Opportunity, the second Mars Explorer Rover is on the surface andtransmitting!

Richard Herring wrote:


I'm curious here. How does GPS "pay for itself"?

By the time and money saved in commercial activities. Think of all those
Navistar Systems in cars that would not have been produced or sold had
there not been a GPS. The additional safety in air traffic control is
worth multi-million dollars in time and lives saved. It is now possible
to land a plane safely in pea-soup fog using GPS.

Rescue operations have save thousands of lives because the location of
lost persons have been exactly known.

In military circles we can now do truly precision bombing thus saving or
ordinance used to cream a target. The uses of GPS in military operations
more than justifies any govt outlay for it. Two words: National Defense.

And a thousand and one other uses.

Bob Kolker

In article aMcRb.155865$xy6.747162@attbi_s02,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:


Richard Herring wrote:
None of which provide a direct flow of $$$ to keep the control and space
sectors functioning.

Some of the tax $$$$ generated by the additional business go to pay for
the GPS.

Another way it can be funded is by subscription, similar to the monthly
fee you pay your ISP. I don't know why it isn't funded that way.

Because it takes a gazillion dollars up front before you being the
trickle of revenue?

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article aMcRb.155865$xy6.747162@attbi_s02,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:


Richard Herring wrote:
None of which provide a direct flow of $$$ to keep the control and space
sectors functioning.

Some of the tax $$$$ generated by the additional business go to pay for
the GPS.

Another way it can be funded is by subscription, similar to the monthly
fee you pay your ISP. I don't know why it isn't funded that way.

Because it takes a gazillion dollars up front before you being the
trickle of revenue?

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article aMcRb.155865$xy6.747162@attbi_s02,
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote:


Richard Herring wrote:
None of which provide a direct flow of $$$ to keep the control and space
sectors functioning.

Some of the tax $$$$ generated by the additional business go to pay for
the GPS.

Another way it can be funded is by subscription, similar to the monthly
fee you pay your ISP. I don't know why it isn't funded that way.

Because it takes a gazillion dollars up front before you being the
trickle of revenue?

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article ,
(Jack Walker) wrote:

Neither was Christopher Columbus an American.

I thought we made him an honorary American?

Which judge swore him in?

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article ,
(Jack Walker) wrote:

Neither was Christopher Columbus an American.

I thought we made him an honorary American?

Which judge swore him in?

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article ,
(Jack Walker) wrote:

Neither was Christopher Columbus an American.

I thought we made him an honorary American?

Which judge swore him in?

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In message E9bRb.122115$5V2.629149@attbi_s53, Robert J. Kolker
writes


Richard Herring wrote:

I'm curious here. How does GPS "pay for itself"?

By the time and money saved in commercial activities.

I thought you were arguing that government has no business subsidising
commercial activities?

Think of all those Navistar Systems in cars that would not have been
produced or sold had there not been a GPS.

I'm thinking of them, but I can't see how that "pays for" either the
control or the space segment of GPS.

The additional safety in air traffic control is worth multi-million
dollars in time and lives saved. It is now possible to land a plane
safely in pea-soup fog using GPS.

(But not yet routinely. To beat the accuracy of conventional ILS you
need to augment the standard positioning service with LAAS or WAAS -
which are funded by the FAA, not the military.)

Rescue operations have save thousands of lives because the location of
lost persons have been exactly known.

Valuable of course, but again it doesn't translate into funding for the
control and space segments.

In military circles we can now do truly precision bombing thus saving
or ordinance used to cream a target. The uses of GPS in military
operations more than justifies any govt outlay for it. Two words:
National Defense.

That's a valid argument, as far as it goes, so why bring in all the
other irrelevancies?


And a thousand and one other uses.

None of which provide a direct flow of $$$ to keep the control and space
sectors functioning.

--
Richard Herring

In message E9bRb.122115$5V2.629149@attbi_s53, Robert J. Kolker
writes


Richard Herring wrote:

I'm curious here. How does GPS "pay for itself"?

By the time and money saved in commercial activities.

I thought you were arguing that government has no business subsidising
commercial activities?

Think of all those Navistar Systems in cars that would not have been
produced or sold had there not been a GPS.

I'm thinking of them, but I can't see how that "pays for" either the
control or the space segment of GPS.

The additional safety in air traffic control is worth multi-million
dollars in time and lives saved. It is now possible to land a plane
safely in pea-soup fog using GPS.

(But not yet routinely. To beat the accuracy of conventional ILS you
need to augment the standard positioning service with LAAS or WAAS -
which are funded by the FAA, not the military.)

Rescue operations have save thousands of lives because the location of
lost persons have been exactly known.

Valuable of course, but again it doesn't translate into funding for the
control and space segments.

In military circles we can now do truly precision bombing thus saving
or ordinance used to cream a target. The uses of GPS in military
operations more than justifies any govt outlay for it. Two words:
National Defense.

That's a valid argument, as far as it goes, so why bring in all the
other irrelevancies?


And a thousand and one other uses.

None of which provide a direct flow of $$$ to keep the control and space
sectors functioning.

--
Richard Herring

In message E9bRb.122115$5V2.629149@attbi_s53, Robert J. Kolker
writes


Richard Herring wrote:

I'm curious here. How does GPS "pay for itself"?

By the time and money saved in commercial activities.

I thought you were arguing that government has no business subsidising
commercial activities?

Think of all those Navistar Systems in cars that would not have been
produced or sold had there not been a GPS.

I'm thinking of them, but I can't see how that "pays for" either the
control or the space segment of GPS.

The additional safety in air traffic control is worth multi-million
dollars in time and lives saved. It is now possible to land a plane
safely in pea-soup fog using GPS.

(But not yet routinely. To beat the accuracy of conventional ILS you
need to augment the standard positioning service with LAAS or WAAS -
which are funded by the FAA, not the military.)

Rescue operations have save thousands of lives because the location of
lost persons have been exactly known.

Valuable of course, but again it doesn't translate into funding for the
control and space segments.

In military circles we can now do truly precision bombing thus saving
or ordinance used to cream a target. The uses of GPS in military
operations more than justifies any govt outlay for it. Two words:
National Defense.

That's a valid argument, as far as it goes, so why bring in all the
other irrelevancies?


And a thousand and one other uses.

None of which provide a direct flow of $$$ to keep the control and space
sectors functioning.

--
Richard Herring