SailNet Community banner
  • SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!

Coast Guard seeks opinion on scrapping LORAN system

7K views 61 replies 19 participants last post by  Idiens 
#1 ·
Just caught a news update that the LORAN system may again be in jeopardy. The Coast Guard needs to receive opinions no later than 7 Feb 2007. To voice your opinion go to https://dms.dot.gov/submit/, register, then enter docket number 24685. :(
 
#2 ·
How many of you are LORAN users? I have a portable Ray Jeff receiver, circa 1991. I tested it about a year ago using a power supply. The rechargeable batteries don't work anymore.

I think the system will survive a few more years. In the overall scheme of things it doesn't cost much to operate it. There are lots of legacy users but nobody I know has bought a receiver lately. There aren't many being offered for sale so I think there is near zero growth in the user base.

--- CHAS
 
#3 ·
Note that if the CG goes for enhancing LORAN, the old receivers will not benefit (or maybe even work). Buying a LORAN receiver in Europe seems to fairly difficult, there's second hand and big ship stuff but nothing recreational.
 
#5 ·
If they upgrade? It's my understanding it's already been done, and the projected use at this point is through 2015, or is that in error?
 
#6 ·
Well, a quick search shows that the upgrades I was thinking of were completed in 2005, but that there are other efforts in the works.
 
#7 ·
It ain't a matter of how much it costs to maintain. It is money that could be better spent elsewhere or returned to the taxpayer. Another government program with few beneficieries and a life of its own. Hell...give the coasties a pay raise and get rid of the loran.
 
#8 ·
Funny the paradox. Sat. radio doesn't get nearly the endorsement that GPS seems to get (both are space-based), but a proven, land-based, very hardy system gets tossed like day-old bread? Never mind that new Loran stations can be set up without the need for extremely expensive space shots, etc. We, as individuals, spend a small fortune on insurance policies (health, auto, home---what a joke--hurricane issues, boat, etc), but no navigation backup (fallback insurance) because of cost? It continues to prove to be virtually un-jammable, and obviously very accurate. The cost is not even a drop in the ocean in the bigger picture. Yeah, that makes sense. I'm sure this way of thinking will prevail, and Loran will be shut down. Maybe we should just fund sat. radio/television with tax money and shut down all the land-based AM/FM and tv stations too.
 
#9 ·
Seabreeze...last time i checked radio and tv were commercial enterprises and stations either make $$ or shut down. Nothing run by the government ever shuts down! Exactly how is Loran a backup system when 99% of vessels have no working loran. There's probably more boats out there with sextants!
 
#10 ·
Seabreeze-

Another thing I'd point out is that satellite radio, XM and Sirius, are both subscription based, where the broadcast television, both ATSC-HD and NTSC-SD, as well as radio, AM/FM, are free. The companies that run broadcast television and radio stations are using public airwaves and provide a service which they are paid for via advertising revenues. This really isn't a valid comparison in any sense. LORAN and GPS are both paid for out of our taxes, and GPS is far more cost-effective.

Also, LORAN has its own share of issues, the first and foremost being a lack of receivers that are reasonably priced for non-commercial use. Another is a lack of training in using LORAN, which is not "off-the-shelf" user friendly, as GPS is. While setting up LORAN land stations doesn't require the costs of a space shot, they do require building a LORAN station, and that is just as expensive, if not more so than a satellite and space shot, given the number of people it serves. A GPS satellite is relatively far more cost-effective. Thirty satellites serve the entire world... which is far more efficient and wider coverage than building the same amount of LORAN stations-either in quantity or dollars.
 
#12 ·
No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!
Ronald Reagan
 
#14 ·
Innovation: GPS + Loran C

For those who want to read a thorough technical analysis, check out this url http://tl.gpsworld.com/gpstl/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=362922 The article entitled Innovation: GPS + Loran C was written on July 1, 2006 by James Carroll for GPS World. It is truly informative. It may help to convince or even change minds on the subject. I for one certainly hope the CG doesn't scrap the system.
 
#15 ·
The LORAN lobby has done amazingly well. Although there are very few users left, LORAN is at best regional and far from global, there are no new receivers on the market, even the protagonists dont seem to dig deep enough to market receivers at competitive prices (no buyers). Nevertheless the FAA were paid by congress (63 million or so) to study using LORAN for aviation (although they have perfectly adequate back-ups in DME and VOR) - great lobbying. The USCG was thinking of putting the LORAN coverage back into CONUS - for the aviators. As a quid-pro-quo, the mariners are using the FAAs WAAS and ignoring the CGs differential system, so clearly what we all need is LORAN (or not). My next buy is a forward looking sonar and an AIS transceiver. LORAN never.
 
#16 ·
Cam, my point was not to compare tax-funded systems vs subscription-based systems. My point was that, if space-based systems are so superior, why not federalize the TV and music services, paid for by the US taxpayer, and give it all to the whole world? It's great when it's GPS, but many deride the subscription-based space-borne systems, and cite all sorts of reasons why it's inferior. Rather duplistic. And forgive me, but you have the nerve, in the rediculously inflated price world of marine supplies, to say that a Loran receiver is expensive??? Come on. I'd say it's just trying to fit in! Sure GPS is a great technology, but I'd rather not have it as my only option, particularly when it's a front line military tool at present. Loran is regional, yep, as it was intended. The fact that everyone else gets to use GPS is a perk, but it's there for the military. The thing I find really weird is that so few private boaters used Loran, for cost or complexity, but they act like they can't live without GPS. I have both, and just got a sextant. I dunno. The Loran strikes me as kinda neat. Maybe I'm intrigued because I've had more experience with GPS. Still, I don't remember ever hearing anyone saying they were carrying 3!!! extra backup LORANS. Seems like one was all they needed. Guess you get what you pay for. My thinking is, you never abandon a solid backup system.
 
