You Loranimals might find this interesting. If you're not a Loranimal, you might still find this interesting as it could effect advancements in the ET Rate.

http://www.gpsworld.com/transp...endangered-life-8781

It dawned on me that the link might be removed, so here is the text.



The Perils of LORAN: an Endangered LifeAugust 25, 2009


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Although the Independent Study of LORAN chartered by the U.S. government’s own Secretary of Transportation produced an unequivocal recommendation to keep LORAN and modernize to eLORAN as a vital back-up to GPS and the national infrastructure, the program remains mired in Congress, and in danger of sinking under the ooze. The Obama administration has used it as a political football, a misguided example of how to save money in the budget. Sufficient members of Congress have climbed aboard the ignorance bandwagon, abetted by drones in the Department of Homeland Security. A recent debate in the Senate provides yet another example how a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

The following excerpt comes from the Senate floor on July 8, 2009, in debate over Senator McCain’s Amendment 1406 to HR 2892.

The amendment proposed by Senator McCain called for halting the LORAN system immediately and not letting it operate for the remaining five months of the year, as stated in the original bill. The $18 million sum mentioned is one estimate of the operational costs of the system for those five months.

Senator Tom Coburn, Republican, Oklahoma: Mr. President, in 2007 I offered this direct amendment. We spent 3 hours on it on the Senate floor. Everybody agreed we needed to get rid of this program then. We had some concerns. The thing I do not understand is why we are waiting the extra 5 months to shut down a program. There is nobody who needs this program. That 5 months — just that 5 months of continuing the program — costs the American taxpayers $18 million. First of all, nobody is using this system now. Nobody is using it. Why can't they notify in 3 months all the people — which is zero — who are using this today? The other question is, why does it take $35 million? Where is the backup detail that shows what the costs will be? Maybe it is $18 million.

Senator Patty Murray, Democrat, Washington: It is $18 million.

Senator Coburn: So why does it take $18 million? There are only seven stations left, and we are talking about facilities that are smaller than these four desks. Tell me how it takes $2.5 million per buoy to shut them down. Only from Washington would it take that much money. Where is the basis for the knowledge that it takes $18 million?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Editor’s Note: The Senator refers to the LORAN system as “seven stations left,” “facilities that are smaller than these four desks,” and “buoy.” None of which is even remotely correct. Perhaps the reason he does not understand is because he does not know what he is talking about.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Senator Susan Collins, Republican, Maine:
Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the Senator from Arizona.

Let me start with some background on the LORAN system since it may not be familiar to many of our colleagues. This is a radio navigation system with 24 land-based transmitters which are operated by the Coast Guard that can be used to determine the location and speed of the receiver. Some mariners and aviators use the current system, which is known as LORAN-C, for navigation, while others have switched to the GPS system. An upgraded LORAN system, which is known as eLORAN, would use LORAN-C transmitting stations as its foundation and it would serve as a backup to GPS as well as a primary navigational tool.

This infrastructure would provide the foundation that is necessary to have a backup for the GPS. If we abandon the LORAN-C system, as Senator McCain has advocated, we would lose the considerable investment of $160 million we have already made to deploy the eLORAN system, and this system is one that a joint Department of Homeland Security and Department of Transportation assessment team has recommended as the backup for GPS.

Why do we need a backup for GPS? The fact is GPS is vulnerable to atmospheric interference and jamming. A loss of the GPS signal for even a short duration and in an isolated region would adversely affect cell phone coverage, the national power grid, and air traffic.

Our nation needs a reliable backup. This isn't just my opinion. This is the considered opinion of an independent assessment team that just filed its final report in January of this year. One of the previous speakers referred to a GAO report that is over 25 years old. I am talking about an assessment that was just completed in January of this year. DHS and the Department of Transportation jointly commissioned an assessment team that included a diverse group of senior decisionmakers and experts from government, academia, and industry. This team reviewed 40 previous reports, interviewed the key stakeholders, industry representatives, and other experts, and received 980 comments on what should be done, and 93 percent of those comments were in favor of maintaining the LORAN system — 93 percent.

