Disastrous GPS Jamming

 

Data Shows Disastrous GPS Jamming

Representatives of the GPS industry presented to members of the Federal Communications Commission clear, strong laboratory evidence of interference with the GPS signal by a proposed new broadcaster on January 19 of this year. The teleconference and subsequent written results of the testing apparently did not dissuade FCC International Bureau Chief Mindel De La Torre from authorizing Lightsquared to proceed with ancillary terrestrial component operations, installing up to 40,000 high-power transmitters close to the GPS frequency, across the United States. More at:

http://tinyurl.com/4u8zfn6

See also

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.
1 2 3 4
6 7 8
<<Page 5>>

US Military Plane Forced Down

Looks like LightSquared may have been doing some testing besides in the US.

http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpps/news/us-military-plane-forced-d...

--
Nuvi 2460LMT

Here we go again

--
Always on the Road Knowing where I've Been

Still L band questions--

The CNET article is so content free... A number of the precision location services rely on an auxiliary low-power L band signal, which is completely wiped out by LightSquared. The only fix for that is for LightSquared to move out of the L band entirely.

And adding another box isn't a fix to existing systems, particularly for light aircraft GPS.

--
Nuvi 2460, 680, DATUM Tymserve 2100, Trimble Thunderbolt, Ham radio, Macintosh, Linux, Windows

And the FCC says

Released: 09/13/2011. STATUS OF TESTING IN CONNECTION WITH LIGHTSQUARED'S REQUEST FOR ATC COMMERCIAL OPERATING AUTHORITY. (DA No.
11-1537). (Dkt No 11-109 ). IB

"LightSquared submitted proposed mitigation techniques to remedy the interference to GPS simultaneously with the technical working group final report. Notably, LightSquared proposed to revise its planned deployment to operate terrestrial transmitters only in the lower 10 MHz of its spectrum. The results thus far from the testing using the lower 10 MHz showed significant improvement compared to tests of the upper 10 MHz, although there continue to be interference concerns, e.g., with certain types of high precision GPS receivers, including devices used in national security and aviation applications. Additional tests are therefore necessary."

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1537...

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

yep

yep

The "Real" Story

Gpsworld had an interesting editorial (http://www.gpsworld.com/gnss-system/out-front-a-pawn-their-g...
) back on August 1st about what may be the real reason LightSquared is doing what they are doing. As a firm believer in the statement "Follow the money", this quote from the editorial truly makes sense:

Quote:

“These guys have b..ls.

Off the record, their business plan is a 100 percent swap.

So the more GPS gets irritated by their b..ls..t and says get out of the L-band, the more LS like it.

Tell your friends to recommend that LS use their other [lower] spectrum.

Now that’s what they don’t want.

The trade is 40 MHz of new terrestrial spectrum.”

One has to remember that LightSquared got its spectrum for free through acquisitions. Trading this undesirable "free" spectrum for valuable terrestrial spectrum in a swap would be a financial windfall for LightSquared.

As I said, "Follow the money".

--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.

LightSquared

there might be a lot more to the story. Check this out http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/15/bombshell-general-accu...

And Another Report on Same Story

From the Daily Beast:

The four-star Air Force general who oversees Air Force Space Command walked into a highly secured room on Capitol Hill a week ago to give a classified briefing to lawmakers and staff, and dropped a surprise. Pressed by members, Gen. William Shelton said the White House tried to pressure him to change his testimony to make it more favorable to a company tied to a large Democratic donor.

The episode —confirmed by The Daily Beast in interviews with administration officials and the chairman of a congressional oversight committee —is the latest in a string of incidents that have given Republicans sudden fodder for questions about whether the Obama administration is politically interfering in routine government matters that affect donors or fundraisers. Already, the FBI and a House committee are investigating a federal loan guarantee to a now failed solar firm called Solyndra that is tied to a large Obama fundraiser.

--
Tuckahoe Mike - Nuvi 3490LMT, Nuvi 260W, iPhone X, Mazda MX-5 Nav

On Fox News

Tuckahoemike wrote:

From the Daily Beast:

The four-star Air Force general who oversees Air Force Space Command walked into a highly secured room on Capitol Hill a week ago to give a classified briefing to lawmakers and staff, and dropped a surprise. Pressed by members, Gen. William Shelton said the White House tried to pressure him to change his testimony to make it more favorable to a company tied to a large Democratic donor.

The episode —confirmed by The Daily Beast in interviews with administration officials and the chairman of a congressional oversight committee —is the latest in a string of incidents that have given Republicans sudden fodder for questions about whether the Obama administration is politically interfering in routine government matters that affect donors or fundraisers. Already, the FBI and a House committee are investigating a federal loan guarantee to a now failed solar firm called Solyndra that is tied to a large Obama fundraiser.

The media is finally picking up this subject. They didn't mention the effect on GPS by Lightsquared, just the politics involved.

Lightsquared is to wireless communications

What Solyndra is to 'green energy' -- follow the money.

--
*Keith* MacBook Pro *wifi iPad(2012) w/BadElf GPS & iPhone6 + Navigon*

More fallout

LightSquared Would Jam GPS, Defense Officials Tell Congress
BY: DEE ANN DAVIS
Inside GNSS
15 September 2011

"Amidst a storm of political controversy and the conspicuous absence of a key administration witness, Department of Defense (DoD) officials told members of Congress today (September 15, 2011) that a proposed broadband wireless service would degrade or render useless billions of dollars of equipment essential to military operations."

"FCC MIA
One member of the Obama administration was notable for his absence. Federal Communications Commission chairman Julius Genachowski, though originally set to speak before the panel, had refused to appear, Turner said in his opening remarks to the hearing.
'I consider the chairman’s failure to show up today to be an affront to the House Armed Services Committee,' said Turner. 'It appears to be symptomatic of a disregard by the chairman for the consequences of the FCC’s January 26 waiver to LightSquared.'"

