Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

LightSquared: GPS industry has campaign to discredit company
The Hill ^ | October 12, 2011 | Brendan Sasso

Posted on 10/12/2011 3:14:44 PM PDT by jazusamo

Jeff Carlisle, LightSquared's vice president of regulatory affairs and public policy, accused the Global Positioning System (GPS) industry of trying to manufacture a political scandal to discredit his wireless company on Wednesday.

"[GPS companies] have completely mischaracterized the political donations [LightSquared investor] Phil Falcone and our CEO [Sanjiv Ahuja] have made," Carlisle said after a House Small Business Committee hearing.

When asked whether he believes the GPS industry has pushed negative political stories about LightSquared, Carlisle said, "There's no doubt in my mind. Of course they have. It's not like this stuff just shows up for no reason whatsoever."

Republican lawmakers, including Rep. Michael Turner (R-Ohio), have called for an investigation of LightSquared's ties to the White House and the Federal Communications Commission to determine whether the company has been given preferential treatment as it seeks regulatory approval.

And Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, who's running as a candidate in the GOP presidential primary, accused the president of "crony capitalism" for his alleged ties to the wireless company.

According to a report, the White House asked an Air Force general last month to change his congressional testimony to make it more supportive of LightSquared.

LightSquared has sent emails to White House aides, at times mentioning its fundraising for Democrats and President Obama. LightSquared's Falcone and Ahuja have both donated tens of thousands of dollars to Republicans and Democrats.

The GPS industry denied coordinating any political campaign against LightSquared.

"LightSquared’s suggestion that inquiries from members of Congress about LightSquared’s contacts with the Obama administration are orchestrated by the GPS industry are silly and self-serving," a spokeswoman for the Coalition to Save Our GPS said. "These members have raised questions about meetings and contacts that are a matter of public record. The Coalition is focused on the serious interference issues presented by LightSquared’s proposals and the need to responsibly address them, which LightSquared has yet to do."

LightSquared plans to launch a wholesale wireless broadband service, but tests earlier this year showed its network interferes with GPS devices. To address the interference issue, LightSquared agreed to operate its cell towers on only the lower 10 MHz of its spectrum.

But even with that commitment, the company acknowledges its network will cause problems for some precision GPS devices, such as those used in agriculture, surveying and construction. LightSquared says it has developed the technology to retrofit precision GPS devices to allow them to function in the presence of the company's signal.

LightSquared has committed to pay up to $50 million to retrofit government receivers, but says fixing commercial receivers is the GPS industry's responsibility.

"[GPS companies] don't want anybody to focus on the real issue: how do you solve the problem and who writes the check?" Carlisle said.

The FCC says it will not allow LightSquared to move forward until it resolves the GPS interference problem. The company's network is currently undergoing another round of testing.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: corruption; cronycapitalism; democrats; fcc; fccchairman; gps; juliusgenachowski; lightsquared; obama; paytoplay; philfalcone; scam
LightSquared has committed to pay up to $50 million to retrofit government receivers, but says fixing commercial receivers is the GPS industry's responsibility.

LightSquared admits it interferes with commercial GPS and there's many millions of them out there and says tough, it's their problem. They have a surprise coming, it's their problem.

Had Gen. William L. Shelton, Commander, Air Force Space Command, not spoken out IightSquared would probably have gotten away with this scam.

1 posted on 10/12/2011 3:14:52 PM PDT by jazusamo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

If LightSquared was harmless to GPS there would be no controversy and the GPS-related industries would have no reason to complain. Companies do not hire lawyers and scream to the high Heavens about things that do not concern them.


2 posted on 10/12/2011 3:31:29 PM PDT by Ronin (If we were serious about using the death penalty as a deterrent, we would bring back public hangings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
FTA:

But even with that commitment, the company acknowledges its network will cause problems for some precision GPS devices, such as those used in agriculture, surveying and construction. LightSquared says it has developed the technology to retrofit precision GPS devices to allow them to function in the presence of the company's signal.

In fact, just about every GPS is used for precision position finding from time to time. For example, GPS is constantly used by all sailors when they are in narrow channels, and a sudded LightSquared-caused course deviation is likely, at least, to cause hordes of groundings and collisions. Just read the AF general's testimony about the massive GPS disruption this will cause, as determined by the AF tests. This monstrosity must be stopped.