Listen to who some of the commentators were. Sprint Nextel, which is the supplier of critical communications capabilities, and the Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration both stated that they currently use the LORAN system and that they support upgrading to eLoran as a backup and complement to the GPS system. The Department of Energy moves controlled nuclear material around the country and uses LORAN-C as "an active and robust supplement to GPS.'' This is the Department of Energy's Nuclear Security Administration telling us it needs and relies on the LORAN-C system. They describe it as an active and robust supplement to GPS. The Department of Energy uses LORAN-C to provide location information on nuclear material in the event of blocked visibility, solar storms, and intentional jamming of the GPS system.

In January of this year, when the team released its report, it unanimously concluded that the eLORAN should serve as the national backup system for GPS and that the LORAN-C infrastructure should be maintained until we have full deployment of the eLoran.

Think what we are doing if this amendment passes. What we are proposing is to discontinue a system that is being relied upon by the Department of Energy and countless other users. That is why this independent assessment team — this isn't my opinion, this is the independent assessment team's conclusion — says we must maintain the current system until we have fully transitioned to the eLORAN system, which will be the backup for GPS. What is being proposed by this amendment is to discontinue the LORAN-C system prior to having a backup in place. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Again, I would emphasize that this was a unanimous conclusion of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Transportation's independent assessment team as of January of this year. It is the newest assessment we have. It is the most complete review that has ever been done.

The fact is, the weaknesses in the GPS system are well known. A GAO report published in May raised serious concerns regarding the near- and long-term health and reliability of the GPS network, noting that there is a high risk — that is GAO's assessment — that the Air Force will not be able to meet its schedule for the deployment of GPS satellites. The Department of Defense predicts that over the next several years, many of the older satellites will reach the end of their operational life faster than they will be able to be replaced.

A Wall Street Journal article in June concluded that the GPS satellite system — the article cited new interference problems with the signals being transmitted by recently launched GPS satellites, raising additional serious concerns about the timeline for the deployment of the next generation of GPS satellites.

The assessment team reported on a GPS interference incident in San Diego that lasted 3 hours. The GPS system is not failproof. It can be intentionally interfered with or it can stop operating due to atmospheric conditions.

The eLORAN would fulfill the requirement established in National Security Presidential Directive 39 for a backup to GPS. This is a modest investment of funds to make sure we do not experience a dangerous gap.

Another myth we keep hearing is that there hasn't been sufficient study into the issue of whether a backup is needed for the GPS system. In fact, as I have indicated, eLORAN has been exhaustively studied. The result of these successive scientific and budgetary analyses is that eLORAN represents the most cost-effective backup to GPS.

Again, that is not just my opinion. That is the unanimous conclusion of the independent assessment team that was established by the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Transportation.

I urge the defeat of the amendment.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Editor’s note: Fortunately, Senator Collins’ speech carried the day. When the senate voted the amendment was rejected 37 – 61. A video of Senator Collins’ speech is available on the website of CrossRate Technology.
However, LORAN and eLORAN are far from out of the woods yet. Several conflicting measures in Congress seek to either kill or continue the programs.

If there were another jamming incident, this time in the DC area, the senators would be singing a different tune.

Given the information Navcen knows about the previous inadvertant Navy Jamming, let them speculate the effects to the DC area. It wouldn't be pretty folks.

Paraphrasing Mark Twain, the demise of Loran is exaggerated.

Wondering about the future of loran:

http://www.govtrack.us/congres...l.xpd?bill=h111-2892

In the upper right corner choose "full text view" then Scroll down to Sec 559a.

This was signed into law yesterday and since the commandant announced the closure of LORAN months ago, I think LORAN-C is history!

Say goodbye to advancement in the ET Rating!!!

Looks like the go date of 4 Jan, 2010 is what we were waiting to hear........

I wouldn't count my chickens yet, boys...there are a few caveats that have to be met....


