<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Global Navigation Satellite Systems – Perspectives on Development and Threats to System Operation</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1420678</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The rapid development of satellite navigation and timing technologies and the broad availability of user equipment and applications has dramatically changed the world over the last 20 years. It took 38 years from the launch of the world’s first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, (October 4, 1957) to the day NAVSTAR GPS became fully operational (July 17, 1995). In the next 20 years user equipment became widely available at the consumer level, and 10 global and regional satellite systems were partially or fully deployed. These highly precise signals provided free to the user have been incorporated by clever engineers into virtually every technology. At the same time interference with these signals (spoofing and jamming) have become a significant day to day problem in many societies and pose a significant threat to critical infrastructure. This paper provides information on the current status and development of navigation satellite systems based on data provided by the systems' administrators. It also provides information on Loran/eLoran, a system which many nations have selected as a complement and backup for satellite navigation systems.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2016 16:32:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1420678</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Clocking on</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1387632</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Ronald Bruno and Charles Schue discuss eLoran as a PNT resiliency solution for ATM applications.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2016 16:19:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1387632</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A Methodology to Map Airport ASF’s for Enhanced Loran</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1266477</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In 2001, the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center completed an evaluation of global positioning system (GPS) vulnerabilities and the potential impacts to transportation systems in the United States. One of the recommendations of this study was for the operation of backup system(s) to GPS; Loran-C was identified as one possible backup system. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has been leading a team consisting of members from industry, government, and academia to evaluate the future of Loran-C in the United States. A significant factor limiting the accuracy of a Loran system is the spatial and temporal variation in the times of arrival (TOAs) observed by the receiver. A significant portion of these variations are due to the signals propagating over paths of varying conductivity; these TOA corrections which compensate for propagating over non-seawater paths are called additional secondary factors (ASFs). Hence, a key component in evaluating the utility of Loran as a GPS backup is a better understanding of ASFs and a key goal is deciding how to mitigate the effects of ASFs to achieve more accurate Loran-C positions while ensuring that the possibility of providing hazardous and misleading information (HMI) will be no greater than 1x10-7. The future of Loran for aviation is based on multi-station multi-chain, all-in-view, digital signal processing (DSP)-based receivers observing TOA measurements with H-field antenna technology. For an aviation receiver, the approach to mitigate propagation issues under study is to use a single set of ASF values (one for each Loran tower) for a given airport. This value may have seasonal adjustments applied to it. The Loran receiver will use this set of static ASF values to improve position accuracy when conducting a non-precision approach (NPA). A Working Group is currently developing the procedures to be used to "map" the ASF values for an airport. The output of the Working Group will be a set of tested and documented procedures for conducting an airport survey; these procedures can then be followed to survey airports nationwide. This paper discusses the procedures being envisioned and the testing methodology for the procedures. Equipment to be used in the surveys and the error budget for the survey equipment will be presented as well as a proposed error budget for the ASF methodology.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Nov 2013 09:22:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1266477</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Airport ASF Mapping Methodology Update</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1266479</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In 2001, the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center completed an evaluation of global positioning system (GPS) vulnerabilities and the potential impacts to transportation systems in the United States. One of the recommendations of this study was for the operation of backup system(s) to GPS; Loran-C was  identified as one possible backup system. A significant factor limiting the accuracy of a Loran system is the spatial and temporal variation in the times of arrival (TOAs) observed by the receiver. A significant portion of these variations is due to the signals propagating over paths of varying conductivity; these TOA corrections which compensate for propagating over non-seawater paths are called additional secondary factors (ASFs). Hence, a key component in evaluating the utility of Loran as a GPS backup is a better understanding of ASFs and a key goal is deciding how to mitigate the effects of ASFs to achieve more accurate Loran-C positions while ensuring that the possibility of providing hazardous and misleading information (HMI) will be no greater than 1x10-7. The future of Loran for aviation is based on multi-station, multi-chain, all-in-view, digital signal processing (DSP)-based receivers observing TOA measurements with H-field antenna technology. For an aviation receiver, the approach to mitigate propagation issues under study is