GPS Requires Satellites

I was US Navy active duty for four years and I did a 7 month deployment on a Frigate. I have been in the combat information center (CIC) and also on the bridge and I have seen how the ship is navigated using the gps system, and I have seen that equipment pointed up at the sky looking for satellites not towers when we were close to shore and out in the middle of the ocean. I have taken part in combat training on how the ship could not see a target over the horizon so helicopters were sent out to track targets the ship couldn’t see visually or with radar because of the earth’s curvature. All/any of the dishes on the ship other than radar were always pointed up at the sky and never along or towards the ground. These are only my own experiences and are not proof to anyone but I believe gps and satellites are real based on these experiences in the military so take it for what it’s worth.

I was US Navy active duty for four years and I did a 7 month deployment on a Frigate. I have been in the combat information center (CIC) and also on the bridge and I have seen how the ship is navigated using the gps system, and I have seen that equipment pointed up at the sky looking for satellites not towers when we were close to shore and out in the middle of the ocean. I have taken part in combat training on how the ship could not see a target over the horizon so helicopters were sent out to track targets the ship couldn’t see visually or with radar because of the earth’s curvature. All/any of the dishes on the ship other than radar were always pointed up at the sky and never along or towards the ground. These are only my own experiences and are not proof to anyone but I believe gps and satellites are real based on these experiences in the military so take it for what it’s worth.

Still no details of where satellite dishes point fron John Davis or others.

Quote from: John Davis on January 11, 2019, 11:32:01 AM

<reserved>

Let's start!

GPS Requires Satellites
GPS does not require satellites to function. It uses very accurate clocks.

We agree the clocks are accurate.  We have to be careful about the use of the word 'requires' when we should use the word 'uses'.

Receivers give the location of each satellite they are receiving from, can be up to 20 with the various system from US, Russia, Europe etc.  Reception is consistent with there not being ground based transmitters.  Particularly Russian ones in the US!

Similarly satellite TV dishes point to locations over the equator consistent with globe calculations.

If the earth never rotates, then there is no geostationer satellite. If geostationer satellite is a lie, how about gps satellite?

If the earth never rotates, then there is no geostationer satellite. If geostationer satellite is a lie, how about gps satellite?

GPS are not geostationary satellites. As such, even with a magically stationary Earth, we can still have GPS satellites.
The jury is still out on geostationary ones, as a stationary Earth requires magic including a negation of gravity, so the same magic could hold the geostationary satellites up.

Quote from: fjr66 on January 26, 2019, 05:28:13 AM

If the earth never rotates, then there is no geostationer satellite. If geostationer satellite is a lie, how about gps satellite?

GPS are not geostationary satellites. As such, even with a magically stationary Earth, we can still have GPS satellites.
The jury is still out on geostationary ones, as a stationary Earth requires magic including a negation of gravity, so the same magic could hold the geostationary satellites up.

So if people doesn't have 100 percent faith in geostationary satellite, does it require to believe in existence of GPS satellite?

Quote from: JackBlack on January 26, 2019, 05:41:47 AM

Quote from: fjr66 on January 26, 2019, 05:28:13 AM

If the earth never rotates, then there is no geostationer satellite. If geostationer satellite is a lie, how about gps satellite?

GPS are not geostationary satellites. As such, even with a magically stationary Earth, we can still have GPS satellites.
The jury is still out on geostationary ones, as a stationary Earth requires magic including a negation of gravity, so the same magic could hold the geostationary satellites up.

So if people doesn't have 100 percent faith in geostationary satellite, does it require to believe in existence of GPS satellite?

Nothing requires your belief in the "existence of GPS satellites" and the GPS was designed in such a way that it could function without satellites.
This was done so that ground based repeater stations could be used where satellite coverage is poor, predominantly close to the poles.

But it would seem very difficult to explain GPS coverage in remote regions and especially over wide expanses of oceans without satellite coverage.

In addition many GPS units, including the tablet I'm using now, show the locations of the satellites and their owners.
At present, indoors under a tile roof, this tablet is receiving up to 28 satellites, mainly GPS (US), GLONASS (Russian) with a few BDS (Chinese) and QZSS (Japanese).
The QZSS uses few geostationary satellites to enhance the accuracy in the Japanese and Oceania regions.

If the GNSS (the Global Navigation Satellite System, the generic name for SatNav) did not use satellites then every "GPS" unit manufacturer must be a part of the "conspiracy".

There's more, but I'll leave it there.

So if people doesn't have 100 percent faith in geostationary satellite, does it require to believe in existence of GPS satellite?

You were asking about a hypothetical which was based upon rejecting evidence.
I wouldn't call that faith.
If people believe on blind faith that geostationary satellites aren't real, they can likely believe anything on blind faith.

But the mere fact that the current implementation relies upon GPS satellites and Earth being round, which also matches where signals are received, sure indicate GPS satellites are real.

The entire basis of this thread is that there is no second set of equations that could match the claim that global satellites are the only solution space. This is wrong, as long as you are dealing with mathematics, and a fairly commonly held set of mathematics. More than that, it is against the r'aison d'etre of science. You all should be ashamed of arguing with us, for it is in that arguing that your empire will fall.

Nero, or en poule?

So what's the evidence that GPS doesn't uses satellites again?

The entire basis of this thread is that there is no second set of equations that could match the claim that global satellites are the only solution space.

No. It is that the math used in the current implementation needs it.

Remember, the entire basis of this thread was a response to your posting of alleged repeated RE arguments, where the arguments from REers that I have seen is that GPS uses satellites, thus without satellites your GPS wouldn't work.
Not that it is literally the only possible way.

Quote from: John Davis on January 26, 2019, 10:36:06 PM

The entire basis of this thread is that there is no second set of equations that could match the claim that global satellites are the only solution space.

No. It is that the math used in the current implementation needs it.

Remember, the entire basis of this thread was a response to your posting of alleged repeated RE arguments, where the arguments from REers that I have seen is that GPS uses satellites, thus without satellites your GPS wouldn't work.
Not that it is literally the only possible way.

There are many papers on the use of fixed ground-based GNSS transmitters to augment performance near airport runways and narrow shipping lanes.
Here's one example: Flight Test Results of Precision Approach and Landing Augmented by Airport Pseudolites by Ben K.H. Soon et al.
I'm no expert on GNSS but I assume than the ephemeris data can handle a transmitter on the earth's surface.
I don't know how the precision clocks are implemented in the Airport Pseudolites.
Here is a paper on some of the problems: Interference and Regulatory Aspects of GNSS Pseudolites by S. Martin, H. Kuhlen, and T. Abt

The entire basis of this thread is that there is no second set of equations that could match the claim that global satellites are the only solution space. This is wrong, as long as you are dealing with mathematics, and a fairly commonly held set of mathematics. More than that, it is against the r'aison d'etre of science. You all should be ashamed of arguing with us, for it is in that arguing that your empire will fall.

Nero, or en poule?

Do you agree that there are GPS satellite transmitters and many receivers can receive from 15 or more? What does your smartphone show?