Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1837886
@johnm

Yes, I think that UK plc wants to have its own infrastructure, guarding against any potential to be held to ransom in the future. I kinda get that future proofing idea.

Anyway, let’s hope they can actually get it sorted.

In the meantime - get your IR training holiday booked in Jersey-on-Sea!
#1837890
PeteSpencer wrote:Isn’t it the case that the UK taxpayer contributed millions to the development of EGNOS?


Not directly.

EU funds were used to develop Galileo and EGNOS and the UK was a net contributor to that pot. However a significant chunk of the development was undertaken by UK firms under various grant funding schemes such as Horizon 2020. So a wide range of European taxpayers contributed to UK company revenues as well as to others.

If the UK can use its expertise to build a UKGNOS safety of life facility on the back of open SBAS that would be good as then there is an additional level of safety and reliability, I'm not sure how all that works though and it would have been nice to have an orderly transition opportunity. Whether it would be practical to add to the GPS, Galileo etc.etc. constellation is a more difficult question I think.

Sorry @G-BLEW I didn't mean to have a political debate, more one on the practical issues and the background.
AlanM, kanga liked this
#1837903
A proposal gaining some support is to encourage the Government in their aspirations for our own Position, Navigation and Timing project but to negotiate an interim deal for EGNOS SoL meantime.

This would not only secure LPV but save someone’s face too. The subscription could come out of the large PNT budget.
johnm, AlanC, MikeB and 2 others liked this
#1837906
CloudHound wrote:A proposal gaining some support is to encourage the Government in their aspirations for our own Position, Navigation and Timing project but to negotiate an interim deal for EGNOS SoL meantime.

This would not only secure LPV but save someone’s face too. The subscription could come out of the large PNT budget.


That would be an excellent and pragmatic outcome.

Ian
johnm, kanga, MikeB liked this
#1837914
G-BLEW wrote:
CloudHound wrote:A proposal gaining some support is to encourage the Government in their aspirations for our own Position, Navigation and Timing project but to negotiate an interim deal for EGNOS SoL meantime.

This would not only secure LPV but save someone’s face too. The subscription could come out of the large PNT budget.


That would be an excellent and pragmatic outcome.

Ian


It doesn't get my support as a taxpayer. Spaffing huge amounts of public money against the wall to create yet another navigation system rather than doing a pragmatic deal to remain in Galileo is nuts. Does anyone think there is the slightest business case?

I won't be holding my breath for either excellence or pragmatism.

P
#1837939
Unfortunately Galileo doesn’t provide the Space Based Augmentation System that EGNOS does.

UK taxpayer commitment to Space including vertical and horizontal launches and PNT and OneWeb is massive and already budgeted for.
#1837968
CloudHound wrote:Unfortunately Galileo doesn’t provide the Space Based Augmentation System that EGNOS does.

UK taxpayer commitment to Space including vertical and horizontal launches and PNT and OneWeb is massive and already budgeted for.


You're right - they're not the same thing. I should have said EGNOS which is what we need for LPV. My comment would apply to that.

The OneWeb spending (at the time we were told it was so the UK could create an alternative to Galileo) is spaffing even more money. See https://spacenews.com/u-k-to-revise-strategy-for-satellite-navigation-system/

A sensible and pragmatic approach would be to work with our neighbours to provide these services.

Paul
By Oldfart
#1838022
Presumably after the June cutoff , the CAA will not require my Garmin to be physically downgraded to LNAV., as that would prevent the use of LPV in Europe etc. So the UK wide guidance will still be available but not “ legal”?
#1838026
Oldfart wrote:Presumably after the June cutoff , the CAA will not require my Garmin to be physically downgraded to LNAV., as that would prevent the use of LPV in Europe etc. So the UK wide guidance will still be available but not “ legal”?


I suspect we'll lose the LPV approaches in the UK from the databases in the Garmin.

P
#1838027
Correct. The signal in space (SiS) will still fall onto UK air and your receiver equipment will continue to make use of it.

Furthermore the RIM Stations at Swannick and Prestwick are to continue feeding the network.

Day 1 CAA will issue a “Don’t use LPV minima” NOTAM and will instruct the data packers such as Lido, Jepps and Garmin to remove the code known as a FAS data block from chips at the next available AIRAC cycle.

Eventually, on trying to load an approach for a UK Aerodrome the LPV line will not be there.
#1838115
AlanM wrote:
PeteSpencer wrote:CI ATC had better prepare for hoardes of IR training wannabes flooding across the channel for RNP LPV training

And cheap fuel........... :roll:


And VOR/DME
And NDB
And ILS
And nice places to eat and stay

All in CAS ;-)

....


That is why I chose a mini-holiday to Jersey all those years ago to do an intensive IR(R) course. No inconvenient/lengthy transits to go find a beacon of some description, continuity of training, and for the required land away Guernsey and Cherbourg are relatively close.
AlanM liked this