"The filters that are being suggested by LightSquared, he said, could undermine the precision of some receivers
“There is a set a frequencies and then there are harmonics off those frequencies. It is those harmonics . . . that are important for the precision of those wideband receivers,” Shelton explained. “Clipping off those harmonics decreases the accuracy of the receiver. If there is something else magic out there, we don’t know about it.”

Asked why DoD had not raised the alarm years earlier when the FCC was considering and approving the increases in power and numbers of broadcast towers at the center of LightSquared’s proposal, Shelton said that the threat to GPS only became clear early this year when LightSquared changed the focus of its business plan from satellite services to a terrestrial network.
“The frequency band that we’re talking about here has, by FCC rulings in the past, always been intended to be a ‘quiet neighborhood’ where GPS could coexist with other signals of the same magnitude,” the general said. “However, if you put a rock band in the middle of that neighborhood it is a very different sort of circumstance.”"

White House May Have Pressured General to Change LightSquared Testimony, Reports Daily Beast
GPS World
15 September 2011
"Melanie Sloan, who runs the nonpartisan ethics groups Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, told the Daily Beast, "With this new set of facts, it starts to sound like a pattern of the White House improperly pressuring people at agencies involving decisions that affect companies tied to donors and fundraisers. It’s always a problem when the White House is pressuring anyone’s testimony. I don’t care if you are a four-star [general] or a GS-15 [career employee], you should be giving your true opinion and not an opinion the White House is seeking for political expediency.”

The White House confirmed Wednesday that its Office of Management and Budget suggested changes to the general’s testimony but insisted such reviews are routine and not influenced by politics. And it said Shelton will be permitted to give the testimony he wants, without any pressure.

In his testimony, Gen. Shelton states: "We believe the signal strength proposed as 'lower power' is actually the same as in the originally published LightSquared plan—and was the power level upon which the NPEF [Note: These were the same as the Las Vegas tests where LSQ stated it would test at full power (1500W but "due to losses" the actual radiated power was 750W] tests were based...."

The Political Storm Clouds Over GPS
BY: PHILIP EWING
DoD Buzz
15 September 2011

"The Obama administration urged Shelton to say “the general supported the White House policy to add more broadband for commercial use; and that the Pentagon would try to resolve the questions around LightSquared with testing in just 90 days. Shelton chafed at the intervention, which seemed to soften the Pentagon’s position and might be viewed as helping the company as it tries to get the project launched, the officials said.”

Shelton didn’t give that testimony to the House Armed Services Committee’s Strategic Forces subcommittee; he told committee members unequivocally that LightSquared’s network jammed the military GPS receivers “and to our knowledge, there are no mitigation measures.” Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio vowed to refer the situation to Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Turner also said that FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s decision not to show up for Turner’s hearing was an “affront” to Congress."

And the stories keep being reported

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

Lightsquished

1) This is the strategy of this administration and non-elected officials - do not recognize congress and refuse to speak.
2) Payback for all of the funds donated to BHO.
3) I just screwed myself - I will probably be reported to his Attachwatch site.
Oh well - come on Nov 2012.

More clips

• Rep. Turner: "If the FCC gives LightSquared the final go ahead to build out its network, I fear the DOD's training activities in the United States would come to an end”… "This cannot be allowed to happen”…"This is about our war fighters who rely on this technology for safety and their technological edge against adversaries." [Communications Daily, House Panel Says LightSquared May Not Be Worth the Price]
• Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) accused NTIA of lobbying for LightSquared. "I have never seen an agency ... advocate that strongly on behalf of any private sector company unless somebody's wheel was getting greased." He said it appeared that there was either "pressure from above or a relationship that was not being disclosed." [Communications Daily, House Panel Says LightSquared May Not Be Worth the Price]
• Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) on Thursday said he was troubled by allegations that the White House had tried to influence Shelton's testimony "The White House shouldn't be telling a four-star general what he can and can't say before a congressional committee on a matter of national security, especially to help the profitability of a private company.” [The Washington Post, GOP lawmakers skeptical over firm's links to White House]:
• Gen. Shelton said GPS devices were designed to work in a "quiet neighborhood," and that LightSquared's network, which is billions of times more powerful than GPS signals, is like "if you put a rock band in that very quiet neighborhood." [The Hill, Fixing LightSquared could take a decade, general says]
• Gen. Shelton: “In summary, based on test results, the LightSquared network would effectively jam vital GPS receivers.” [Colorado Springs Gazette, Tests show proposed wireless system jams GPS receivers]
• Gen Shelton: “Based on the test results and analysis to date, the LightSquared network would effectively jam vital GPS receivers”… “And to our knowledge thus far, there are no mitigation options that would be effective in eliminating interference to essential GPS services in the United States.” [Inside GNSS, LightSquared Would Jam GPS, Defense Officials Tell Congress]

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

No suprises here

The Center for Public Integrity’s iWatch news service reported on 300 pages of emails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, {emphasis added}indicating that LightSquared officials were in contact with White House aides regarding the company’s planned network, at times citing its fundraising for Democratic causes and President Obama. According to the article, “emails and other records reveal that LightSquared’s reach into the administration was more extensive than officials have acknowledged. The records also show that White House technology officials were advised of serious concerns among GPS proponents over the possible threat to air traffic control and other critical emergency responders.” The article also appeared on The Huffington Post.

[Note] What often is not reported is LSQ had planned to conduct a test near their Reston VA HQ before the Las Vegas tests were held. That test was cancelled after LSQ had received a Special Temporary Authority to construct and operate a transmitter from the FCC. The US Dept of Transportation, FAA had concerns about the signals interfering with aircraft trying to land at both Washington DC airports, National and Dulles. One can only imagine the furor that would have been raised should an aircraft on approach to either airport strayed outside the very restricted flight lanes and gone over the White House or Capitol.

