Xref: utzoo rec.ham-radio:30686 sci.electronics:17559
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uunet!shelby!neon!kaufman
From: kaufman@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Marc T. Kaufman)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,sci.electronics
Subject: Re: GPS accuracy in wake of Desert Storm?
Message-ID: <1991Feb7.180340.10395@Neon.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 7 Feb 91 18:03:40 GMT
References: <1172.27A97FF9@w8grt.fidonet.org> <826@nddsun1.sps.mot.com> <39009@cup.portal.com>
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Lines: 16

In article <39009@cup.portal.com> ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith) writes:
>Uh, I think what was objected to in the orignal posting was not
>discussing how GPS works and how accurate it is, but the request
>for how to get around limitations the military imposes for
>security purposes.

>That hasn't been discussed in IEEE journals and Sailing, has it?

Sure it has... Well, at least in Aviation Week.  The US Govt has been
advertising GPS as good for civil use, then reserving the right to degrade
the signal.  The recommended way (as seen by civil airlines) to improve
accuracy is to use GLONASS, the Russian system, which the Russians promised
not to degrade. [let's see how effective Mr. Grubs' rantings are at keeping
GLONASS secret from the Iraqis...]

Marc Kaufman (kaufman@Neon.stanford.edu)