Long Range Navigation and Hyperbolic Navigation

We look back in history for this segment on hyperbolic navigation systems. The British developed the GEE H2S navigation system while the US worked on LORAN. Loran did not see widespread civilian aircraft use until the 1970s. Why did it take so long?

[@MauryMarkowitz]

Taking a measurement with Loran-C by hand took several minutes as you fiddled with timer controls on an oscilloscope and tried to get two signals to line up. Only a dedicated navigator could do it, it was not something a pilot could do while flying. But from the start, the system was to be automated by timing certain portions of the signal. The Air Force system to do this filled most of a semi-trailer and cost millions of dollars. The same could be implemented in a single chip for a few dollars by the late 1970s, which is when they started to appear on boats and private aircraft.

[@glaciernitz-mercaeant2948]

Yes this is completely so! Also when I first came in to the Coast Guard and was working with this system, many of the receivers worked using servos and locktal metal can type tubes they were huge receivers it two to three men to move one the most common receiver then was about 350 lbs. and 1 5ft. tall and I believe 2ft x 2ft, and had hinges at the back and it opened like a hotdog bun. This was the (SPN-30) aka Spin30.

[@skinnyflea2628]

I needed this I’m so glad this was made! Thank you :)

[@alexhudspeth1213]

I would say the late advent of microcircuitry slowed the introduction of LORAN to civilian aircraft. my experience comes from working as a LORAN technician in the Coast Guard in the late 80s. up until my time, receivers were big and heavy, and really hard to deploy on a mobile unit like an airframe. Heck, we still had analog radar in everyday use. but in the mid 80s, miniature electronics made small and environmentally stable receivers possible. of course, I'm sure the FAA wasn't the most efficient at allowing new electronics onboard, either. But that's just my 2 cents.

[@slehar]

Advent of the computer chip to calculate position from TDs. The WW2 oscilloscope method impractical.

[@qcope]

I am not old enough to know... but I think you'll find the original LORAN was GEE, re-implemented on lower frequencies. This resulted in lower precision but longer range, appropriate for the Pacific campaign.

[@condor5635]

LORAN was a cool thing for our Cessna. We got a Texas Instruments LORAN I am guessing in the 1980-1983 timeframe for our Cessna 172. Loved its ability to give distance, ground speed, direction and everything. Supplemented the VOR nicely (we did not have DME) and made navigation so easy. I think it must have cost 3-4 thousand dollars at the time. Funny how all that stuff is now replaced with iPads and such! Thanks for the video

[@jonny__b]

LORAN wasn't triangulation (which measures angles), it was trilateration (measuring distances)

[@davidecramp]

Used both LORAN and DECCA for marine navigation. LORAN used time difference where as DECCA used phase difference. LORAN had a longer range than DECCA. DECCA had higher precision. Both used special charts with the "lanes" printed on up until the 1980s when more powerful computing was available in a small form factor allowing the receivers to calculate latitude and longitude. Cost and GPS killed off both systems. There was another system called OMEGA I did see installed on aircraft and called also be used by subs at shallow depth due to it's use of VLF radio.

[@williamhalsall537]

The first LORAN I came across was on a ship..... Was a LORAN-A, about the size of a small fridge. Imagine packing that in a Cessna.😁. Did work on a system called Decca Hi-Fix, very accurate. I would say comparable to GPS today.

[@willarddevoe5893]

I have a Texas Instruments 9000 and a Sea Scout. It's appalling to consider the towers were scrapped. I figured best utility would be to build much smaller systems and more of them, the same that would have benefitted VOR. There's still a system in New Jersey. Nobody runs it.

[@AbsalomMelchizedek]

Something else...