Loran-C to migrate to another area of DHS

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

FYI all ...

I've read over at Inside GNSS (http://www.insidegnss.com/node/551)

Late in the drafting process of the Fiscal Year 2009 (FY09) budget proposal that went to Congress earlier this week (February 4), officials added language “migrating” the LORAN-C system from the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) to the Department of Homeland Security’s National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD). A $34.5-million budget and 294 positions would take part in the migration.

Looks like the ET rating will tighten up abit in the advancements, much like it did when the DOD mandated oversea's stations closed in the early 90s.

Can anyone shed some light on the makeup of the 294 positions that are moving within the DHS?

Could ATON be the next to migrate?

p.s. GPS is thirty years old ...

[ETC Joel Szymczyk]

Joe- it is another paperwork drill... The only real-world difference to the troops on the ground is how the money is going to be routed, and changes to a couple of support (CEU, property) related issues. We are still POB/TS. Nothing is happening to the billets, at least not in the forseeable future, as far as we know.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

Could there be some retirement jobs opening up for ET's and maybe in the future for us ATON guys?

[MKC Craig Thorngren (Ret)]

$34.5 Million... I wonder if that's just the cost to migrate all of the Loran stations to eLoran. I know when I left Attu last summer we had more than $11 million in what was deemed "needed" repairs to the facility. Some were minor and some were major items like a drinking water filtration system so that the arsenic levels would be within the national standards and repairing the runway...

Jim, I'm sure you get a job as a snow removal technician at Attu, St. Paul or Pt. Clarence:D

Craig

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Joel,

It's been 20 years since I seen your name on a TTY. I remember when you reported to Brian Sebastian at CA when I was at NA.

[ETC Joel Szymczyk]

that's a fact, I guess it was 19 years ago anyways. No one who has been "Jester-ized" has ever fully recovered....:D

My impression, and my opinion for what it's worth, is that the CG will be operating LORAN for as long as there is LORAN. I've been wrong about a lot of things though, just ask my wife....

[ETC Ben DiGuilio]

The 35 Million is just the estimated cost of completing the transition to E-Loran. (AC&I) the maintenance is a whole different pot. One that DHS is not so happy to pay for (10 million worth of pop board items shaved down to 2 Mil for FY09)

I just hope that the LORAN program does not wind up looking like the POLAR program. But if the above trend continues i feel that it will be inevitable

[AMTCM John Long]

I hope they keep Gillette and Havre open! I've been networking to do a hunt out there!!:D :D :D

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

John,

It took them over 30 years to get this far. I think GI and HA will be around for awhile. Gillette is on top of a mesa as I recall, and it's probably 30 mi outside of town. If you haven't scouted yet, the two attachments are from about 15500 - 16000 ft altitude. You could have an interesting hunt. :D

Havre on the other hand ... Their first XPO relayed a story about a mountian lion sitting in the foyer when he arrived at work on day. Nice. Imagine rushing down there because of a problem and your entry is delayed because you forgot to arm yourself. :D

[HSC Chris Fly]

Joel- What's up brother? I haven't heard from you since you were on the Legare and I was on the Tampa!

The CG has been saying they were going to turn over Loran since I went to ET school back in '95.....as Joel said, we'll have Loran as long as there is Loran.

Chris

[CWO Eugene Diotalevi (BMC)]

http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/loran/E6-22421.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[USCG–2006–24685]
Long Range Aids to Navigation
(LORAN) Program; Office of Navigation
and Spectrum Management
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS, Office of the
Secretary, DOT.
ACTION: Notice; request for public
comments

[CWO Eugene Diotalevi (BMC)]

U.S. Department of Homeland Security
February 7, 2008
Contact: (202) 282-8010
STATEMENT FROM DHS PRESS SECRETARY LAURA KEEHHNER ON THE
ADOPTION OF NATIONAL BACKUP SYSTEM TO GPS
Today the U.S. Department of Homeland Security will begin implementing an
independent national positioning, navigation and timing system that complements the Global Positioning System (GPS) in the event of an outage or disruption in service. The enhanced Loran, or eLoran, system will be a land-based, independent system and will mitigate any safety, security, or economic effects of a GPS outage or disruption. GPS is a satellite-based system widely used for positioning, navigation, and timing. The eLoran system will be an enhanced and modernized version of Loran-C, long used by
mariners and aviators and originally developed for civil marine use in coastal areas. In addition to providing backup coverage, the signal strength and penetration capability of eLoran will provide support to first responders and other operators in environments that GPS cannot support, such as under heavy foliage, in some underground areas, and in dense high-rise structures. The system will use modernized transmitting stations and an
upgraded network.
###

[CWO Eugene Diotalevi (BMC)]

U.S. Coast Guard Posture Statement


Migrating LORAN-C to DHS National Protection
and Programs Directorate
LORAN-C Modernization
($34.5M) / [294 positions]
The administration of the LORAN-C program will migrate to the DHS
National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) in preparation
for conversion of LORAN-C operations to Enhanced LORAN
(eLORAN). NPPD will oversee the development of eLORAN to
provide national backup capabilities for position, navigation, and
timing. The 2009 request refl ects transfer of LORAN-C operations
to NPPD, however the Coast Guard will continue operation of the
system in 2009 on a reimbursable basis.

