If that map is corect, then coverage has degraded in the Central Pacific but improved in the north west pacific.

I flew a Muskateer with a Loran C pannel mount in it. Worked great (I thoght at the time) then. If I bought a plane with it in it, I would not get rid of it unless I was doing a major upgrade. Not sure I would pay money to have one installed.

And sombody asked "whats a hand DR" Not serious are you?

Tim

Hello to all- I’m a long time lurker, and now a new member. I figured I’d let this somewhat controversial topic lure me out of my shell for my first post.

I’ve actually looked into this issue a good bit and have formed some fairly strong opinions about it. As I see it, the primary problem with this LORAN decision is the incredibly poor planning of our federal government.

The Federal Radionavigation Plan is published every two years, and has called for the decommissioning of NDBS, VORs, TACANS, and eventually, ILS. Further, the FAA is well on its way to implementing the NextGen air traffic control system which involves the self-reporting of aircraft position based on GPS- derived coordinates, and the abolishment of ground based surveillance radar.

GPS is great, but as others have pointed out, has some limitations. Primarily, the received power of the GPS signal is very weak, and is consequently easily interfered with by things such as the previously mentioned solar flares, ionospheric disturbances, and malicious or accidental jamming, or “spoofing”. There was a case a few years ago in which the GPS signal within a few hundred square miles of the San Diego harbor was wiped out by a guy’s malfunctioning TV set.If a LORAN station needs maintenance, you send a truck (or maybe a C130), but you don’t need a rocket.

People recognized this years ago, and suggested LORAN as a reliable backup and augmentation to GPS. The government commissioned an independent assessment team to determine if LORAN was a needed backup for GPS. The unanimous recommendation of the team was to keep and enhance the LORAN system for GPS backup for Position, Navigation, and Timing use by aviators, boaters, and telecommunications, among others. That year the DHS issued a policy requiring enhancement of the LORAN system.

The enhancement of LORAN to “eLORAN” was already underway at that time, and addressed some of the limitations of LORAN-C, which was already a pretty good system. New propagation modes and antennas were developed which made use of electric AND magnetic wave reception to eliminate the susceptibility of the LORAN system to lightning and P-static. Accuracy was improved, and a data channel was added to provide LORAN status messaging and the capability to transmit real time information. New receivers operated in “all-in-view” mode which allowed navigational information to be gleaned from any transmitter rather than only the transmitters from a user selected chain, and to resolve ambiguities on LORAN baseline extensions. Receivers have been flight tested which take data from GPS and LORAN simultaneously and improve the result over that which would be produced by either method alone. GPS and LORANs strengths and weaknesses complement each other perfectly.

At this time over $160 million has been spent to upgrade the transmitters to eLORAN, and the upgrade is almost complete. The annual operating cost for the ENTIRE LORAN system is $36 million, which is a fraction of the cost of launching a single GPS satellite. It will cost more to decommission the LORAN system than to complete the eLORAN upgrades.

Commercialization of integrated receivers has lagged because, understandably, companies have worried about the government’s continued flip-flopping on long-term LORAN support.

So my nightmare scenario goes like this: I’m cruising along in the clouds on final when some yahoo down below decides to nuke a burrito in his secondhand microwave, or maybe the sun farts, and suddenly I no longer know where I am or how to get to the final approach fix. ATC is of zero help, because my ADS-B depends on GPS, which is dead, they have no radar and therefore don’t know where I am either. VORs, ILS, and LORAN are all fond memories. The best I can hope for is that my sentimentality has kept me from removing my old ADF receiver from the panel, and I just happen to know where a pair of AM radio stations are located.

Certainly at this point I’m cussing the short-sighted dimwits in our federal government who said “we’ll decommission the only known backup to GPS today, then later we’ll decide whether we really need a backup to GPS, even though we’ve already paid to be told that we do”.

So this is the opinion I’ve formed after a lot of reading and questioning, but I’d love to be told why I’m wrong (or right). I have no vested interest in this issue other than that I want to be able to fly safely and don’t want to see my hard earned tax money wasted (and I have a very reliable 618 LORAN in the panel).