Sec. 559. (a) Subject to subsection (b), none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be available to operate the Loran-C signal after January 4, 2010.

(b) The limitation in subsection (a) shall take effect only if:

(1) the Commandant of the Coast Guard certifies that the termination of the operation of the Loran-C signal as of the date specified in subsection (a) will not adversely impact the safety of maritime navigation; and

(2) the Secretary of Homeland Security certifies that the Loran-C system infrastructure is not needed as a backup to the Global Positioning System or to meet any other Federal navigation requirement.

(c) If the certifications described in subsection (b) are made, the Coast Guard shall, commencing January 4, 2010, terminate the operation of the Loran-C signal and commence a phased decommissioning of the Loran-C system infrastructure.

(d) Not later than 30 days after such certifications pursuant to subsection (b), the Commandant shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives a report setting forth a proposed schedule for the phased decommissioning of the Loran-C system infrastructure in the event of the decommissioning of such infrastructure in accordance with subsection (c).

(e) If the certifications described in subsection (b) are made, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Commandant of the Coast Guard, may, notwithstanding any other provision of law, sell any real and personal property under the administrative control of the Coast Guard and used for the Loran-C system, by directing the Administrator of General Services to sell such real and personal property, subject to such terms and conditions that the Secretary believes to be necessary to protect government interests and program requirements of the Coast Guard: Provided, That the proceeds, less the costs of sale incurred by the General Services Administration, shall be deposited as offsetting collections into the Coast Guard ‘Environmental Compliance and Restoration’ account and, subject to appropriation, shall be available until expended for environmental compliance and restoration purposes associated with the Loran-C system, for the costs of securing and maintaining equipment that may be used as a backup to the Global Positioning System or to meet any other Federal navigation requirement, for the demolition of improvements on such real property, and for the costs associated with the sale of such real and personal property, including due diligence requirements, necessary environmental remediation, and reimbursement of expenses incurred by the General Services Administration: Provided further, That after the completion of such activities, the unexpended balances shall be available for any other environmental compliance and restoration activities of the Coast Guard.

quote:

(2) the Secretary of Homeland Security certifies that the Loran-C system infrastructure is not needed as a backup to the Global Positioning System or to meet any other Federal navigation requirement.

Ha!

http://pnt.gov/policy/legislation/bills.shtml#loran

Now this is interesting. It's gone, no, it's not.

It's gone, IF it's no longer a maritime system as deemed by Commandant.

It stays, if it's converted to eLoran as a viable backup to GPS (timing etc.)

So, the President will get his wishes and terminate Loran-C on 032359Z Jan 10. At 040000Z Jan 10, the newly commissioned eLoran units will be managed by USCG personnel. Maybe they will contract out the staffing and maintenance.

Isn't life grand in the world of politics. The Congress will never relieve the CG from their attachment to the Loran program.

SEC. 222. SUPPLEMENTAL POSITIONING SYSTEM.

(a) Study Required- The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation and other heads of appropriate Federal departments, shall conduct a study to determine whether there is a continued need for a supplemental air and maritime navigation system as a backup to the Global Positioning System.

(b) Study Components- The study shall--

(1) analyze the impact of the termination of a supplemental system may have on maritime and aviation safety, including general aviation;

(2) review national navigational capabilities available in the event of a loss of the Global Positioning System;

(3) investigate the capabilities of currently available radionavigational technologies and systems, including the LORAN-C program currently operated by the Coast Guard as well as modernized LORAN systems, and costs and infrastructure requirements necessary to establish a supplemental system nationwide; and

(4) include recommendations for future courses of action.

(c) Public Comment- The Secretary shall--

(1) publish in the Federal Register a draft report containing findings, conclusions, and recommendations from the study required by subsection (a);

(2) accept public comments regarding such draft report for a period of not less than 60 days after the date the draft report is published in the Federal Register; and

(3) consider any such public comments in the preparation of a final report under subsection (d).

