LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

Where's Jim Donahue when ya need him?

http://www.defensedaily.com/cgi/av/s...ontimeon.h tm

Steve

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

Right here. Silliness. The vote is already in. LORAN is dead. Always was
dead when GPS came along. You can't support a local system as an
alternative to a global one. Stick to your guns Steve.... All those planes
and ships should have celestial capable crew on board. Won't actually help
anybody but it will provide employment to us old foggies who know how to use
a sextant. Sure LORAN could have been as good...and we also might have
learned to do an automatic job off stellar distances. Keep it up
Steve...you and OTN can end up the last of the true navigators..."We don't
know where we are...we don't know where we are going...but we have redundant
manual systems that may, (or may not) tell us where we are."

Go for it Stevel

Jim

"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Where's Jim Donahue when ya need him?


http://www.defensedaily.com/cgi/av/s...ontimeon.h tm

Steve

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

See Rec boats response....should not waste cruising bandwidth on this
nonsense. .. Jim
"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Where's Jim Donahue when ya need him?


http://www.defensedaily.com/cgi/av/s...ontimeon.h tm

Steve

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 19:11:06 -0700, "Jim Donohue"
wrote:

See Rec boats response....should not waste cruising bandwidth on this
nonsense. .. Jim

lol. Actually, I was just gonna post it to cruising since reliable
radio navigation is probably more important to cruisers than
recreational day boaters who stick to familiar waters.

Steve

"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Where's Jim Donahue when ya need him?


http://www.defensedaily.com/cgi/av/s...ontimeon.h tm

Steve

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 19:09:42 -0700, "Jim Donohue"
wrote:
"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Where's Jim Donahue when ya need him?


http://www.defensedaily.com/cgi/av/s...ontimeon.h tm

Right here. Silliness. The vote is already in. LORAN is dead. Always was
dead when GPS came along. You can't support a local system as an

More and more people are disagreeing with you and are finally coming to
realize the folly of trusting everything to one mode of navigation.

alternative to a global one. Stick to your guns Steve.... All those planes

Sure you can, for the area the local system covers.

Steve

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 03:01:20 GMT, (Steven Shelikoff)
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 19:09:42 -0700, "Jim Donohue"
wrote:
"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Where's Jim Donahue when ya need him?


http://www.defensedaily.com/cgi/av/s...ontimeon.h tm

Right here. Silliness. The vote is already in. LORAN is dead. Always was
dead when GPS came along. You can't support a local system as an

More and more people are disagreeing with you and are finally coming to
realize the folly of trusting everything to one mode of navigation.

alternative to a global one. Stick to your guns Steve.... All those planes

Sure you can, for the area the local system covers.

P.S., I'll bet the boaters from FL to NC who still have LORAN are pretty
happy they have that backup since GPS is supposed to be unreliable from
6/11 to 6/20 in that area due to military exercises.

Steve

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

Go to West Marine. Search on Loran. How may sets do you find Steve?
Dead...quite dead.
"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 19:11:06 -0700, "Jim Donohue"
wrote:

See Rec boats response....should not waste cruising bandwidth on this
nonsense. .. Jim

lol. Actually, I was just gonna post it to cruising since reliable
radio navigation is probably more important to cruisers than
recreational day boaters who stick to familiar waters.

Steve

"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Where's Jim Donahue when ya need him?



http://www.defensedaily.com/cgi/av/s...04&file=decisi
ontimeon.htm

Steve

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

"Jim Donohue" writes:

Go to West Marine. Search on Loran. How may sets do you find Steve?

Go to froogle.google.com. Search on Loran. You can still buy
new Furuno Loran-C receivers (but not from West Marine). And
there are plenty of perfectly good units available on Ebay.

--lyndon

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:04:08 -0700, "Jim Donohue"
wrote:

Go to West Marine. Search on Loran. How may sets do you find Steve?

There are plenty of places I can buy a LORAN set. I wouldn't get it
from West Marine in any case.

Steve

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

In deed you can. You can also find them at ham swap meets next to the old
boat anchor radios and at marine swap meets next to the 8 track stereos.

The point was not that they are unobtainable...but that the product has been
entirely abandoned by the leading retailers.

You can also find differential receivers...which will continue to be
marketed for the big boaters. But you will not find them for long on the
retailer shelves.

The thought that LORAN has some role as a backup to GPS in a military
jamming situation is pretty close to ludicrous. You really think the
electronic warfare guys are not going toimpact long wave? You think LORAN
is resistive of jamming?

