Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site lsrhs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!genrad!grkermi!lsrhs!usenet
From: damon@lsrhs.UUCP (Damon Micheals)
Newsgroups: net.aviation
Subject: Loran's
Message-ID: <910@lsrhs.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 6-Feb-86 12:28:23 EST
Article-I.D.: lsrhs.910
Posted: Thu Feb  6 12:28:23 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Feb-86 04:44:49 EST
Reply-To: damon@lsrhs.UUCP (Damon Micheals)
Distribution: net
Organization: LSRHS, Sudbury MA
Lines: 21


Loran-C in aviation seems to be a hot topic these days, for good reason.
Marine Navigators have relied on its great accuracy for over 10 years.
	Despite these many years of Loran-C experience, design of
receivers is still an art, not a science. It's not like a calculator
which always gives the same answers, given the same inputs. There are
many, many pitfalls for the unknowledgeable user or buyer.
	My companys only product is Loran-C receivers, so I know whereof
I speak. We make the absolute top-end Marine Loran. (I do all the assembly
language programs that live inside of our recievers.) We have just
introduced our first aviation Loran, the NorthStar M1, we expect it to
dominate the market shortly. Though programs are pretty nearly in final
shape, there is always room for extra bells and whistles if they would
be valuable to the navigation community.
	I am hereby soliciting comments about desireable features for
aviation Loran-C. I would also like to hear of users experiences, good
or bad, with the Loran system. Finally, if you have any questions about
Loran-C in general, or the Northstar M1 in particular, I would be happy
to discuss them with you.

				Shel Michaels.