The Obama administration came up with a loopy plan to save a grand total of $36 million out of the proposed $3.5 trillion federal budget by canceling funding for the Coast-Guard-operated terrestrial Long Range Navigation system (Loran). A lot of folks (except the bean counters) view Loran as the only viable backup to the satellite based GPS system used for position, navigation and timing worldwide.
The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation thinks otherwise, and came up with $37 million in fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2011 in its version of the Coast Guard's 2010 authorization bill to operate the Loran system, as well as an upgrade to a more precise system called enhanced Loran (eLoran).
The Coast Guard operates 24 Loran stations nationwide and 19 stations have been upgraded to eLoran, which broadcasts a data channel to improve accuracy, availability and integrity of geospatial information.
eLoran provides position accuracy to between 8 feet and 65 feet, with availability measured at 99.9 percent and integrity at 99.99 percent, according to the International Loran Association. GPS offers position accuracy between 8 feet and 25 feet for civilian users, but its high-frequency, low-power signal can be jammed more easily than the low-frequency, high-power eLoran signals.
GPS was developed by the Defense Department for its precise navigation and location requirements in the 1970s, and since then it has morphed into a global utility used as the base technology for the Federal Aviation Administration's air traffic control system and its timing signals are used by telecommunications companies worldwide for network synchronization.
GPS faces more down-to-earth problems than jamming. The Government Accountability Office reported last month that GPS performance could start to degrade next year. Delays in the development and launch of two GPS satellites could reduce the number of satellites in orbit to below the minimum 24 that are needed to provide precise location information, GAO said.
Cristina Chaplain, director of acquisition and sourcing management at GAO, told a House hearing last month that if the number of GPS satellites drops below 24 it could have a heavy impact on users, including intercontinental commercial aviation, which "may have to cancel, delay or reroute flights." Cell phone enhanced 911 emergency services, which rely on GPS to locate callers, "could lose accuracy, particularly when operating in urban canyons or mountainous terrain," she added.
So, what's the problem in spending $37 million a year on an eLoran backup?
COMMENTS
Mr. Douglas, I don't make a cent from the eLoran being there or not. Your idea that it is not worth the cost is ludricris, just like Obama's plan to cut missile spending while two lunatic nations are hard at work developing ICBM capability and looking to place nukes on top of those missiles (not even a secret, they openly tell us they will use them when they get the capability). Again, any system that offers redundency from people intent on destroying us should be maintained. Only $ 37 million a year, we probably spend that in one hour supporting all the illegal aliens in this country. Tell me if it will be scary when an Iranian/North Korean nuke lands in your neighborhood?
Defender of the Free World 06/29/09 09:34 pm ET
I am a firm believer in back up systems. In this world today where groups are determined to attack and undermine our ability to operate and function every back up needs to be available and protected.
David Pinckney 06/16/09 10:10 am ET
What a bunch of demogoguery. Trying to scare people into eLoran because we may have a temporary dip in satellite coverage for GPS might make sense if eLoran were available to fill in the gap, but eLoran is not yet deployed and reversing Obama's funding cut would make absolutely no difference with the possible problem - and I emphasize "possible." Nor would it make any difference with current or planned cell phone positioning, since none of them are able or will be able to use eLoran.
There is a reasonable argument to be made that eLoran should be funded as a future backup for GPS position, but to call Obama's recoomendation "loopy" is unforgiveable and gives me the distinct impression the author has been paid off by people who would benefit from eLoran funding. I should note in closing that there are also very reasonable arguments against funding eLoran. We should not be fooled by the current federal funding party into thinking that any and all arguably good ideas can or should be funded.
John Douglas 06/15/09 09:31 am ET
At least one branch of our government understands the problem and is not letting a diaster happen by cutting Loran funding.....
Buck 06/15/09 08:05 am ET