> In a statement published after this article's publication, the GSA blamed the Galileo outage on "a technical incident related to its ground infrastructure."
I wonder what this could mean?
I wonder what this could mean?
Guenter Hein, Professor Emeritus of Excellence at the University FAF Munich told us, “As far as I know, it is a problem of the PTF [Precise Timing Facility] in Italy – time has an impact on the whole constellation!”
It seems like a little drift shouldn't make that much difference, but keep in mind that the speed of light in a vacuum (or air) is about 1 foot per nanosecond, so for every nanosecond one of those clocks has drifted, that's a foot of positional accuracy you no longer have...
(later generation satellites have an 'autonav' mode that presumably makes this less severe (by using SV-to-SV ranging and such so they're not completely blind to changes), but Galileo may not have that capability or there might not be enough SVs to use that capability yet)
Wouldn't be too surprised if that ground station's job (which I guess is compensating for relativistic effects to the clocks' timing) was extended to compensate for rebooting clocks.
The Linux timekeeping system can normally deal with a clock that is steady but not the right rate by learning what correction to apply, but these were far enough off to be well beyond the maximum correction.
This only affected particular instance types, so changing to a non-affect type could fix it, but all the working types were more expensive than the types we were using which was annoying. Sometimes you could change to a working type then back to the buggy type and end up with one that did not have the problem.
There were a few people asking about this in the support forums, but apparently it was only hitting cheapskates like us who had not paid extra for support. Finally, someone paid for incident support and opened a ticket and Amazon quickly found and fixed the problem.
It's not DNS
There's no way it's DNS
It was DNS
As deployed today the two needn't have any electronic connection although they do.
Eventually a MEOSAR is intended to use the accompanying navigation transmitter to send replies from ground SAR. Initially an acknowledgement ("We see your distress beacon" and by implication "somebody will try to help") and perhaps later more.
But that requires proof of concept and then newer beacons as today's beacons, even the ones with GPS (many rely on COSPAS SARSAT to triangulate their position itself) do not know such an acknowledgment might arrive or how to interpret it.