NavList:

   

Reply

I suspect it ain't gonna happen.  President Bush tried to eliminate
Loran-C three or four years ago, and several government agencies,
ranging from the FAA (for aircraft navigation) to the Department of
Defense (for military uses) opposed the elimination of Loran-C.   In
fact after the dust cleared money was ADDED to the budget for Loran
upgrades to the new e-Loran system (which is the Loran equivalent of
GPS's WAAS).   There are some really strong arguments to have a second
high-precision navigation system whose technology is independent of that
of GPS (eg, terrestrial rather than space-based)

Lu Abel

Anabasis wrote:
> The US Coast Guard will discontinue it's LORAN-C operations in 2010:
>
> "On February 26, 2009, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
> publicly announced the President's Fiscal Year 2010 Budget. In the
> section for the Department of Homeland Security, the budget "supports
> the termination of outdated systems such as the terrestrial-based,
> long-range radionavigation (LOrAN-C) operated by the U.S. Coast Guard
> resulting in an offset of $36 million in 2010 and $190 million over
> five years." For more information on the proposed FY2010 Budget, visit
> the OMB website under President's Budget. "
>
> This will obviously affect the East and West Coast Chains of North
> America and will at least degrade the chain in the Pacific region by
> closing the Guam station.  I am not sure if Japan has plans on keeping
> their stations intact.
>
> In any case, coastal navigation along north America outside of the
> RADAR range of land will not be entirely dependent on GPS for
> electronic navigation.  To me, this means the celestial navigation is
> even more important, as without LORAN, there will be no electronic
> back-ups available if GPS is degraded or fails.
>
> Jeremy
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Navigation List archive: www.fer3.com/arc
To post, email NavList@fer3.com
To , email NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply