It is still difficult to achieve centimetre accuracy with consumer grade receivers because this level of accuracy is only achieved using “survey-grade” equipment - by post-processing the received satellite location information, usually using another fixed GPS receiver as a reference point. Both receivers would store the actual signal data received from the GPS satellites as opposed to a calculated summary.

Well, tell that to the people in darfur, in palestine, in iraq, etc etc. Wonder like that is a luxury that the majority of people on this planet can ill-afford, being caught up as they are in the rather more pressing matter of survival.

All the places you mention are suffering as a result of man-made conflict. Perhaps some other worldly human achievements might mediate in those conflicts, just as art and music do. “Wonder” is in the same moral space as arts funding, I suppose…

Crucially, I am not arguing that money should be taken from education programmes, or health services, to pay for such endeavour. I am saying that money should be taken from Trident to pay for it. You may retort by saying that the money from Trident should be spent on education and health services… but that never seems to actually happen. I think my space proposals have more chance of success.

Cleanthes is half-right - it being controlled by the americans is not actually a problem…unless the americans have a problem with you. And I’d say that puts one in a potentially rather vulnerable position, esp. given their track record.

I don’t think that “wonder” is such a poor reason to act

Well, tell that to the people in darfur, in palestine, in iraq, etc etc. Wonder like that is a luxury that the majority of people on this planet can ill-afford, being caught up as they are in the rather more pressing matter of survival.

Let us not forget that the man-made “wonders” and magnificent feats of engineering, art, technology and so on in this world were largely built upon slave labour, using largely appropriated resources. We already know that fabulous things can be achieved by abusing others - isn’t it time to prove that such things can be approved in an ethical way - ie not by pouring billions of pounds away while millions of people are starving and dying unnecessarily? I just think it’s pretty sick.

And wouldn’t providing the Galileo system to the Chinese be precisely the sort of power we would like to have over them? We could then threaten to turn it off/withdraw usage if they misbehaved…

As I say above, this post is not a defence of the Galileo system as it currently stands. Rather, I am saying that if we are going to spend billions on expensive, powerful, strategic military hardware, then astronauts and navigation systems are a better payload than nuclear weapons. Can you think of any other alternatives? I might suggest that even a Coca-cola sign would be better…

Then why does Tom Tom work?

” and is wholly controlled by the Americans. “

Which isn’t remotely a problem unless you have a problem with Americans.

“Gallileo was an attempt to create one controlled by the Europeans,”

See above. I have a much greater problem with the “Europeans”, for which we should substitute the more accurate description “those who rule the European Union”, wasting MY money on a system which is unnecessary (in that GPS already does it just as well), redundant (in that GPS does it at all), for which they want to charge for user access (where GPS is free), and for which the main rationale is a highly intrusive road charging scheme. In short, they have spent a decade taking EU taxpayers money on a system that will enable them to charge EU citizens even more.

” and it would actually be accurate to the metre.”

And they are also planning to make it available to the Chinese.

If you don’t trust the Americans, I’d trust the Europeans and the Chinese a damned sight less…

The world already has a gps system, why do we need another?

The current GPS system is only accurate to 10 metres, I believe, and is wholly controlled by the Americans. Gallileo was an attempt to create one controlled by the Europeans, and it would actually be accurate to the metre.

Trident is not for the singular purpose of destruction.

You mean it can sing songs as well? It is designed to do one thing, which is launch a rocket, and all that rocket can do is explode and break stuff, lots of stuff.

My point is that, as a step towards disarmament, why not have some other technology which we can use as a powerful bargaining chip against bullies? One that doesn’t have armageddon as its end-point. Galileo is the first thing that comes into my head, but there must be others, especially concerning energy. A giant space-bourne magnifying glass that harnesses solar power, perhaps?

I also think that there is something in this phrase I’ve latched onto, “collective human psyche”. I don’t think that “wonder” is such a poor reason to act, and (coupled with good, inspiring leadership) I think there would be less-tangible benefits to a space programme - just as there are less tangible benefits to the current NASA activities. The argument for nuclear deterrent seems horribly circular. The argument for orbiting the earth less so - to my mind anyway.

But as an alternative way to spend the money, sending two or three people to the moon for the “wonder” of it would be an inexcusable waste. The world already has a gps system, why do we need another?