Talk:Satellite navigation solution

For the non-technical reader

For the non-technical reader, it would be useful if the technical / mathematical description were accompanied by some clear text description of how the calculation is achieved. Phellmon (talk) 18:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

GNSS jamming

How are GNSS (e.g. GPS) signals jammed by governments, such that these calculations don't work any more for determining position? There are numerous examples of governments "denying service" to particular regions, e.g. GPS signals were blacked out in the country of Georgia for the duration of the Russian war with Georgia (see http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/Articles/09spring/mcdermott.pdf which was cited by the Wikipedia GLONASS article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gnuish (talk • contribs) 19:11, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

• dead link. arj - [1]. Слишком похожий (talk) 10:12, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Article is deliberately being made non understandable

It appears that some of the writers of this article are deliberately attempting to make the article non understandable. The use of terms such as the "light cone equation" appear to be an example of this attempt to confuse the reader. There is no reason to mention light cones. The so-called light cone equation is an equation of a sphere and should be referred to as such. Wikipedia:Make technical articles understandable explains how Wikipedia articles should be written.

Note that $\scriptstyle r({\boldsymbol {r}}_{i},\,{\boldsymbol {r}}_{\text{rec}})$ is a three-dimensional sphere radius. --Kkddkkdd (talk) 18:04, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Merge proposal

This article is confusing and poorly written. Navigation section of Global Positioning System should not be merged with it. RHB100 (talk) 19:47, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Closed, given lack of support. Klbrain (talk) 20:45, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal RHB100's draft

RHB100 (talk · contribs) has made the draft User talk:RHB100#Navigation equations that has been proposed for a merger here. Trialpears (talk) 16:36, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

The current description in this article is rather opaque and would certainly benefit from a rewrite. However the recurring discussion about spheres should not be rehashed once again. The main argument seems to be in this sentence: "that there is one and only one clock bias". But just as well there "is only one position", so position and bias play the same role in the equation as unknowns. Furthermore the clumsy reference to "Equations in R3 section of Sphere" is superfluous. −Woodstone (talk) 07:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Closing, given the uncontested objection and no support. Klbrain (talk) 13:43, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

@ 80.83.21.143 (talk) 01:52, 26 August 2023 (UTC)