The US government originally questioned the whole project, claiming it to be unnecessary given the existence of GPS.
Yes. Well, the US aviation industry weren't saying that - they were saying, 'good idea, and we won't have to pay for it'. So there has been a long negotiation with the US government, which has more or less been resolved. And now that the US government sees Galileo as going ahead, they have become more constructive. They were pretty unconstructive up until a year ago.
Do you think that has got anything to do with China's involvement and funding of Galileo?
No. I think it's got more to do with the US government trying to block it. It's a commercial threat to US industry. I don't think you have to look too much beyond that. It does complicate their life militarily but I think they now recognise that they have to accept it. I don't think the China thing was crucial because Europe is also being careful. They've said to China, 'you're in' but only up to a certain point. The Europeans are also a bit nervous about China.
What exactly is your role in this Galileo?
Although there are 27 satellites, there is also a huge ground infrastructure comprising computer intensive systems to provide the information that makes Galileo work. At the moment, we are prime contractor to design that facility -- a 7.5m euro contract from the European Space Agency (ESA).
Where are those facilities going to be based?
Well, somewhere in Europe. It's a hot political topic. From our point of view, we don't care. Every country would love to have it. The UK is on for it. Lord Sainsbury said the UK must have the operations facility. The Spaniards have said, 'we've built a facility, here it is'. And then there are the Italians and the Germans...
Is there any technical constraint on where it could be?
As long as there's good telecoms infrastructure... and near a major airport. A decision will have to be made soon. The PFI concessionary contractor will get to decide where it goes and he'll make that decision on commercial grounds. However, the commercial ground might be that he's offered a free site by a government. But in the meantime, before the concession contract is placed, ESA is developing four satellites to demonstrate and to remove technical risk. It will have to choose somewhere for its ground facilities, which may not necessarily be the same as that which the concessionary uses, but it could be the same. Wherever those ESA facilities go, then that country will have a good chance of hosting the main project. That is going to happen soon -- in the next six months.
What kind of systems will you use for this project?
A lot of the hardware has to be safety critical. The EGNOS system, because it is used for aviation, had to be certified by the Civil Aviation Authority. But you don't want it all requiring special hardware because the cost becomes astronomical. There is one part of the system that performs the final check on the information that is broadcast - we were prime contractors for that 10m euro deal, and it was built around a special operating system produced by a US company. Galileo will have similar requirements but some of it will be done on standard operating systems and off-the-shelf products.
But for us the main concern isn't the hardware; it's the software. The budget for the ground facilities for Galileo is around 300m euros, and a lot of that is for antennas and radio equipment. For the computer side - around 150m euros - nine tenths of that will be for software. Mostly it will be custom-built as this is a fairly unusual project. Almost all the real-time software will be custom-built.