The scheduled shutdown date for eLORAN is Feb 08- I believe we should lobby very hard to prevent this from happening.

-Bill

Links:
Federal Radionavigation Plan:
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/frp2008 ... n_Plan.pdf

Independent assessment team report:
01/2009 IAT: http://www.crossrate.com/uploads/pdf/IA ... 202009.pdf

DHS statement of LORAN support:
http://www.crossrate.com/uploads/pdf/LO ... 191614.pdf

Welcome Bill, I'm glad your here!!!!

Jaerl wrote:I just ran across this article about the Loran being phased out. Too bad for me since I just put in an Apollo 618c for a backup to the GPS. Thank you Mr. Obama.

http://www.mgn.com/news/dailystorydetai ... ryid=10586

Dang Dude! Bag on the president when he spends money... Bag on him when he tries to save money.

I used to use one when we fished on the great lakes. It was a really good tool if you wanted to know generally where you were. On a 30' boat going 20 miles per hour, looking for a harbor it did the job. In an aircraft going 150, looking for a runway... NO.

Talking about money wasters. 36 million per year for what at best 1,000 aviators?

Welcome RDU Stinson. I landed at RDU when I was getting my instrument rating in Goldsboro. Nice folks in that part of the world, lots of airports, and lots of NASCAR!!!!

RDUStinson wrote:So my nightmare scenario goes like this: I’m cruising along in the clouds on final when some yahoo down below decides to nuke a burrito in his secondhand microwave, or maybe the sun farts, and suddenly I no longer know where I am or how to get to the final approach fix. ATC is of zero help, because my ADS-B depends on GPS, which is dead, they have no radar and therefore don’t know where I am either. VORs, ILS, and LORAN are all fond memories. The best I can hope for is that my sentimentality has kept me from removing my old ADF receiver from the panel, and I just happen to know where a pair of AM radio stations are located.

I can help you here. Stay out of the clouds unless you have inertial nav. and a good autopilot. Kidding, of course.

You have some well thought out ideas, by the way.

Again, welcome.

gb

I find it interesting that apparently all the folks so heartily supporting the continuation of LORAN have apparently never actually USED LORAN as a navigation aid.

One question: If the "new, improved" eLORAN is so great, why hasn't some manufacturer of electronics grabbed right onto it, and built a machine to take advantage of all those wonderful assets??? Sorta like happened with GPS a few years ago?

Hey, so eLORAN fixes all the problems of the "old" loran systems. Still, NOBODY makes a dang LORAN receiver. What the hell is the point of having a system which NOBODY makes a receiver for?

And, sorry to inform you that the notion that one guy's television malfunction disabled the GPS signal over a broad area is bogus. Try again. DHS reports?? These are the folks who permitted a guy with a bomb in his shorts to get aboard an airplane bound for the US????

Again, you gots your backup system, but apparently, Jaerl is going to be about the only soul on this here country that will benefit from that "backup".

Suit yourself. My vote is decommission the sucker.

When somebody's microwave puts me into a mountain, you can call me wrong.

MTV

MTV, The reason no one makes new Loran equipment is because people like you keep calling for it's death. No one is going to start building new units until the future of Loran is assured. Read the last three sentences of the following article.

Cabinflyer, You haven't been paying attention. It will cost the same to tear down the Loran System as it will to maintain it. The president isn't saving money he is throwing away money we have already spent. Then what will happen? As soon as something happens with the GPS System, (which has been predicted), everyone will be yelling for a new backup system. Then we can start building one from scratch. That will save a lot of money.


