Galileo Will No Longer Require Special Manufacturer's License

Galileo Will No Longer Require Special Manufacturer's License
http://www.gpsworld.com/gnss-system/galileo-will-no-longer-require-specia=
l-manufacturers-license-9083

October 28, 2009
By: Alan Cameron

STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN =E2=80=94 The International Association of Institutes o=
f Navigation, meeting in=20
Sweden this year, forms the occasion for what has become ritual in all su=
ch meetings: the=20
updating of status on each GNSS. Today, for the first time in my memory a=
t least, all=20
three major systems must confess to and make commitments to get around lo=
oming obstacles.=20
GPS and GLONASS both have errant satellites emitting aberrant signals, an=
d Galileo has yet=20
another construction delay.

As it turned out, only the Galileo program brought anything significant t=
o announce at the=20
IAIN conference, making a clean breast of schedule postponements and a cl=
ear statement of=20
cause for possible division of the upcoming satellite work order. Galileo=
=E2=80=99s biggest news=20
popped out, however, in response to a question posed to the GPS program. =
Paul Verhoef told=20
the audience that the EU plans to announce within weeks that a special li=
cense to=20
manufacture and sell Galileo receivers will no longer be required.

The GPS presentation made no allusion to that system=E2=80=99s current sa=
tellite and signal=20
problems; a substitute speaker for GLONASS, which did not send a personal=
representative,=20
acknowledged a problem with that system=E2=80=99s satellite(s), but had n=
o details to offer.

Galileo. Paul Verhoef, program manager of the European Union (EU) satelli=
te navigation=20
programs, opened the IAIN second morning session with an update on EGNOS =
and Galileo.

=E2=80=9CThere is a lot going on, as you know. I=E2=80=99m going to give=
you a bit of insight into the=20
kitchen.=E2=80=9D

Before his planned remarks, however, he paused to refer to the opening ke=
ynote given by=20
David Last of the University of Wales (these remarks may be presented in =
an upcoming=20
edition of GPS World magazine).

=E2=80=9CI agree with David=E2=80=99s message. It would be an illusion to=
think that setting up satnav=20
systems is the one and only solution. Other solutions are necessary. It =
may well be that=20
there is no business case for eLoran, but this does not mean that we do n=
ot do backup=20
solutions. There are things like jamming, solar flares, and other things=
=2E It becomes=20
more and more important to discuss and agree on suitable backup solutions=
=2E=E2=80=9D

He then proceeded with his prepared remarks on EGNOS and Galileo.

=E2=80=9CEGNOS is in operation since October 1.=E2=80=9D Verhoef display=
ed plots of results of=20
comparative measurements taken at the DG-TREN headquarters in Brussels, d=
emonstrating a=20
=E2=80=9Csubstantial improvement on position=E2=80=9D accomplished by EGN=
OS, closely approximating the=20
accuracy rendered by differential GPS (DGPS).

=E2=80=9CTo us a very stringent requirement is to meet the safety-critica=
l aspect of operations=20
for the Single European Sky [aviation] regulatory package. It will be au=
thorized next=20
year by the French authority, based in Toulouse.=E2=80=9D This will be th=
e first step for wider=20
certification and implementation, eventually to be taken over by a Europe=
an aviation=20
authority based in Cologne, Germany.

=E2=80=9CWe are currently putting in this service with a rather long-term=
perspective. It will be=20
quite a while there before Galileo is there, completely there. We have t=
o take a number=20
of margins with that. We will need to have EGNOS for at least a 20-year =
perspective, even=20
if Galileo is there. Later we will decide whether to integrate it, wheth=
er Galileo should=20
take it over; this is not the moment to have this debate. Somewhere in t=
hat 20-year=20
period, we will have a discussion on where we go with EGNOS. The aviation=
community needs=20
at lest a 7-year notice of any change, so that is well taken into account=
with this=20
20-year perspective.=E2=80=9D

Galileo Update. =E2=80=9CThis is a slide we are shortly going to change. =
It says full operational=20
capability (FOC) in 2013. You now know we are not going to meet that dat=
e.=E2=80=9D

IOV phase call for 4 satellites, while FOC calls for 27 (+3 in-orbit spar=
es). Five uplink=20
stations for IOV, later to reach nine for FOC. Two TT&C stations in IOV,=
Norway will be=20
the host of three facilities, and the U.S. similarly.

The first two satellites will be launched in November 2010, and the next =
two in April=20
2011. The launch pad is under construction in Kouro, Equatorial Guinea, =
for the Soyuz=20
launch rockets. The control center there in Kouro should be ready in two=
weeks from now.

=E2=80=9CThen we come to the procurement as it stands at this moment. We=
are procuring the=20
capacity through six main work packages. We are on track to announce the =
satellite=20
contracts before Christmas, as well as the system support contract. Perha=
ps the launch=20
contract, but perhaps not until after Christmas. The other contracts are =
not time-critical=20
at this point, therefore we have delayed them slightly; to be announced i=
n the first=20
quarter of 2010.=E2=80=9D

=E2=80=9CWe have split the total of the 28 satellites we will order into =
two work orders. In the=20
first work order we will procure up to 22 satellites, and in the second w=
ork order the=20
rest. The industry bidders are to submit their best and final offer for =
8, 14, and 22=20
satellites. The most crucial decision in the whole procurement will then=
be for us to go=20
single-source with one of them, or dual-source with both.=E2=80=9D He ref=
erred to the similar=20
process in GPS procurement, although in that case alternating block-to-bl=
ock, not within=20
blocks. =E2=80=9CA double supplier would mean spending extra money, but =
it would bring some risk=20
reduction. Will it be worth the extra money we will have to pay for it. =
By the end of the=20
year we hope to have the answer for that.=E2=80=9D

By the end of the year we will have under contract the delivery of 22 sat=
ellites, and the=20
launch contract. So by the end of the year we will be able to give a very=
clear schedule=20
on Galileo deployment.

=E2=80=9CThere remains uncertainty on where it will end. Budget question=
s depend on parliament=20
and the EC on these matters, which will drive the final aspects of the wo=
rk. We live in=20
difficult economic times, and there is some things to be determined in 20=
14, when the next=20
funding cycle will begin.=E2=80=9D

=E2=80=9CBy the end of 2013, we will have an initial constellation of 16 =
satellites, 4 IOV and 12=20
FOC satellites. This is targeted to provide the open service,=E2=80=9D an=
d parts of the other=20
services: safety of life, PRS, and commercial. Completion of these will =
depend on the=20
open funding questions.=E2=80=9D

=E2=80=9CWe have one major problem at the moment, and it is not clear to =
us why our colleagues are=20
not addressing this issue at the highest importance. I am referring to co=
mpatibility with=20
all GNSS systems.=E2=80=9D He referred to U.S. and Russia systems specif=
ically and said all was=20
proceeding smoothly in those respects; he did not mention China or the Ch=
inese Compass=20
system by name, referring to it simply as =E2=80=9Cthe other=E2=80=9D or =
=E2=80=9Cthe others,=E2=80=9D and clearly implied=20
that this is where the difficulty lies.

GPS. Jason Kim from U.S. Department of Commerce and the National Coordina=
tion PNT office=20
gave background on the American system; however, nothing was mentioned ab=
out the current=20
problem with an errant signal from SVN49 and possible solutions under con=
sideration for=20
that satellite.

The next-generation Block IIF satellite should be ready by July (perhaps =
this was an old=20
slide?), but because of launch issues, we cannot launch until June of nex=
t year.

The IIR-M 20 has activated the CNAV signal on L2C for testing receiver eq=
uipment. The=20
third civil signal, L5, is also in broadcast demonstration from that sate=
llite.

The director position for the national coordination office is still vacan=
t (since Mike=20
Shaw=E2=80=99s departure for an industry position).

Kim emphasized the DOC viewpoint that there be a level playing field for =
all manufacturers=20
across all GNSS, particularly for receiver markets and applications.

=E2=80=9CELoran is being debated in Congress, and that information is mak=
ing its way to the=20
President.=E2=80=9D

Big News for Manufacturers. In response to a question from the audience a=
bout the U.S.=20
position on the Galileo interface control document (ICD), Kim reiterated =
that, for the=20
Galileo open service, an ICD has been published, but in order to use it f=
or commercial=20
purposes, a specific license is required from the EC =E2=80=94 however th=
e process for obtaining=20
such a license in far from clear. =E2=80=9CWe expect Galileo to become a =
reality very soon. We=20
think it=E2=80=99s going to be real. We want everyone to be prepared, an=
d to develop=20
applications, and grow that market. Look at the GPS model, making the in=
formation freely=20
and openly available to everyone. We have an ongoing dialog with our Eur=
opean colleagues=20
to do the same thing.=E2=80=9D

Paul Verhoef of the EU then rose from the front row of the audience to ta=
ke the microphone=20
again and add these remarks.

=E2=80=9CWe published the ICD so companies could do their initial researc=
h, use and test things,=20
but could not sell, since under the previously envisioned public-private =
partnership, the=20
private operator was envisioned to have some rights to that. [Since the =
termination of=20
the PPP effort] we have had further discussion with our member states. We=
have an ambition=20
to become, after GPS, the second system of choice. In order to reach that=
, the user market=20
is key. We are currently putting our hands to the last bits and pieces o=
f the=20
documentation [revising the previous stance], to be published in a few we=
eks=E2=80=99 time. We=20
will no longer require a licensing document in order to manufacture and s=
ell devices. We=20
had to do this bit of work to follow up on the initial [different] prepar=
ations made under=20
the PPP.=E2=80=9D

GLONASS. Sergey Revnivykh from Russia sent his apologies to the IAIN Conf=
erence, along=20
with his powerpoint slide presentation, which was presented by one of the=
conference=20
organizers, B=C3=B6rje Forssell of Norway.

=E2=80=9CThe Russians have problems with a specific satellite [on orbit].=
The next satellite is=20
still scheduled for December launch. The details of the problem are not k=
nown to everyone,=20
but it seems to be quite substantial, because the Russians have set up a =
task force to=20
solve this problem.=E2=80=9D

He then proceeded to give the standard GLONASS presentation that has been=
seen several=20
times recently, with no new items. The only note of difference seems to =
be an attitude of=20
wishing to co-locate GLONASS ground monitoring stations around the world,=
perhaps with=20
those of other systems. No other GNSS targeted by this effort are called =
out by name, nor=20
are any specific locations the Russians desire to monitor from =E2=80=94 =
although Diego Garcia=20
would presumably be of interest.