[FeepingCreature]

My current impression from reading this article is that SpaceX could create a better GNSS than Galileo in a year as a side project - not because of their cheap launches, but because of their diy development culture. I am stunned by the level of organizational inadequacy of allowing such critical parts of the system to be developed by not just a contractor but a chain of subsidiary contractors, with feedback cycles that move at the speed of corporate communication. My expectation now is that Galileo will never catch up to GPS and will eventually be forgotten.

[blub]

I think you're being downvoted because you made a pretty amateurish mistake: on HN you're supposed to say that you yourself can create a better GNSS over the week-end.

[abdulhaq]

Galileo is a strategic asset in case of dispute with the US. It is not in a competition with GPS, it simply has to function as designed and continue to operate independently of US desires. The US objected to the construction of the Galileo system.

[creato]

The US did not object to the concept of Galileo, the US objected to the EU's choice of frequency, which made it impossible to jam Galileo without jamming GPS. The EU changed the design to avoid this, and I am not aware of any follow-up objections.

[LeoPanthera]

Perhaps a good lesson that the opposite of “move fast and break things” is “move slowly - but still break things”.

[abra0]

Move slowly and be unable to fix things fast.