CG wants opinions on LORAN system again due chopping block

[Michelle d'Aoust]

I just came accross this notice on the Cruising Worlds Website http://www.cruisingworld.com and thought you might be interested.

Boaters have until February 7 to comment on the navigation system's future

January 26, 2007
By Kitty Martin

The future of LORAN—the WWII era radio navigation system that has served mariners for decades—has been in jeopardy since the advent of GPS, but a recent move by the Department of Homeland Security may have sealed its fate.

Not long ago, the U.S. Coast Guard spent $160 million to modernize LORAN, but that didn't stop the Coast Guard's parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security, from eliminating LORAN from its 2007 budget. Congress has voted to put the money back for one year, but the long-term future of LORAN remains uncertain.

Boat Owners Association of the United States advocates maintaining LORAN as a backup to GPS. "With the GPS signal being relatively weak, there is concern that it is susceptible to jamming, which could present national security problems if it is the sole navigation system for the U.S.," said Elaine Dickinson of BoatU.S. Government Affairs. "Testing has shown Loran to be virtually jam-proof," Dickinson adds.

Before it eliminates LORAN altogether, the Coast Guard is looking for public commentary on the issue. Boaters have until February 7 to express their opinions. After that date, the topic is closed, and the Coast Guard will decide the future of LORAN.

To voice your opinion, go to https://dms.dot.gov/submit/, register, then enter docket number 24685.

Let's think sailing,
Michelle

[Neil Gordon]

Boat Owners Association of the United States advocates maintaining LORAN as a backup to GPS.

How many boat owners will equip their boats with both GPS and Loran? I suspect not enough to justify classifying Loran as a "backup."

The real backup to GPS is traditional navigation, aka "looking around."

[Michelle d'Aoust]

Many of my sailing friends, including myself have both systems. We have all been in situations where the GPS was not functioning and LORAN and charts helped save the day. There is new equipment that combines both GPS and Loran in one box. When one or the other dies we hope to replace it with the updated box. We feel that too many possibilities exist for jamming of GPS signals. There is a great deal of information available on the subject. I'd rather be safe than sorry.

[Joe Myerson]

FWIW, I sent in a comment urging that the LORAN-C system be continued.

This is in spite of the fact that I decommissioned my boat's LORAN system last spring, not because I didn't find that it worked as an accurate substitute (or backup) for my GPS, but because I needed the circuit to wire my GPS into my newly installed VHF with DSC.

The GPS is much easier to use that LORAN, and I'm not sure how many sailors still use both systems--but large numbers of divers, fishing guides, commercial fishermen and lobstermen rely on it. LORAN is a particularly useful tool, I'm told, for returning to precisely the same spot on the water. This makes it especially useful to those whose livelihood depends on finding and placing traps or underwater objects that might not show up on a chart.

Anyway, it only takes a few seconds to post a comment, and I'd urge other CDers to do so. That being said, I don't expect the current DHS to give any weight at all to public input (oops, I hope I'm not being political).

--Joe

[bottomscraper]

Could the money be better spent? (Coast Guard VHF upgrades and ICW maintenance come to mind.)

What percentage of boaters actually still carry Loran? If not many people have them, other benefits are of little consequence.

With GPS - WAAS accurarcy as good as it is, is the Loran repeatability argument still valid?

[Russell]

Personally I say let it go. Its unnessisary expense and most people should be able to find their way home even if their GPS does fail.

As for boat US making a comment about dropping loran causing a "national secuirty problems" is just downright silly, what place does Boat US to make comments like that? If our defense department doesnt see it as an issue I think they are far more qualified to suggest one way or the other. Boat US being a boating organization though I of course understand their support for keeping Loran, its their function to support such things, but to try to use national security to support their argument just makes them sound silly.

Joe, I am curious, do you really know for a fact that "large numbers" of divers, fishermen, etc... rely on loran? I find it hard to beleive that there is many out there who have not plopped down the $100 or so for a handheld GPS and use loran exclusively, ones who havent done so yet I cant imagine even use Loran either. And even if there are so many that rely on it as you suggest, considering how cheap GPS is I am hardly going to be too concerned about their needing to go out and buy a GPS.

The loran system is going to be sunset sometime in the near future, I see no reason not to do it sooner then later. I removed the loran installed on my bought when I bought it, and threw it away, yes it was working perfectly, but I couldnt even give the thing away.

[Joe Myerson]

Russell,

You might be right about how few or many commercial guys still use LORAN. My "evidence" is purely anecdotal, and several years old. In my business, we sometimes buy photographs of marine life from freelance photographers. One in particular told me that he found LORAN-C more accurate for locating a particular spot, once he had punched it into his system, than even a GPS with WAAS.

Also, I was talking to a person in Maine's Department of Fisheries who worked extensively with lobstermen. This conversation took place two years ago. At the time, she said many lobster fishers (ugh!) still relied on LORAN. Whether that was out of old-time Yankee resistance to change, parsimoniousness or experience, I don't know. And I don't know if the situation exists today.

Still, the government, in its infinite wisdom, has already invested a considerable amount of cash in automating LORAN, and I, for one, think the money to keep the system up would not be wasted.

So maybe it's my own New England cussedness that says "if it ain't broke, don't dump it."

--Joe

[Bill Michne]

I won't repeat all the above arguments about Loran as a backup to GPS, but I'd like to make two points. First, using a chart and compass is a great backup for GPS if the weather is clear enough and you are close enough to landmarks to see and identify them. At night it is all too easy to confuse lighted aids to navigation. Plotting your position in relation to an incorrect aid identification could have unfortunate consequences. And while DR's are better than nothing they're not very accurate. Second, and more importantly, elimination of a totally independent backup system to GPS makes jamming GPS all the more attractive to those who would do it.

[Joe CD MS 300]

In what type of scenario would the "jamming" argument make sense? Not that I am an expert on the subject but most military / defense application are based on the GPS system. I doubt if any are now based on Loran. Loaran is only a two dimensional system. GPS is 3d, which is what is needed for guidance of planes, missiles, etc. and is not limited to the vicinity of land based Loran systems. I would think that any motivation to jam a GPS signal would be independent of whether there was a land based Loran system in place or not and would occur most likely as a defensive measure in the area of a potential military target.

The military usually will take all the bells and whistles they can get. If they don't need Loran I certainly don't. Even if the GPS system is turned off I got around before without Loran or GPS I'll be able to do it again. We waste enough money.