My point is that no pilot should put all his eggs in one basket, nor does any autopilot system rely on one source of data, such as GPS. There are also data that GPS simply cannot provide (like height above terrain). GPS is not now, nor do I think it ever will be, the "be-all and end-all" for aeronautical navigation. There will ALWAYS be backup systems to GPS, primary systems to which GPS might be the backup, and systems which GPS cannot replace.
This is probably all moot, as others have pointed out that the Galileo web site makes it clear that the aviation and other "safety of life" services will be on channels well-removed from our allocations.
----- Original Message ----- From: "David B. Toth" ve3gyq@amsat.org To: "George Henry" ka3hsw@earthlink.net; "amsat bb" amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 11:28 PM Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: Galileo interference on L band
At 11:08 PM 9/20/2006, George Henry wrote:
Gosh! How did we ever fly airplanes without crashing them, before satellite navigation?
Show me a commercial pilot who would rely solely on his GPS for navigation, and I'll show you a pilot who doesn't belong in the cockpit!
With all due respect George, that is an overly emotional and inane comment. I relied on GPS navigation solely on my trip back from the DCC in Tucson ... as well, I used my XM-Radio weather datalink to pick my way through the front created by Hurricane Helene. The VOR receiver would not have allowed me to do all that.
And once my Garmin 430 is updated for WAAS , I'll be able to do precision approaches with GPS.
ADFs are being decommissioned and I doubt you'll see any new ILS approaches being installed ...
No, I'm not a COMMERCIAL pilot, but I fly a lot, and there ARE a lot of commercial missions being flown with GPS alone (with probably 2 GPS receivers on board). AND, GPS improves situational awareness which DOES decrease crashes and other accidents.
73 Dave VE3GYQ/W8 Spencerville, OH