As in, your future reading, in these pages.
Changes are in store, and soon to become real. (Isn’t that always the way?) But truly, while continuing to cover every front of GNSS and PNT development, both businesswise and technologywise, we are improving the methods by which we do so. After listening to your input, of course.
Among the questions we asked you in the course of the 2018 State of the GNSS Industry Survey was:
“Please share story ideas with the editors of GPS World and/or let us know if your company is doing something unique.”
Among the answers you gave — here’s where the bit about your future comes in — were these, and here’s some of the content with which we’ll be seeking to fill 2019’s pages:
- Using a manned experimental jet aircraft to simulate low observable cruise missiles for countermeasures flight testing.
- UAV remote sensing legal issues.
- Transitioning from GPS to internal building locating.
- Definition of safety standards for autonomous road vehicles.
- IoT sensors for remote monitoring with GPS and mobile for asset monitoring, biofuel stockpiles, personal tracking.
- Data point collection for integration into Esri parcel fabric / CadNSDI development.
- Increasing lifespan of professional surveyors.
- Modernizing National Height System, validating existing geoid model, running precise first-order leveling, and taking GNSS observations.
- More on geodesy, for example, mapping projections, ellipsoids, geooids, and so on.
- Augmented GPS for integration with the 911 Emergency system.
- After 30 years in government doing threat analysis and 18 years consulting/contracting, I plan to smell the flowers, but keep my hand in where needed. I have noticed, on issues of national security that are technology driven, we are often filling even the lowest managerial level with non-technical persons, who are often not qualified to assess the analysis they must review. Hence the product and the analysis suffer. I’m guessing the same thing is happening at the systems acquisition world. And might be a major factor in the “business as usual” cost and schedule overruns. We need fewer “suits” and more sweatshirts.