Hi You still come back to what killer Loran-C in the first place - Who is going to use it?
Until somebody shuts down GPS in a big way, not a lot of drive for an alternative. I not saying that is a well thought out situation. It is indeed the position everybody has taken. It is a classic cost / risk issue. Cost is known, risk is assumed to be low / zero... Bob On Mar 4, 2012, at 5:50 PM, "Poul-Henning Kamp" <[email protected]> wrote: > In message <[email protected]>, "J. > Fors > ter" writes: > >> One option might be more, smaller, cheaper stations. > > At one point, a LORAN-X (for some value of X > D) was proposed which > would use ~1kW transmitters with PRNG codes at 100kHz and give vastly > better results than LORAN-C. > > It's mentioned somewhere in the ILA's archives, probably early '80ies. > > The idea has been partially validated by DCF77's phase-coding. > > > -- > Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 > [email protected] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 > FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe > Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
