If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
If you have contacts at FAA HQ, check out Mitchell Narins, AND-702, whose
2002 paper "FAA Evaluation of Loran-C I-CNS Conference Briefing" laid a foundation for many of the arguments in favor of continued funding. He is not, to my knowledge, in the pocket of the loran manufacturers. 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." |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message ...
If you have contacts at FAA HQ, check out Mitchell Narins, AND-702, whose 2002 paper "FAA Evaluation of Loran-C I-CNS Conference Briefing" laid a foundation for many of the arguments in favor of continued funding. He is not, to my knowledge, in the pocket of the loran manufacturers. I've seen him give several talks at ION and attended the ICNS conference. Mitch is good people with a sound technical understanding and has no problem dancing Bob Gardner Regards, Jon |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Gardner wrote: 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. What's enhanced GPS in this context? GPS today meets RNP 0.3. If you meant enhanced LORAN, no one I have dealt with is even talking about such a requirement. And, the airlines aren't about to spend any money on anything like that. Like I said, "triple mixed" IRS does quite nicely in a pinch and they are already part of the equation. The GPS goes out and you use triple mix IRS postion until you get into a DME environment, then DME/DME does the update until you get onto the ILS. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
If you meant enhanced LORAN, no one I have dealt with is even talking about
such a requirement. And, the airlines aren't about to spend any money on anything like that. Like I said, "triple mixed" IRS does quite nicely in a pinch and they are already part of the equation. In June 2002 I attended a presentation on LORAN given by Mitch Narins. Here are the key points I noted then: - The goal would be to provide a backup to GPS, capable of RNP 0.3 non-precision approach. - LORAN availability, accuracy, integrity, and continuity were all insufficient, and were all considered medium technical risks. Integrity was considered the biggest challenge. - It was estimated that 5 to 7 years of development would be needed before LORAN could serve as a backup to GPS. - No market was seen for standalone LORAN receivers - the enhanced LORAN would be used only as an integrated component in multimode receivers. I don't know what progress, if any, has been made in the past two years. Barry |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Barry wrote: In June 2002 I attended a presentation on LORAN given by Mitch Narins. Here are the key points I noted then: - The goal would be to provide a backup to GPS, capable of RNP 0.3 non-precision approach. I have a goal to win the Lottery Jackpot, too. ;-) I had an Azure portable Loran that I got in 1988, as I recall. Then, they filled in the mid-continent gap a couple of years later. Nonetheless, here in Southern California, where the goemetry goes tango-alpha, I often saw 1/2 nautical mile errors. Keep in mind that RNP is a total system commitment, from pilot, to avionics, to accuracy and integrety of the sensor. The powers-that-be decreed that GPS could deliver RNP 0.3 with RAIM and approach display scaling of 0.3 n.m. Thus, we got GPS RNP 0.3 by fiat, rather than by the ICAO definition of RNP. The snake oil salesmen have been working hard to get to .20 and even .11, but so far (fortunately) the feds won't buy into it, except for local differential. Boeing has a great demo system at Moses Lake that works at one airport with one very advanced 737-900. Fours years have passed and there is no RNP .20 or .11 except with Boeing's demo at one airport with one very expensive airplane. And, this is working with the best stuff, not with "computed ADF." ;-) |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Four years have passed and there is no RNP .20 or .11 except with Boeing's
demo at one airport with one very expensive airplane. Doesn't Alaska Airlines have a special procedure into Juneau with RNP less than 0.3? |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Barry wrote: Four years have passed and there is no RNP .20 or .11 except with Boeing's demo at one airport with one very expensive airplane. Doesn't Alaska Airlines have a special procedure into Juneau with RNP less than 0.3? Yes, but that is bogus RNP, in that they use terrain mapping radar and some other enhancements to keep off the canyon walls. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Noel wrote: In article , wrote: Doesn't Alaska Airlines have a special procedure into Juneau with RNP less than 0.3? Yes, but that is bogus RNP, in that they use terrain mapping radar and some other enhancements to keep off the canyon walls. anything that helps the nav system maintain containment and integrity is perfectly ok. -- Bob Noel By that definition, eyeballs work well when you can see. No doubt that belts and suspenders work well, but using the terrain mapping feature of airborne weather radar doesn't fit the ICAO definition of RNP. It works at Juneau because of the topography. It wouldn't work at most places. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Approach Question- Published Missed Can't be flown? | Brad Z | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | May 6th 04 04:19 AM |
Procedure Turn | Bravo8500 | Instrument Flight Rules | 65 | April 22nd 04 03:27 AM |
Why is ADF or Radar Required on MFD ILS RWY 32 Approach Plate? | S. Ramirez | Instrument Flight Rules | 17 | April 2nd 04 11:13 AM |
Which of these approaches is loggable? | Paul Tomblin | Instrument Flight Rules | 26 | August 16th 03 05:22 PM |
IR checkride story! | Guy Elden Jr. | Instrument Flight Rules | 16 | August 1st 03 09:03 PM |