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

LightSquared - Obama's Dangerous Broadband Boondoggle

By Michelle Malkin September 21, 2011 6:35 am

If you thought the half-billion-dollar, stimulus-funded Solyndra solar company bust was a taxpayer nightmare, just wait. If you thought the botched Fast and Furious border gun-smuggling surveillance operation was a national security nightmare, hold on. Right on the heels of those two blood-boilers comes yet another alleged pay-for-play racket from the most ethical administration ever.

Welcome to LightSquared. It's a toxic mix of venture socialism (to borrow GOP Sen. Jim DeMint's apt phrase), campaign finance influence-peddling and perilous corner-cutting all rolled into one.

The company is building "a state-of-the-art open wireless broadband network." Competition in the industry is a good thing, of course. But military, government and civilian aviation experts have long objected to LightSquared's potential to interfere with the Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite network. As the government's own Positioning, Navigation and Timing agency explained:

"The GPS community is concerned because testing has shown that LightSquared's ground-based transmissions overpower the relatively weak GPS signal from space. Although LightSquared will operate in its own radio band, that band is so close to the GPS signals that most GPS devices pick up the stronger LightSquared signal and become overloaded or jammed."

Two high-ranking witnesses -- Air Force Space Command four-star Gen. William Shelton and National Coordination Office for Space-Based Positioning, Navigation and Timing Director Anthony Russo -- have now blown the whistle on how the White House pressured them to alter their congressional testimony and play down concerns about LightSquared's threat to military communications. According to Eli Lake of The Daily Beast, both officials were urged to express confidence in the company and endorse its promise to address any technical concerns "within 90 days."

Gen. Shelton had noted earlier this year: "Within three to five miles on the ground and within 12 miles in the air, GPS is jammed by (LightSquared's) towers. ... If we allow that system to be fielded and it does indeed jam GPS, think about the impact. We're hopeful we can find a solution, but physics being physics, we don't see a solution right now."

Despite industry-wide protests, the firm somehow received fast-track approval for a special FCC waiver that grants LightSquared the right to use wireless spectrum to build out a national 4G wireless network on the cheap. Ken Boehm, of the conservative watchdog National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) in Washington, D.C., summed up the deal earlier this year: "LightSquared will get the spectrum for a song, while its competitors (e.g., AT&T and Verizon) have to spend billions."

The current "fix" LightSquared proposes to address the interference problems is a costly, conceptual pipe dream that could require massive retrofitting of millions of handheld GPS devices. GPS expert Eric Gakstatter scoffs: "I've been pretty open-minded about LightSquared proposing a solution, but this really insults our intelligence. (A)s we've seen previously with LightSquared, it's not about finding a practical solution for the GPS user community; it's all about selling an idea to the FCC. The problem is that the FCC doesn't have to live with LightSquared's half-baked 'solution'; we do."

So, what's greasing LightSquared's skids? Hint: It used to be known as "Skyterra." In 2005, Obama put $50,000 into the speculative firm -- raising eyebrows even among his water-carriers at The New York Times. The paper noted that Skyterra's principal backers at the time of the investment included four Obama "friends and donors who had raised more than $150,000 for his political committees."

One of those pals who urged him to buy stock in Skyterra was George Haywood, a major Skyterra investor and campaign donor who chipped in nearly $50,000 to Obama's campaigns and to his political action committee along with his wife.

Coincidentally, Obama bought his Skyterra stock the very same day the FCC "ruled in favor of the company's effort to create a nationwide wireless network by combining satellites and land-based communications systems." The Times reported that immediately after that morning ruling, "Tejas Securities, a regional brokerage in Texas that handled investment banking for Skyterra, issued a research report speculating that Skyterra stock could triple in value."

Coincidentally, Tejas and its chairman, John J. Gorman, were also major backers of Obama -- flying him in a private plane for political rallies and pitching in more than $150,000 for his campaign coffers since 2004. Obama sold his stock at a loss in November 2005, but his political relationship with the company was cemented. In 2009, shady billionaire hedge-fund manager Philip Falcone -- whose firm Harbinger Capital Partners is reportedly under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission for market manipulation abuses -- acquired Skyterra.

Coincidentally, Falcone, his wife and LightSquared CEO Sanjiv Ahuja have contributed nearly $100,000 between them to the Democratic Party during critical White House meeting periods and negotiations over LightSquared's regulatory fate.

Oh, and coincidentally, there's $6 billion earmarked for a "public safety broadband corporation" buried in the Obama jobs proposal just as LightSquared pushes into that market, too.

It's all just one strange quirk of timing, Team Obama shrugs. Except, as we all should know by now: There are no coincidences in Chicago on the Potomac. Just an endless avalanche of quids, quos and taxpayer woes.

---

Michelle Malkin is the author of "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies" (Regnery 2010).

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

Very disturbing!!!

Very disturbing!!! sad

--
http://www.poi-factory.com/node/21626 - red light cameras do not work

It must be rocket science

Communications Daily reports that DirectTV CEO Mike White said yesterday at the Goldman Sachs conference in New York, "We looked at the LightSquared stuff a number of years ago and actually it was our team that did the work that said 'This isn't going to work because it conflicts with GPS,' so we walked away from it."
And it's getting even more obvious there is no one at LSQ that understands that. It's either that of Philip Falcone doesn't have any one that can read a book without pictures.

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

cnet report

Disastrous GPS Jamming

Don't they know that the majority of people using cell phones also have GPSs.

--
3790LMT; 2595LMT; 3590LMT, 60LMTHD

You mean...

rthibodaux wrote:

Don't they know that the majority of people using cell phones also have GPSs.

