[time-nuts] The Demise of LORAN (was Re: Reference oscillator accuracy)

J. Forster jfor at quik.com
Sat Nov 14 23:28:57 UTC 2009


Somehow, I think they will keep GPS running whatever the cost. There is a
huge civilian constituency (everybody who cannot or is too lazy to read a
map) and relies on GPS to guide their Lexus to the nearest Starbucks.

Also, the military needs it to guide and target munitions. The initial
Afgahnistan victories over the Taliban would have been impossible without
GPS and the Special Forces teams.

The folly of the decision will likely not become apparent until there is a
major tragedy of some kind.

Frankly, I doubt that $190 M would buy a single GPS bird and launch today.

-John

================


> I was thinking about the costs side as well. From the 2010 budget info I
> have been able to find, "The savings could top $36 million in 2010", with
> something like $190M over the following 5 years.
>
> I think that the GPS birds are far more than that to maintain and replace.
> I
> found the following in a May 2009 article which indicates there may even
> be
> some question on the GPS service quality in the near future.
>
> The U.S. Government Accountability Office has identified that the USAF-run
> GPS satellite constellation is in trouble. There are currently 30
> satellites
> in orbit, the 24 needed for the system and six spares, which sounds like
> enough to run the system. The problem is that many of the satellites are
> getting old and will need replacing soon or will fail. The USAF has a
> program to replace the satellites, but it is US$1B over budget and almost
> three years behind schedule.
>
> U.S. Government Accountability Office recently said that it "is uncertain
> whether the air force will be able to acquire new satellites in time to
> maintain current GPS service without interruption...there will be an
> increased likelihood that in 2010, as old satellites begin to fail, the
> overall GPS constellation will fall below the number of satellites
> required
> to provide the level of GPS service that the U.S. government commits to."
>
> Why not keep LORAN and drop one spare bird.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quik.com>
> To: "Don Latham" <djl at montana.com>
> Cc: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement"
> <time-nuts at febo.com>
> Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 11:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] The Demise of LORAN (was Re: Reference oscillator
> accuracy)
>
>
>>
>> OK, so who is in a position to MAKE them care? How about those who
>> understand this is a Homeland Security (among other) issue? Perhaps FOX
>> news?
>>
>> Likely LORAN costs about as much a year as a mile of fence along the
>> Mexican border, probably less.
>>
>> FWIW,
>> -John
>>
>> ================
>>
>>> You've hit it on the nose. NONE of them are interested in anything but
>>> social issues. LORAN will not get any of them re-elected, and that's
>>> all
>>> any of 'em care about.
>>> Don
>>>
>>> J. Forster
>>>> Does anybody know who in Congress might take the lead in reversing the
>>>> decision? None of the reps in this state are at all likely to give a
>>>> damn.
>>>> Their interest is apparently only in social issues.
>>>>
>>>> -John
>>>>
>>>> =====================
>>>>
>>>>> AOPA is pushing congress to repristinate funding for LORAN. General
>>>>> aviation is probably the heaviest user on this Nav system. The
>>>>> aviation user community would love to see Nav systems with integrated
>>>>> LORAN and GPS capabilty, but the industry has done little in this
>>>>> area, due to lack of government commitment to LORAN. The FAA knows
>>>>> the
>>>>> GPS can be easily jammed, but has done nothing do push LORAN as the
>>>>> GPS backup system.
>>>>>





More information about the time-nuts mailing list