Loran C off the air
Tom Azlin N4ZPT
n4zpt at cox.net
Mon Aug 9 07:35:05 CDT 2010
I suppose this could be a failed gold watch tactic. Or a "I will let it
fail if you are so convinced it will work" strategy we are watching.
But obviously not everybody said to keep Loran. Congress is frequently
funding stuff the administration or DoD wants to kill. So why not now?
I agree that what I read on line is uniformly in support of keeping
Loran running as a backup timing system (which was always a secondary
use I thought). So why did it not get prioritized within the Coast Guard
when the initial calls for un-needed programs went out? Or if so
inexpensive did not someone else pick up the mission, facilities,
people, etc as the Coast Guard offered? Or if GPS were so vulnerable
did DHS not tell the Coast Guard to just keep it going for
infrastructure protection. And so on.
Not a very interesting debate seems to me.
73, tom n4zpt
On 8/8/2010 11:16 PM, Mike O'Dell wrote:
> everybody that looked at it said to keep Loran-C
More information about the Tacos