You mean the other way around, "The majority of people using GPS also have cell phones."

LightSquared Signs Multi-Year Wholesale Agreement with YourTel A

LightSquared Signs Multi-Year Wholesale Agreement with YourTel America.

Boy, this article is full of one liners(all BS of course).

http://www.lightsquared.com/press-room/press-releases/

--
Nuvi 2460LMT

Sorry

Let's face it, LightSquared IS going to get the license to build and operate it's proposed systems. The interference problem can be cured using microwave pre-selectors or filters. They are NOT cheap or easy to use but they do work. They are a solution for the military as well as commercial airlines but their cost will make private GPS units a thing of the past. If you want the same functionality in the future as your GPS gives you today, you will have to subscribe to a service through your cell phone provider. It is going to happen, there is just too much money behind it for the FCC to squash it.

sorry jack

jackj180 wrote:

Let's face it, LightSquared IS going to get the license to build and operate it's proposed systems. The interference problem can be cured using microwave pre-selectors or filters. They are NOT cheap or easy to use but they do work. They are a solution for the military as well as commercial airlines but their cost will make private GPS units a thing of the past. If you want the same functionality in the future as your GPS gives you today, you will have to subscribe to a service through your cell phone provider. It is going to happen, there is just too much money behind it for the FCC to squash it.

LightSquared already has a license to operate in the MSS band. They do not have an AUTHORIATION to operate the ground stations at the power requested, nor for the number requested.

The waiver request is to change the purpose of the frequencies from space to ground with SOME terrestrial augmentation to a terrestrial network with some satellite augmentation.

Let's get the terms correct. They have a license (actually many different licenses) but lack the authorization to build and operate that many ground stations. It's a big (and very important) difference. Now you can understand some of what they state in their ads. It's not all BS, just 99 and 44 one-hundredths BS.

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

Please explain

jackj180 wrote:

If you want the same functionality in the future as your GPS gives you today, you will have to subscribe to a service through your cell phone provider. .

How does the GPS work in a cell phone when the signal is jammed?

--
1490LMT 1450LMT 295w

Good Question

spokybob wrote:
jackj180 wrote:

If you want the same functionality in the future as your GPS gives you today, you will have to subscribe to a service through your cell phone provider. .

How does the GPS work in a cell phone when the signal is jammed?

It won't

spokybob,

GPS in the cell phone won't work. If you read what I wrote, I didn't say there would be GPS service available in cell phones. I said that "If you want the same functionality in the future as your GPS gives you today, you will have to subscribe to a service through your cell phone provider." How will that service work? I don't know but I can make some guesses as can you.

We are talking about a possible return of trillions of dollars here. You're $200 GPS and the several billion dollar PND industry can't hold a candle to that. It is going to happen.

License

Box Car wrote:

The waiver request is to change the purpose of the frequencies from space to ground with SOME terrestrial augmentation to a terrestrial network with some satellite augmentation.

Let's get the terms correct. They have a license (actually many different licenses) but lack the authorization to build and operate that many ground stations. It's a big (and very important) difference. Now you can understand some of what they state in their ads. It's not all BS, just 99 and 44 one-hundredths BS.

Unless there has been vast changes in the procedures the FCC uses, they do NOT issue licenses or construction permits for services that would be against the FCC regulations. You are correct in that they have applied for a waver or change in the usage of certain frequency bands. But that isn't the same thing as a license. The FCC has issued conditional use permits for testing in certain areas but those are permits, not licenses, and are for a limited amount of time.

As for the BS in their news releases, for Pete's sake man those are written by PR people not engineers. Of course they are full of BS!

Not Necessarily

jackj180 wrote:

They are a solution for the military as well as commercial airlines but their cost will make private GPS units a thing of the past. If you want the same functionality in the future as your GPS gives you today, you will have to subscribe to a service through your cell phone provider. It is going to happen, there is just too much money behind it for the FCC to squash it.

This is not necessarily so. Besides the L1 band that LS #&^#$&^ up, there is L2C and the new L5 that operate outside the 1500MHz band. The civilian GPS manufacturers could abandon L1 and design their receivers to work with L2C and L5 exclusively. Of course this does not solve the issue that all of us with an investment in PND's can throw them in the trash. As much as the manufacturers complain, I cannot help but think that secretly they covet the idea of consumers having to replace every device out there with newer models. Forced obsolescence by the government happened with TV two years ago and is a boon to TV manufacturers. Now GPS manufacturers can get a shot at it.

--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.

How about?

This has been discussed before: Not just we users, but airliners, John Deere and other brands of agriculture & construction equipment would need new receivers. These are not $200 devices. At present the planting & harvesting equipment is steered by GPS to an accuracy of 2". Smart phones & 4G service will never be adequate.

--
1490LMT 1450LMT 295w

@jackj180

jackj180 wrote:

Unless there has been vast changes in the procedures the FCC uses, they do NOT issue licenses or construction permits for services that would be against the FCC regulations. You are correct in that they have applied for a waver or change in the usage of certain frequency bands. But that isn't the same thing as a license.

Uhmm then what's this?

Common Name: LightSquared / Call Sign: S2358

Frequency Band (MHz): 1525-1535, 1535-1559, 1626.5-1660, 1660-1660.5
http://reboot.fcc.gov/spectrumdashboard/detailLicense.seam?c...

It most certainly is a LICENSE for which LightSquared has applied for a WAIVER of the Commission's rules to allow the construction and operation of a terrestrial system. They aren't lying when they state they have a LICENSE to operate in those frequencies.

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

Error

I'm getting an Error when I go to that FCC site, BoxCar.

Try these.......

TheProf wrote:

I'm getting an Error when I go to that FCC site, BoxCar.

Try:
http://reboot.fcc.gov/spectrumdashboard/resultLicenses.seam?...