3 posted on 10/12/2011 3:33:38 PM PDT by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

I am torn on this issue.

On one hand, it’s disgusting to see the obvious ties to the Obama Administration being used to further LightSquared’s agenda.

But similarly, all GPS receiver manufacturers are suppose to protect their devices from out of band interference.

And since LightSquared payed for the spectrum they want to use, I don’t see how it is fair to LS to keep them from using properly licensed spectrum.

If we were a true capitalist society, the GPS manufacturers would have to take a hike on this one, IMO.

As for consumers who would be shafted by this approach, I think it would be a case of “too bad”. Either you would have to cross your fingers that your manufacturer would support your device, or just admit you didn’t know enough about the complexity and limitations of the device you bought.


4 posted on 10/12/2011 3:33:40 PM PDT by Aqua225 (Realist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
...LightSquared's Falcone and Ahuja have both donated tens of thousands of dollars...

Where's the rest of the money trail to the pols? Contributions of $10,000-$100,000 are nothing on the scale of this enterprise. It's like offering a crooked cop $1.98 to fix a speeding ticket.

5 posted on 10/12/2011 3:39:35 PM PDT by omega4412
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aqua225; jazusamo

Also, I will admit that I own a number of GPS devices, but luckily none installed in a vehicle.

I would have thought the manufacturers would have designed in the correct band pass filters, rather than praying that valuable spectrum around the GPS band would never be sold.

The FCC is also at fault here. They, knowing that a high bandwidth radio network would be installed on nearby spectrum, just figured it was OK to sell LS the spectrum they wanted, without checking to see if a critical national service very nearby would be affected or not.


6 posted on 10/12/2011 3:41:45 PM PDT by Aqua225 (Realist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Aqua225
From articles on this from the beginning it seems Falcone was a big supporter and donor of Obama and Democrats.

The licensing applications submitted to the FCC by LightSquared were fast tracked and much testing was passed up.

That's when Gen. Shelton stepped up because of the Air Force testing and told a Congressional Committee what they had discovered. He had been approached by WH staff to alter his upcoming testimony and he told them to get lost.

I'm no electronics person but I've read that the GPS band is susceptible to interference and everyone knows it. The band has been kept as it is because of accuracy. It seems the FCC was going to license LightSquared kind of under the table. I don't know if I got all that right but there's been many articles posted here at FR regarding it.

7 posted on 10/12/2011 3:45:05 PM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Aqua225

LS has been very devious about this. They bought a company that owned satellite frequencies close to GPS and in a band intended for satellite transmission only . The satellite signals were not strong enough to use with th eLS ground recievers so LS asked for a wavier to “agument” the satellite signals with ground based repeaters/transmitters. The problem is having those ground based transmitters blasting high powered signals in a frequency area used by ground based receivers designed for satellite signals, NOT high powered ground based signals. It’s not a simple matter of filtering, it would be like listening to a wisper (GPS) in one ear when someone’s (LS ground based repeaters) screaming in the other.

The FCC should not have granted LS the waiver to operate high powered ground based repeaters in a frequency range that’s always been used for satellite transmissions.


8 posted on 10/12/2011 3:48:46 PM PDT by dynoman (Objectivity is the essence of intelligence. - Marylin vos Savant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: omega4412

Exactly. Their donations were chump change compared to what they stand to make off of this. And there’s not much doubt the FCC tried to fast track the licensing for LightSquared.


9 posted on 10/12/2011 3:49:39 PM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Who sold the frequencies that close together? The intent was most likely known. This problem will only get worse if we can’t fix it here.


10 posted on 10/12/2011 3:51:36 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dynoman

Thanks. That’s what I’d read but couldn’t remember it.


11 posted on 10/12/2011 3:51:58 PM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: allmost

Check post #8, it explains it well.


12 posted on 10/12/2011 3:53:26 PM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Yeah, I read that. A department/name would be helpful. This is part of ‘digital tv’ push, opening up the spectrum. For what? I can see both sides here.
13 posted on 10/12/2011 3:59:22 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Make LS use a different band.
It's much cheaper to redesign a few test units than many thousands (millions?) of units already in the field.
Hey, the gubmint could take the vital GPS spectrum by eminent domain, much like we buy land and clear trees for power lines.

