP budget.

Lastly, program leaders must decide on the process and guidelines for contracting with a system operator after a fully operational capability (FOC) is achieved for Galileo.

The Galileo legislation establishes a reorganized structure for deploying the GNSS system and managing the program. It confirms the previously established guidelines for the procurement process that will start in mid-June, with the EC as the program manager and ESA as the design authority that is also responsible for getting bids and letting contracts.

Program leaders hope to have selected vendors and gained signatures on contracts by late this year or early 2009. “ESA will start the procurement, but will not be able to sign contracts until other agreements worked out,” Verhoef said. “These negotiations will be done in parallel with the procurement process.” Verhoef says he hopes that the program can gain six to nine months by following this parallel approach.

The outlines of the regulation had been agreed to in advance during an “informal meeting” among representatives on the council, commission, and parliament earlier this year. That agreement followed approval in late January of a proposal by Parliament’s Industry, Research, and Energy (ITRE) Committee to abolish the GSA and turn responsibility for ensuring the Galileo system’s security requirements over to a new Committee on European GNSS Programs.

“Parliament was rather badly surprised by our announcement last year that the PPP negotiations were ending,” Verhoef said in Toulouse. “They felt they needed better insight into the progress of the program.”

As agreed upon by the three organizations, the regulation sets up a new entity, the Galileo Inter-institutional Panel (GIP), which will be composed of three representatives each of the council and parliament and one representative from the EC. The GIP will monitor the implementation of the GNSS program, the international agreements with third countries, and the preparation of the satellite navigation markets.

The GSA, which would have had a more central role as overseer of a once-envisioned public-private partnership (PPP) to deploy and operate Galileo, will retain a board composed of representatives from the 25 EU member-states and continue as a separate agency but under the direction of the EC.

Under the new regulation, the GSA will now monitor the implementation of security procedures and perform system security audits, “[r]especting the Commission’s role as manager of the programmes and in accordance with guidelines issued by the Commission.”

Ultimate responsibility for management of the security program remains with the EC, which plans on establishing a GNSS Security Board chaired by the commission and composed of security experts with representatives from each member state.

The GSA will be responsible for establishing and operating the new Galileo security center and also will “contribute to the preparation of the commercialisation of the systems with a view to smooth functioning, seamless service provision and high market penetration.”

The regulation also enables the EC to assign other tasks to the agency, “in particular the promotion of applications and services and ensuring the certification of the components of the systems.”

The full text of the regulation can be found at the parliament’s website.

Finishing the Galileo Signal Specification
Officials acknowledge that they need to finalize the Galileo SIS ICD as soon as possible, especially now that the GIOVE-B satellite is in orbit broadcasting new signals, including the multiplex BOC (MBOC) designed for civil use. Verhoef told Inside GNSS that he would like to have the issue resolved by the ION GNSS 2008 conference in September, where he expects to face a lot of questions from GNSS equipment designers and manufacturers.

The issue is complicated, however, by the prohibition on commercial use of the current provisional ICD as well as the question of possible fees that a post-FOC Galileo system operator might want to collect for services or from GNSS equipment manufacturers. One option, Verhoef says, would be to issue free licenses to manufacturers for a limited term. Another would be to resolve the issue in advance and implement those terms in the course of negotiating a concession contract with an eventual Galileo operator.

Manufacturers are pressing for a resolution of the problem before investing in receiver developments that might be wasted if the ICD changes, especially those companies planning on building equipment based on application specific integrated circuits (ASICs) and even field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs).

Although a number of receiver manufacturers have announced Galileo-ready equipment, those generally only involved the design of the receiver front-ends — antennas and RF integrated circuits that can process the wider bandwidth of Galileo (and future GPS). The digital signal processing (DSP) portion of the receiver is what really requires the certain specifications of a final ICD, although manufacturers working with software defined radios — also known as software receivers — have more flexibility in altering their products to accommodate changes.

Gard Ueland, president of the Galileo Services association of “downstream” manufacturers, told Inside GNSS that industry wants to have the Galileo infrastructure in place as soon as possible but would also like to see funds go into R&D projects for early demonstrations of Galileo applications.