to use a single set of ASF values (one for each Loran tower) for a given airport. This value may have seasonal adjustments applied to it. The Loran receiver will use this set of static ASF values to improve position accuracy when conducting a non-precision approach (NPA). A Working Group is currently developing the procedures to be used to “map” the ASF values for an airport. The output of the Working Group will be a set of tested and documented procedures for conducting an airport survey; these procedures can then be followed to survey airports nationwide. The draft procedure has been tested during data collection at airports in Maine and Ohio. This paper discusses the results of this data collection: how well the spatial variation seen on the ground matches the BALOR model prediction and the implications of this on the proposed procedure, an analysis of how many ASFs should be required to meet Required Navigation Performance (RNP) 0.3 for each airport based on geometry and ASF variation in the area, and results of the position accuracy obtained by the aircraft flying approaches when using the airport ASF values.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Nov 2013 09:22:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1266479</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Assessing the Limits of eLoran Positioning Accuracy</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1266013</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Enhanced Loran (eLoran) is the latest in the longstanding and proven series of low frequency, LOng-RAnge Navigation systems. eLoran evolved from Loran-C in response to the 2001 Volpe Report on Global Positioning System (GPS) vulnerability. The next generation of the Loran systems, eLoran, improves upon Loran-C through enhancements in equipment, transmitted signal, and operating procedures. The improvements allow eLoran to provide better performance and additional services when compared to Loran-C, and enable eLoran to serve as a backup to satellite navigation in many important applications. The Czech Technical University in Prague (CTU) participates in the eLoran research activities coordinated by the General Lighthouse Authorities of the United Kingdom and Ireland (GLAs). In this work, the focus is on questions that arise when considering introducing new eLoran stations into an existing network. In particular, this paper explores the issue of Cross-Rate Interference (CRI) among eLoran transmissions and possible mitigation at the receiver end. An eLoran receiver performance model is presented and validated using an experimental eLoran signal simulator developed by a CTU and GLAs joint effort. The resulting model is used to evaluate the achievable positioning accuracy of eLoran over the British Isles.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Oct 2013 16:03:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1266013</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Getting out of a jam</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1121113</link>
      <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 10:03:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1121113</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Determination of LORAN-C/GPS Human Factors Issues</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/933271</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Discussions were held with a variety of private, Coast Guard, and off shore airplane and helicopter pilots who use Loran-C for navigation. These discussions revealed a number of problems concerning the design and use of' the controls and displays of Loran-C receivers. The results are also relevant to CPS receivers that have many operational characteristics in common with Loran.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 2010 12:42:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/933271</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Pilot GPS LORAN Receiver Programming Performance A Laboratory Evaluation</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/933288</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study was designed to explore GPS/LORAN receiver programming performance under simulated flight conditions. The programming task consisted of entering, editing, and verifying a four-waypoint flight plan. The task demands were manipulated by varying flight turbulence and the time interval between test sessions. Flight performance data indicated that subjects were well trained on the flight task; significant effects of turbulence and test interval were not found. Programming performance was very good and critical errors occurred on only 13% of the test trials. Examination of the conditions surrounding each error indicated that specific display design and system logic attributes contributed to the errors. In addition, examination of error recovery methods showed that non-intuitive menu structures complicated and confused the recovery process. Pilots rarely recalled "doing anything wrong" when errors occurred, suggesting that the receiver interface design was opaque and did not provide a good understanding of system function. Recommendations for GPS/LORAN receiver controls, functions, menu structure and logic, error recognition and recovery, and general usability are discussed.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 2010 12:42:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/933288</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Loran-C shutdown plan worries satnav watchers</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/913856</link>
