IP: Delays seen in rules on ultra-wideband

[David Farber <dave@farber.net>]

> From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne@warpspeed.com>
>
> [Note:  This item comes from reader David Reed.  Your comments about the 
> susceptibility of GPS to interference has been noted by many others during 
> the course of the UWB debate the past several years. Unfortunately, we 
> left the realm of science and reason on this topic sometime ago.  We're 
> now in the realm of politics and spin.  I have posted some stories 
> recently where other countries in the world are thinking about developing 
> alternatives to the US GPS system.  Let us hope that they make some better 
> technology choices.  DLH]
>
> At 8:44 -0800 12/7/01, David P. Reed wrote:
> > From: "David P. Reed" <dpreed@reed.com>
> > To: dewayne Hendricks <dewayne@warpspeed.com>
> > Subject: Fwd: Delays seen in rules on ultra-wideband
> > Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 08:44:27 -0800
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> >
> > FYI, the following Reuters article suggesting UWB delays seems interesting.
> >
> > I still wonder, if GPS is so easy to disrupt, how it can possibly be 
> > mission-critical in a battlefield setting :-)
> >
> > One thing worth noting is that UWB technology provides highly accurate 
> > position sensing, and a ground-based network of UWB radios would provide 
> > a much better positioning system than GPS for commercial use.  Could it 
> > be that the real motive is to block competitors from creating low-cost 
> > and more accurate competition for the commercial users of GPS (Garmin, 
> > Magellan, Trimble, and their customers)?  What if those pricey golf carts 
> > could use UWB instead of GPS to figure out the distance to the hole? The 
> > resistance to "low power FM" from competitive interests was mounted as 
> > technical objections, but clearly funded by licensees whose cash flow 
> > might be affected.
> >
> > Well, none of this makes a whole lot of sense to the engineer in me.
> >
> > > Delays seen in rules on ultra-wideband
> > > Reuters
> > > December 6, 2001 4:41 AM PT
> > >
> > > WASHINGTON-- New rules on a controversial wireless technology that some
> > > critics fear will disrupt vital navigation aids are likely to be delayed
> > > until next year, sources familiar with the situation said on Wednesday.
> > >
> > > Although the Federal Communications Commission has listed ultra-wideband
> > > (UWB) for discussion at its Dec. 12 meeting, the matter is likely to removed
> > > from the agenda to allow further discussion, the sources said.
> > >
> > > Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz asked the Commerce Department last
> > > month for help in seeking a delay, saying the Pentagon needed more time to
> > > prepare a report on potentially harmful interference with the Global
> > > Positioning System (GPS).
> > >
> > > A spokesman for Commerce Secretary Donald Evans said a 60-day delay had been
> > > requested from the FCC. The Commerce Department oversees airwaves used by
> > > the government.
> > >
> > > UWB, with uses ranging from ground-penetrating radar to wireless data
> > > networks, has raised concern that it could interfere with other users of the
> > > airwaves.
> > >
> > > As its name suggests, ultra-wideband uses a broad swath of the radio
> > > spectrum, but in thousands or millions of pulses of low-powered emissions
> > > per second. Most other radio technologies operate within narrow frequencies
> > > that are assigned specific users and purposes to reduce interference.
> > >
> > > Backers of UWB have said the new technology, with some basic safeguards, is
> > > benign enough to come under FCC rules applying to unintentional emitters of
> > > radio frequencies.

For archives see:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/