Congressman wants to re-activate LORAN
Is this a belated Aprils Fools joke ?
Area Congressman John Garamendi, D-Walnut Grove, has introduced legislation to make better use of the government's "underused" long-range navigation system, known as LORAN. Re: Congressman wants to re-activate LORAN
The bipartisan National Positioning, Navigation and Timing Resilience and Security Act of 2015 would require the secretary of defense to develop the system for military and civilian uses. The LORAN system would be used as a backup for America's Global Positioning System (GPS).
"A backup system could also reach places that GPS currently cannot, such as inside many buildings," Garamendi said. "This would help first responders and law enforcement more effectively protect the public."
Garamendi is the ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Committee.
• n n
Posted by John Davis on April 05, 2015 at 22:43:19.
In reply to Congressman wants to re-activate LORAN posted by jimvm on April 05, 2015
Hi Jim,
Unfortunately, I'm afraid it's not a joke. I've read studies about the risks of not having a backup for GPS, and indeed, the consequences could be widespread. But I'm afraid holding up LORAN as that backup is just starry-eyed and costly wishful thinking.
Even if they stick "e" in front of LORAN and add all the auxiliary data they can fit into the pulse train, about the only place it has real application as a "backup" to GPS would be in surface transportation. It is just plain not capable of adequate 3D location. Big glaring obvious problem area there: aviation.
For that matter, I have to question how vital a GPS backup is on land anyway. If there have been widespread industry complaints that trucks and trains are in mountain-shaded no-GPS areas too long to track adequately now, I'm not aware of them. LORAN isn't going to work in tunnels, any more than GPS does, and mountainous terrain does distort timing of LF signals arriving from different directions, so there would be anomalous positions reports with LORAN anyway.
(As for deliberate jamming of GPS with fake position data for the sake of hijacking a shipment, yes, that's possible. But it's an overly elaborate and unnecessary expedient, for reasons we can go into later if need be. And as for LORAN being harder to jam than GPS--not necessarily. In fact, it's relatively easy in the rail environment, and not entirely out of the question on long stretches of rural highway.)
Second obvious glaring problem area: the "G" in GPSS stands for Global. It's available virtually everywhere on earth, all the time, as long as enough sky is exposed. How is LORAN supposed to back up that capability? Ground-based systems require multiple stations within groundwave distance of the receiver to achieve full precision, meaning you have to build enough of them on every continent where you plan to operate...and good luck out on/over open oceans. Nobody could afford to build--let alone operate--a Global LORAN! Thus, for ground forces conducting a crucial mission on the trackless plains of Wazooistan, or a SEAL team scuttling a pirate, or a drone operator trying to follow a terrorist to his lair, there is NO viable backup system with the precision of GPSS.
Rep Garamendi may have worthy motives in wanting to aid emergency workers to track individuals inside buildings via their phones...although I'm personally not thrilled with that thought, on so many levels! Still, how is LORAN supposed to help? In how many steel-reinforced buildings do you have LF reception at all? Those babies are big Faraday cages at 100 kHz!
Even assuming a LORAN receiver of any accuracy whatsoever could be crammed into a phone, or that a magic centimeters-long antenna would be sufficient outdoors, it still wouldn't be adequate inside. Oh, and there remains that pesky problem of not even being able to tell which floor the subject is on because the system is fundamentally 2D.
Rather than pouring more money down that rabbit hole, if we're going to continue making the world more and more dependent on geopositioning, then we're going to have to get serious and do one of two things:
(1) Invent some new technology for backup that comes closer to GPS accuracy, but which is more robust and yet as cheap per user. Or better (IMO),
(2) Spend that money instead on hardening GPSS against realistic threats, up to and including massive solar flares. There's not a lot that can be done in the space segment itself, but we can:
-(a) Provision a basic fleet of satellites and launch vehicles at secure ground locations, and maintain them and the lauch facilities faithfully, to be ready for quick deployment. There are a few backups ready now, I gather, but not nearly enough in case the sun gives a repeat of the 1859 Carrington event. (The government should give some thought to stockpiling electric transformers as well.)
-(b) Stop being so pig-headed when we install GPS-dependent ground facilities and apply a little common sense. Cell towers and data centers don't have to place their receive antennas at such obvious locations, for instance, nor even on the same premises. In many cases, they can be located high enough up on a structure that they can be shielded against intruding signals from below the plane of the horizon. A terrorist bent on un-synchronizing my home town's Internet access wouldn't have to set up a GPS jammer to do it...any redneck driving by the phone office with a shotgun could take out communications here for days.