Here is part of a good article on the subject:

Since 1997, the U.S. Government has spent $167 million dollars upgrading LORAN. [19] [20] According to a report on the costs of decommissioning the system, it would cost just as much to shut down as to upgrade to eLORAN. [21] [22] A distinguished panel, commissioned by the Government, determined that keeping LORAN and upgrading it to eLORAN is in the national interest of the U.S. [21] Without a robust and technically different system to provide Precision Navigation and Timing (PNT) information in support of national infrastructure, the U.S. would be vulnerable to potential economic damages in the billions of dollars in the event of a widespread disruption of GPS. [22] [2] This type of disruption is easily within the technical capability of anyone, as GPS jammers are available from several sources. [23] LORAN forms the basis of eLORAN, and should be preserved to protect U.S. national security. [21] [2] Other countries have already embraced and are deploying eLORAN. [24] Further, in Feb 2008, the U.S. officially stated, through the Department of Homeland Security, that LORAN / eLORAN would be the official backup for GPS in the U.S. [24] [22] The reversal of this policy has led to grave economic damage to many who provided LORAN based products and services, and fails to account for the overwhelming public support for the system voiced in a 2007 Request For Comments. [22]

Here is the whole article: http://wapedia.mobi/en/LORAN

Jerry,

Uh, I would respectfully point out that the cost to decommission the system is a ONE TIME cost. The cost to continue operating it is actually an ANNUAL cost, and as I noted before, you can bet there are a lot of additional costs involved with the operation of that system that aren't reflected in your estimated operating costs. Again, you are raising red herrings. Let's compare apples to apples, okay? These articles you quote are written by folks who support the continuation of the system, apparently.

As to your assertion that "The reason no one makes new Loran equipment is because people like you keep calling for it's death" amazes me. Wow---I had no idea I had that much influence In actuality, I watch the aviation news pretty close, and I only recall a couple of times in the last forty years that the subject of decomissioning the system came up in the media. In those cases, the alphabet groups pretty much shot down the concept ASAP.

I regret to say I had NO influence in those cases, cause if I actually had the powers that you ascribe to me, I'd have shut the sucker down BEFORE the government pissed all that money away on the system to upgrade a useless system.

And, contrary to your assertion, I am NOT stubborn...I'm right

But, ya know what??? None of us are going to actually have much influence on this decision, one way or tother.

MTV

MTV, I have one question,,,, Have you ever been wrong????

If your ever out this way I'll buy you lunch and then we can argue in person!

Jerry

I've used 'em. Had a Foster 500 in a '59 Commanche. Worked OK, very complicated logic. Had a Apollo Flybuddy LORAN in a Supercub. Worked OK. Both used in the W. United States, nice to look at while flying cross country, but I sure wouldn't bet my life on them. Have had them in boats in Alaska. Didn't work worth a damn.

gb

Jerry,

Oh, yeah--I've been wrong MANY times.

But not on LORAN...

MTV

Thanks for the welcome- I already feel right at home! For what it's worth, I'm not actually based at RDU, but at a small field called Raleigh East abot 20 miles east of RDU.

MTV, you're right- it wasn't a TV set, but rather an accidental jamming during a test of something else. (I was a victim of someone else's hyperbole). The report is here:

http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index. ... pic=160821

The point remains though, that GPS is vulnerable to multiple interferences.

In my opinion Jaerl is absolutely right about the reason noone's making new receivers (for aviation, anyway):

“Even though loran is an operational system that has recently been expanded and modernized, interested mariners may have a hard time purchasing a loran receiver. And there are currently no combined GPS/loran receivers on the market. Loran supporters, like the International Loran Association, have stated that without a firm commitment by the Department of Transportation (DOT) for the continued operation of loran, marine electronics manufacturers aren’t going to make the capital investment to produce combination GPS/loran receivers.

The Volpe Center study seemed to agree with this assessment when it recommended continuing “the Loran-C modernization program of the FAA and the Coast Guard until it is determined whether Loran-C has a role as a GPS backup system. If it is determined that Loran-C has a role in the future navigation mix, DOT should promptly announce this to encourage the electronics manufacturing community to develop new Loran-C technologies.”

There are at least a few companies geared up to do exactly that, though:

http://www.locusinc.com/loran.html
http://www.crossrate.com/

I think these guys presently make integrated GPS + LORAN equipment, mostly for marine applications, and some of it for Europe. As best I can tell, Europe a la the General Lighthouse Authorities (GLA) has settled on the continuation and upgrade of eLORAN. I think the same may be true of Russia and possibly India (not sure on this).

As to your assertion that I've not used LORAN to navigate, that's not true. As I mentioned, I have a 618c in the panel that I use every time I fly. Admittedly I consult it far less than my moving map GPS and not in IMC, but it works just fine, especially considering that it's maybe 25 years old. I replaced an internal battery and some worn switches a few years ago, and it does just fine.

Before I had the GPS I used to fly to the east coast somewhat regularly, where the only usable VOR has long been out of service, and radar coverage is spotty at best. There are few ground lights out there, there are multiple restricted areas, and there is absolutely no other navaid. My Loran is wired into my CDI, and it's really nice to be able to key in my flight plan and just follow the needle to my destination. The key is to recognize the limitations of the receiver, such as the need to switch chains as I approach the coast.

My older receiver is packed full of memory chips and probably represents the state of the art back in the days when the 8085 processor was the mightiest thng in existence. The massive amount of processing which is available today in a chip the size of your thumbnail makes small cheap and powerful moving map GPS + LORAN navigators completely realizable.

As best I can tell your argument against LORAN is that "I used it years ago and it sucked". I don't see that as being the case with the new system and receivers.

Let me ask you: are you really comfortable with ALL the navigation in the US being based on GPS and GPS alone? The experts say this is not a good idea, and have recommended against that approach. So they're decommissioning the recommended backup now, then later they'll decide if it is (was) needed. It's kind of like saying "We'll close Gitmo, THEN we'll decide what to do with the prisoners".

Seems pretty backward to me, and a huge waste of money. That's my beef with the decision that's been made. If a backup is needed for GPS, identify it now. If it's something other than LORAN and is viable, great- kill LORAN. But don't do it the other way around.

As far as the DHS, you're absolutely correct- it was the exact same folks on whose watch the underwear bomber almost succeeded who elected to kill LORAN, after the previous administration and DHS crew had committed to it. (The consolation on the underwear bomber situation is that he's allegedly burned badly enough that he will be completely unable to enjoy his 99 virgins in the afterlife).

Thanks for listening!

-Bill

Uh, Bill, you wrote: "Before I had the GPS I used to fly to the east coast somewhat regularly, where the only usable VOR has long been out of service, and radar coverage is spotty at best"

I assume, since you are in the Carolinas, that you're talking the east coast of North Carolina?? I counted five VORs on the Charlotte Sectional right along the coast, plus one on the south end of the Washington chart, at Elizibeth. I don't know my geography well in that part of the world, but looks like there should be pretty good VOR coverage all along that coast. None of those are out of service. Heck, there are VOR's up and down the East coast, all well within easy reception range of each other. So, what east coast are you talking about?

But, you seem to be missing my point, which is that a "replacement system" for GPS is not going to be useful UNLESS it can pretty much immediately step in and fulfill essentially the same capabilities or at least sorta the same as the system it is intended to replace. Whether I have had good experiences with LORAN or not, the fact is, LORAN is not now, and probably never will be a viable backup for GPS.

As I said earlier, LORAN is not approved for instrument approaches. GPS is. In fact, GPS is now widely approved for precision instrument approaches.

So, what is LORAN going to do for us if GPS quits? It can only be used for enroute IFR. Achieving approach approval is a time consuming process, AND that lengthy process can't even be STARTED unless there is a unit out there to test the process with. The FAA approved the GPS system for IFR use in record time, and even that took a long time to accomplish, and it took literally YEARS to achieve precision approach approval. And, even that is still not as good as an ILS, as far as minima go. There are no Cat III GPS approaches.

So, LORAN could serve as a replacement for GPS for us VFR guys, right? Who cares? If you're VFR, your backup system is and always should be, a sectional chart.

