GPS - Creaking at the Seams?

Regular readers of my blog know I occasionally update you on the status of Galileo, the European eqivalent of GPS. It’s been entertaining to watch the various factions argue about the cost of Galileo and its eventual fate. With luck, according to the current schedule it should become operational around 2013.

One of the major arguments against Galileo is that it won’t provide any capability that isn’t already provided by GPS. According to its critics, why waste billions of euros on Galileo when you can already get everything you need from GPS, for free? The US GPS community has taken a similar stance, amused that Europe thinks they need their own independent system.

Now it turns out that GPS might not be the rock of stability its supporters have made it out to be. A recent report issued by the US Government Accounting Office lists a litany of problems with GPS, some so serious that it is entirely possible the system may fall below the necessary minimum number of satellites as early as next year.

This might seem surprising since GPS requires a minimum of 24 operational satellites and there are now 30 in operation. But the report shows that 8 satellites are currently only one component away from total failure, and new satellites aren’t being launched as rapidly as old ones fail. Part of the problem is that the contract for the most recent satellites, the IIF series, was given to a new contractor, Boeing. (Previous series were built by Lockheed-Martin.) Boeing has experienced a series of delays and cost overruns that have put them almost three years behind their original schedule.

The one glimmer of hope is that in a typically conservative government approach, GAO’s concern arises because the probability of maintaining a full constellation of satellites falls below 95% for the years 2010-2014. That’s only a 5 percent chance of disaster. Nevertheless, for a system as critical to the world as GPS, that’s an unacceptably high risk. It just goes to show that maybe Galileo’s advocates have a legitimate case for why this potentially redundant satellite navigation system isn’t such a bad investment after all.