If that still doesn't work then try:
http://reboot.fcc.gov/spectrumdashboard/searchName.seam
and enter Lightsquared in the box at the bottom and click on "Search"

--
Nuvi 2460LMT

an open letter

LightSquared has been publishing open letters in major markets over the past few days. Let's take a look at one of them.

"To Americans everywhere,

Today, with limited competition in the U.S. wireless market, there are still vast areas of our country without access to broadband. Other areas are plagued by dropped calls and weak signals."
What I don't understand is how your wholesale network will improve the ability of my cellular carrier to build more sites to improve coverage. When you state "without access to broadband" how are you defining access? Virtually every residence is served by either telephone or cable television. Each offer high-speed Internet service, but they may not offer service at rates exceeding the 4MB/sec downstream speed the FCC categorizes as broadband. Then again, there are a great many that either refuse or lack the ability to purchase a connection having that speed.

"America's wireless infrastructure is at a critical crossroad as weak signals, dead-zones, and over-subscribed networks risk stalling American innovation and failing to meet consumer needs now and in the future. Within the next 24 months, demand for broadband wireless will outstrip the current total spectrum available in the United States—jeopardizing everything from the smartphones and tablets we love to the emergency responder services we rely upon to keep us safe."
Again, how will your network which is available only to carriers improve the signal from my carrier which may - or may not - purchase capacity from you result in a stronger signal if my carrier doesn't build more sites? Oh, the last time I checked - which was 30 seconds ago, there isn't a single emergency response agency depending on the nation's cellular network to provide the critical communications links to their responders. That doesn't mean emergency responders don't carry cell phones, it means that when it comes time for them to be sent on an emergency response the call comes in through their radio over a private land mobile radio network.

"In fact, a 2011 FCC report states that a third of California households lack any form of broadband."
Again, define "broadband" and specifically "any form of broadband."
I have cable television service in my home. I purchase Internet access from my cable provider. The speed tier I have is approximately 1.5 Mbps. According to the FCC, it's not broadband so therefore, according to LSQ it's not broadband but it's all I need.

"The current nationwide wireless providers have failed to innovate and in the process have failed to keep pace with consumer and technological demands."
Uhmm, if the wireless carriers weren't innovating there wouldn't be smartphones and tablets demanding increasing amounts of data.

"Understanding this impending reality, LightSquared began investing nearly a decade ago in the development of America's first state-of-the-art nationwide wireless broadband network integrated with satellite coverage to provide high quality broadband access and affordability for all Americans."
LSQ wasn't in business 10 years ago. It's predecessor was formed in 2001 according to Wikipedia so any statement of a "long history" is only true if the timeline starts in 2002. The firms which pioneered the concept of providing large scale data transfers using satellite have almost to a company folded. LSQ came into being through the purchase of the assets from those bankrupt companies so don't tell me your company has been around for 10 years - it hasn't. Some of those that follow telecommunications remember companies such as Iridium which launched a constellation of Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites with the premise of providing telephone service to anyone, anywhere (as long as you had a clear view of the sky). SkyTerra is another. About the only major company to survive is Inmarsat which is made up of the remains of several other companies. Remember Comsat, PanAmSat and how about XM radio?

"After the review of our engineering and technological plans, LightSquared received the license to operate our network in 2003 and again in 2005 with the full endorsement of the GPS industry."
Again, LSQ didn't have any plans to submit because they weren't around. The companies they purchased submitted plans to launch satellites and augment their signal in areas with limited transmitters operating within the prescribed rules and regulations.

"Half a dozen years ago, Republican and Democrat regulators and policy experts understood the impending crisis caused by a lack of competition and innovation, and they, too, endorsed our plan to bring an affordable solution to Americans no matter where they live."
I hope you're wearing chest waders. I believe LSQ is referring to the plans to auction additional spectrum for wireless carriers. The auction was held in 2008.

"Recently, concerns have been raised about interference with GPS devices. We take these concerns very seriously. Despite the fact that the interference is caused by others' inappropriate use of LightSquared's licensed spectrum, we have been proactive in working toward a solution to the GPS issue."
Well, it wasn't an issue until your conditional waiver was granted. Just for the record, there are no federal regulations covering the frequencies that may be received by a device. The regulations only cover the emission or transmission of signals. To state their issue is over the "inappropriate use of LightSquared's licensed spectrum" is a gross misstatement of fact.

"We are making a $150 million private investment in the solution for GPS. We have moved our spectrum farther away from the core GPS frequencies and at the request of the FCC, we set up, funded, and ran the largest and most comprehensive testing program this country has ever seen."
Oh? I'll take your efforts and raise you an Underwriter's Laboratories, Food and Drug Administration, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Federal Communications Commission and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. I'll keep some of the smaller ones like Consumer Reports and Factory Mutual off the table.

"Hundreds of engineers tested hundreds of devices in laboratories around the country, providing experts an enormous bank of data to assess the extent of the problem and design the solution."
But they weren't YOUR laboratories.

"With 99.5 percent of all commercial GPS interference accounted for and solved, LightSquared has now tackled solving the remaining .5 percent of GPS interference occurring on precision devices that also inappropriately violate our licensed spectrum."
Carefully note "commercial." And yes, if you include all the cell phones and PNDs in your total number of devices, then 1/2 a percent does sound small, but 1/2 percent of 300 million is a VERY large number.

"We have partnered with established GPS manufacturers to develop technology that eliminates interference issues for high-precision GPS devices, including those in the agriculture, surveying, construction, and defense industries. Pre-production designs are already in testing; once completed, this technology can be implemented simply, quickly, and inexpensively into GPS devices."
These unproven filters can be integrated into new designs. What about existing units which meet the DOD requirements of filtering for spurious out-of-band emissions? (Oh, the DOD notice wasn't a requirement, it was an advisory and assumed (silly government) the frequency band would remain as originally intended.)

"This solution allows our network to coexist harmoniously, side by side, with GPS—generating much-needed competition in the marketplace and ultimately providing more than 260 million Americans with access to wireless broadband."
Unproven claim as no filter units have been produced nor made available for testing.

"The facts are clear. The need for additional wireless broadband is imminent. The desire to expand free-market competition and to provide consumers with broader access has been the hallmark of both Republican and Democrat policy makers for more than a decade. Regulators from both Democrat and Republican Administrations have conducted reviews of the LightSquared network—the most extensive in the history of the FCC—and both have reached the same conclusions: they support the LightSquared network.

Business and industry groups also realize the need to innovate in this space. In a letter sent this week to key members of Congress, half a dozen farming organizations - including the American Farm Bureau - urged lawmakers to communicate the benefits of both technologies to the FCC. "The FCC must ensure that accurate GPS will continue to be available for precision agriculture and also ensure that broadband access be made available for all of rural America," the groups said.

LightSquared's commitment to infuse $14 billion of private investment—without any government funding—into America's infrastructure will bring 75,000 jobs over the next five years, competition, and innovation to the U.S. wireless industry, with affordable prices and better service for Americans everywhere. I hope you will join with us as we work to build the 21st-century communications network all Americans deserve.

To learn more, visit us at www.LightSquared.com

Yours sincerely,

Sanjiv Ahuja
Chairman and CEO, LightSquared"

I'm just tired of debunking the half-truths, exaggerations and outright lies in this open letter, so do a little research and see just how deep the BS really is.

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

Now it's going to cost US!

LightSquared Chief Marketing Officer Frank Boulben told CNET that there are roughly 500,000 commercial precision GPS devices in the U.S. that could be disrupted by its network. But the company has developed a device, which costs between $300 and $800 and will protect GPS devices from such disruptions

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-12261_7-20119551-10356022/lightsquared-gps-fix-to-cost-industry-$400m/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20

--
Always on the Road Knowing where I've Been

What a joke!

"We screw up, and you get to pay. Us. Again."

--
nüvi 3790T | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, will make violent revolution inevitable ~ JFK

White House Won't Turn Over Solyndra Documents

The Lightsquared fiasco if ever investigated may end this way as well.

http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpps/news/white-house-wont-turn-over...

--
Nuvi 2460LMT

Here's a pretty fair summation

A magazine piece in the National Journal describes in detail LightSquared’s ambitions and the hurdles it faces. “Less than a year after sending its satellite into orbit,” according to the article, “LightSquared itself may be about to crash and burn.” While the company’s first crisis was technological, it soon became political, and throughout the process, the FCC’s “public enthusiasm seems to have waned.” The article notes that the Coalition to Save Our GPS “sprang up seemingly overnight” in March to push back against LightSquared and that soon government groups were warning that LightSquared caused a “complete loss of GPS receiver function.” And while the company has revised its plans, it hasn’t won over many critics, the article says. LightSquared has reason to hope, according to the piece, because policy makers still support its “broadband-for-all” objective, but it’s likely to remain a hot issue in Washington.

NOTE: The primary reason high speed broadband and Internet isn't in remote places is there are no users to pay for the service. Another issue is the definition of Broadband. The FCC changed the point where a connection can be considered "broadband" from speeds greater than 756 kbps to speeds greater than 4 Mbps. I personally don't have need for that great a speed, and my cable company couldn't deliver a constant connection approaching that speed in any event. All the providers, even those bringing in fiber to the point of connection multiplex their connections. The distribution point may have speeds of 1 Gbps or higher, but that speed is divided down by the number of users connected to the distribution point. That one distribution point can serve over a 1000 end users. The speed you receive more than likely is variable. It will vary according to the number of users on that particular segment and the speed tier they purchase. If you pay for say a 4 Mbps connection, then you get a larger slice of the available bandwidth, but will probably never reach the full speed promised. If you read the fine print your provider only promises "speeds up to" the tier purchased.

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

The movements

Remember the "housing-for-all" movement? Similar money is there to be made from the Government in the “broadband-for-all” movement. However, I'm against it because it isn't a "green-broadband-for-all" movement.

Box Car wrote:

A magazine piece in the National Journal describes in detail LightSquared’s ambitions and the hurdles it faces.
(snip)
“LightSquared has reason to hope, according to the piece, because policy makers still support its “broadband-for-all” objective, but it’s likely to remain a hot issue in Washington."
(snip)

--
Vince Nuvi 350

Bandwidth

What Boxcar says is true up to a certain point. Broadband speed requires bandwidth, the faster the speed the greater the bandwidth required. While supplying the needed bandwidth isn't a problem using fiber optics, it is a problem with wireless.

Equipment manufacturers have been able to supply multi-gigabit transmission equipment for decades for fiber mediums. The available bandwidth using single-mode fiber is almost unlimited. I retired a little over 5 yrs ago from a long distance company. We had equipment that could send data rates of 25 gigabit or more. In fact, we could send that speed over a single fiber in both directions at the same time. The equipment isn't cheap but it is available.

TV stations use a bandwidth of 6 MHz to transmit one HD (1080i) channel of data using loss-less data compression. Multiply that bandwidth by several hundred subscribers, all watching a movie, and suddenly you have a bandwidth requirement of hundreds of megahertz. Supplying that bandwidth using wireless data links just isn't feasible.

Lightsquared isn't going to be able to supply their promised speeds, at least not in cities. But it is going to happen. There is just too much money potential for it to be scrapped.

Surprise: Airlines Not Investing in New GPS Equipment

Due to the uncertainty of the future of L-Band GPS, airlines are holding off on purchasing next generation navigation equipment lest it get impacted by LightSquared's operations.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/faa-lightsquared-q...?

