Yes. Galileo, GLONASS(Russia), BeiDou(China), NavIC (India) and QZSS (Japan) all use CDMA coding with PRN number to identify the unique space vehicle.
With the exception of GLOSNASS, each constellation uses same frequencies across all space vehicles. For GLONASS, each space vehicle transmits on a different frequency (1602 MHz + n Ć 0.5625 MHz).
(I will need to spread by response over multiple replies, as new users of libre space are limited to how many hyperlinks they can include in a postā¦)
Finally, despite the FDMA design, an L1/L2 frequency may be shared by multiple satellites. The GLONASS constellation is organised so that satellites sharing the same frequency are always physically separated to avoid interference. More detail on this here: GLONASS Signal Plan - Navipedia
As we know, the GNSS constellations are used by hundreds of millions of people daily, and there are dedicated observation facilities for it. So I canāt imagine open-source/amateur observation data being useful to many people.
What am I doing? Running direction finding experiments on the L1 channel. I found it frustrating that the popular the sat tracking app, which uses SatNOGS data for freqs, does not show PRN numbers.
For context, Iād like to link to the previously mentioned feature request for Look4Sat here: rt-bishop/Look4Sat#115
As I understand @pross, this thread is about storing publicly known (static) information related to specific satellites into SatNOGS DB, to then be available to display it in SatNOGS DB and third party tools like Look4Sat. Since the PRN number is GNSS-specific (or even GNSS-constellation-specific) I can only see this viable to get realized by developing a way to easily add additional (optional) attributes to satellite or transmitter entries. With the current data model (a static schema which defines all available fields) this is not possible. That said, if there is someone to lead, a revision of the data model is possible [long term goals]. related: Feature request satnogs-db#140: extend the transmitter fields.
So I canāt imagine open-source/amateur observation data being useful to many people.