[ETC Ben DiGuilio]

Thank you for posting the bulletins but what are you trying to say?

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Thank you for posting the bulletins but what are you trying to say?

Someone will sit down and figure out whether or not it's worth it for NPPD to spend money with the CG to run the Loran-C program.

For one thing, all those "taxes" being applied and not reaching the unit would't exist and that would leave more money for the program.

I can tell you this ... twenty years ago a station was upgraded to the remote operating system. The billets were reduced and the District was still being funded by the program at the old rate. The unit received a paltry amount. When the OIC requested funding to comply with what the CG told Congress they would do, there were no funds. When the request to the program for additional funding went through, it was reminded that there was enough money saved from the "utilities" to cover it.

Even with the establishment of a new unit [which will turn 20 in Jul 2010], there were a couple of issues. The OFCO stated what was being sent to the District by OG. When the OIC asked for a commercial school for his EPO he was told there was no money. However, when it was pointed out that the OFCO gave x dollars for the training Operating Guide, and this being the first request for funding under that OG, where did the money go? The Training PO didn't know about those funds [poor communication on someone's part]. That same unit had some things left over from the construction punch list. HQ, according to a HQ source, sent money to the servicing CEU to solve those discrepancies. However, when the EPO went to the EO conference, the XO of the CEU stated there was "no money". Again, probably a miss communication by the party sending the money. I wasn't privy to the method of delivery of the cash and I certainly didn't see any of the punch list cleared as quickly as HQ indicated.

Yes, there are areas when support can improve, and it's been suggested multiple times.

After I had retired, I heard a story about a servicing CEU that wasn't too concerned that the tower lighting system wasn't operating properly. Pretty funny considering many USAF bombers flew low and slow [you could see them smile as they went by] past that 700 ft marker, waiving to a senior service. :)

Money talks ... BS walks. At the unit level there is nothing you can do about poor customer service. At the funding level ... you can.

[MKC Craig Thorngren (Ret)]

... At the unit level there is nothing you can do about poor customer service. At the funding level ...

Joe,
I think there is something you can do... A well worded CASREP, with picutres included in it, to the correct people (i.e. to people outside the normal CASREP process that have a direct concern for you and your crew)can do wonders. After the message was sent the CO and I received quite a few phone calls from a host of people who applied pressure to the "money holders" to fix the problem rather quickly.

To put it all in perspective, we had 800 sandbags on the roof of our station to stop it from being ripped off and hold down tarps to keep the rain/snow out. It had been that way for over a year... Within a month and a half we had a repair crew on scene taking care of the problem.

Craig

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Craig,

I didn't realize you can attach photos to official messages.

If the OPCON or the ADCON doesn't express concerns, the SUPRTCON won't lift a finger.

Anyone else (outside of those three) is just working their own network.

I have casrept'd buildings because of roofing problems. Of course there already was an SSMR on file for that same problem, but when it became a safety issue ... CASREP was the order of the day, as well as the MK and ET's became roofers patching up every hole they saw on the roof inspection. I have no problem expressing my concern ... to the point where I wrote a letter to one command [O-6 CO] telling them what they did with an ECO was assinine. Of course you couldn't hear any nice words associated with Chief Jester for a couple of years after that, but, that's the price one pays sometimes. I wanted to say what they did was $%^&ing stupid, which was more my style, but inappropriate for an official letter.

The CASREP system is suppose to work. It all depends on how you assign the effect on operations.

I had a camelback bearing go bad on the AN/FPN-42 Transmitters on Attu once. I tripped nine a requisition (999 priority code) for a new one. Within the delivery window for overseas' shipments, the bearing finally went out and I had no part ... so I had to CASREP it. Life is interesting on a Loran Station with only one transmitter (I know the ssx is one transmitter, but it has a soft fail system). I simply told my guys to use every blower on the unit and see if they will activate the sail switches so the transmitter could be used in an absolute emergency. We didn't need it though.

Anyway, the point of that information was ... D17 asked the CO why didn't I CASREP the transmitter when I thought it "might" fail. I told the Ltjg, "hell skipper, I think all the electronics might fail ... My crystal ball is defective so I just don't know when. I'll CASREP every piece of equipment if D17 wants me to using the I think it might fail criteria."