-(c) And, if we're still scared about GPS jamming at sensitive transportation hubs at major population centers, the Congressman and his cronies could stop cutting back the FCC's enforcement division and build it up instead! Just as the Commission's monitoring stations were essential to the nation's security during WW II, a network of automated receivers at a few strategic locations around every critical city could instantly direction-find any intentional jamming. This kind of interference identification is not rocket science: any signal originating below a certain viewing angle in that comparatively narrow and regulatorily protected band of frequencies is, by definition, interference. So is any signal arriving from the sky that is too strong to be a satellite, or is not formatted correctly to be GPSS (as simple as detecting false "motion" of a fixed GPS unit at the receive site itself). The network should notify relevent local law and EMA officials as soon as the triangulation is available, as well as the FCC staff who would conduct further analysis if needed. Such a network, carefully thought out, should require only a fraction of the money it would take for LORAN operating bills.
Right now, it seems to me LORAN is a solution looking for a better-fitting problem.
John Radio Andernach
Posted by Mike Terry on April 12, 2015 at 18:08:40.
Tarmo Tanilsoo writes on the PCJ Media and PCJ Radio Facebook group:
April 11, 2015
About that DRM signal at 177 kHz that has been puzzling some DXers - turns out it apparently is German army radio Radio Andernach. Not much use for DXers though because the channel is only available for army members. Unless you are in Afghanistan or Kosovo where they have FM relays. EAR Beacon
Posted by John Bruce McCreath on April 13, 2015 at 11:57:02.
My LowFER beacon EAR will remain on the air 24/7/52 as in past years,
giving receiving stations an off-season signal to check their gear with.
73, J.B., VE3EAR Wm Lowfer Beacon Shutdown
Posted by Mike - N8OOU on April 14, 2015 at 01:59:52.
I will be taking the WM Lowfer beacon down on April 15th for antenna revisions and relocation. I hope to have it back in operation 24/7 later this summer.
Re: Wm Lowfer Beacon Shutdown
Posted by John Davis on April 14, 2015 at 17:35:42.
In reply to Wm Lowfer Beacon Shutdown posted by Mike - N8OOU on April 14, 2015
Thanks for the update, Mike. Will be looking forward to its return.
John
new cw hifer beacon
Posted by Sal, K1RGO on April 16, 2015 at 16:36:06.
I have been running a hifer cw beacon ~ 7wpm on 13.562 Mhz with an East - West dipole, call ID is v1rgo/b. I am receiving it on a Michigan SDR ok. Technology of ELF-Transmitters
So here is another 24/7 beacon for all. EH has a North- South dipole.
later............Sal, K1RGO
Posted by Heran on April 16, 2015 at 22:59:56.
With which components were the ELF-transmitter of the US Navy and ZEVS of the Russian Navy realized? Re: Radio Andernach
Are they realized as transmitters for higher frequencies with transistors and/or vacuum valves or are as in HVDC converters thyristors used?
Or are perhaps motor-generators used?
Posted by Heran on April 16, 2015 at 23:02:08.
In reply to Radio Andernach posted by Mike Terry on April 12, 2015
Why is it for German civilians not possible and allowed to listen to Radio Andernach, as German civilians are allowed and of course can receive the radio programms for British and American military staff!
Re: Radio Andernach
Posted by John Davis on April 17, 2015 at 03:37:56.
In reply to Re: Radio Andernach posted by Heran on April 16, 2015
I wonder if the fellow who posted on the PCJ Media website misunderstood the nature of the tests. I'm no expert on DRM, but I don't remember reading anything about encryption keys in the specification.
[UPDATE] Per our UK columnist Alan Gale, apparently encryption is possible in the DRM standards, so the public could indeed be excluded. Seems to kind of defeat the point of DRM being intended for broadcasting, though.
Re: Technology of ELF-Transmitters
Posted by John Davis on April 17, 2015 at 03:54:11.
In reply to Technology of ELF-Transmitters posted by Heran on April 16, 2015
I do not know about the Russian ZEVS hardware*, but it is my understanding that the US Navy ELF system used conventional transistors. The drive circuitry is simpler than for thyristors, it is easier to achieve good signal purity with transistor circuitry, and there would be no need for commutating components to ensure reliable turn-off of the devices.
