Galileo

RE: Galileo

The Russian system LOL Nah, I think we can do it better ourselves. 😀 It’s good for our industry.

RE: Galileo

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 10-08-02 AT 03:58 AM (GMT)]It really is a big waste of money, the only reason i see it being fit is the EU are worried of a US shut down, most likely due to wars. But, such a shut down is only regional and unless a certain country is at war with Europe, so do you still want your services to go on when a war is happening there?
As for all that accuracy and data crap, you simply need ground emitters that allows differential mode on GPS and there you go, an insant sub-meter resolution at a very very affordable price(<10million?).
If you don’t want to depend on the US, go for Russian system then. Lastly, this probably has more to do with the EU’s vision of being more involved with global conflicts, so in that case just say so, no need for this “only commercial” non-sense. Also, i think GPS signals are offered for FREE. Europeans can make their own receivers, so what’s with this paying Americans thing?

RE: Galileo

Galileo is a necesary step to get a less dependant Europe from the US. What it costs, is simply unimportant.

RE: Galileo

Anyway, it’s too late now. Galileo will come }>

RE: Galileo

yes BUT repaing a highway is infantly more useful than creating something that exist not just once already but twice

we don’t need to triplicate satlatie navigation !

rabie :9

RE: Galileo

€ 3,2 B is not much Rabie. Ever wondered how much it costs to repair the highway between Antwerp and Brussles for example? € 3 B !!!!

RE: Galileo

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 07-08-02 AT 04:14 PM (GMT)]oh god here we go a mjor dissection…..

Like other major European projects such as the Airbus or Ariane,

airbus is great as it made (some }>) european plane makers viable

airena outs satalites up

both MAKE MONEY!!!

galileo wil lcost lots of meooney and will not make us (europe) money, nor is there a point (i will talk more latter)

likely to revolutionise society in the same way that the mobile phone has done in recent years

GPS is doing that – why does europe need its own version – come on a gps reciver dosen’t cost mucha nd the us is improving the system

GALILEO will afford considerable advantages in many sectors of the economy. In road and rail transport, for example, it will make it possible to predict and manage journey times, or, thanks to automated vehicle guidance systems, help reduce traffic jams and cut the number of road accidents. However, although transport by road, rail, air and sea is the example most frequently quoted, satellite radionavigation is also increasingly of benefit to fisheries and agriculture, oil prospecting, defence and civil protection activities, building and public works, etc. In the field of telecommunications, allied with other new technologies such as GSM or UMTS, GALILEO will increase the potential to provide positioning information as well as to provide combined services of a very high level.

have these people not herd of GPS or GLOSSNAS – why not use them ??? why waste billions on sending and building satalites

The role played by satellite global positioning systems in our everyday lives is set to grow considerably. The real impact of satellite global positioning on society and industrial development, as is the case for all major technical innovations, will become clear only gradually, even though many practical applications are already possible. While there is no question but that the future of guidance systems involves satellite radionavigation, there are sectors other than the transport sector which are already dependent on this new technology, even if they are not aware of the fact. This is true of the financial sector when it comes to determining the exact time of bank transactions. Some analysts regard satellite radionavigation as an invention that is as significant in its way as that of the watch: in the same way that no one nowadays can ignore the time of day, in the future no one will be able to do without knowing their precise location.

i don’t disagree with this but why do we need a diffrent one from GPS ????

WHY ???

Having control of the satellite constellation technology which is central to the system means having control of the many industrial applications made possible thanks to satellite positioning. The European Union cannot afford not to become involved in what, it is already clear, will be one of the main sectors of industry in the twenty-first century. That would mean becoming dependent on systems and technologies developed outside Europe for applications vital to the running of the society of tomorrow.

this amkes it sound like we are being blockaded by the USA and russia nad denied acces to their systems. we do not need “autarkey” (self sufficency).

the EU can afford not to be invloved because it wil cost us a shed load of cash to make and put the satalites in orbit

A system that both competes with and complements the American GPS system

a contridiction in terms ???

There are at present two radionavigation satellite networks in the world, one American (GPS), and one Russian (Glonass). Both were designed as military systems.

so what…..

Since the Russian system seems to have not succeeded in generating any significant civil applications, GALILEO offers a real alternative to the establishment of a de facto monopoly in favour of GPS and American industry.

a monopoly normally is bad BUT – prices have gone down, accuracy has got better, hence WHAT IS THE PROBLEM ???

GALILEO has been designed and developed as a non-military application, while nonetheless incorporating all the necessary protective security features. Unlike GPS, which was essentially designed for military use, GALILEO therefore provides, for some of the services offered, a very high level of continuity required by modern business, in particular with regard to contractual responsibility;

the us is hardley likley to turn GPS off as they want to use it, if they restrict it its hardley the end of the world as accruacy would go down to several meters -ohh no! what comercail application need the accuracy. we’ve been sued to restricted acesse so whats new ?