GSA and the Road Ahead
The fate of the GSA’s staff and the budget for FP7 R&D projects also remains up in the air.

The plan that transitioned the Galileo acquisition from a PPP process required an additional €2.4 billion in public funds. €400 million of that amount was designated as coming from the €50 billion 7th Framework Program budget of European capital investment during 2007–2013.

The GSA had been allocated €350 million in 7FP funds for GNSS-related technical R&D projects. How much of that amount might be taken back to make up the €400 million remains to be determined.

About €40 million was allocated for the GSA’s first call for projects last year, and another €40 million has been designated for a second call this year, according to Pedro Pedreira, GSA’s executive director.

Typically, only half of a framework program budget ends up being spent in the original categorical allocations, with the remainder being reprogrammed as a sort of European Community contingency fund. Verhoef says the issue will be revisited during the 7FP mid-term review in 2010.

As for GSA staff, the EC is considering whether to move some of the agency’s technical personnel directly into its Galileo unit. Pedreira told Inside GNSS that he wants to ensure “stability” for current GSA staff and hopes to have a revised work plan clarified with the EC by the end of June, and a 2009 work plan approved by the GSA board by the end of September.

The new regulation calls for preparations for an exploitation phase comprising infrastructure management, maintenance, “constant improvement,” and replenishment of the system, as well as certification and standardization operations.

The GSA has been working since last July on a concept for post-FOC operations and has come up with what Pedreira characterized as a “very exciting, innovative” proposal that he believes will “meet the expectations of member states.”

“We are really talking about the transfer of risks,” Pedreira said, an issue that ultimately stymied the original PPP effort. “How would the system operate within the EU legal framework?”

But GSA needs to “sell” the EC on the concept on the concept and, in turn, the EC would have to choose the time to present any proposal to the council. In any case, Pedreira added, there’s no rush for a new operations PPP, which would be difficult to conclude at this point and probably cost more. In the meantime, the program is too busy figuring out work share and procurement contracts.

But That’s Not All
As if these tasks were not enough, other issues remain to be addressed by Galileo program leaders.

Another round of talks is taking place this week in Brussels with Chinese representatives regarding the proposal to place a portion of the Compass (Beidou) signals on the same frequency planned for Galileo’s public regulated service (PRS).

It’s much the same situation as arose a few years ago when Europe originally proposed to overlay its L1 open service signals on the new GPS military (M-code) signal. That potential conflict was eventually resolved in the course of negotiating the 2004 Galileo/GPS cooperation agreement between the United States and the European Union.

“We need to make sure we have the same idea of the problem,” Verhoef told a press conference during the ENC 2008. “As with all engineering, you spend half the time identifying the problem and the other half solving it.

“We have particular problems [with the Compass frequency plan] that we’re not sure the Chinese are aware of,” he added.

The Chinese delegation included Liao Xiaohan, deputy director of High & New Technology Development and Industry for the Ministry of Science and Industry, who spoke at the ENC 2008 conference. Other members were Ran Chengqi, deputy director of the China Satellite Navigation Project Center (CSNPC), and Yang Qiangwen, CSNPC senior engineer.

The new regulation also appears to try to head off any further complications arising from Spain’s desire to upgrade its safety-of-life center to a fully qualified Galileo satellite control center equivalent to those planned in Oberpfaffenhofen, German, and Fucino, Italy. Under the regulation, the program would accept the creation of such a facility and its inclusion in the system’s ground infrastructure as long as no additional cost fell on the Galileo and EGNOS program budgets for the 2007–2013 period.

Meanwhile, non-European companies — particularly U.S. aerospace firms — are pressing for clarification of the level of their involvement in the program, which will follow EU rules, not those of ESA that guarantee a “geographic” award of contracts to companies based on their national governments’ financial contribution to a program.

Considering the experience of past European space programs, “a substantial amount of American components will be flown on the system,” Verhoef said.

The new procurement plan seems to relegate non-European companies to subcontract status. But some companies would like to be able to compete for the lead contracts for the Galileo satellites, for instance.