Vacuum tubes have no particular advantage at those frequencies and current levels. In principle, motor-alternator sets could be employed, but accurate control of the signaling frequencies for advanced transmission modes would be quite difficult.
* [UPDATE:] I have since learned, from an article by Trond Jacobsen at www.vlf.it, that the ZEVS system employs minimum-shift FSK. This means that they, too, probably use conventional transistors in their transmitters. Whether the final amplifier stages might also contain vacuum tubes, since the Russians do still manufacture quite a lot of those, I could only speculate.
John
Motala, Sweden 191KHz
Posted by Mike Terry on April 18, 2015 at 19:29:00.
Christian Stödberg writes in the Skywaves DX Facebook group:
2nd May will there be test transmission from the old longwave transmitter in Motala, Sweden on 191KHz. I will check power and time and reply later
It's not the original 150kW transmitter though a new, smaller one with low power.
Re: new cw hifer beacon
Posted by Geek on April 20, 2015 at 19:50:07.
In reply to new cw hifer beacon posted by Sal, K1RGO on April 16, 2015
Heard it on Blerp SDR yesterday. Too weak for my lousy CW to confirm more than a "1" and a "R". But good to see another!
MTI beacon
Posted by Chuck Sayers on April 23, 2015 at 15:43:22.
04/23/15 1535z
copying beacon MTI on 13557.55 khz usb in Harrisburg Pa
FN10of. just above the noise level here but strong enough
to get the call sign in the clear quite a few times.
That's good haul from Stone Mountain Ga to PA.
Chuck Sayers
New Beacon Hifer Beacon RQ
Posted by Bill Hensel on April 23, 2015 at 20:55:54.
RQ is on frequency 13.56355 Mhz, it will run 24/7 except for times that
I am dxing the 22 meter band. Location is Pine, Colorado. The antenna is
a dipole running North - South. Power is about 4 Mw.
Enjoy RQ and Good Dxing
Re: New Beacon Hifer Beacon RQ
My ham call is AA0RQ
Posted by John Davis on April 23, 2015 at 22:40:28.
In reply to New Beacon Hifer Beacon RQ posted by Bill Hensel on April 23, 2015
What transmission mode are you running, Bill?
Best of DX with the new beacon! Will listen for it here the next time I can safely spend time out in my field, which will probably be mid-day Saturday. (Likely to be wet and stormy until then.)
John
Re: New Beacon Hifer Beacon RQ
Posted by Bill Hensel on April 24, 2015 at 01:35:28.
In reply to Re: New Beacon Hifer Beacon RQ posted by John Davis on April 23, 2015
John, RQ grid square
I'm sorry about not mentioning the mode,
mode is CW. The last time I was listed in part 15 was back in the early 90s with my MEDFER D on 1675 Khz. Glad to be back.
Posted by Bill Hensel on April 24, 2015 at 15:27:21.
John, RQ grid square is DM79IJ I noticed on the Hifer list it was missing because I did not think to give it to you. Saturday Afternoon HiFERs
Happy Dxing Bill
Posted by John Davis on April 26, 2015 at 09:45:36.
Took a while to see anybody today. Nobody was coming through at all in early afternoon here in SE Kansas...the band was eerily dead, with some sort of mild QRN but without even the usual racket right at 13.560 to assure me everything was operating correctly. Had it not been for WWV being so solid at 15 MHz, I would have thought something had died in the antenna buffer or the radio.
I gave LF a try for a while, but lightning static from hundreds of miles away was too strong to copy anybody at the LowFER watering hole, or even MP at 137.7805. So, I spent a couple of hours doing an interesting spectroscopic study of WWVB at 60 kHz. Or, more correctly, all around but not actually at 60 kHz. The old transmission format, with its combined amplitude and pulse width modulation, produced an intricate lace and filigree pattern centered on the 60 kHz carrier frequency. But with the added BPSK keying now, the much more intricate pattern of sidebands as viewed at Argo's 60 seconds slow mode reveals there's very seldom any energy right at the carrier frequency these days. The exact 60 kHz point is conspicuous by the absence of signal with everything else mirrored above and below it. Anyway....
