Loran phase out date?

[Roger Long]

How much longer is the Loran system going to be active?

--

Roger Long

[Bob Gardner]

For the foreseeable future. Google "enhanced loran" for some links. Almost
all of the stations in the US have been upgraded, with new transmitters and
timers, and the USCG has authorization to expand further.

With enhanced loran, there are no more chains as such...today's loran
receiver can receive as many as 40 stations simultaneously. Only "legacy
lorans" will still use chains. When I visited the West Coast USCG loran HQ
at Petaluma, CA they were monitoring 26 stations, some as far away as
Russia. I wrote an article about enhanced loran for the October 2004 issue
of IFR, if you can track down a copy.

Bob Gardner

"Roger Long" > wrote in message
...
> How much longer is the Loran system going to be active?
>
> --
>
> Roger Long
>
>
>
>

[Jim Logajan]

"Roger Long" > wrote:
> How much longer is the Loran system going to be active?

The US Coast Guard site is precisely ambiguous:

"While the Administration continues to evaluate the long-term need for
continuation of the LORAN-C radionavigation system, the Government will
operate the LORAN-C system in the short term. The U.S. Government will give
users reasonable notice if it concludes that LORAN-C is not needed or is
not cost effective, so that users will have the opportunity to transition
to alternative navigation aids."

From: http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/loran/Default.htm

[Bob Gardner]

You and Roger should both look at this. I have visited Locus, Inc., where
the all-in-view technology was developed; I have visited (as I said before)
the very active USCG loran operating HQ in California. I have seen plots of
flights comparing enhanced loran to GPS. I have seen the future of loran.

http://www.loran.org/

Bob Gardner LCDR USCG (Ret)
CO of two loran-C stations
"Jim Logajan" > wrote in message
.. .
> "Roger Long" > wrote:
>> How much longer is the Loran system going to be active?
>
> The US Coast Guard site is precisely ambiguous:
>
> "While the Administration continues to evaluate the long-term need for
> continuation of the LORAN-C radionavigation system, the Government will
> operate the LORAN-C system in the short term. The U.S. Government will
> give
> users reasonable notice if it concludes that LORAN-C is not needed or is
> not cost effective, so that users will have the opportunity to transition
> to alternative navigation aids."
>
> From: http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/loran/Default.htm

[RST Engineering]

This was discussed quite diligently after 9/11. The fact of the matter is
that with an airplane and $5k in parts, anybody that wanted to could blow
GPS away over tens of thousands of square miles for as long as they wanted
to.

It is a real witch to blow away a megawatt transmitter for more than a few
hundred feet.

Jim



"Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
...

> You and Roger should both look at this. I have visited Locus, Inc., where
> the all-in-view technology was developed; I have visited (as I said
> before) the very active USCG loran operating HQ in California. I have seen
> plots of flights comparing enhanced loran to GPS. I have seen the future
> of loran.

[Ron Lee]

The issue has been delayed for years. Look up the Federal
Radionavigation Plan at the Coast Guard site. At one time the idea
was unless LORAN provided a NPA capability it was worthless.

I wrote that even if it never does that it is still a viable en route
system that is not subject to the same vulnerabilities as GPS.

It also provides timing services.

Ron Lee

[Matt Whiting]

RST Engineering wrote:

> This was discussed quite diligently after 9/11. The fact of the matter is
> that with an airplane and $5k in parts, anybody that wanted to could blow
> GPS away over tens of thousands of square miles for as long as they wanted
> to.
>
> It is a real witch to blow away a megawatt transmitter for more than a few
> hundred feet.

So you are saying that we need MUCH larger satellites? :-)

Matt

[Darrel Toepfer]

Bob Gardner wrote:
> I wrote an article about enhanced loran for the October 2004 issue
> of IFR, if you can track down a copy.

http://www.loran.org/news/LoranIsBack.pdf