Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Kooky_Support3624 t1_iwqm7gi wrote

Civilian GPS has limited number of satellites they are authorized to connect to at a time. Military GPS can connect up to 24 satellites at a time for an accuracy better than 10cm with better response time. Still cool to see alternatives to DoD dependent technology.

10

VTCifer t1_iwroyhp wrote

>Civilian GPS has limited number of satellites they are authorized to connect to at a time. Military GPS can connect up to 24 satellites at a time for an accuracy better than 10cm with better response time. Still cool to see alternatives to DoD dependent technology.

Yeah, going to need a citation on that.

1- GPS receivers don't 'connect' to GPS satellites. The GPS satellites are (for the nature of receivers) broadcast only.

2- The US Air Force has only committed to keeping 24 satellites in total operational 95% of the time. There's actually only 31 actually flying satellites currently. No way you could receive signals from 77% of the satellites in orbit at the same time ~50% of them are going to be below the horizon at any given time, and they operate on line of sight. (?probably? slightly less than 50% due to curvature of the earth)

7

Kooky_Support3624 t1_iwrr4wi wrote

The citation is that I am a SME on avionics. All the GPS modules I have worked on have potential for 24 connections(channels) at a time, typically you will never see more than 18 at any one time. It is a one way connection yes, and they use something similar to frequency hop to effectively encrypt all but 3 or 4 for civilian use.

Edit: for further clarification, they have to recieve a steady signal before they use pings from any particular satellite. That confirmation process is what I am referring to as connecting.

4

ExtonGuy t1_iwswo2h wrote

"Pings"? And all this time I though it was a continuous binary phase-shift keying. More like a chirp or chipping.

3

Zenon504 t1_iwrwbak wrote

Too many complicated words. Seems true.

1