14 posted on 10/12/2011 4:07:11 PM PDT by BitWielder1 (Corporate Profits are better than Government Waste)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allmost

The frequencies owned by the company LS bought were never intended to be used by ground based transmitters. That’s why LS had to ask for a waiver to use ground based retransmitters.

The FCC screwed up big time by granting the waiver. How coudl have prior users like GPS known the FCC would do that sometime in the future?

http://www.saveourgps.org/

Like someone said, this administration is so bad even their corruption is incompetent.


15 posted on 10/12/2011 4:10:00 PM PDT by dynoman (Objectivity is the essence of intelligence. - Marylin vos Savant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dynoman
I'd like to know who sold those frequencies to LS. “The Government” doesn't quite cut it here imo.
16 posted on 10/12/2011 4:12:51 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dynoman
Yup.

And for those that don't know, it was the MILITARY that brought the world GPS.

The GPS project was developed in 1973 to overcome the limitations of previous navigation systems,[1] integrating ideas from several predecessors, including a number of classified engineering design studies from the 1960s. GPS was created and realized by the U.S. Department of Defense (USDOD) and was originally run with 24 satellites. It became fully operational in 1994."

Clinton was the first Rat with his snout in the cheese - he gave away the military control on GPS accuracy, and later, frequency control.

It was a payoff to donors who wanted to piggy back on what the DoD funded and implemented.

17 posted on 10/12/2011 4:13:47 PM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: allmost

http://nlpc.org/stories/2011/02/02/did-harbinger-hedge-fund-buy-influence-white-house-probe-asked-fcc-spectrum-givea


18 posted on 10/12/2011 4:18:43 PM PDT by dynoman (Objectivity is the essence of intelligence. - Marylin vos Savant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dynoman
Links are great supplements, and appreciated, but this is an idea forum so a summary would be welcome in the future. Blind links suck imo.
19 posted on 10/12/2011 4:22:30 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Please bump the Freepathon or click above and donate or become a monthly donor!

20 posted on 10/12/2011 4:24:27 PM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dynoman

It’s an interesting link no doubt.


21 posted on 10/12/2011 4:24:40 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: allmost

LS bought a company called SkyTerra that already owned the satellite frecquencies, read post 18.

But the satellite signals would not work for high speed 3G 4G wireless so they asked the FCC for a waiver to use high powered ground based retransmitters to increase signal strength so they could compete with the likes of Verizon and ATT with a much lower overhead.


22 posted on 10/12/2011 4:25:04 PM PDT by dynoman (Objectivity is the essence of intelligence. - Marylin vos Savant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dynoman

Thanks for the summary, I think you explained what is going on here better than most of these “he said/she said” news stories.

The question I would like answered is: Did the Obama administration sell these frequencies to their cronies simply because they didn’t foresee the consequences? Or, were the consequences intended because they align with Obama’s goal of weakening America?

The results may be indistinguishable regardless of whether the cause was corruption, negligence, incompetence, or something more seditious, but that is, I think, the real issue we need to be focusing on: establishing the motives.


23 posted on 10/12/2011 4:26:14 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: allmost

I think the term “crony” capitalism fits well, what LS did is certainly not Ayn Rand objectivist capitalism.


24 posted on 10/12/2011 4:30:03 PM PDT by dynoman (Objectivity is the essence of intelligence. - Marylin vos Savant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: dynoman; allmost

Thanks for that link, it’s a great piece by Ken boehm at NLPC, I bookmarked it.


25 posted on 10/12/2011 4:32:47 PM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dynoman

Never read Rand. No need. I’m living it. I would like to know who assigns these spectral areas to emitters.


26 posted on 10/12/2011 4:33:48 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Ronin

I’ve watched LightSquared stuff screw up GPS for cars and phones. Not sure about military GPS capability, but messing up millions of drivers who’ve ditched maps for Onstar is not an acceptable trade so that LightSquared can take over some of that bandwidth.


27 posted on 10/12/2011 6:54:25 PM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Aqua225

I don’t see how LS paying for something entitles them to that something if it is obtained wrongly. If I went on Craigs List and bought a stolen laptop, I should be able to do anything I want with it, since I paid for it. Screw the poor sucker who had it stolen, they should have kept better care of it. They deserve to lose it, so I am therefore happy to use it as I see fit. It is mine, and posession is 9 10ths of the law.

