U.S. Perspectives on eloran as a Timing Backup And Available Hardware. Charles Schue UrsaNav, Inc. KTN Trinity House October 8, 2012

Transcription

1 U.S. Perspectives on eloran as a Timing Backup And Available Hardware Charles Schue UrsaNav, Inc. KTN Trinity House October 8, 2012

2 Corporate Overview Chesapeake, Virginia, USA Founded in 2004 Four main business units: C 5 ISR, IT, IM, LF World Leader in LF Technology Leesburg, Virginia, USA Principal locations in Virginia Regional offices in Massachusetts & South Carolina office handles EMEA opportunities Commercial and government clients in 32 countries. About us

3 Low-Frequency Business Unit Alternative/Backup Solutions to GNSS/RNSS Loran-C, X Chayka, eloran, LFPhoenix, and Beyond Temporary, X Transportable, & Tactical Solutions 21 X st Century Technology Positioning, Navigation, Timing/Frequency & Data (PNTF&D) Systems X Symmetricom Time Scale Solutions X TWLFTT, TWLLTT, TWSTT X Transmit and Receive Antennae x Data Channel (9 th /10 th Pulse, Eurofix, Other) State-of-the-Art Transmitting & Receiver Technologies Nautel NL Series LF Transmitters X UrsaNav LF Multi-Mode Receivers X CrossRate, Locus, & Plutargus IP X Receivers for UK GAARDIAN/Sentinel IDM Differential GPS/GNSS Solutions Nautel Vector Series DGPS Transmitters X Trimble RS/IM Equipment X Trimble Control Station Software X Antennas, Nautel ATU, spares, shelters Installation, training

4 GPS Dependent Systems e-navigation DGPS, ECDIS, DSC, AIS Radar, Synchronized Lights Homeland Security Defense Telecommunications Networks Landline / Mobile / Paging Systems Computer Networks / Internet Electrical Power Systems Phase Synchronization & Flow Control Banking & Finance High-Speed Trading ATM transactions Agriculture Of the (18) CIKR sectors, (15) use GPS timing. GPS timing is deemed essential for (11) of the sectors. [Source: Department of Homeland Security]

5 U.S. Timing & Frequency Requirements Sources: Results from a GPS Timing Criticality Assessment, Carroll (DOT/VNTSC); Lombardi (NIST) 5

6 Why is an Alternative to GPS Timing Necessary? GNSS/RNSS Vulnerabilities Performance degradation Ionosphere & solar activities (natural) Unintentional & intentional (human factors) Signal blockage Spectrum competition (e.g., LSQ) Common signal use across GNSS Radio frequency interference System anomalies & failures Jamming Spoofing & Counterfeit Signals Low-cost personal privacy devices 100W Super Jammer (Range over ½ mile Plugs into cigarette lighter*) 150W L1 L5 Full Band Jammer (Range up to ¼ mile*) * Range as advertised on the supplier s website. Independent tests have shown significantly further ranges for lower output power.

7 Potential GPS Timing Loss: Sector Impact Industry Timing Requirement Impact of Loss Monetary Impact of Loss Banking / Financial 3 s absolute to 1ms Market vacuum (loss of liquidity); market "skimming"; leaked pricing information* Tens to Hundreds of Millions per Trade Telecommunications 1us Loss of communications, E911 Millions+ DoEnergy: Electrical Power SmartGrid 10 ms to 1us Grid stability, efficiency, outages, equipment damage Billions** DOD/DHS 1ms Loss of communications Safety / Security DOT: FAA <1us To 50ns Loss of ability to trilaterate position; loss of communications Safety, Security, Efficiency * Source: Dr. Todd Humphreys, University of Texas at Austin ** Source: 8/14/2003 NE Interconnection Outage

8 Example: SmartGrid Timing Using GPS SmartGrid Phasor Measurement Unit (PMU) sensors use timing or frequency for accurate measurement of the power grid phase Sensors don t provide data without time synchronization 1/2 to 2/3 of PMUs currently unusable at any given time because of lost GPS timing Vulnerabilities include: Limited, to no, indoor GPS reception Low E windows are a problem for GPS

9 Why is eloran the Best Alternative? Time. Frequency. Data. Position. Terrestrial-based Significantly higher power than satellites Dissimilar failure modes to GPS Considerable usable range of > 1,000 miles Requires fewer transmitters than other terrestrial solutions Time, frequency, & data require only a single transmission site Independent of GPS, but interoperable with GPS Spectrum protected worldwide Lessons learned from LSQ ( GPS Band) Integrity built into eloran signal Also provides complementary integrity for GPS Available in many GPS denied environments Can meet, when appropriately equipped/designed: Maritime: HEA 8m-20m; IMO 10m Aviation RNP 0.3

10 Why is eloran the Best Alternative? Meets stringent timing reference requirements << 1 υs Transmissions synchronized to well within 10 ns of UTC Sub nanosecond synchronization with Two-Way Time Transfer Meets stringent frequency reference requirements Provides Stratum-1E standard better than 1 x long-term Same Stratum standard as GPS Meets or exceeds all public infrastructure needs AM, FM, TV, Electric Power, Telecomm, Mobile, Wireless, Banking, Finance, etc. Data Channel(s) available All manner of functionality, including time of day and corrections DGPS messages available (RTCM SC-104) Provides alternative wide-area critical messages/notifications Third-Party Data Channel options

11 U.S. Timing Providers Source: The Potential Role of eloran in the National Time and Frequency Infrastructure 11

12 U.S. Frequency Providers Source: The Potential Role of eloran in the National Time and Frequency Infrastructure 12

13 Why should we care? Robust, resilient, alternative PNT&F Truly multi-modal Seamless, interoperable, yet dissimilar to GNSS Extremely cost effective Sovereign control Traceable to UTC Can recover UTC from cold start w/o GPS Continuity of operations Even during jamming & spoofing events The M in Interference Detection & Mitigation Location Stamping - Proof of position * Time Stamping - Proof of time * * - Courtesy of Logan Scott Consulting.