(d) Final Report- The Secretary shall submit a final report, including the findings and recommendations, of the study required under subsection (a) and responses to comments gathered under subsection (c) to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate not later than 1 year after the enactment of this Act.

(e) Secretary Defined- As used in this section, the term `Secretary' means the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating.

JoeJester,
Can you give some more insight on how you think this is going to effect the ET rate if it goes the way you say it might? Thanks

If LORAN goes away, ALL of us ETs better be ready to stay the same rank we are right now because our rate is going to be very fat for a good lttle while.

Doesnt look good for any rate with all of the SRB's being pulled........

Well with the 12 scheduled retirements and ME rate standing up and the fact its still going to take a little while to have the loran stations disassembled and shut down I think we will still have some advancements. I'm at least hoping so since I'm #11 on the MAY 09 ET1 list!

Well see as the first cut was Zero all the way down the broad for ET and now there is NO bonus for Guaranteed ET A school or SRB. If you can it might be a good idea to start looking at putting in a package for OSC or ME (if it is not too late)

I guess I will reword my question. (sorry for the confusion) I already know what is going to happen if "loran" shuts down. What I am asking is does anyone know what kind of effect there will be if we switch to ELORAN? Is it the same as closing down loran stations? As far as advancements go, if loran shuts down we will probably see a quarter of the advancements, if not less. I believe the numbers are in one of the ET force notes back in August or July.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Steezno,

quote:

Maybe they will contract out the staffing and maintenance.

That's been the plan all along.

quote:

Originally posted by CutterET:
Well with the 12 scheduled retirements and ME rate standing up and the fact its still going to take a little while to have the loran stations disassembled and shut down I think we will still have some advancements. I'm at least hoping so since I'm #11 on the MAY 09 ET1 list!

I do wish you the best but I do want you to keep in mind with the ME rating those billets are coming from all rates and ranks meaning those ET jobs are moving to the ME rate and are lost in the ET rate.

quote:

Originally posted by gsandman:

quote:

Originally posted by CutterET:
Well with the 12 scheduled retirements and ME rate standing up and the fact its still going to take a little while to have the loran stations disassembled and shut down I think we will still have some advancements. I'm at least hoping so since I'm #11 on the MAY 09 ET1 list!

I do wish you the best but I do want you to keep in mind with the ME rating those billets are coming from all rates and ranks meaning those ET jobs are moving to the ME rate and are lost in the ET rate.

I'm actually going to have to say you are incorrect. ME is all brand NEW billets for the CG and will not be taking billets away from any rate. Say 60 ETs are chosen that makes 60 open ET billets. ME has created all new billets not taking away from other rates.

Right now you have three scenarios ...

Status quo ... Loran-C remains Loran-C or shifts to eLoran fully managed, staffed, and maintained by the owners of the Loran System since 1941, the USCG. Effect: ET Billets as well as MK, HS, SK, FS, and CWO(ELC) remain constant.

Convert to eLoran with a mix of CG managed, staffed, and maintained with A-76 contractors doing the field maintenance. Loss of billets.

To put this in prospective, when they closed the European, Pacific, and Hawaiian Loran-C units, that equated to about 57 ET billets. Also keep in mind that was only 13 stations, so some of those billets came from the support side. Closing the current crop of stations in this mix would be much higher in number. The ET Force manager should know how many billets are affected, as you can not simply add up those in the billet manual for the Loran-C stations.

The closing twenty years ago clamped down on advancements for a few years ... not cycles ... years. I seem to recall it was about three or four. This is where you have to bust your a$$ and study for the SWE, and I don't mean just a few hours, if you wish to advance.

Closing Loran-C will have a similiar effect. Loss of all the billets, support, management, and operational. The advancements would clamp down tight.

Personally, I wouldn't want to see it go. Yes, I know the marine navigation side is all but gone. Some may think that is the end of the military mission. I believe cooler heads will prevail and understand the timing side is just as important if not more than the navigation side. Think about the effects of losing the sole source, GPS, to the the various industries that use it for timing. That infrastructure disruption would be devistating.