It is based on the same technology as GPS and provides a similar – and possibly higher – degree of precision, thanks to the structure of the constellation of satellites and the ground-based control and management systems planned;

why do we need more precise info – “my car is now eactly 13cm from the fast lane of the M25” – how does this help me ???

GALILEO is more reliable as it includes a signal “integrity message” informing the user immediately of any errors. In addition, unlike GPS, it will be possible to receive GALILEO in towns and regions located in extreme latitudes;

were spending billions to make an exisintg system work in cites – surley the US is already working on this.

It represents a real public service and, as such, guarantees continuity of service provision for specific applications. GPS signals, on the other hand, in recent years have on several occasions become unavailable on a planned or unplanned basis, sometimes without prior warning.

this is from the corupt EU that spends half its bidget on CAP, has soemthing like 7% of its bidget LOST ! and the accountants won’t sign the accounts off for years. the accoutnant brogught in to fix this has been shafted !!!

Using both infrastructures in a coordinated fashion (double sourcing) offers real advantages in terms of precision and in terms of security, should one of the two systems become unavailable;

The existence of two independent systems is of benefit to all users since they will be able to use the same receiver to receive both GPS and GALILEO signals.

totally uneccessary dupliction!!!

By the same token, Europe would have put itself out of the running had it abandoned the GALILEO programme.

can some one confirm for me that we are not at war with america!!!

NOW THE BEST BIT …..

GALILEO development and deployment costs, including the construction and launch of 30 satellites and the setting up of the ground-based component, have been evaluated by the Commission as €3.2 billion. It should be noted that the estimate given in the PricewaterhouseCoopers study is very similar to the Commission’s own figure. The difference of €200 million can be explained by the fact that PricewaterhouseCoopers includes a substantial allowance for risks and the construction of spare satellites.

[h1]€3.2 billion !!![/h1] of my taxpaying money is being wasted to produce something that already exits TWICE !!! 3.2 billion could be sent on sorting out coruption, CAP reform, feeding por africans, just about anything but triplicating satalite navigation ??? WTF!

Pricewatergousecoopers says the comission is 2000 million out !!! what have we here – more corrution }> are you sure they signed their estimate }>

[b]GALILEO is not expensive[/b] 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀

oh and 3.2 billion is just small change hey, if thts spare be sure to sned some to my house

The price is equivalent to that of some 150 kilometres of semi-urban motorway or the cost of just one track of the main tunnel for the future high-speed rail link between Lyon and Turin.

im sure a motoway or railway line would be much more useful, or amybee some hospitals, or aid to africa or something but AGAIN why triplicate satalite navigation.

GALILEO will create more than 100 000 jobs and will generate service and equipment contracts estimated at approximately €9 billion per annum.

imsure given very little time i can think ofbetter job creation programes – the peole emplued are hight tech people with good well piad jobs alredy – the people need help are coal miner, steel workers and little farmer, starving afrians – NOT a scientist living in a huge house !!!

total wast of money

rabie :9

RE: Galileo

1. It is NOT expensive, read this

“http://europa.eu.int/comm/energy_transport/en/gal_why_en.html“

RE: Galileo

it is expensive !!!

there is no cheap way of getting 20 satalites into earth orbit !!!

as i’ve said there is no need to independant of the us – if i were china i would make my own system but we aren’t! we aren’t a rouge nation – we are infact top line allies that get stuff like amraams with no questions.

all this is jsut set up by the french who want to piss the americans off even more – blame the frogs }> 😀 }>

rabie :9

RE: Galileo

1. Galileo is not expensive Rabie, read the factfile on the site.

2. Galileo is necessairy, because Europe can not rely on the US for ever. We need to have our own satellite system, because it’s not good to be dependant on a country which is an economical rival.

3. Galileo is not some ‘idea’, the project already started some months ago, and in 2006, the sattelites should be orbitting around the globe.

RE: Galileo

1) its a totally pointless wast of money

2) the current version of gps everyone can use – there is no longer a two tier system of mlitary and comercial – ie any set you buy now could guide a crusie missile }>

BUT…

the us warns everyone that it may turn off or restric / reintroduce the devide again in the time of war

3) hence GLOSNASS (splelling) exists – apparenlt y the chinese weapons use both.

4) going back to 1), why does europe america best ally need a seperate system ??? we are never going t be fighting them and launching 20 satlaites each with atomic clocks and whatnot is going to be very expensive

if we were planing to fight them or were planning to lunch a range of euro gps giuded bombs then maybee but the COST !!!

rabie :9

RE: Galileo

I think something about 20 satellites. GPS is very accurate, but the DOD will not allow the industry to use all the capabilities of it, because it’s a military system, unlike Galileo.

RE: Galileo

more precise and meant for economic rather than military? Do you really buy that? If it’s more precise, tell me why the military won’t use it? It’s just worded to avoid the military budget cuts that’s all. Interesting though, how many sats and what orbits? Probably lower than the US system but much more sats.