14 September 2011 DHS report to Congress GPS timing important Concern for a lack of a backup(s) DHS investigating alternatives Precise time via wire/fiber Asked USCG to investigate wireless time transfer CRADA (Effective 02/13/2012) Two years after Loran-C Termination Promotes R&D efforts; tech transfer Not a contract; no exchange of funding; not government sponsored Objectives Research, evaluate, document Time. Frequency. Data. (Position.) LF in the USA: A Way Ahead Disclaimer: The USCG has no intent to acquire, operate, or provide wireless time technology or associated services.

15 Loran-C, eloran, LFPhoenix, and Beyond! Started testing February 29, 2012 Transmissions currently from dbf Wildwood, NJ Transmission to within <10 ns of UTC Able to transmit from any former Loran-C or GWEN site Able to transmit using transportable LF-in-a-Box solution Several test locations with multiple receivers (142 miles) Chambersburg, PA (160 miles) (170 miles) Burlington, MA (310 miles) Durham, NH (354 miles) Charleston, SC (505 miles) Mobile Measurement Unit TWSTT solution installed at dbf June, 2012 TWLFTT solution truly sky-free testing in 2013

16 TWSTT 1 PPS Router 5 MHz Router GNSS Time Scale 1 PPS Router 5 MHz Router LF Timing Generator online LF Receiver - UN151 LFDC Generator LFDC Integrity Monitor Local Station Controller GNSS Time Scale 1 PPS Router 5 MHz Router LF Timing Generator online LF Receiver - UN151 LFDC Generator LFDC Integrity Monitor Local Station Controller KVM/Display KVM/Display LAN UPS V LFDC LFDC UTC NAV Cesium 5071A Cesium 5071A Cesium 5071A UPS V LFDC LFDC LFDC UTC NAV LFDC Technology Exists Today Loran-C, eloran, LFPhoenix Global land-mass and EEZ+ coverage possible that is truly sky-free.

17 Transmitting Site Equipment Suite Rack 102 Wide x 39.5 Deep x 72.5 High

18 OEM Timing Receiver Module Engineered-to-Order: Higher SWAP-C Quantity Order: Significantly Lower SWAP-C Partial Sentinel Probe Interior Standard 19 Rack-Mount, 1u Enclosure eloran Receiver Dimensions: 4.75 x 6.75

19 First Blush Indoor Performance Test Prototype H-field antenna Dimensions: 38 x 38 x 19 mm 1.5 x 1.5 x.75 Smallest H-field antenna to date Antenna in noisy office environment 5 meters away from outside wall

20 Verified eloran T, F, & D Coverage Proper reception, tracking, & decoding of signals from dbf at Kansas City, MO 1,050 miles

21 Early Results: eloran Timing performance Time recovery to within 75 ns RMS (UTC) Distances to 500 miles (conservative; no differential corrections) External E-Field antenna Time recovery to within 200 ns RMS (UTC) At 1,000 miles (no differential corrections) External E-Field antenna One-time calibration against Symmetricom ATS-6501 Rb disciplined L1/L2 receiver; free-running afterwards Compensated for ASFs, receiver processing delays, cabling delays, etc. Calibration can be done using a hot-clock method, or with TWTT techniques Data Channel performance LF Data channel reception and decoding Distances exceeding 1,000 miles

22 Single Site eloran Scenario: 1,000 Mile Radius Wherever there is color, we expect LFDC demodulation. Acceptable modulation at 1,000 miles.

23 Multiple eloran Site Scenario: 1,000 Mile Radius T, F, & D Coverage Example for the Contiguous 48 States With Four Sites

24 AFCEA SIGNAL Magazine, October 2012 Global Positioning System Is a Single Point of Failure. GPS vulnerabilities could be addressed with upgraded long-range navigation. This is another example proving that the GPS system is vulnerable. The U.S. military must take a hard look at all solutions that would provide a redundant capability. One such possibility is a system known as long-range navigation (LORAN). This system was developed in 1958 to provide navigation for shipping. It uses powerful signal pulses at a low frequency and is not line-of-sight dependent. Consequently, LORAN does not have the same vulnerabilities as the GPS. However, on February 8, 2010, the U.S. Coast Guard stopped the LORAN transmissions, effectively retiring the system. Even though LORAN was retired, researchers at Stanford University and the U.S. Coast Guard continue to develop a 21st-century model. The project is known as eloran. It provides the added capability of a data channel plus vastly improved accuracy. For example, LORAN was accurate to approximately 460 meters, while eloran is accurate to between 8 and 20 meters. This is comparable to most handheld GPS receivers, which are accurate from 10 to 20 meters. The U.S. military has receivers that are accurate to less than one meter. eloran s accuracy will need to be developed further to provide the same military GPS capability. The United States needs to invest additional funding into this system to develop its viability as a backup to the GPS. However, the greatest argument against any new system is its cost.... Fiscal hawks will argue that the military does not require a redundant capability for the GPS. On the other hand, the U.S. National Security Strategy report states that the U.S. military must preserve its conventional superiority. Scientific innovation is exactly what is required to develop a redundant capability for the GPS. It is blatantly obvious that the GPS is highly vulnerable, and the United States must prioritize funding for research and development of a comparable system. eloran is one possible solution to this problem. The author, Captain Charles A. Barton III, USAF, is the chief of plans and programs at the 689th Combat Communications Wing, Robins Air Force Base, Georgia.

25 LF. Time. Frequency. Data. Today!