#17 ·
Seabreeze..OK understand your position on Loran but still don't get the music/tv/satellite analogy. Having used loran extensively in the 70's and 80's I am aware of the function and limitations. Not much sense in carrying backup Lorans as they were not battery powered, were not cheap and were coastal systems and good coastal navigation skills were considered "the backup" at that time.
My point is that systems and infrastructure are put in place for USE by a client...whether it be GPS or Loran or the National Weather Service. In this country...very often the customer is the military when it isn't the general public. When the CUSTOMER no longer uses the system having made a choice to use something else...taxpayer money shouldn't continue to be spent on it. This has clearly happened with LORAN.
When you buy a sextant...I don't have to pay for it. When you want to have Loran...I do. That's the difference between my extra GPS's and your GPS/LORAN choice as well. So I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one.
 
#18 · (Edited)
You don't have to worry about it I got the last loran C made:D
I use loran at work every day as do the other 200 boats in the harbor. but its more out of habit than need. Furuno was the last place you could get a loran. and as far as I know they quit making them as of this year. trust me you don't want one at 2000.00 a copie. For me Its good to have redundancy in the form of two seperate systems they are not as easy as gps but they are fairly accurate in the right hands 50 to60 ft aint bad considering the age of the system. The last time they said they were going to get rid of it they found out that it would cost more to tear down and dispose of the stations than it would to leave it running and maintain it for the next twenty years. and that was only about five years ago.I thought it was a scam by the gps manufacturers because it caused wholsale panic in a lot of the older fishermen that hadn't converted any of their way points to lat and long. alot of gps units got sold that year i guarantee. Cam alot folks still use it in the gulf its like a language of sort. people have been communicating possitions in TD's for so long thats its hard to learn to speak differently. If Im ever in trouble or one of my friends are in trouble and we can get our position out in TD"S then there are about 100 people who know not only exactly where you are but could drive right to you with out even thinking about it. the coast guard is only people we would give a position to in lat. long. alot of the rigs and patches are refered to by their TD's. It is antiquated but does work and quite afew people down here still use it as their primary means of navigation just because they cant get past the fact that when your going west the numbers go up on that new fangled GPS:D DINASAURS ARE NOT EXTINCT
 
#19 ·
Matt/Joni...interesting post...didn't realize there were 100 people left using it! <g>
Guess it is kinda like regular TV vs. HD TV...I suppose at some point, the government will take back the regular TV frequencies and the 100 or so people living in the Gulf will have to adjust to that too and get one of them new fangled sets. Probably somewhere around the turn of the next centruy! <G>
 
#21 ·
Well, they haven't scrapped lighthouses or buoys as of yet but the GPS system, its accuracy and dependability and all of the innovations for it these days sure make for a good argument that way. I suppose I'd vote for putting the system into standby and holding on to my old Ray-Jeff just in case (right next to my Davis sextant). 10 more years, when they've found the way to make GPS wipe yer butts, then we can trash out our lorans.
 
#22 ·
I guess if you have a LORAN receiver and live in an area of coverage, then having the government keep LORAN transmitting is a good deal. For those without a receiver, and unable to buy one, or at a competitive price and who live outside LORANs coverage - the government need not spend the money.

The US Navy quit supporting the system and cleverly sold the European chain to the Europeans. The Europeans discovered it needed upgrading to keep working and did so for a few years. Then the enthusiam wained as they discovered how few users there were. The Irish had the EC pay for a new station, but they did not switch it on, as the locals complained about the effect on their potatoes. The Germans put their station on offer to anyone who wanted to take over its expense. France wants to keep it for their military, just in case the US do something clever with GPS in the Bay of Biscay. The British never had a LORAN station, but they found an old BBC radio tower at Rugby, which might make a handy start, so Trinity House is now strongly supporting it - because GPS is soooooo vulnerable (one sneeze and its gone). I hear the Japanese have a bit of a chain too, plus the Russians have a slightly incompatible copy. I hear the US LORAN lobbyists say that the Europeans have an enhanced system operational, but try buying a non-experimental receiver for it - still none on sale. On this side of the pond, the lobbyists point to the great progress the FAA is making on adopting LORAN for aviation. More smoke and mirrors. If LORAN was not a system past its time, the US Navy would have kept it.

PS: Around here, lighthouses are being disused and virtual bouys introduced as AIS messages.
 
#23 ·
You know, I would hate to see light houses dissapear - though I could give a crap about Loran. For me, it is always wierdly reassuring to come in from sea or be making a passage at night and see the light (visually, not on some chart screen or paper map with a plotted course). I don't use it for navigation, per se, but when I have made a passage at night and am coming in, to see that light is always reassuring to know my chart plotter has not been lying!!! Weird, I know. Maybe it is just me.
 
#24 ·
Besides, lighthouses are such icons for photography... can you imagine a coastal photo without any lighthouses? Sad day indeed.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top