Because the procurement guidelines limit large companies to only bidding on two of six Galileo “work packages,” some question remains as to whether at least two competitors will show up to go after the lead spacecraft contract. EADS Astrium is expected to compete, as is OHB Technologies (whether or not partnered with Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd., which EADS is in the process of acquiring).

The regulation encourages dual-sourcing, but Verhoef told the press conference, “We’re not going to wait for three or four years to get somebody who’s able to bid.”

The post Galileo’s Drama: Different Set, Additional Actors, a New Play for Europe’s GNSS? appeared first on Inside GNSS - Global Navigation Satellite Systems Engineering, Policy, and Design.

In an April 15 meeting, the Council of the European Space Agency (ESA) has created a Galileo Directorate to accommodate the agency’s newly enhanced role in Europe’s GNSS program.

Acting on recommendations of ESA’s Director General Jean-Jacques Dordain, the council agreed to bring back René Oosterlinck, former head of the Navigation Department, to serve as the director of the Galileo program and navigation-related activities (D/GAL) through the end of 2010.

In an April 15 meeting, the Council of the European Space Agency (ESA) has created a Galileo Directorate to accommodate the agency’s newly enhanced role in Europe’s GNSS program.

Acting on recommendations of ESA’s Director General Jean-Jacques Dordain, the council agreed to bring back René Oosterlinck, former head of the Navigation Department, to serve as the director of the Galileo program and navigation-related activities (D/GAL) through the end of 2010.

The council also selected Didier Faivre for appointment as Galileo director beginning January 1, 2011, for a term of four years. Faivre is currently ESA’s Head of the Navigation Department. The directorate office will be set up by June, according to Giuseppe Viriglio, ESA’s director of telecommunications and navigation.

The creation of a Galileo Directorate reflects the new role that ESA has taken on as the technical lead and procurement agent under the new public procurement plan for Galileo, following abandonment of the public-private partnership (PPP) approach last year.

In addition to implementation of the Galileo Program for the European Commission, the new directorate will focus on other related satellite navigation activities, including the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service (EGNOS) that will be integrated into Galileo over the coming years.

A Belgian national, René Oosterlinck joined ESA in 1979 and has served as ESA Director of Legal Affairs and External Relations since June 2005. Before that, he was head of the Navigation Department for more than five years, dealing primarily with Galileo and EGNOS.

Faivre has more than 20 years’ experience in space-related activities, having joined the French Space Agency CNES in 1983. He moved to ESA in 2000 as the head of the coordination office within the Applications Directorate and became head of the Navigation Department in 2006.

In their April 15 action, the ESA council also created directorates for human spaceflight, science and robotic exploration, and telecommunications and integrated applications as part of a wider reorganization.

The post ESA Creates Galileo Directorate, Appoints Oosterlinck appeared first on Inside GNSS - Global Navigation Satellite Systems Engineering, Policy, and Design.

That would move an additional €2.4 to €3 billion onto the public tax burden, but it might also represent the quickest route to completion of the GNSS project backed by the European Union (EU) and the European Space Agency (ESA).

A sea change appears to be taking place in Europe’s Galileo program as its political masters prepare to transform the struggling public-private partnership (PPP) into a more traditional institutional program wholly sponsored by the public sector.

That would move an additional €2.4 to €3 billion onto the public tax burden, but it might also represent the quickest route to completion of the GNSS project backed by the European Union (EU) and the European Space Agency (ESA).

The move follows the collapse of negotiations between the European GNSS Supervisory Authority (GSA) and an eight-member consortium of private companies that sought a 20-concession to complete and operate Galileo. A European source close to the negotiations confirmed the new directions for the program to Inside GNSS.

At a March 22 session, the EU Transport Council gave the consortium until May 10 to incorporate and get negotiations back on track, at the same time asking its executive arm, the European Commission (EC) — assisted by the GSA and ESA — to come up with alternative options for handling the project.

On May 11, the GSA Administrative Board concluded, “We did not see relevant progress at the level that the Council expected,” according to GSA Executive Director Pedro Pedreira. That assessment and a discussion of alternatives have gone back to the transport ministers.

The officials are expected to re-visit the Galileo situation at a Transport Council meeting in early June. Jacques Barrot, EC vice-president and transport commissioner, is expected to announce the options under consideration by the EC on May 16.

