Subject: Problem for boaters and APRS?
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 12/16/2004 4:26 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4YZ) writes:

Subject: Problem for boaters and APRS?
From: "KØHB"
Date: 12/15/2004 10:23 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: t

A friend sent me the link below. At first I thought it had to be an April
Fool
joke, but apparently The Shrub really IS that stupid!


http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...ellites.html?e
x=1104168601&ei=1&en=4e6b58c489759881

I'd ask you where you've been, Hans, but I know the question's
rhetorical.

Slick Willy specifically stated that he was authorizing the
deactivation
of accuracy inhibitors for non-military users based upon the pemise that
American military commanders could re-activate it, or the President could
order
it's complete isolation from non-authorized users. That was in 1993 or
1994,
I
believe.

IIRC, the accuracy inhibition was turned off just before Gulf War 1 (1991)
and
President Clinton simply decided not to turn it back on.

Nope. It was still active. President Clinton made a point of announcing
the intent to remove the inhibitors and making it more accurate for civilian
applications.

Also IIRC, the effect of accuracy inhibition was to degrade the accuracy of
"civilian" users to about plus-minus 30 feet.

As opposed to the almost 300 yard to 1/2 mile "accuracy" that it was at
before, it was a MAJOR improvement to non-US Armed Forces users.

WHY, Hans, would the United States NOT act to either "desensitize" the
GPS
net, or completely remove it from use for the criteria set forth in the
article...?!?!

The article talks about shutting it off. Or parts of it. Seems to me that
capability should have been a part of it from day one.

It was.

Where were you?

I think Hans' point may be that we have become so dependent on GPS that
turning
it off would hurt us more than it would stop the terrorists. The 9/11 attacks
didn't depend on GPS in any way.

No, Jim...it would "inconvienience" us...It would not hurt us.

And the "hijack an aircraft and use it as a missle" thing is unlikely to
happen again.

Just think how much more damage Saddam's SCUD's could have caused had they
had GPS navigation rather than their antiquated Soviet inertial navigation.

Or it may be that openly talking about what you're going to do removes a
level
of protection. Terrorists with any sense (yes, an oxymoron) know now that
they
shouldn't depend on GPS.

You mean they shouldn't depend on GPS AFTER the first volley of
attacks, don't you...?!?!

As of RIGHT NOW, anyone with the money and desire to do so can use GPS
against us. So, Jim, in YOUR estimation, how many lives are worth the
inconvienience of not having a moving map display in your Escalade...???

Is it your contention that, given a set of "extreme criteria" (attack on
the United States, overt acts of war, etc), that we should leave the net
"open" regardless...???

What was stated in the article is NOTHING NEW!

Sure it is.

No, it was not.

73

Steve, K4YZ