NavList:

   

Reply

Lu Abel wrote:
> 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

I think you sell the Obama administration short.  He's looking for money
for healthcare and energy and politically this is low hanging fruit.  I
see it happening.  If he wants it bad enough he has all the votes he
needs whenever he needs them.  Who's gonna stop him?  The Republicans?
DoD?  Sell your Loran gear now it'll be useless in 2 years.

> 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)

The only money adding is gonna be for what the Obama administration
wants not what anybody else wants.  I agree there are strong arguments
for having a second electronic system, I just don't think the people who
want it have enough political clout to keep it.

> Lu Abel
>
> Anabasis wrote:
>> 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

You are exactly right, Jeremy.  Even more reason for all the errors in
the celnav tables to be corrected.  Sooner is better than later.

-Scott

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

   

Reply