The Alternatives. Reuters UK, citing a draft of an EC report that the news service said it had obtained, identified the preferred option as a public takeover the project now and issuance of a new tender for a private operator once the Galileo space and ground infrastructure is built. Projected completion of the system under that scenario would be the end of 2012.

In that case, ESA would probably act as the prime contractor for the project, extending its role beyond the in-orbit validation (IOV) phase. IOV includes construction of a ground monitoring and control segment and launch of the first four operational Galileo satellites beginning in 2009, as well as three experimental spacecraft, the first of which went into orbit in December 2005. ESA currently is overseeing a billion-euro IOV contract with the European Satellite Navigation Industries (formerly Galileo Industries).

A sizable question mark beside this option is whether ESA, with its background in scientific and research projects, can execute a time-sensitive commercial project with greater consequences for failing to deliver products and services to market as needed.

Another option, according to Reuters, would have the public sector launch 18 satellites and then turn the project over to industry to launch the remaining 12 — delaying completion until a year later. The final option would continue on the present PPP, prospectively delaying a fully operational system until mid-2014 at the earliest.

Since the March 22 ultimatum, the consortium members agreed to incorporate a Galileo Operating Company (GOC) to sign a so-called “head of terms” agreement with the GSA outlining the concession contract. However, consortium members apparently continued to wrangle among themselves, with some aerospace manufacturers speculating that they could do better under a new conventional program contract.

Then, in early May, the consortium apparently sent the commission a letter requesting additional time and incentives to resolve the stand-off.

GIOVE-A Nav Message

Despite the political situation, technical progress on Galileo continues. Early in May, ESA announced that the system’s first experimental satellite, GIOVE-A, had successfully transmitted its first navigation message.

The nav message contains the information needed by user receivers to calculate their position. Prior to reaching this milestone, the satellite had been broadcasting only the data needed for measuring the receiver-to-satellite distance.

The message was created by the navigation signal generator unit on board GIOVE-A, using content prepared by the GIOVE Mission Segment. The nav message was uplinked from the Guildford ground station in England operated by Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd. and then transmitted from the spacecraft to the users.

The objective of the test was to demonstrate an end-to-end link between the mission segment and user receivers. The navigation message is being generated for demonstration purposes only — no service guarantee is provided.

Copyright 2007 Gibbons Media and Research LLC

The post Galileo’s Plan B (and C) appeared first on Inside GNSS - Global Navigation Satellite Systems Engineering, Policy, and Design.

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.

This might, indeed, be the most difficult moment since the first tentative examination in 1993 of a European counterpart to the U.S. Global Positioning System. Although Galileo’s premature demise remains a distant prospect, statements at the March 6–8 Munich Satellite Navigation Conference and subsequent conversations with public and private officials indicate that the shape, schedule, and viability of the Galileo program may be at stake.

Here’s why.

At the beginning of 2006, the Galileo Joint Undertaking (GJU) — a rare fusion of European stakeholders — went out of business without having completed a contract with a consortium of eight private companies for a 20-year concession to complete and operate the Galileo system.

The GJU’s role had always been planned as a temporary one, focused primarily on the executing a concession contract. But it also has had responsibilities for letting and managing GNSS-related projects under the European Commission (EC) 6th Framework Program (FP6).

Those responsibilities have now been taken up by the European GNSS Supervisory Agency (GSA), a long-planned EC legal entity that was expected to merely sign the concession contract, own and oversee the Galileo infrastructure and operations on behalf of the public interest, and manage a variety of high-level tasks such as signal certification and system security. (The GSA, its roles, personalities, and plans will be explored more fully in a future issue of Inside GNSS.)

As the public pronouncements in Munich and later conversations made clear, however, some of those expectations have changed.

The in-orbit validation (IOV) phase and overall Galileo program are behind schedule due to technical and institutional issues — in itself, not an unusual situation for GNSS infrastructure projects in general. The second experimental satellite, GIOVE-B, experienced an electrical malfunction during testing that has delayed its launch until December.

Also not unexpectedly, the Galileo program is costing more than originally budgeted. More ominously, the concession negotiations — already over a year past the original completion date — have come to a standstill, and a general consensus exists that a contract will not be finished this year either.

Disconcerted Consortium

Probably the leading proximate cause is the inability of the consortium to incorporate a Galileo Operating Company (GOC) and appoint a chief executive officer (CEO). That situation, in turn, stems from a disagreement among consortium partners on an effort by the Spanish members, AENA and HispaSat, to expand their share in the allocation of work on implementation of Galileo.

Angling for a larger part of the Galileo business has been a common aspect of both the ESA and GJU contractual processes. However, numerous sources indicated that this effort, which some suggested may have Spanish political backing as well, departs from a key December 2005 agreement among consortium members and EU transport ministers regarding project shares.

But other factors are at play, too. Among these is the difficult issue of eliminating or at least adequately quantifying so-called design risks and reaching agreement on how these are to be shared among public and private partners.

Jean-François Bou, director of Thales Galileo program and acting CEO for the consortium, told the summit audience that there needs to be “full traceability between the mission requirements [established by ESA for the IOV phase] and the system requirements” under which the Galileo system will be completed and operated.

“A technical baseline is mandatory,” Bou said, adding that it remains unclear who will certify the system software and hardware, among other issues.

ESA is also experiencing strains with its private partner, the European Satellite Navigation Industries (ESNI, formerly Galileo Industries), which has the billion-euro contract for the IOV phase. Between 400 and 500 subcontracts had to be let simultaneously, and many remain unsigned. Consequently, some subcontractors have had to work without funds or even suspend Galileo activities.

Speaking Plainly

The situation brought some unusually blunt statements from EC officials during the plenary session of the Munich summit — public comments that took industry representatives aback.

Acknowledging that the concession negotiations have proved “more difficult than anyone anticipated,” Matthias Ruete, EC director general for energy and transportation, warned that “political patience is running short. Our political masters are expecting, and rightly so, for this program to go forward.”

The failure to incorporate the GOC also drew criticism from Pedro Pedreira, the GSA’s executive director, who told his Munich audience, “The consortium is not able to present its own terms, let alone negotiate those terms.”

In a later press conference, Pedreira added, “Downstream development [of Galileo-capable receivers and services] can’t happen without the certainty of system completion. We won’t have a reliable date [for completing the system] until a concession contract is signed.”

As Inside GNSS went to press, a March 22 meeting of the European Transport Council was expected to spend considerable time deliberating and evaluating the Galileo program, before giving guidance on the political way ahead. The council may also bring pressure on Spain to temper its commercial representatives in the consortium.

Ruete says the Transport Council will assess the program and set a clear timetable, including milestones that must be met to avoid potentially adverse actions. Asked if it was possible that the Galileo program might be stopped, Ruete noted, “A negotiator has to have alternative plans for success and a credible threat in terms of negotiations. We may have plans B, C, D, E, and F. Plan G, to stop Galileo, is the most improbable one.”

Ruete, who was the head of the EC’s GNSS unit for several years before leaving for another post in 2000, noted that he had left the Galileo program “when it was just a baby and have come back to find an unruly teenager.”

Despite such growing pains, Ruete said, “Galileo has faced crises in the past and has always found a way to move forward. This situation might be described as catharsis rather than crisis. We need a catharsis to find a way forward.”

Progress, Nevertheless

In fact, the Galileo program has continued to advance. Although they failed to achieve a full contract, the GJU and the consortium signed a so-called “head of terms” document last year outlining the sections of the contract and the areas of high-level agreement.

On March 2, ESA released the GIOVE-A Signal-in-Space Interface Control Document (SIS ICD). The document provides the technical details of the signals transmitted by the GIOVE-A satellite now in orbit.

Although the GIOVE-A SIS is different than the multiplexed BOC (MBOC) signal now expected to be transmitted at the L1 frequency, the ICD will enable receiver manufacturers and research institutions to use an actual Galileo signal for their research and development. The SIS ICD is available at the GIOVE web site.

ESA also has awarded a contract to UK-based Surrey Satellite Technology Limited to begin building a second spacecraft for Galileo. Named GIOVE-A2, the new satellite has an estimated value of €25 to €30 million and will use the company’s proven GIOVE-A technology.

Giuseppe Viriglio, ESA’s director of telecommunications and navigation, said ESA has used the delay in launch of GIOVE-B to prepare it to transmit MBOC signals, and that GIOVE-A and -A2 could as well.

Recently, ESA has allowed two GNSS manufacturers, Septentrio and NovAtel, to begin marketing Galileo receiver technology that those companies developed under program contracts.

Elsewhere in GNSS

Galileo’s difficulties are occurring during a very dynamic and swiftly changing international GNSS environment. China says it is moving to establish its own GNSS, Compass, even while it continues work on Galileo-related projects under an agreement with the EU.

Kehong Chen, vice-director of the Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality and member of a summit panel, expressed the Shanghai government’s support for Galileo and his belief that the 2010 World Expo in that city would be a “perfect stage” for demonstrations of Galileo products.

In response to a question about simultaneous Chinese development of Galileo and Compass, Chen said only, “Different kinds of systems can fulfill the requirements of different kinds of users.”

In the United States, the GPS III program is supposed to release a final request for proposals for space segment modernization within a matter of weeks, with industry responses due in the summer. A contract would come four to six months later, according to Col. Mark Crews, chief engineer of the GPS Wing (former Joint Program Office) at the U.S. Space and Missile Systems Center at Los Angeles Air Force Base. An RFP for the GPS III ground control segment has already gone out.

Meanwhile, Russia is accelerating restoration of the GLONASS system and considering addition of an interoperable CDMA signal. Sergey Revnivykh, a representative of the Russian Space Agency, said that two more launches, each with three GLONASS-M satellites, will take place this year, bringing the total number of healthy operational satellites in the constellation to 18.

Nineteen satellites are in the GLONASS constellation now, but three are in the process of decommissioning, three are being commissioned, and three are off-line for maintenance.

Copyright 2007 Gibbons Media and Research LLC

The post More Perils for Galileo . . . and Other GNSS Dramas appeared first on Inside GNSS - Global Navigation Satellite Systems Engineering, Policy, and Design.

Russian officials are working to develop a plan that will meet Russian President Vladimir Putin’s directive to have the full GLONASS constellation in place by 2009 instead of 2011.

Putin reportedly wants to see performance of a 24-satellite constellation that is comparable with GPS and Galileo two years earlier than the deadline established in a 2001 plan to rebuild and modernize the Russian GNSS.

Meanwhile, according to an RIA Novosti news report, Federal State Unitary Enterprise NPO Prikladnoi Mekhaniiki “M. F. Reshetnev” in Krasnoyarsk responsible for designing the modernized GLONASS satellites has received orders to build four more GLONASS-M satellites — with the possibility of increased number of launches in 2007.

Four GLONASS-M spacecraft are currently in orbit, although the two launched December 25, 2005, have still not begun transmitting. Altogether, 17 operational GLONASS satellites were in orbit as of March 27, but only 13 were currently broadcasting navigation messages.

Meanwhile, the Russian Federation and the European Union (EU) have signed a wide-ranging agreement to cooperate in space activities. Meeting in Brussels on March 10, Anatoliy Perminov, the director of the Federal Space Agency of the Russian Federation (Roscosmos), and European Commission Vice-President Günter Verheugen signed a joint document aimed at enhancing the bilateral relationship. An implementing agreement was also signed by Jean-Jacques Dordain, director-general of the European Space Agency (ESA).

Under the new accord, joint space initiatives will comprise projects of mutual interest, to be implemented through established instruments, including ESA and Roscosmos programs and the space work program of the Seventh EU Framework Program for Research and Development.

Specific areas of interest include GNSS, earth observation, satellite communications, access to space and space transportation systems, space science and exploration and use of the International Space Station, and space technology development. GNSS activities include finalizing and implementing the Galileo-GLONASS agreement and cooperation on user applications.

Copyright 2006 Gibbons Media and Research LLC

The post GLONASS: Picking Up the Pace appeared first on Inside GNSS - Global Navigation Satellite Systems Engineering, Policy, and Design.