The airlines and IFR GA users are the users in aviation who really need a system that functions well, and permits them to fly their schedules. There are no LORAN units in airliners, I'm willing to bet. There are no units in current or even recent production. There is no initiative to ensure that LORAN could be used for IFR approaches.

So, please explain to me HOW LORAN could function as a backup to GPS. Your argument that nobody is building a LORAN receiver or anything else to promote the system because the government has threatened to shut down the system is accurate enough, I suppose, but it becomes sort of a chicken and egg thing. And, frankly, I think it's probably wrong.

Many of us watched how quickly the entire world grabbed onto GPS. It was amazing. Why did that happen? Because GPS offers so much capability and accuracy is astounding. Notwithstanding folks' assertions of it's shortcomings and failures, actual failures have been minor and extremely rare at best. GPS is the superstar when it comes to navigation, no doubt.

Now, if "eLORAN" was such a super duper, uber accurate system, with, as some here assert, as good an accuracy and reliability as GPS, I really have to believe SOMEONE would be designing a receiver, or at least a combination receiver, EVEN with the threat of shutdown. Mariners were the original users and target of the LORAN system, yet even in that world, there is apparently only one box in current production.

But, back to the argument of LORAN as a backup: Let's assume that the LORAN system is saved. Still no receivers available. New manufacture is all that counts--you can't base a replacement on 20 year old stuff. So--GPS fails, for whatever reason. Nobody in COMMERCE will be able to use LORAN, because there are no receivers, and the system is not applicable to the most important IFR useage--instrument approaches. Further, it's not been approved for RVSM either.

So, again, my point is that LORAN isn't a viable alternative to GPS. To suggest that if the government announced today that it was going to keep the system in perpetuity, manufacturers would jump right on building new units and getting them approach approved is, at least in my opinion, a little far fetched.

Face it, folks: The ONLY currently available VIABLE backup to GPS is the VOR system, including the ILS systems. If the FAA starts shutting those down, we will have no viable backup.

Let LORAN die.

MTV

If you were to substitute the long-winded tedious arguments with entertaining wit, this would read like an old Miller beer commercial.

On the left... LESS FILLING!

And on the right... TASTES GREAT!


Makes me miss the old days!

Face it, folks: The ONLY currently available VIABLE backup to GPS is the VOR system, including the ILS systems. If the FAA starts shutting those down, we will have no viable backup.

Since ( as far as I know ) you cannot file a IFR flight plan with LORAN only, I am assuming all the GPS, LORAN, ILS, etc. discussion actually is around VFR flying.

Every couple of months I turn off my gps, VOR, ADF, etc. and drag out my stopwatch and E6-B along with the appropriate sectional charts. I spend the day navigating the old fashion way and after I knock the rust off, I am pretty surprised how accurate it can be.

The E6B has no batteries nor does the Mark-1 eyeball. Have to admit the stopwatch does run on batteries ( I am not that much of a purist but could be). As a result EMP, foreign power blasting satellites, power grid failure, or FAA discontinuations do not effect my navigation.

Do I use GPS on a daily basis? You betcha, but I feel retaining the old skills is pretty important.

TD

TomD, I'm not impressed. Post again when you've gained command of this:

I have used Loran many times in the past and it sucked. I remember when we started talking about gps and many couldn't believe it was going to be so accurate.

I think some of you have the perception its close to GPS wrong it may get you close to the town but its not getting you to the runway.

Kill it already don't waste another second. VOR, ILS and a chart should still get us about anywhere we need to go.

OMG don't look out the window and figure out where you are if the GPS quits.

I thought it was suppose to be dead years ago I want to know who is accountable for the spending waste keeping it alive. Lets tar and feather the guy.

1SeventyZ wrote:TomD, I'm not impressed. Post again when you've gained command of this:

I have used one of those many times.

That will not work in an airplane. You have a hard time with horizon. You need a buble sextant and a nav dome in the plane. A copy of American Practial Navigator by Bowditch would also be handy along with tables and a very accurate time piece.

Tim