Slashdot Mirror


US Coast Guard Intends To Kill LORAN-C

adaviel writes "LORAN (Long Range Aids to Navigation) is an electronic navigation system using low-frequency radio, used by many boaters (including me) before GPS. It has an approximately 200m accuracy and is a functional replacement in case GPS fails or the US implements selective availability in time of war. The US Coast Guard, part of the Department of Homeland Security, intends to turn it off starting February 8." This is in spite of $160M spent on modernizing LORAN stations over the past 10 years.

11 of 316 comments (clear)

  1. hmm by nomadic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It has an approximately 200m accuracy

    Wow, I didn't know it was that inaccurate.

    and is a functional replacement in case GPS fails or the US implements selective availability in time of war.

    If the US implements selective availability of GPS, they can certainly also just turn off Loran-C.

    1. Re:hmm by ivan_w · · Score: 3, Insightful

      200m is good for what ?

      - Retrieve a crab/lobstrer pot ?
      - Retrieve a Man Overboard ?
      - Fetch a gill net ?
      - Meet with a sister ship during a seine net operation ? ... No.. lemme tell you.. 200m is NOT good enough !

      (No personal experience here - but my Old Man did !)

      --Ivan

    2. Re:hmm by mysidia · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Does anyone else see the irony? in using LORAN US implements selective availability, when LORAN is only accurate to 200m ?

      Selective availability was a (currently disabled) feature of GPS that adds intentional errors up to 100 meters / 328.08 ft to publicly available GPS signal...

      Before SA was turned off in 2000 the typical SA errors were 32ft horizontal, 98ft vertical.

      SA is easily defeated using Differential GPS.

      One thing to note about LORAN, vs GPS, however is: GPS is basically owned by the United States. The US government has full control over it.

      On the other hand, LORAN is an international system, used by many countries... Many countries, the US, Japan, Europe, use LORAN.

      I'm sure the US government can't stand being part of an international system... they've got to turn off their receivers, to tighten their stranglehold on navigation control systems.

      There can't be an alternative to GPS available, when the US needs to switch it off or block the signal over/around certain areasw in an emergency or time of war...

    3. Re:hmm by geekmux · · Score: 4, Insightful

      200m is good for what ?

      - Retrieve a crab/lobstrer pot ? - Retrieve a Man Overboard ? - Fetch a gill net ? - Meet with a sister ship during a seine net operation ? ... No.. lemme tell you.. 200m is NOT good enough !

      (No personal experience here - but my Old Man did !)

      --Ivan

      Sit in the middle of the ocean and turn off GPS. Perhaps you'll quickly see the value of "good enough". I'm all for a backup plan, and a backup plan to the backup plan, especially if we can avoid pissing away a $160M investment.

  2. Costs and benefits by MaXintosh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is in spite of $160M spent on modernizing LORAN stations over the past 10 years.

    There's this thing called the Concorde Fallacy that is relevant here. It doesn't matter how much money you spent, all that should matter is anticipated future costs and benefits. And I think for a 200m redundant navigation system, future costs >> benefits.

  3. Last time... by RedBear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Last time I saw a LORAN-C device was on my family's sailboat that we used to motor-sail to Alaska from Washington through the Inside Passage. That was 1990. It wasn't much use even at the time. Radar and charts were much more helpful with navigation. I haven't even heard mention of the term LORAN-C for a very long time. I don't think most vessels have a LORAN-C receiver installed anymore. Maybe big ones, but not the hundreds of thousands of small to medium size vessels. Hard to justify keeping it running if nobody is using it. What's the benefit if almost nobody owns the necessary hardware anymore? Just playing Devil's Advocate. I'm sure it's still useful to somebody, somewhere.

  4. Sunk cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is in spite of $160M spent on modernizing LORAN stations over the past 10 years.

    Econ 101: don't make decisions on the basis of sunk costs.

  5. Re:Idiotic. by jpmorgan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No country wants to maintain them? What are you smoking?

    The GPS system is launched and operated by the US Air Force, first and foremost for US military activities. It wasn't some magical pan-national committee that put the satellites into orbit and built the ground stations. And the USAF maintains them and modernizes them. If GPS goes offline, all those fancy GPS guided weapons go offline too.

    As for redundancy... put two GPS receivers on your ship.

  6. That's NUTS by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hear hear.

    What bugs me is this statement from the Coast Guard:

    If a single, domestic national system to back up GPS is identified as being necessary, the Department of Homeland Security will complete an analysis of potential backups to GPS. The continued active operation of Loran-C is not necessary to advance this evaluation.

    They're studying whether they NEED a backup so they'll turn off the only current backup before the study is finished or (if required) the replacement backup is deployed?

    That's NUTS! What happens if GPS is compromised between the decommissioning of LORAN-C and the deployment of the hypothetical replacement?

    Also: Why deploy a DIFFERENT backup and make all the users buy ANOTHER device when they ALREADY HAVE LORAN-C equipment? Even if the equipment was FREE the cost of obtaining it and installing it, multiplied by the number of users, would be astronomical. Unless something damned cheap, built off some other deployed tech, is designed, the cost of maintaining LORAN-C would be a drop in the bucket.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  7. How about by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Insightful

    200m is good for what ?
    - Retrieve a crab/lobstrer pot ?
    - Retrieve a Man Overboard ?
    - Fetch a gill net ?
    - Meet with a sister ship during a seine net operation ? ... No.. lemme tell you.. 200m is NOT good enough !

    How about:

    - Find a port when you're somewhere random in an ocean?

    I'd be HAPPY to live with a 200 meter error if I'm trying to, say, get the Golden Gate Bridge to show over the horizon in time to beat a squall line into San Francisco Bay. Or to know if I'm FAR ENOUGH OFF the west coast of North America that I won't be blown onto it before a storm I can't outrun blows by.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  8. Re:LISTEN, TERRORIST-COMMIE LOVERS !! by fyngyrz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's more likely they're planning to turn it off because the European GPS equivalent is set to go online soon.

    All it'll take to turn every one of the satellites in both systems into fried orbital junk is one little hiccup from the sun in the right direction. It is extremely foolish to turn off this system; once off, it will degrade even if left physically in place, and it won't be functional when needed -- which will be very suddenly.

    The odds of non-satellite based navigation being needed eventually near 100%. Such solar "hiccups" have happened several times since the middle of last century. Some destroyed equipment on the ground -- and at those energies, nothing in orbit is likely to survive intact. That's not to say we've seen the worst the sun can do, either. Prior to the last century, high energy solar events had only non electronic technologies to induce current in; most likely weren't even noticed beyond a curious increase in corrosion here and there.

    It never fails to astonish me how foolish our government can be.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.