      <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 07:23:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/913856</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Radionavigation Systems: A Capabilities Investment Strategy</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/908236</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This document is composed of the following sections: Section 1 - Introduction: Describes the background, purpose, and scope of the Radionavigation Systems Task Force. It summarizes events leading to the preparation of this document and tasks that were conducted under this study. Section 2 - Current Situation: Describes Federal radionavigation planning. It also summarizes current radionavigation systems as well as future potential radionavigation systems under research & development. Section 3 - Modal Requirements & System Capabilities Assessment: Describes the technical approach used by the Task Force. It lays out the system requirements for transportation and non-transportation users and compares them to the capabilities of each radionavigation system. Section 4 - Selection Methodology: Describes the process of establishing a number of alternative radionavigation system mixes and how they were evaluated and down selected to 3 alternatives mixes and a baseline. Section 5 - Backups to GPS: Describes current and future modal backups to radionavigation systems. Section 6 - Radionavigation Systems Mix Analysis: Describes the final alternative mixes recommended by the Task Force. This includes a baseline and 3 alternative mixes. Section 7 - Loran Decision: Describes the various options available regarding the Loran-C decision and recommendation from the Task Force. Section 8 - Cost: Discusses the program funding for the various radionavigation systems. Section 9 - Conclusions and Recommendations: Presents the Task Force final conclusions and recommendations]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:09:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/908236</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Loran-C Augmentation for GPS and GPS/WAAS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/898342</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Illgen Simulation Technologies, Inc., (ISTI) participated in Loran-C and other navigational programs for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and other governmental agencies for some fifteen years. The Cooperative Agreement reported here was carried out in support of the evaluation of the Loran-C navigational system as a partner for GPS systems in the National Airspace System (NAS), with recognition that other navigational and precise-timing applications exist. In December, 2003, ISTI was acquired by Northrop Grumman Corporation and was renamed Northrop Grumman Simulation Technologies Corp. (NGST). There were no personnel changes of significance to this cooperative agreement as a result of the acquisition. ISTI/NGST cooperated within a large and diverse team assembled by the FAA offering expertise in specific Loran-C-related areas. In 1997, ISTI personnel assisted the FAA in forming what is now the Loran-C Evaluation Program. Working with AND-740 at program inception and prior to initiation of Cooperative Agreement 99-G-038, hypotheses were formulated, and these are still pertinent today: Program Hypotheses Loran-C meets the requirements to support NAS operations including non-precision or LNAV/VNAV approach procedures. Loss of availability due to p-static no longer expected to be a significant factor Loran-C meets RNP 0.3 requirements accuracy, availability, integrity, continuity Advantages of a GPS/Loran-C combination are demonstrated in flight Availability of horizontal nav with integrity through approach if GPS is lost Ability to dispatch in the absence of onboard GPS capability CONUS and Alaska demonstrations show utility of Loran-C Coverage improvements for enroute navigation through NPA Augmentation of WAAS communication of GPS integrity Loran-C communication of Loran-C integrity, timing, control information Loran and Loran/GPS hybrids can be certified, and have NAS benefits RTCA, FAA documents, ops concepts.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:46:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/898342</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>U.S. proposal to terminate loran-C draws fire from UK</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/891412</link>
      <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:23:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/891412</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Back to the future with Loran</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/879261</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Subtitle: The need for a backup to GPS, coupled with the decision to use new technologies to update Loran, seems to have given the long-range nav system a new lease on life.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 07:49:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/879261</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Enhanced or eLoran for Time and Frequency Applications</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/873977</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The US Loran system is undergoing a modernization that will result in an enhanced or eLoran system. As a part of this modernization, three 5071A cesium clocks were installed at each transmitter, and state-of-the-art time and frequency clock measurement and control equipment was installed which uses GPS to steer the ensemble averaged Cs clocks to recover UTC 'USNO' within 15 nanoseconds at each transmitter. When the conversion to eLoran is complete, the eLoran system will use time-of-transmission 'TOT' control similar to GPS, and add a 9th pulse or Loran data channel 'LDC' that will distribute UTC, leap second, and other information from each of the 29 transmitters in North America. eLoran provides performance comparable to GPS for numerous time and frequency applications, so eLoran can act as a traceable, infinite, and independent backup to GPS in these applications. This paper provides an overview of the eLoran modernization program and new eLoran antenna and receiver technology, and data from recent tests, including preliminary studies of Loran performance using H-field antennas located indoors.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 07:32:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/873977</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>E-navigation and the case for eLoran</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/871852</link>
      <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 07:36:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/871852</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>