John Hickey, the US Federal Aviation Administration's deputy associate administrator for aviation safety, says the uncertainty on implementation details of broadband wholesaler LightSquared's new L-band 4G network is having a "chilling effect" on operators considering equipping with next generation air transportation system (NextGen) avionics. Those avionics include the automatic dependent surveillance - broadcast (ADS-B) units that airlines must install by 2020.

The FAA is pushing for early adoption of ADS-B by operators.

But Hickey warned, "operators will wait several years down the road to see what happens". Speaking at the Air Traffic Control Association annual meeting recently in Washington, DC Hickey stated: "This is the most intractable problem I have been involved with in 31 years in aviation. Technology can solve this, but the real problem is time and cost."

Hickey says the problem extends past US borders. "There are 2,000 aircraft that fly into the US daily and weekly. They will be significantly impacted if we can't solve the GPS issue," Hickey said.

LightSquared in January gained US FCC conditional approval to deploy an L-band (satellite-based) broadband network, pending the results of what turned out to be a massive four-month investigation of potential GPS interference by industry, government and LightSquared. The FCC's January decision allowed LightSquared to roll out, pending the interference analysis, a full-time nationwide network based on an existing "ancillary terrestrial component" (ATC) provision that, in all other cases, allowed for rebroadcasting L-band signals only as gap-filler for land-based networks.

The final report in June showed that the LightSquared final deployment plan featuring an "upper" 10MHz channel near the GPS band operating simultaneously with a "lower" 10MHz band had a devastating effect for aviation's certified receivers, precision receivers (including WAAS and certain ADS-B ground station components) and general purpose receivers (non-certified airborne units).

An internal FAA report, which Hickey said had been "inadvertently released" this summer, estimated a cost of $70 billion and loss of 800 lives if the network were to be deployed as planned.

Simultaneous with the June report however, LightSquared modified its operating plan, offering to use only the lower 10MHz channel and cutting ground transmitter power from an estimated 40,000 transmission towers. LightSquared has put plans for the upper 10MHz on hold, but has not relinquished the spectrum.

A new round of "targeted" testing on the lower 10MHz requested by the FCC in September is underway, set to be completed in November. In parallel, Hickey says the FAA has been meeting with LightSquared on a weekly basis since June to analyse the impact of a lower 10MHz deployment on certified aviation receivers, the only aviation GPS units required to conform to a minimum performance standard.

"We don't always agree with them when we make assumptions on how to analyse [the interference]," said Hickey, adding, "It wouldn't surprise me if the [final] report will be that we agree to disagree".

Hickey said the FAA is making "an honest effort to find perhaps a win-win solution" that will allow both GPS and LightSquared operations, a nod to the White House's initiative to expand broadband coverage in the US. He notes that analysis so far shows that precision timing and general use aviation GPS units "have to some degree a significant impact even on the lower [10MHz] band".

LightSquared earlier this month announced that it had "solved" the interference issue for precision GPS units in the lower band using filters developed by several suppliers, some as cheap as $6, though company or independent testing has not yet confirmed how well the filters might work.

Even with a favourable outcome of the lower 10MHz testing with or without filters, there's still concern in the industry about introducing the upper 10MHz channel at some point in the future. "The at-play business case is operations in the lower band," said Hickey, "though I do think there is significant concern over the long term use of the upper band. LightSquared has not given that band back to the FCC."

"If we have in any way a compromise to the [GPS] system, we compromise the future of NextGen", Hickey said.

--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.

LightSquared Files FCC Petition

AVWeb, December 20, 2011, LightSquared Files FCC Petition, By Russ Niles, Editor-in-Chief

LightSquared has thrown down a potentially tricky legal gauntlet and challenged the Federal Communications Commission to clarify its right to use the sliver of radio spectrum it owns for a ground-based broadband network. In a petition for declaratory ruling (PDF) filed Tuesday, the upstart broadband service wholesaler repeats its claim that the manufacturers of GPS devices that are affected by the broadband signals are to blame for the interference. "It recently has become apparent that the commercial GPS industry has manufactured, and sold to unsuspecting consumers, unlicensed and poorly designed GPS receivers that 'listen' for radio signals both in the 'RNSS' frequency band in which the U.S. GPS system is intended to operate, as well as across the adjacent 'MSS' frequency band that is not intended for GPS use, and in which LightSquared is licensed," the petition says. "The commercial GPS industry claims, without justification, that these GPS receivers somehow are entitled to 'protection' from the LightSquared authorized operations ...." LightSquared is also asking that the manufacturers of GPS equipment be kept out of any deliberations on the future of LightSquared's applications because, according to LightSquared, the GPS makers lack the legal standing to have their comments heard. The GPS industry says the filing is a rerun of previous LightSquared rhetoric that selectively cites previous FCC rulings and ignores its own positions on the interference issues.

In a statement issued late Tuesday, the Coalition to Save Our GPS said LightSquared has agreed to not to interfere with GPS. "In its January 2011 order, the Commission made clear that LightSquared would not be permitted to commence operations until it had demonstrated that it would not interfere with GPS," said coalition spokesman Jim Kirkland. "LightSquared did not challenge this condition at the time, and has to live up to it. There is overwhelming technical evidence—the most recent of which was released by the Government just last week--that this condition has not been satisfied." The petition is the latest in a series of aggressive moves by LightSquared, which says it has spent billions to get its high-speed wireless broadband system off the ground. If approved as written, the LightSquared petition would put the entire legal onus for coexistence on the GPS industry. However, LightSquared insists it's still willing to help solve the interference problems. "While we ask the FCC today to confirm our legal rights, LightSquared remains fully committed to cooperate with all parties -– the GPS industry, GPS users, and the federal government -– to ensure that LightSquared's network is deployed in a way that is compatible with GPS users," said LightSquared spokesman Jeff Carlisle. "LightSquared has always recognized the critical importance of the GPS system, and we firmly believe that GPS devices can peacefully coexist adjacent to our network."