I finally returned to HF around 5 PM, in hopes that 22 meters might be more of an early evening band this time, and sure enough, EH and NC were starting to show up at the watering hole, along with an incredible amount of CODAR. There seemed to be somebody 10 Hz above EH, but I could never see who it was...just bits and pieces of carrier. Higher up the band, MTI was audible about half the time, but no sign of PBJ. GNK was coming in well most of the time. I listend for RQ and thought I could detect signal as I shifted around the frequency, but the CODAR pulses were too disruptive to be sure whether it was a keyed signal or a stray carrier. Will keep trying in coming days.
John
Re: WM Hifer beacon now on air
Posted by Chuck Sayers on April 26, 2015 at 16:41:30.
In reply to WM Hifer beacon now on air posted by Mike - N8OOU on February 23, 2015
HI copying your beacon this afternoon using Argo 143 and an Afedri SDR. The signal is pretty strong.
Copying WM over and over again
Qth here is Harrisburg Pa. FN10of
Re: WM Hifer beacon now on air
Posted by Mike - N8OOU on April 27, 2015 at 12:38:24.
In reply to Re: WM Hifer beacon now on air posted by Chuck Sayers on April 26, 2015
Chuck,
Thanks for the reception report on the WM Hifer beacon. According to QRZ.COM it is a 580+ Mile path to your QTH. Your Afedri SDR receive must be working well to catch a bit of my signal.
73 - Mike
Icom R-75 Filters For NDB and General LW DXing
Posted by Al Earnhardt on April 27, 2015 at 18:27:10.
I am considering purchase of an Icom R-75 and noticed a lot of LW folks are using same. Any thoughts on what filters to add to the two additional slots available? I notice that some of the recommended ones on Universal Radio's site are no longer available, but INRad seems to have a good assortment available.
Re: Icom R-75 Filters For NDB and General LW DXing
Posted by John Andrews, W1TAG on April 28, 2015 at 16:41:31.
In reply to Icom R-75 Filters For NDB and General LW DXing posted by Al Earnhardt on April 27, 2015
Al,
I have 500 Hz 1st IF and 250 Hz 2nd IF filters in my R75 receivers. For casual CW listening, I prefer the 500 Hz filter. The 250 Hz filter is good for more hostile situations, but is tiring to listen to. I also use an HP3581A wave analyzer as an external audio filter, which really helps with NDB's. Not great for tuning around, but it does help when you are trying to focus on those slow, repeated ID's.
John, W1TAG
Re: new cw hifer beacon--28 April, 2015/1710UT
Posted by EdWSlidell,LA on April 28, 2015 at 17:10:25.
In reply to Re: new cw hifer beacon posted by Geek on April 20, 2015
Hi all. I've been trying to hear the V1RGO/b beacon on about 13561.5 KHz for the last week or so, but have only been able to hear it yesterday and today--27/28 April, 2015. It is fairly weak here in EM50cg, but at times the entire callsign is copiable when the signal gets up to about 3-3/4-9 or so. It has been heard during the 1400-1700 UT period in the morning here. Others heard during the last week or so have been MTI, 4-4-9, around 13556KHz, SZX,3-3-9, around 13563 KHz, GNK, around 13564, 4-4-9, and FRC, 3-3-9, around 13565 KHz. As of the time of posting, V1RGO/b is the only station being heard. For some reason it can only be heard on the 32 ft. vertical antenna, and not the 22m (E-W)dipole or the 143 ft. LW(ENE). Ed WSlidell, LA EM50cg
Tuesday LowFERs and HiFERs
Posted by John Davis on April 29, 2015 at 17:10:21.
In reply to Saturday Afternoon HiFERs posted by John Davis on April 26, 2015
Yesterday was a good afternoon for SIW at 185.2993, and a great one for MP. QRN was two S-units lower than during my attempt last Saturday, when I couldn't see anyone, and that made a huge difference.
QRN is also low again today, so I'm capturing SIW right now and hope to catch the frequency/mode transition as well in a little bit. Then I'll take another look for MP, and if the relative quiet persists, maybe others as well. I'll post results & images this evening.
Yesterday wasn't so great for HiFERs...nobody at mid-day, only EH and NC at the watering hole in early evening, with lots of fading. Higher up, MTI was audible some of the time (no sign of PBJ), GNK was intermittently available, and traces of what might or might not have been RQ amidst the CODAR.
John
Re: Icom R-75 Filters For NDB and General LW DXing
Posted by John Davis on April 29, 2015 at 17:26:22.