Problem is, they are trying to commandeer a part of the spectrum used by GPS satellites. GPS satellites are solar powered and 12,000 miles away. They have an output of about fifty watts. A walkie-talkie that kids play with is about 2.5 watts. Having a broadband 4G wireless network operating in the GPS band would be like having a candle in front of a huge spotlight in the middle of the day.

I own 3 GPS devices which I use for hiking. They help me find the way back, to know where I am and how far I traveled, and also to identify landmarks nearby. They cost in the range of 300 to 600 dollars each, plus map software and subscriptions. If LightSquared is allowed to proceed, I personally will be out about 900 dollars. But hey, they own it, and I should have been more careful what I spend my money on.

Unless you own stock in LightSquared, and have divested all your Garmin, you should not be torn.


28 posted on 10/12/2011 9:30:39 PM PDT by webheart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: webheart

I totally disagree with you. If they paid, and were properly approved(*), and, and this is the clencher, LS’s equipment’s out of band harmonics are within the specifications set by the FCC for acceptable interference to GPS receivers, then LS has no culpability.

The culpability lies 100% with the GPS manufacturers.

And yes, I still stick by what I say about us the users buying complex devices that we do not understand the complete physics of operation of (I do have a pretty good set of radio knowledge, actually...). And it can be even worse for the GPS manufacturers if they sold their products as “compliant” with being resistant to specific levels of chatter out of neighboring bands. I suspect there is such a compliance statement on record with the FCC. That will be a document referenced when court proceedings begin.

Garmin, et al, should hope they are in the right, and LS’s equipment is generating too much power out of band. Or they could have some serious lawsuits on their hands... everything ranging from defective products to death liability suits from free ranging farm and military equipment.

This is all simple radio stuff a first level technician should know, and if this ends up in the courts, it will be resolved based on clear cut numbers, whether we want our GPS units to break or not. If LS is in the right, then yes, they should have full rights.

Also, several people have said that a bandpass filter won’t fix the problem. But, I must argue, it in fact will fix the problem. These are high order bandpass filters, which should be relatively compact at the frequencies we are talking about here. If the GPS manufacturers have been blowing off the interference tolerance requirements, this is not LS’s problem, and LS shouldn’t even be culpable for modifications to military equipment.

Now, I don’t have any numbers, but they will eventually come out in public, and it will be clear at that point who was skirting compliance issues: LS or the GPS manufacturers.

Additionally, I own stock in no GPS manufacturers, nor LS. I do have GPS receivers that I would love to stay functional, but if LS is in the right, then a class action lawsuit is going to solve the problems with the GPS manufacturers.

Ie., I am not even remotely concerned currently.

Finally, I want to be sure you understand my position. I *want* my GPS units to keep working (I own 2 GPS phones, 3 handheld GPS units, and 1 automotive stick-to-the-windshield unit, given to me as a gift -— about $1400 investment of my own, and $300 of the gift giver).

But this is where liberalism and conservatism diverge. Wants are what leads down the path of bizarre regulations and budget deficits. After all, liberals *want* to help the poor people. They want to eliminate gun violence by taking away our lead launchers. They want lots of things. Social justice, etc.

Only when we sit back and look at the raw facts will this issue be resolved, OR the GPS manufacturers will get the break of a lifetime from government, or LS will be allowed to plow over GPS by exceeding mandated radio emission limits.

I am betting this will not be resolved on facts, and I will bet the lobbyists from both sides are lining up 10 deep on the hill at every door available for both camps.

I just hope no true conservative legislators try to come out on this issue without the raw facts, or they will be looking pretty stupid unless they get lucky.


* properly approved means: they specified their equipment would not provide anymore energy out of band, than that specified by the FCC to be acceptable interference to GPS receivers, or acceptable to the FCC. The FCC should have maintained some margin of error here... ie., LS’s out of band energy should have been required to be several dB below what the FCC specified a compliant GPS receiver should be able to deal with.


29 posted on 10/13/2011 1:15:45 AM PDT by Aqua225 (Realist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Aqua225

One more point: if the FCC relaxed standards about crossband interference to let LS play, then YES, that would be crony capitalism.

