The FAA is marching toward sole dependence on GPS.

Well, let me put it this way. It isn't in any of the FAA's NexGen
performance-based nav systems plans.

Bob Gardner wrote:
No, Sam....LEGACY loran sucks. Enhanced loran (which will require new
receivers/antennas to utilize its GPS-equivalent accuracy) is right
around the corner. A new eLoran station has recently been put on the air
in the UK, and the Coast Guard is well on the way to upgrading its whole
system. Go to www.loran.org and start following links. www.crossrate.com
is another useful site.

Bob Gardner

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

And LORAN sucks and does not work in much of the world.

Can't argue with that...it is a Coast Guard program, not an FAA program.
Still, if you follow the links in www.loran.org you will see a lot of USCG
Headquarters names listed.

It seems as though I have to repeat this over and over, but with eLoran you
don't have to select chains or group repetition rates...you just turn it on,
like a GPS, and it starts displaying RNP 0.3-accuracy positions. Its
all-in-view technology uses all usable signals within range and processes
them simultaneously. The wonders of microtechnology...

Bob Gardner

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...
Well, let me put it this way. It isn't in any of the FAA's NexGen
performance-based nav systems plans.

Bob Gardner wrote:
No, Sam....LEGACY loran sucks. Enhanced loran (which will require new
receivers/antennas to utilize its GPS-equivalent accuracy) is right
around the corner. A new eLoran station has recently been put on the air
in the UK, and the Coast Guard is well on the way to upgrading its whole
system. Go to www.loran.org and start following links. www.crossrate.com
is another useful site.

Bob Gardner

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

And LORAN sucks and does not work in much of the world.

Sam Spade wrote:

Well, let me put it this way. It isn't in any of the FAA's NexGen
performance-based nav systems plans.

The FAA does not OWN LORAN. The DOT has done a diservice to the GA
comminity by waffling on LORAN for a decade or more. Make it a viable
system and the GA community can have another viable RNAV-like system
like the big boys do with their expensive FMS, DME, inertial units.

NextGen. Yea right. Force GA pilots to spend TBD thousands of
dollars on the ADS-B Out equipment that provides no benefit to me.
They can't even make what they have now work properly although the
airlines are also culpable in the problems we have today.

Ron Lee

"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...
Sam Spade wrote:

Well, let me put it this way. It isn't in any of the FAA's NexGen
performance-based nav systems plans.

The FAA does not OWN LORAN.


Nor does the FAA OWN GPS.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:


"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...
Sam Spade wrote:

Well, let me put it this way. It isn't in any of the FAA's NexGen
performance-based nav systems plans.

The FAA does not OWN LORAN.


Nor does the FAA OWN GPS.


True Steven but they do own WAAS (a GPS augmentation system) which
they seem to make essential to many programs such as ADS-B Out.

Ron Lee

In article ,
(Ron Lee) wrote:

True Steven but they do own WAAS (a GPS augmentation system) which
they seem to make essential to many programs such as ADS-B Out.

huh? What is the relationship/interaction between WAAS and ADS-B?

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

Bob Noel wrote:

(Ron Lee) wrote:

True Steven but they do own WAAS (a GPS augmentation system) which
they seem to make essential to many programs such as ADS-B Out.

huh? What is the relationship/interaction between WAAS and ADS-B?

Bob Noel

Look at the ADS-B Out NPRM, page 56956, third column (right side of
page) for these points which IMO seems that the FAA conveniently
specify ADS-B Out performance requirements that can only be met using
GPS augmented with WAAS.

"This proposal specifies performance standards for aircraft avionics
equipment for operation to enable ADS B Out. These performance
standards would accommodate and facilitate the use of new technology.
Presently, GPS augmented by the Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS)
is the only navigation position service that provides the level of
accuracy and integrity (NIC, NACp, and NACv) to enable ADS-B Out to be
used for NAS based surveillance operations with sufficient
availability."

Plus near the bottom of that column:

"In order to meet the proposed performance requirements using the
GPS/WAAS system, aircraft would be required to have equipment
installed onboard the aircraft that meets one of the following: (1)
TSO C145b, Airborne Navigation Sensors using the GPS augmented by
WAAS; or (2) TSO-C146b Stand-Alone Airborne Navigation Equipment using
the GPS augmented by WAAS."

Ron Lee

Why wouldn't you want a WAAAS capable panel mount in any case, ADS-B
notwithstanding?

There is a whole different world of safety and operational access
available with 145/146 panel mounts over 129 boxes.

Ron Lee wrote:
Bob Noel wrote:


(Ron Lee) wrote:


True Steven but they do own WAAS (a GPS augmentation system) which
they seem to make essential to many programs such as ADS-B Out.

huh? What is the relationship/interaction between WAAS and ADS-B?

Bob Noel


Look at the ADS-B Out NPRM, page 56956, third column (right side of
page) for these points which IMO seems that the FAA conveniently
specify ADS-B Out performance requirements that can only be met using
GPS augmented with WAAS.

"This proposal specifies performance standards for aircraft avionics
equipment for operation to enable ADS B Out. These performance
standards would accommodate and facilitate the use of new technology.
Presently, GPS augmented by the Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS)
is the only navigation position service that provides the level of
accuracy and integrity (NIC, NACp, and NACv) to enable ADS-B Out to be
used for NAS based surveillance operations with sufficient
availability."

Plus near the bottom of that column:

"In order to meet the proposed performance requirements using the
GPS/WAAS system, aircraft would be required to have equipment
installed onboard the aircraft that meets one of the following: (1)
TSO C145b, Airborne Navigation Sensors using the GPS augmented by
WAAS; or (2) TSO-C146b Stand-Alone Airborne Navigation Equipment using
the GPS augmented by WAAS."

Ron Lee

Ron Lee wrote:
Sam Spade wrote:


Well, let me put it this way. It isn't in any of the FAA's NexGen
performance-based nav systems plans.


The FAA does not OWN LORAN. The DOT has done a diservice to the GA
comminity by waffling on LORAN for a decade or more. Make it a viable
system and the GA community can have another viable RNAV-like system
like the big boys do with their expensive FMS, DME, inertial units.

NextGen. Yea right. Force GA pilots to spend TBD thousands of
dollars on the ADS-B Out equipment that provides no benefit to me.
They can't even make what they have now work properly although the
airlines are also culpable in the problems we have today.

Ron Lee

ADS-B is not a performance-based navigation system, thus not in the
context of this thread.

Performance-based navigation is. Have you seen the RNP SAAAR IAP for
Runway 31 at Bishop, CA for example? Look at the minimums on that IAP
compared to the other IAPs for that airport.

So far as the GA community is concered, keep in ming there are light
aircraft then there are business aircraft. A world of difference.

Sorry...it's Mitch Narins...I spelled it wrong. Read this:
http://www.loran.org/library/Road%20to%20eLoran.pdf and note the FAA logo on
the first page.

Bob Gardner

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...
Well, let me put it this way. It isn't in any of the FAA's NexGen
performance-based nav systems plans.

Bob Gardner wrote:
No, Sam....LEGACY loran sucks. Enhanced loran (which will require new
receivers/antennas to utilize its GPS-equivalent accuracy) is right
around the corner. A new eLoran station has recently been put on the air
in the UK, and the Coast Guard is well on the way to upgrading its whole
system. Go to www.loran.org and start following links. www.crossrate.com
is another useful site.

Bob Gardner

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

And LORAN sucks and does not work in much of the world.