In reply to Re: Icom R-75 Filters For NDB and General LW DXing posted by John Andrews, W1TAG on April 28, 2015
Although I don't have an ICOM, I can endorse what John A says about desirable filters. A 500 Hz BW is more pleasant for general listing, but I also treasure the 250 Hz filter in my Kenwood for situations where there are multiple aerobeacons crowded together around a single frequency. It makes it especially easy to separate Canadian modulation sidebands from U.S. beacons, for instance, and sometimes to separate the sidebands from other carriers. You'll probably benefit from having both available.
The narrower filter also assists sometimes for other modes such as WSPR, where I occasionally have a strong signal right next to the WSPR sub-band de-sensing the receiver. A narrow filter and a little IF passband shift, and voila! I can hear again.
John D
Re: Tuesday (and Wednesday) LowFERs and HiFERs
Posted by Garry Hess on April 29, 2015 at 21:35:53.
In reply to Tuesday LowFERs and HiFERs posted by John Davis on April 29, 2015
John, thanks for the report on lowfer SIW. It did switch to slash code on 185.185 kHz mid-day. Will keep it going until after this weekend's microwave sprint activity. Then it will be down until Fall.
My hifers are both running and I'll keep them on year-round but conditions have been poor. Only copy NC,EH, and MTI regularly here. Re: Tuesday (and Wednesday) LowFERs and HiFERs
--
73, Garry, K3SIW, EN52ta, Elgin, IL
Posted by John Davis on April 29, 2015 at 21:38:22.
In reply to Re: Tuesday (and Wednesday) LowFERs and HiFERs posted by Garry Hess on April 29, 2015
Yup, caught the switchover at 12:25 PM CDT:
Currently looking to capture MP on 137.7805.
John
Maybe Some Relief from Codar on 22 Meters
Posted by John Davis on April 29, 2015 at 21:45:38.
Well, eventually, that is. One part of the FCC's big new rulemaking Docket 15-50 concerns allocation of specific bands to oceanographic radar operations. There will be several HF bands, and the top end of the one nearest our HiFER activity will be 13.550 MHz, as recommended by the 2012 World Radio Conference.
It will be some time before the new rules go into effect, and most likely a while longer before the experimental operation of the current systems ends or gets shifted to the new allocation. But it's something for us to look forward to!
John
Re: Icom R-75 Filters For NDB and General LW DXing
Posted by Doug Williams on April 29, 2015 at 23:34:23.
In reply to Icom R-75 Filters For NDB and General LW DXing posted by Al Earnhardt on April 27, 2015
Al, if you want to do serious weak signal LF receiving with the R75 you should get the dual 250 Hz CW filters (FL-53A and FL-101). In addition, you should also purchase the CR-282 High Stability Oscillator.
Having typed this, I see both the crystal filters that I listed are marked as discontinued by Universal Radio. That sends a message to me that the R75 itself is on the way out.
You might be better served, if you are interested in LF listening, by researching Sofware Defined Receivers that are sensitive at LF frequencies.
Source: I own an R75 with the dual 250 Hz filters and the high stability osc, as well as a high end SDR.
Any questions, I will be happy to try to answer here or via e-mail. - Doug KB4OER
Re: Icom R-75 Filters For NDB and General LW DXing
Posted by Al Earnhardt on April 30, 2015 at 03:42:19.
In reply to Re: Icom R-75 Filters For NDB and General LW DXing posted by Doug Williams on April 29, 2015
Thanks for the replies so far, everyone. Antenna change on the WM Hifer beacon
Doug, I appreciate all of you thoughts about this receiver and optioning it. It does have that "close out" look with the special they are running on it and the unavailability of the various filters. I looked at the Inrad radio site and it looks like they still have after market versions of the two 250 Hz filters available. Does anyone here have any experience with them? Also, Doug, any recommendations on an SDR if I decided to spend on that instead?
Posted by Mike - N8OOU on April 30, 2015 at 20:04:57.
This afternoon I switched the WM Hifer beacon from the dipole to a newly installed 1/4 wave vertical that is located atop a metal pole barn. I am using the metal roof as the ground plane. This should give the signal better omni directional coverage. My next test is to see if the mounting, and material selection can withstand the typical winds we have here.
The beacon is sending on 13.5553 Mhz running in FSKCW 3 mode.
Reports are welcomed.
MTI today
Posted by Bill Hensel on April 30, 2015 at 22:02:51.
Caught three fad ups 2155-2157Utc...
This was done by ear...if the ID was 8-10 wpm it would have been better,
Location here is Pine, Colorado DM79IJ
potrzebie