Silliness...all silliness.

Jim
"Lyndon Nerenberg" wrote in message
...
"Jim Donohue" writes:

Go to West Marine. Search on Loran. How may sets do you find Steve?

Go to froogle.google.com. Search on Loran. You can still buy
new Furuno Loran-C receivers (but not from West Marine). And
there are plenty of perfectly good units available on Ebay.

--lyndon

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 18:19:16 -0700, "Jim Donohue"
wrote:

In deed you can. You can also find them at ham swap meets next to the old
boat anchor radios and at marine swap meets next to the 8 track stereos.

The point was not that they are unobtainable...but that the product has been
entirely abandoned by the leading retailers.

Not entirely.
http://www.furuno.com/Furuno/Rooms/D...ED834C6A%5D%5D

But close. Which is what you'd expect for a system who's future was
seriously in doubt until recent interest in keeping it alive. The
current momentum to extend the life of LORAN only started in 2001.

The thought that LORAN has some role as a backup to GPS in a military
jamming situation is pretty close to ludicrous. You really think the
electronic warfare guys are not going toimpact long wave? You think LORAN
is resistive of jamming?

I guess you don't know very much about RF jamming then. If so, you'd
know it's MUCH easier to effectively jam a wide area if you only have to
jam one frequency with extremely weak signals on it than a wide spectrum
of RF with much stronger signals. So yes, LORAN is much more resistive
of jamming than GPS. Orders of magnitude more resistive of jamming.

Steve

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

Steven Shelikoff wrote:
Where's Jim Donahue when ya need him?

http://www.defensedaily.com/cgi/av/s...ontimeon.h tm

Steve

About 4 years ago, my industry (Marine) "sources" started saying that we
should not count Loran out, and that plans were beginning to be
formulated to update/upgrade the system.
To be honest, my reaction, though positive, was not too optimistic.
It's nice to read that this is still being considered, though if it does
come to pass, I would also hope that they figure out how to increase
range and coverage.
Only a fool goes offshore/deepsea for extended voyages, with one single
navigation method available ..... and six GPS receivers does not mean
you have six methods, only that you have 5 backups for one method, maybe.

otn

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 05:00:28 GMT, otnmbrd wrote:



Steven Shelikoff wrote:
Where's Jim Donahue when ya need him?

http://www.defensedaily.com/cgi/av/s...ontimeon.h tm

Steve

About 4 years ago, my industry (Marine) "sources" started saying that we
should not count Loran out, and that plans were beginning to be
formulated to update/upgrade the system.
To be honest, my reaction, though positive, was not too optimistic.
It's nice to read that this is still being considered, though if it does
come to pass, I would also hope that they figure out how to increase
range and coverage.

I don't think there are plans to increase the range and coverage to
include, for instance, mid ocean. The plans are to greatly increase the
accuracy and to make LORAN a backup stratum 1 time source. That's good
for several industries, like cellphones, broadcasters, etc.

As long as it covers the coast out to around a few hundred miles, that's
good enough for 99.999% of boaters. You usually don't need ot know
*exactly* where you are when you're hundreds of miles from anywhere.


Only a fool goes offshore/deepsea for extended voyages, with one single
navigation method available ..... and six GPS receivers does not mean
you have six methods, only that you have 5 backups for one method, maybe.

Yup.

Steve

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

Steven Shelikoff wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 05:00:28 GMT, otnmbrd wrote:



Steven Shelikoff wrote:

Where's Jim Donahue when ya need him?

http://www.defensedaily.com/cgi/av/s...ontimeon.h tm

Steve

About 4 years ago, my industry (Marine) "sources" started saying that we
should not count Loran out, and that plans were beginning to be
formulated to update/upgrade the system.
To be honest, my reaction, though positive, was not too optimistic.
It's nice to read that this is still being considered, though if it does
come to pass, I would also hope that they figure out how to increase
range and coverage.


I don't think there are plans to increase the range and coverage to
include, for instance, mid ocean. The plans are to greatly increase the
accuracy and to make LORAN a backup stratum 1 time source. That's good
for several industries, like cellphones, broadcasters, etc.

As long as it covers the coast out to around a few hundred miles, that's
good enough for 99.999% of boaters. You usually don't need ot know
*exactly* where you are when you're hundreds of miles from anywhere.

I got the sense (sources) that they were at least contemplating some
increased coverage but most mid-oceans would still not apply.
This makes Loran only a limited backup/second source system, as G
there are many more areas to the world, than just the US, that could
benefit.

otn

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

"Jim Donohue" writes:

The thought that LORAN has some role as a backup to GPS in a military
jamming situation is pretty close to ludicrous. You really think the
electronic warfare guys are not going toimpact long wave?