To read more click here.
http://www.avweb.com/avwebbiz/news/LightSquared_Files_FCC_Pe...

For a copy of the LightSquared petition:
http://www.lightsquared.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Light...

From my perspective LightSquared has two major issues to resolve; 1) the issue of a receiver "looking into the MSS Band" and, 2) the issue of interference to GPS signals.

There are no regulations covering the frequencies a receiver can cover or "listen to." There is precedence regarding the use of receivers but not the possession. Case in point are the regulations in some jurisdictions regarding the use of radar/lidar detectors. In those jurisdictions it is illegal to use the receiver with the intent of avoiding detection but not the possession of the device. It's OK to have a detector, you just can't have it turned on in those jurisdictions. Having the device energized is proof of intent to avoid detection.

Lightsquared has also claimed to have developed filters that prevent their signal from interfering with GPS but according to my sources none of them have been made available for testing with existing equipment.

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

LightSquared's Cash Reserves Drying Up

--
Garmin: GPSIII / StreetPilot / StreetPilot Color Map / StreetPilot III / StreetPilot 2610 / GPSMAP 60CSx / Nuvi 770 / Nuvi 765T / Nuvi 3490LMT / Drivesmart 55 / GPSMAP 66st * Pioneer: AVIC-80 / N3 / X950BH / W8600NEX

"Rights"

I am not aware of anyone denying LightSquared's right to use "their" (actually the public) frequencies AS THEY WERE INTENDED; for satellite to ground communication. This whole debate centers on LightSquared trying to change the rules of the game and have their L-band allocation redesignated for terrestrial communication. That is unacceptable and what they just cannot seem to get through their collective thick heads. If they want to set up a terrestrial based network, then they should have entered into the spectrum auctions and purchased spectrum already designated for that purpose. Instead, they got cheap spectrum through their acquisition of SkyTerra (who in turn got it for free) and they want to convert it to valuable terrestrial spectrum. Besides being a ripoff of the taxpayers, it also slaps them in the face by damaging their GPS network.

--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.

LightSquared: Preliminary analysis of the test findings (14-DEC)

http://www.gps.gov/news/2011/12/lightsquared/

Quote:

December 14, 2011
...
Preliminary analysis of the test findings found no significant interference with cellular phones. However, the testing did show that LightSquared signals caused harmful interference to the majority of other tested general purpose GPS receivers. Separate analysis by the Federal Aviation Administration also found interference with a flight safety system designed to warn pilots of approaching terrain.

The BS

never ends.....

--
Always on the Road Knowing where I've Been

Lightsquared

LightSquared Gets 30-Day Extension

As broadband provider LightSquared continues to push for the right to use a communications spectrum that could interfere with GPS units, Sprint this week agreed to extend its Dec. 31 deadline for a $9 billion deal with the company another 30 days, according to Reuters. The agreement between the two companies to share network infrastructure is dependent upon LightSquared's getting the OK from the Federal Communications Commission, which so far has not been forthcoming. LightSquared has said the signal interference is due to poor design in GPS units. The Coalition to Save Our GPS has called LightSquared's claims "inaccurate and self-serving."

LightSquared, which is funded by billionaire Philip Falcone, has agreed to pay Sprint to build a wireless network for selling broadband service on the wholesale market, according to Reuters. According to LightSquared, problems in the GPS spectrum are due to poor design by manufacturers of GPS products. Last month, LightSquared petitioned the FCC to let it move ahead with its plans, declaring that manufacturers of GPS units are not entitled to any "protection."

--
Dudlee

Interesting

Dudlee wrote:

LightSquared Last month, LightSquared petitioned the FCC to let it move ahead with its plans, declaring that manufacturers of GPS units are not entitled to any "protection."

This came up when the TV stations were alloted the new frequencies for digital broadcasting. TV viewers in some areas on the fringe of reception area, complained about interference from adjacent cities. The FCC ruled that only broadcasters, not receivers were entitled to protection from interference. FCC further ruled that the protection only extended out to a defined area. The affected viewers had to protect themselves, such as installing highly directional antennas, pointed in the proper direction.

--
1490LMT 1450LMT 295w

That's true - but

spokybob wrote:
Dudlee wrote:

LightSquared Last month, LightSquared petitioned the FCC to let it move ahead with its plans, declaring that manufacturers of GPS units are not entitled to any "protection."

This came up when the TV stations were alloted the new frequencies for digital broadcasting. TV viewers in some areas on the fringe of reception area, complained about interference from adjacent cities. The FCC ruled that only broadcasters, not receivers were entitled to protection from interference. FCC further ruled that the protection only extended out to a defined area. The affected viewers had to protect themselves, such as installing highly directional antennas, pointed in the proper direction.

It's true only transmitters are protected from "harmful interference." The fly in the ointment for the precision units is they have to have a very wide bandpass in their receivers as they receive not only the GPS signals from the satellites, but a correction signal broadcast in between the two 5 MHz frequency pairs used by LSQ's lower band authorization. It's the same problem with aviation units, LSQ's system will interfere with the reception on the WAAS terrestrial component as well.

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

defense bill

there is a section in the new defense bill will not allow the FCC from doing anything to affect the military, believe it sect 913

Telecommunications Reports

noted comments made at the Federal Communications Bar Association's annual FCC Chairman's dinner, where Chairman Genachowski joked about LightSquared: "LightSquared has two tables," he said. "A quick note from the Hilton staff - those of you sitting at the upper table will need to vacate the table, and those of you at the lower table are still too loud."

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.
1 2 3 4
6 7 8
<<Page 5>>