advertisement


Oh Britain, what have you done (part ∞+3)?

Status
Not open for further replies.
slavedata said:
This Brexit fantasy gets more farcical by the day. Latest statement we'll build and launch our own Satellites if we can't join in with Gallileo.
This from a country that can't fund a health service, has austerity causing disabled people to starve and multiple homeless people dying on the street. As well as terrorising its own citizens with dawn raids from the anti immigration police. Plus a minor issue of being unable to present a coherent requirement to European Brexit negotiations. How much longer do we have to suffer this bunch of jokers pratting about rather than running the country!!!
Click to expand...

Welcome to the Crazy Hideous Age Of Stupid. Or CHAOS, if you'd prefer...
 
slavedata said:
This Brexit fantasy gets more farcical by the day. Latest statement we'll build and launch our own Satellites if we can't join in with Gallileo.
This from a country that can't fund a health service, has austerity causing disabled people to starve and multiple homeless people dying on the street. As well as terrorising its own citizens with dawn raids from the anti immigration police. Plus a minor issue of being unable to present a coherent requirement to European Brexit negotiations. How much longer do we have to suffer this bunch of jokers pratting about rather than running the country!!!
Click to expand...


It's a big project and would soak up a lot of engineers who may well be more productive elsewhere, so there is the opportunity cost to consider. Also every silicon vendor who made GPS chipsets would have to incorporate the new system in and they might say "no, gallileo is fine", so it could be one big white elephant.
 
Seeker_UK said:
MEO is not as busy as LEO or GEO and there are still enough slots for the 14-16 satellites required for a (UK) GNSS.
Click to expand...
Not going to be economically viable unless we could sell the facility to somebody else too, though. Given that the US, the EU and Russia already have their own systems it's getting to be a pretty mature market.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Not going to be economically viable unless we could sell the facility to somebody else too, though. Given that the US, the EU and Russia already have their own systems it's getting to be a pretty mature market.
Click to expand...

I was responding to the statement that orbits were getting congested - they're not, but the market is.

The UK can still make some money out of Galileo - Astrium and probably SSTL could be in the running to make the future replacements.

That said, the UK needn't worry about GNSS, it should focus on providing more communications satellites. That's where the real money is going to be for the foreseeable future.
 
Isn't Galileo, as currently envisaged, dependent on base stations located in British Overseas Territories/Dependencies? It seems to me that neither Galileo sans UK, and/or a UK stand alone system is likely to be commercially viable.
 
AIUI, the only UK locations that house elements of the ground segment are Ascension and Falkland Islands. They house Ground Sensor Station which monitor signals from Galileo birds and report back to the HQ so that if there any discrepancies in position or timing, adjustments can be made. If the UK spits its dummy out and stops the ground stations contributing to managing the constellation's accuracy then ESA will probably negotiate to put one on Tierra del Fuego to replace the Falklands and and one on the Canary Islands as the best replacement for Ascension.

The UK needs Galileo (particularly if it wants to build the next gen of satellites) but Galileo can do without the UK.

The fundamental issue behind all of this i that the Galileo rules clearly state that no non-EU (note, not non-ESA) country can access the higher-accuracy, secure Galileo services. UK will be leaving the EU and the EU does like to do stuff by the book. All parties are responsible: ESA / EU for lack of flexibility and UK for not being too concerned with it. This is not the last thing that UK will have missed - too many issues, not enough staff to look beyond trade and economy.
 
Seeker_UK said:
AIUI, the only UK locations that house elements of the ground segment are Ascension and Falkland Islands. They house Ground Sensor Station which monitor signals from Galileo birds and report back to the HQ so that if there any discrepancies in position or timing, adjustments can be made. If the UK spits its dummy out and stops the ground stations contributing to managing the constellation's accuracy then ESA will probably negotiate to put one on Tierra del Fuego to replace the Falklands and and one on the Canary Islands as the best replacement for Ascension.

The UK needs Galileo (particularly if it wants to build the next gen of satellites) but Galileo can do without the UK.

The fundamental issue behind all of this i that the Galileo rules clearly state that no non-EU (note, not non-ESA) country can access the higher-accuracy, secure Galileo services. UK will be leaving the EU and the EU does like to do stuff by the book. All parties are responsible: ESA / EU for lack of flexibility and UK for not being too concerned with it. This is not the last thing that UK will have missed - too many issues, not enough staff to look beyond trade and economy.
Click to expand...
This of course will be further turned into “the prison camp guards are punishing us” and cue “The Great Escape” fee DVD’s with the DM.
Then wait till the reciprocal health cover and EU-wide mobile data roaming and calls are turned off by the UK phone companies because they no longer have to comply and Spanish resorts are out of reach financially when the pound shrivels further.
Responsibility lies 100% with the U.K. Gov. I’m hoping the Tories get their red lines, hard Brexit and have to explain to those who voted for Brexit that these are the consequences. They did no planning and thought they could walk out and call the shots about which pieces of furniture and how many sets of keys for the front door they could hang on to. Wrong!
 
I’ve only dipped in and out of this thread so I may be repeating what has already been said.

I’ve formed the opinion that the reason the government continues to provide no clear vision of future trade arrangements is because they know they have promised mutually incompatible things (leaving customs union, frictionless trade, no hard border in Ireland) and the moment they acknowledge this they risk losing power. And power is much more important to any of them than the good of the country.

Publicly they all dismiss suggestions of a second referendum but secretly they hope that they are forced into that by parliament, with a reversal of the original outcome letting them off the hook. Then they can all say how disappointed they are while heaving a collective sigh of relief.

I’m only talking about the cabinet here, not the ERG nutters.
 
It's not clear that a second referendum would reverse the outcome- the polls have not moved since the original vote. I think that is more depressing than the original referendum result itself because it shows that Brexit, like Trump has become a cult.
 
sean99 said:
It's not clear that a second referendum would reverse the outcome- the polls have not moved since the original vote. I think that is more depressing than the original referendum result itself because it shows that Brexit, like Trump has become a cult.
Click to expand...
I can't understand why people who thought the first referendum was a spectacularly bad idea would be interested in holding a second one. Most voters have not become much more knowledgeable about the complex web of legal, constitutional, trade and assorted regulatory issues that one needs to understand to have an informed opinion. This is what MPs, parliamentary commissions, subgroups etc. are for.
 
kendo said:
We have yet to reach peak stupid. These incompetent, unbelievably stupid bastards are not finished yet.
Click to expand...

If we reach peak stupid then that'll be the end of human civilisation as we know it. Trump is a massive part of the CHAOS.
 
PsB said:
I can't understand why people who thought the first referendum was a spectacularly bad idea would be interested in holding a second one. Most voters have not become much more knowledgeable about the complex web of legal, constitutional, trade and assorted regulatory issues that one needs to understand to have an informed opinion. This is what MPs, parliamentary commissions, subgroups etc. are for.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Any new referendum would need a supermajority too—no chance of that happening.

Stephen
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top