Yes, that's what I think. GPS is useful in a military situation because
provides extremely high accuracy. Thus selective availability -- the
ability to remove that pinpoint accuracy on demand. Loran does not
provide the accuracy of GPS, therefore is cannot serve the same
military role. Thus there is no militarily-related reason to jam
Loran.

You think LORAN
is resistive of jamming?

No. What I think is there is no reason why the military would want
to.

--lyndon

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 05:00:28 GMT, otnmbrd
wrote:

Only a fool goes offshore/deepsea for extended voyages, with one single
navigation method available ..... and six GPS receivers does not mean
you have six methods, only that you have 5 backups for one method, maybe.

Exactly why I carry two GPSes (one for boat, one for Zodiac), a
bulkhead compass, a pelorus (with angles discreetly placed in tape on
coamings), a stopwatch, a depthfinder, current paper charts with
Notices to Mariners, cruising guides as needed and am looking for an
old sextant to teach myself celestial.

And I cruise the Great Lakes G. LORAN is obviously less popular, but
the older guys still have working sets and even RDF isn't
extinct.,,although I have no idea if it works unless you are line of
sight to an airport, say.

Overkill? Maybe, but my pilotage is pretty sharp, and I can do running
fixes, DR and LOPs and ETAs without firing up the GPS, just a few
neurons. Neither night nor fog bother me if I can get a visual fix
occasionally, which will serve us well when we go offshore, as will
learning celestial.

I believe the more familiar and practised one is with a variety of
techniques, the calmer and more pleasurable the sail. Half of "feel"
is just internalized technique and "sea sense" is no exception.

R.

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 05:00:28 GMT, otnmbrd
wrote:
snip
Only a fool goes offshore/deepsea for extended voyages, with one single
navigation method available ..... and six GPS receivers does not mean
you have six methods, only that you have 5 backups for one method, maybe.

ah....but if you're in the middle of nowhere and; even if your backup
GPS is functional, but GPS is down; you're better off staying where
you are...even if you don't know where that is.

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

Horace Brownbag wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 05:00:28 GMT, otnmbrd
wrote:
snip

Only a fool goes offshore/deepsea for extended voyages, with one single
navigation method available ..... and six GPS receivers does not mean
you have six methods, only that you have 5 backups for one method, maybe.


ah....but if you're in the middle of nowhere and; even if your backup
GPS is functional, but GPS is down; you're better off staying where
you are...even if you don't know where that is.

ah.... but if you have the ability to use other methods, not related to
GPS, there's no need to stay where you are, unless they too are down.

otn

LORAN here to stay? Maybe.
 

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 20:38:20 GMT, otnmbrd
wrote:



Horace Brownbag wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 05:00:28 GMT, otnmbrd
wrote:
snip

Only a fool goes offshore/deepsea for extended voyages, with one single
navigation method available ..... and six GPS receivers does not mean
you have six methods, only that you have 5 backups for one method, maybe.


ah....but if you're in the middle of nowhere and; even if your backup
GPS is functional, but GPS is down; you're better off staying where
you are...even if you don't know where that is.

ah.... but if you have the ability to use other methods, not related to
GPS, there's no need to stay where you are, unless they too are down.

I was in an accelerated nursing program once. Git yer BSN in 1 year;
no sleep; pre-reqs required.

I'm in my, what was an equivalent to 2nd year student, and in the 1-1
debriefing I was doing with my instructor regarding the status of my
patient for the day, I go through the guy's vitals...heart rate and
rthymn, temp., other stuff to show we've read the text, and used our
heads.

She interupts my report to ask a question, as expected, if something
wasn't clear.

"What's 'normal' body temperature?"

"Huh?"...I just didn't get this. I asked for clarification. "What do
you mean...?"

"What is the normal body temperature of an averge person?"

"Really?"

"Yes."

"Really?"...but she gave that look that said she wasn't going to
budge.

This was too much for me.

I said, "I hate to be insulting, but I learned that in elementary
school. I think most people have. I remember it being repeated, and
repeated throughout the grades through high school. I'm in the second
year equivalent of an accelerated program. My classmates and I didn't
'just fall off the turnip truck'."

"If you have to ask me; and I didn't know what the generally
considered human body temp is; at this stage of the game...we've got
some very serious problems with the system that put us here in the
hallway."