P1258894842zVqxF

1
Impact of enhanced Loran on the European
Community
32nd Annual Convention and Technical Symposium of
the International Loran Association Boulder,
Colorado, USA November 3-7, 2003

Jacques Manchard, Head of the Lighthouses and
Buoys Division
2

• Please , could you explain to me what is the
  definition of
• enhanced Loran ?
• Peter Kent, Tokyo

3
A - Europe

1. NELS and Loran C
2. NELS and enhanced Loran
3. Galileo and Loran
4. Some European countries and enhanced Loran
5. ERNP and enhanced Loran

4
NELS and Loran C

• The service offered by NELS will not be available
  after 2005
• Some of the NELS members countries think that
  this system no longer corresponds to the users
  needs
• NELS did not care of the market
• This will result in a dramatic loss of knowledge
  and working ability

5
NELS and enhanced Loran

• 1999 NELS statement on the integration of
  systems
• 2001 implementation of Eurofix in four stations
• 2002 development of new receivers

6
Galileo and Loran C

• Before 2003, the questions were often
• is Loran fighting with Galileo ?
• will it be enough money ?
• Now, as the Galileo project is well going on
• it is easily accepted to heard about Loran
• but there is a tremendous amount of work to be
  done

7
Some European countries and enhanced Loran

• Germany has implemented a Eurofix monitoring
  station
• The United Kingdom submit a note on vulnerability
  and back up of GPS to the European Maritime
  Safety Agency

Blue NELS members Red country asking to join
NELS Green countries interested by NELS
8
ERNP and enhanced Loran
European wide service provision
European Radio Navigation Plan
Spectrum policy
Promotion of international standards
Assistance in developing andsiting of radio
navigation aids
Evaluation along common elements and coherent
funding policy
Assistance to member States
9
B - GNSS back-up and enhanced Loran

• An important part of the debate to have on
  enhanced Loran is the back-up role.
• what is understood by back-up to GNSS ?
• does GNSS need a back-up ? If so, what is the
  justification ?
• do Loran C and Chayka qualify to provide the
  services required ?
• The EMRF has been asked by EC to extend the Dr
  Ward study on GNSS vulnerability and mitigation
  measures to all kinds of marine aids to
  navigation

10
C - France

1. France and Loran C
2. France and enhanced Loran
3. French proposal
4. Actions

11
France and Loran C

• Loran C directly concerns two Ministries
• the Ministry of Defence owns the two stations and
  the Control Centre
• the Lighthouses and Buoys Division of the MITHTS
  manned the two stations
• The users were mainly in the maritime domain

12
France and enhanced Loran

• The Ministry of Defence decide to maintain and
  use Loran C until 2015 for his own purposes
• The Ministry of Infrastructures, Transport,
  Housing, Tourism and the Sea decide to work on
  the advantages of enhanced Loran for
  terrestrial users

13
French proposal

• France is trying to implement a new system
• It is a minimal concept, allowing to every
  interested country to join the project

• Lessay and Soustons
• Ejde (running costs payed by France)
• Sylt (taking in account the German project)
• Sellia Marina (renovated with the Loophead
  acquired equipment)

Contribution of Megapulse
14
French proposal (2)

• Due to the baselines distances between Soustons
  and Sellia Marina, and Sylt and Sellia Marina,
  options to implement a new stations have to be
  studied, in

• Provence
• Alsace
• Lorraine

Contribution of Megapulse
15
Actions

• At the NELS level

The NELS figures must be the best as possible
Proposals of actions to reduce the gap with what
is mandatory must be made and implemented
The External Time References equipment must be
implemented in all the stations
The NELS CAO must give all the needed information
about Loophead equipment status and cost sharing
16
Actions (2)

• Decided by France

Technical analysis about the implementation of a
new chain including Sellia Marina to be made
Draft report on the expected performances of the
SELS chain, and the costs of the project to be
prepared
Budget a new station in 2004 to be found
Research of land possibilities to be done
Letters to the German, Italian and Dannish NELS
members representatives, to launch the technical
work, to be sent
17
Actions (3)

• To be proposed by France

• Technical meeting between
• Denmark
• Germany
• Italy
• France
• to be organise in January 2004, to validate the
  draft reports

18
Conclusion

• France

Contribution of Telematica
19
Thank you for your attention
For any further question jacques.manchard_at_equipe
ment.gouv.fr