But if the specifications set by the FCC are not exceeded (or relaxed preferentially), then it’s too bad and so sad for the GPS manufacturers and owners like myself.


30 posted on 10/13/2011 1:43:46 AM PDT by Aqua225 (Realist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Aqua225
But similarly, all GPS receiver manufacturers are suppose to protect their devices from out of band interference.

Nonsense! That light squared garbage is IN their bands. Trust me, Military grade receivers are designed to resist jamming. They do it rather well. This lightsquared junk could hardly be worse if it was specifically designed to jam GPS. But if something is being used for critical functions do you just shrug and say it is their problem? That is like shining a night in a brain surgeon's eyes and then telling him it is his problem to buy sunglasses. Newer aircraft systems use precision GPS to LAND THE PLANE. You don't Eff with frequencies like that. You give them a nice margin of safety.
31 posted on 10/13/2011 5:49:10 AM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Aqua225
then it’s too bad and so sad for the GPS manufacturers and owners like myself.

You clearly have no idea all the stuff GPS is being used for. This is not a 'too bad' situation. If the specs don't allow GPS enough margin then they should be changed. GPS has prior claim and is being used for safety critical things. 'Fixing' all receivers, if it is really possible, would run in the billions. Probably tens of billions and perhaps more. This ain't just swapping out a couple tom-toms in few yuppies BMWs. This is a much bigger ball of wax. Lightsquared claims they designed a fix for GPSs but I doubt they even have the security clearances to begin to design such a thing.
32 posted on 10/13/2011 5:54:53 AM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: webheart
If I went on Craigs List and bought a stolen laptop, I should be able to do anything I want with it, since I paid for it. Screw the poor sucker who had it stolen, they should have kept better care of it.

You have a startlingly inaccurate grasp of the law and morality. possession of stolen property is a CRIME. You can do jail time for that.
33 posted on 10/13/2011 5:57:41 AM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Aqua225

Go read post 18. Then go study up on RF.


34 posted on 10/13/2011 6:00:38 AM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
It is astounding to me how many ignorant people think this is some simple legal issue. Stop and think about it like this.
I buy a lot of land off the end of a runway. I go to the city, pay off the mayor and I get a waiver that says it is ok for me to build a HUGE tower there. When the airport owners, pilots, passengers, and local National Guard all scream about it I just say, “Hey, the tower is not COMPLETELY blocking the runway. Land around it.” They all cry, “But the wind it creates make landing harder and we have to dodge around it when we do a close pattern.” I just shrug and say, “Not my problem. Fly your plane better.”

Wake up people! And stop defending a democrat donor payoff scam.
35 posted on 10/13/2011 6:11:16 AM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TalonDJ

Very nicely put and not too much off the mark at what LS is trying to do except with the help of Zer0 in the WH LS went to the FCC, the horses mouth so to speak, to get their waiver.


36 posted on 10/13/2011 7:58:10 AM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: TalonDJ

You bore with that spin story you pointed me too. 5 months vs. 6 months? Come’on. That’s just a ridiculous complaint.

There was absolutely no technical data as to how LS was causing more than allowed interference in a adjacent band.

If there are no FCC rules regarding how much interference GPS must accept, then that is more incompetent government bureaucracy at work for us. I still say that government failed again, and the GPS manufacturers failed too, because they didn’t go into the game without FCC rules protecting their spectrum.

Pants down moment for government and their cronies at the GPS manufacturers, that a different part of government and their cronies were able to take advantage of.

And how did that story indicate some gap in my knowledge about RF? If two radios are not on the same frequency, the FCC is supposed to regulate how much interference a transmitter in one band can produce to another. Failure of the government allowed someone else Coupe de Tat on the GPS spectrum.

Now, I give you a real world example:

In radio repeaters/multiplexers used by EMS, etc., usually transmit and receive on the same antenna, and even better, just a few 100Khz apart. A simple multi order filter array keeps the receiver from hearing the transmitter.

Such filters are small at the GPS frequency range.

It’s totally ridiculous that the FCC did not regulate the amount of interference, and I think Falcone just may be brilliant for realizing it. If that is what happened...


