GPS approach safety case

wrote in message ...

My recollection is that legacy RNAV aircraft can meet the Euro
requirements
quite easily using DME/DME.

"Legacy" as in already having an RNAV system as part of the FMS that works
on a different sensor? Yes, but we're talking systems that cost as much as
many GA aircraft are worth.

Those clunky birds don't even have GPS.
Basically, Euro wanted crummy VOR aircraft out of the system.

And it seems to have had the desired effect. Navigation in Europe these
days tends to be from five-letter waypoint to five-letter waypoint (or
rather, direct to five-letter waypoint). In NW Europe at least, most routes
are now RNAV routes.

Julian

"Roger Halstead" wrote in message
...

Here I have basick RNAV and it doesn't even have a GPS input.
Strictly the old KNS-80, but it is RNAV ... over here.

We have one too, and it bought us an exemption for a few years. But it
doesn't meet current B-RNAV requirements for two reasons:

1) Its VOR is no longer approved for IFR use in Europe, since it doesn't
meet FM-immunity requirements -- I think they made a filter kit for the
upgrade to FM immune, but its cost was a serious fraction of the cost of a
TSO-C129a GPS!

2) B-RNAV equipment has to have a waypoint database, so that when they sent
you to FOOBA the nav kit knows where you're going, even if you don't.

Julian

wrote in message
...
Julian, so what is the reason no gps approaches in the UK?
What is the CAA waiting for?
Are there not some fields that could benefit from an approach that can
be lined up exactly with the centerline?
Is it only politics?

Good questions. I'd rather not put words into the CAA's mouth. I just want
to ask the questions once armed with the safety case!

Julian

Well, yes. If one checks with them, one will find:

http://www.reelektronika.nl/

with the current status of the project as well as many links.

Generally speeking, I find the concept of a back-up rnav with a

- different technology,
- different frequency band,
- different modulation and a
- ground-bases vs. space-based set-up of the stations *very* appealing.

Also the cost of installation and operation are only a fraction of what the
space-based system would require.

Here is a citation from a private email:

"Galileo is a European initiative to make sure that high-level satellite
technology remains also available in Europe, [SNIP]
However, the systems are indeed very much alike which means that both
systems will , unfortunately, be sensitive to intentional and unintentional
interference."

The only other option for a back-up rnav I can see at the horizon are small,
selfcontained solid state INS.

....just my 5 pence...

Happy Flying, Eckard

"Julian Scarfe" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:atLwc.293$%a5.124@newsfe5-win...
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...
Google "eurofix" to get a glimpse of the future.

Interesting, though it doesn't appear to have been updated for three years
(including the "live" test data)!

Julian

Roger, you and C. J. Campbell are referring to what is now known as legacy
loran. Enhanced loran timing has an accuracy of one nanosecond, compared to
the timers I used when I was in the USCG. New antennas, using the H-field,
have eliminated the effects of precipitation static. New "all-in-view"
receivers work with 30 to 40 stations simultaneously, obviating the need for
the pilot to select chains or be concerned with station geometry. It's a
whole new technology that should not be compared to legacy loran.

Go to http://www.locusinc.com/library/2004ICNS.pdf and you will see the
result of test flights showing the enhanced loran track overlying the GPS
track within a microscrump.

Bob Gardner

"Roger Halstead" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 6 Jun 2004 18:22:59 -0700, "Bob Gardner"
wrote:

OK, then, go to www.avionicsmagazine.com, June 2004 issue, and see the
future. My point is that within a few years, enhanced loran will be
available when GPS is not.

What is enhanced Loran? I've used the old Loran for years and have
developed a healthy distrust of its accuracy. It is handy and easy to
use, but I always want something to prove it's correct.

Multipathing, atmospherics, signal failure, complete loss of
navigation from the loran, 2 miles changes in position when changing
chains, and one time it had me at the wrong airport 20 miles from the
desired one. When I headed for home 2 hours later it still was
figuring I was in the wrong place. About 5 miles after I started
south it did a reset and low and behold, I was not back on course.
:-))

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Bob Gardner

"Julian Scarfe" wrote in message
news:atLwc.293$%a5.124@newsfe5-win...
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...
Google "eurofix" to get a glimpse of the future.

Interesting, though it doesn't appear to have been updated for three
years
(including the "live" test data)!

Julian

Who says they cant "USE" it? All DOD says is that they reserve the right
to degrade its accuracy or discontinue it. They arent saying "For US Use
Only".

Dave

C J Campbell wrote:
"Dave S" wrote in message
link.net...

At the risk of sounding endlessly questioning,

How would turning off GPS suddenly cause the death of thousands. Other
navigational equipment is required (at least in the US). And the GPS
system IS a DOD facility, operated by the US. I dont see any obligation
being promulgated on us to the rest of the world.

The Russians have their own version dont they? Do you think they have
any sense of responsibility to any US users who may happen to be using
their system?



Maybe that is Europe's problem. Somehow they can't understand that we are
not creepy, underhanded Europeans with an ulterior motive for everything.
They think that we must be just like they are.

So, if it is not to kill thousands of people, what is the hidden agenda
behind keeping DOD in charge of GPS? If turning off GPS will not endanger
anyone, what is the real objection that the Europeans have to it?

Bob Gardner wrote:

OK, then, go to www.avionicsmagazine.com, June 2004 issue, and see the
future. My point is that within a few years, enhanced loran will be
available when GPS is not.

That must be some joke fostered by the LORAN equipment manufacturers.

The high-end stuff that goes oceanic all have triple IRS units, which with
position mix will do far better than any LF "enhanced ADF."

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news
Roger, you and C. J. Campbell are referring to what is now known as legacy
loran.

Still does not address the issue of cost, though. Why develop an expensive
system the cost of which will be spread across a tiny user base when GPS
works just fine?

In the first place, the motivator is finding a backup for GPS that is
sufficiently removed in frequency and technology that both cannot be jammed;
users world-wide are demanding this. Second, your "small market" argument
fails when you consider the number of industries that are dependent on
timing...the telecommunications industry is one major market. Just read the
references I have given (and I have many more) to get the big picture. Or
Google "loran + gps.

Don't limit your thinking to aviation and maritime uses.

Bob Gardner

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news
Roger, you and C. J. Campbell are referring to what is now known as
legacy
loran.

Still does not address the issue of cost, though. Why develop an expensive
system the cost of which will be spread across a tiny user base when GPS
works just fine?

I usually appreciate your input to these newsgroups because you obviously
have an insider's perspective. In this case, however, you have not done your
homework. Enhanced GPS meets the RNP 0.3 standard, which will make it good
for nonprecision approaches when the funding is solid and the whole system
is upgraded.

Bob Gardner

wrote in message ...


Bob Gardner wrote:

OK, then, go to www.avionicsmagazine.com, June 2004 issue, and see the
future. My point is that within a few years, enhanced loran will be
available when GPS is not.

That must be some joke fostered by the LORAN equipment manufacturers.

The high-end stuff that goes oceanic all have triple IRS units, which with
position mix will do far better than any LF "enhanced ADF."