37 posted on 10/18/2011 3:23:22 PM PDT by Aqua225 (Realist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Aqua225
Pants down moment for government and their cronies at the GPS manufacturers, that a different part of government and their cronies were able to take advantage of.

You might think that sounds witty but you need to take a step back. GPS was designed by the military, for the military. It was intended as an instrument of national security. Clinton ordered it privatized. Manufactures have since been using the specifications, signal formats and infrastructure that it all a government design. They have been creating products in good faith using that standard. For the government (read democrats) to come back later and force them all to change their designs so they can make a quick buck to profit someone else is unethical. It is the classic democrat move of screwing Peter to payoff Paul. Satellite frequency bands are intended for a few watts of signal at very high altitude transmitting and being received on earth. It was not approved or intended for high wattage ground based transmitters. If you know a darn thing about RF then you know the inverse square law. And you should know that something designed to pick up a 50 watt signal 300 miles away is not likely to be happy with a 500 watt signal blasting out near it. GPS receivers were designed based on the assumption that the nearby bandwidth would be used for satellite down-links and not for ground based distributed infrastructure. Light squared bought the company that owned the satellite bands and then bribed the FCC to bend the rules for them. GPS receivers were designed to work, and DO work, in the RF environment as it was regulated to be back then. No one gets into ANY RF game without the FCC rules protecting their spectrum. The democrats want to screw over dozens of companies so their contributors can make a quick buck. GPS manufactures are hardly 'government cronies'. Everyone designed their gear to just meet FCC rules. Why would anyone massively over engineer their design on the OFF CHANCE that the FCC might decide to screw them later? That would be insane and business suicide.
38 posted on 10/19/2011 9:26:27 AM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: TalonDJ

So?

100W’s into a diplexer won’t open the squelch on a radio connected on the other side of the diplexer.

A diplexer is just a fancy name for a very tight bandpass filter (multi order).

You seem to agree, indirectly, that the government is responsible either way. The GPS manufacturers should have been pushing for interference guidelines from the git-go.

Who knows, maybe the GPS manufacturers weren’t cronies, but they should have been early on. Maybe they figured the military would protect them? That is some form of cronyism itself.... Good luck with that -— that’s like assuming no Democrat President or Congress would ever be elected.

Anyhow, I seriously doubt LS ground based transmitters are 500W. I don’t know of any uwave transmitters in that power range, except radar. And even then, proper filtering can still compensate (though the size of the GPS receiver could be larger).

The GPS manufacturers should have lobbied FCC for very specific band protection, or if they failed, installed the correct filters. Unless they really expected the military to shield them from business harm, I just can’t see their reasoning. At all.


39 posted on 10/19/2011 10:46:49 AM PDT by Aqua225 (Realist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Aqua225
The filters are not as simple as you are assuming because GPS works across more than on frequency at a very low power. One nice tight band pass filter does not solve the issue. So it is not one filter, it is several. Would those fit in your cellphone? Your tom-tom? The military's drones or bombs? Should we have to redesign ALL those things so some democrat contributors can make a buck? Could engineers shield these things? Sure, anything is possible. The issue is: should they have to. They DID have specific frequency protections. The FCC recended it and the companies are even now fighting to get that over turned.
Maybe they figured the military would protect them? That is some form of cronyism itself.... Good luck with that

You are playing fast and loose with the term 'cronyism'. If someone in government contracts you to build something to THEIR specifications you don't have to be a 'crony' to think your customer should have a vested interest in seeing to it that what you sell them still works in 6 months or a year. If this is being a 'cronie' then anyone that ever did any business with the government is one. But not all government 'cronies' are created equal. I prefer the ones building stuff in support of national defense. What I can't figure is why a conservative would stab those guys in the back in favor of some big democrat contributor making a quick buck by bending the established rules. This stuff is directly threatening MY lively hood. My company played by the rules in good faith and now the democrats are bending those rules to screw us over in order make big money. A lot of big dems are invested in Lightsquared. They are bending the rules for a payoff.
40 posted on 10/20/2011 6:45:02 AM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Aqua225

I wonder if the government passes some rule on car efficiency will you just shrug it off and say ‘the car cronies should have designed them better.’ Will you just happily pay thousands to have your car modified to meet new rules while blaming the car designers?


41 posted on 10/20/2011 6:50:40 AM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson