RIGA TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, TRANSPORT AND AERONAUTICS

INSTITUE OF AERONAUTICS

Richard STANLEY
Student of the Professional Masters higher education study program „Aviation
Transport”
(Student ID No. 161AMG022)

ANALYSING THE POSSIBILITIES OF IMPROVING THE

EFFICIENCY OF LONG-RANGE NAVIGATION SYSTEM

MASTER THESIS WITH PROJECT PART

Scientific Advisor
Docent Mg.Ing.
Igors SMIRNOVS

Riga 2019
 RIGA TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Transport And
Aeronautics
INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICS

Date:___________ Registration No.:_________

Study program: Aviation transport

Specialization: Technical maintenance of aircraft electronic equipment

CONFIRMED
RTU FMETA Deputy Director for Academic Affairs of the Institute
of Aeronautics
Dr.chem.,ing.techn. A.Rijkuris

_______________________________
(signature)
20.... ______ _________________

TASK OF THE MASTER THESIS

Student:RICHARDSTANLEY_________________________________________________________
(name, surname)
Topic of the Master Thesis: ANALYSIS OF POSSIBILITIES FOR IMPROVING THE
EFFICIENCY OF LONG-RANGE NAVIGATION SYSTEM
_________________________________________________________________________
Task: 1.To study the different types and methodology used in various navigation specially in
LORAN.______________________________________________________________________
2. To use the required working of the Loran-C system and Calculate the location fix and
errors.______________________________________________________________________
3. To compare these results with other possible improvements and realize the improved
analysis._______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

Scientific
advisor: __________________________________________________________________________________________
(position, scientific degree, name, surname, signature, date)
Consultant: ______________________________________________________________________________________
(position, scientific degree, name, surname, signature, date)

Submission date of the finished work _________________________

Task ____________________________________________________________________________________________
received: (date, student’s signature)

The Task has to be filled in two copies: 1- for the head of the study direction; 2 – for the student

RIGA 2019
The Master Thesis has been drawn up in the RTU FMETA Institute of Aeronautics

Author: stud. RICHARD STANLEY..........................................................................................

(signature, date)

Scientific advisor: Docent Mg.ing.Igors Smirnovs ................................................................

(signature, date)

The Master Thesis is advised for defense:

Director of the Institute: Dr.habil.sc.ing., prof. A. Urbahs .........................................................

(signature, date)

The Master Thesis has been defended in the State Examination Commission’s session that
took place on
..........…………………… and has been evaluated .......................................(....)

The Secretary of the State

Examination Commission: ..........................................................

(name, surname) (signature)

3
 ANOTĀCIJA
Darba mērķis ir izprast un veikt analīzi par iespējām uzlabot tāldarbības navigācijas
sistēmas efektivitāti.

Aviācijai un visai gaisa transporta koncepcijai ir vienīgais pamats, kas virzās pa ceļu un
navigāciju. Kopš navigācijas sistēmu attīstības lidmašīnās, gaisa transports ir attīstījies efektīvi.
Šajā darbā ir aplūkotas dažāda veida tāldarbības navigācijas sistēmas izpētes un to attīstības.
Sistēma LORAN-C ir pētīta dziļāk. Šis darbs seko Loran-C idejas attīstībai no tās izcelsmes kā
100 kHz hiperboliskās navigācijas sistēmas uz jaunākiem notikumiem, kad tā atradusi
lietojumu klāstu gan plānošanai, gan maršrutēšanai. Pētot iepriekš esošas sistēmas un attīstītot
modernas sistēmas, ir iespējams ieviest dažādas metodes un uzlabot navigācijas efektivitāti un
precizitāti.

Visu darbu veido 113 lappuses, 55 attēli, 28 tabulas, 75 formulas, 17 literatūras avoti.

Atslēgas vārdi: navigācijas sistēma, tāldarbības navigācijas sistēmas, Loran-C, hiperboliskā

navigācijas sistēma, trauksmes signāli, pozīcijas līnija, kļūdu labošana.

4
 ABSTRACT

The purpose of this thesis work is to understand and research, the analyzing the
possibilities of improving the efficiency of long-range navigation systems.

Aviation and the whole concept of air transport has its sole basics revolving around path
and navigation. Ever since the development of navigation systems in aircrafts, air transportation
has been evolving efficiently. In this work, the study and development of Long-range
navigation systems of various kinds can be seen. But, LORAN-C will be more in-depth. This
work follows the advancement of the Loran-C idea from its origin as a 100-kHz hyperbolic
navigation system to later occasions when it found an assortment of uses to both planning and
route. With research of previously existing systems and developed advanced systems, various
techniques have been possible to implement and improve the efficiency and accuracy of
navigation.

The whole work consists of 113 pages, 55 pictures, 28 tables, 75 formulas, 17 literature
sources.

Key words: Navigation system, Long Range Navigation Systems, Loran-C, Hyperbolic
navigation system, Groundwave signals, Line of Position, Error correction.

5
 АННОТАЦИЯ

Цель данной дипломной работы состоит в том, чтобы понять и провести анализ
возможностей для повышения эффективности систем дальней навигации.
Авиация и вся концепция воздушного транспорта имеют свои единственные основы,
вращающиеся вокруг пути и навигации. Начиная с развития навигационных систем в
самолетах, воздушный транспорт развивался эффективно. В этой работе можно увидеть
изучение и разработку систем навигации большого радиуса действия различных видов. Но
LORAN-C будет более углубленным. Эта работа следует за продвижением идеи Лорана-С от
ее возникновения как гиперболической навигационной системы с частотой 100 кГц до
более поздних случаев, когда она нашла ассортимент применений как для планирования,
так и для маршрута. Благодаря исследованиям ранее существующих систем и
разработанных передовых систем стали возможны различные методы для реализации и
повышения эффективности и точности навигации.

Вся работа состоит из 113 страниц, 55 рисунков, 28 таблиц, 75 формул, 17

литературных источников.

Ключевые слова: навигационная система, дальние навигационные системы,

Loran-C, гиперболическая навигационная система, сигналы наземных волн, линия
положения, исправление ошибок.

6
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 12

Navigation System Equipment: ........................................................................................... 12

GPS equipment: ................................................................................................................ 13

LORAN: ........................................................................................................................... 14

1. LONG RANGE NAVIGATION SYSTEMS ................................................................ 15

1.1 Inertial Navigation Systems: .......................................................................................... 16

1.1.1 Strapdown Inertial Navigation System (INS):......................................................... 16

1.1.2 INS Structure and working: ..................................................................................... 17

1.2 Very Low Frequency (VLF)/Omega radio navigation:.................................................. 19

1.2.1: Dead- reckoning equation: ..................................................................................... 22

1.3 Long Range Radio Navigation (LORAN): .................................................................... 23

1.3.1 Hyperbolic navigation system: ................................................................................ 24

1.3.2 Operation LORAN (two station examples): ............................................................ 24

1.3.3 LORAN vs GEE: ..................................................................................................... 25

1.4 Global Positioning System (GPS): ................................................................................. 28

1.4.1 How it started: ......................................................................................................... 28

1.4.2: GPS Functionality: ................................................................................................. 29

2. LORAN INFRASTRUCTURE EVOLUTION ............................................................ 31

2.1 LORAN Build and Equipment: ...................................................................................... 31

2.2 Early Stages of LORAN:................................................................................................ 31

2.3 Principles of Operation (General Infrastructure): .......................................................... 33

2.3.1 Range: ...................................................................................................................... 34

2.3.2 Accuracy: ................................................................................................................. 35

2.3.3 Timing and Fix: ....................................................................................................... 35

2.3.4 Homing: ................................................................................................................... 36

7
 2.3.5 LORAN operation and repetition periods: .............................................................. 37

2.3.6 LORAN phase coding and coding delay: ................................................................ 39

3. LORAN-C........................................................................................................................ 43

3.1 CYTAC: ......................................................................................................................... 43

3.1.1 CYTAC Operational test: ........................................................................................ 45

3.2 LORAN-c Operation: ..................................................................................................... 50

4. Loran-C. Structure diagram, operating algorithm, parameters................................ 58

4.1 Loran-C Component description and Structural schematics: ......................................... 58

4.1.1 Technical description of Transmitting component(s):............................................. 58

4.1.2 Technical description of Receiver Component: ...................................................... 60

4.2 Loran-C operational analysis & performance: ............................................................... 62

4.3 Groundwave component: ............................................................................................... 65

4.3.1 Groundwave propagation error & anomalies: ......................................................... 65

4.3.2 Area Monitors & Geographic Accuracy of Ground equipment: ............................. 66

4.3.4 Loran-C position measurement and Instrumental errors: ............................................ 66

4.4 Skywave Equipment Performance: ................................................................................ 67

4.4.1 Skywave Discriminations: ....................................................................................... 68

4.5 Operational theory: ......................................................................................................... 69

5. Calculating the various possibilities existing in Loran-C ........................................... 72

5.1: Determining the position: .............................................................................................. 72

5.1.1 Normal determination using Pythagorean theorem and determination of fix: ........ 73

5.2 Estimating the fix and providing efficiency using the triangulation method: ................ 92

5.2.1: Case 1: Considering Master (M) and Slave (Y) stations : ...................................... 95

5.2.2 Case 2: Considering Master (M) and Slave (X) station: ............................................. 99

6.2.3 Considering Slave (X) and Secondary Slave (Y) station: ..................................... 101

8
 5.3 ANALYZING THE POSSILIBILITY OF IMPROVING EFFICIENCY BY
DETERMINING THE ERROR PLOT AGAINST ALL ANGLES IN THE QUADRANT:
............................................................................................................................................ 104

6. FUTURE ENHANCEMENTS..................................................................................... 109

6.1 e-Loran: ........................................................................................................................ 109

6.2 Working Flowchart: ..................................................................................................... 110

CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... 112

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................ 113

9
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1:A mechanical HSI (left-top) and an electronic HSI (left-bottom) both display VOR
information ............................................................................................................................... 13
Figure 2: Garmin GPS receiver in Flight Simulator ............................................................... 13
Figure 3: A control panel of military aircraft after LORAN was first put in use [1] .............. 14
Figure 4:LORAN hyperbolic signal [3] ................................................................................... 15
Figure 5:Strapdown INS schematic [5] ................................................................................... 17
Figure 6: INS structure [3] ..................................................................................................... 17
Figure 7: OMEGA transmitting stations ................................................................................. 21
Figure 8: Stations Transmitting single point signal [7] .......................................................... 21
Figure 9: local-level geographic and body frames [8] ........................................................... 22
Figure 10: Omega data transmission [7] ................................................................................ 23
Figure 11: LORAN Line of Position [10] ................................................................................ 25
Figure 12:GEE airborne equipment, with the R1355 receiver on the left and the Indicator
Unit Type 62A on the right. [11] ............................................................................................. 27
Figure 13: Interior view of the AN/APN-4 Loran A receiver. [14] ......................................... 27
Figure 15: Errors in GPS before and after disabling Selective Access (SA) mode [15] ......... 29
Figure 16: Loran working Sketch [image courtesy Stanford university(gps.stanford.edu)) ... 33
Figure 17: LORAN signals Day/Night [16] ............................................................................. 34
Figure 18: HOP at day / night [16] ......................................................................................... 35
Figure 19: Distortion signals perceived at the display [16] ................................................... 36
Figure 20:North Carolina beach Master station (Photo from Google Earth). [18] ............... 44
Figure 21: The Jupiter Slave station 1 station 1957 (Image courtesy Google) [18] .............. 44
Figure 22: Martha's Vineyard Station during construction. (From NBS monograph 1972)
[18] .......................................................................................................................................... 45
Figure 23:Sperry technique for marking a point on the Loran-C pulse. [18] ......................... 46
Figure 24: NBS Pulse scheme [18] ......................................................................................... 47
Figure 25: NBS Stations [18] .................................................................................................. 49
Figure 26: Bermuda Station Scatters and Fixes. [17] ............................................................. 52
Figure 27: LORAN -c Chains [17] .......................................................................................... 54
Figure 28: LORAN C EQUIPMENT DIAGRAM..................................................................... 59

10
Figure 29: Loran-C Receiver Block Diagram [18] ................................................................. 60
Figure 30: Nomograph for computing contours of geometric accuracy. [18] ........................ 64
Figure 31: Geometric accuracy Contours [18] ....................................................................... 64
Figure 32:Nighttime Skywave Field Intensity. [18] ................................................................ 68
Figure 33: Loran-C Lop depiction [6]] ................................................................................... 70
Figure 34: Master-Slave station (Patapur-Coconada)[19] .................................................... 73
Figure 35: Master-Secondary stations(Patapur- Balasore) [19]. ........................................... 75
Figure 36: Puri station (Secondary Z) [19] ............................................................................ 77
Figure 37: Diamond Harbor station(U) [19] .......................................................................... 78
Figure 38: Char-Chapli & Diamond Harbour (U) [19] ......................................................... 80
Figure 39: Graph depicting the fixes of the secondary station to the observer (X) ................ 89
Figure 40: Station distances values. ........................................................................................ 90
Figure 41: Graph depicting the time taken by each station. ................................................... 90
Figure 42: Time differences of the signal. ............................................................................... 91
Figure 43: Char-Chapli, Master, Observer triad .................................................................... 91
Figure 44: Calculation of angle of signal transmission [20] .................................................. 92
Figure 45: Determining the fix and angle using the Bombay chain. ....................................... 93
Figure 46: Distance vs error when a=0. ................................................................................. 96
Figure 47: Distance vs Error when a=45° .............................................................................. 97
Figure 48: Distance vs Error when a=90................................................................................ 98
Figure 49: Errors Vs Distance when B=1049.676 NM. ........................................................ 101
Figure 50: Graph distance vs errors when B=942.7646 ....................................................... 103
Figure 51: When Baseline is in M-Y duo(117.17NM) ........................................................... 107
Figure 52: When Baseline is in M-X duo(1049.76) ............................................................... 107
Figure 53: When Baseline is in X-Y duo (924.7646) ............................................................. 108
Figure 54: Typical working of the e-Loran system ................................................................ 110
Figure 55: e-loran working ................................................................................................... 111

11
 INTRODUCTION
Aircraft navigation, like all other navigation has been widely developed over the years with
new and efficient methodology and equipment. Generally aerospace navigation implies the
possibility of a three-dimensional controlled motion. Through which we can attain high
maximum speed and through similar methods and parameters of motion, we are able to
precisely identify location and confirm their measurement. The key factor to the development
of such navigation possibilities is through the advancement and studies in the field of navigation
systems and sensors that play a main role in these systems.
The main difference between the systems and sensors is the level of complexity. In a
system, there are a lot of sensors and integral elements like the INS (Inertial Navigational
System) or certain ground-based components such as the radio navigation system; or the space-
based systems such as the SNS (Satellite Navigation Systems). Nevertheless, the main reason
behind these systems is to provide reliable information and parameters that can help improve
the accuracy of navigation systems providing the efficiency not just determined by the
complexity of the design but by the dynamic and spectral properties of the measurement of
error. Errors actually play an important role for each error is to be considered valuable and the
changes are to be made according to the values brought about by the error.
Navigation System Equipment:
Aircraft navigation supporting equipment have been developed and enhanced
through the recent years. Lot of effort and study has been put into the development of
such systems. Below listed are few of the equipment that have helped in the navigation
of the aircraft and a brief description about them:
VOR: VHF Omnidirectional Range:
It is a beacon that is present in the aircraft navigation unit. It is basically a short-
range navigation system which enables the aircraft to determine its position and stay on
a given course. Operating frequency channel over Very High Frequency (VHF) band
108 – 117.95 MHZ with channel spaced of 50 or 100 kHz (50 kHz for dense zones, 100
kHz elsewhere). The first 4 MHz is shared with the ILS band, the VOR being allocated
to 160 of the 200 available channels [1].

12
 Figure 1:A mechanical HSI (left-top) and an electronic HSI (left-bottom) both
display VOR information

GPS equipment:

It is most commonly utilized collector within the air ship. The fundamental
structure of the GPS was created by the assistance of earth-centered arranges
and gives the airplane position in reference to the World Geodetic Framework.
GPS operation is based on the concept of extending and triangulation from a star
grouping of satellites in space which act as exact reference focuses. The collector
employments information from a least of four satellites over the cover point (the
most reduced point over the skyline at which it can utilize a adherent). [1]

Displaying EHSI

Figure 2: Garmin GPS receiver in Flight Simulator

13
 LORAN:
Essentially LORAN (Long Extend Route) may be a hyperbolic radio
route system that was created by Joined together States amid WWII (World
War II). The LORAN (LOng Extend Route) could be a hyperbolic radio route
framework created within the US amid World War II. It is based on the
calculation of the time distinction between two radio beats, transmitted by two
ground stations, one ace and one slave, ordinarily isolated by almost 1000 km.
Each combine broadcast at one of four frequencies (1.75, 1.85, 1.9 or 1.95
MHz). [1] .

Figure 3: A control panel of military aircraft after LORAN was first put in use [1]

14
 1. LONG RANGE NAVIGATION SYSTEMS
Long range navigation systems were formerly a part of the hyperbolic radio
navigation systems category. In our modern world most of the Loran systems are obsolete
and not many are in working condition. Certain updates and enhancements had been made
to some of the systems in the recent years such as Loran-C, Chayka, and ELoran (commonly
written as eLoran), work at 100 kHz in the low frequency (long wave) part of the range.
The transmitters structure chains, each containing a master and 2– 5 optional slave stations.
A few transmitters, known as dual rates, belong to two chains (1,2). All are based on the
principle of transmitting synchronized signals from two or more pairs of stations.

Earlier, the receiver part of the system would obtain results by measuring time
differences (TDs). This is achieved by calculating the difference between the TOAs (times
of arrival) of the signals from two transmitters present in the same chain. Therefore, every
TD obtained is corrected for the difference in the TOT (Time of transmission) hence,
defining a LOP (Line of position) that is in the shape of a hyperbola. It is in this LOP that
the receiver may be located. Thus, the method is known as hyperbolic positioning where a
two-dimensional position fix can usually be obtained from two TDs.

Figure 4:LORAN hyperbolic signal [3]

The Figure 2.1 illustrates the hyperbola-shaped line of position along which the
receiver/transmitter (Master/slave) is located. The center station of the hyperbola being the
15
master station and the stations indicated with colour’s (Purple, red, green) are the
slave(secondary) stations.

1.1 Inertial Navigation Systems:

Inertial Navigation Systems, sometimes known as Inertial navigational unit
(INU) is a navigation system which is a combination of an inertial measurement unit
and a navigation processor. The inertial measurement unit also known as the Inertial
Reference Unit (IRU) provides the attitude, acceleration, angular rates, velocity, true
and magnetic headings, personal data, absolute altitude and wind data signals.

This measurement of units is done by an incorporated set of accelerometers and

gyros that are set in a strapdown configuration. It is called strapdown because the set of
gyros and accelerometers (3 each) are mounted on to the aircrafts reference, like a strap
that is attached to it. The data from these will be sent to the FMCS (Flight Management
Computer System), the digital flight control system, the EFIS (Electronic Flight
Instrument System), the VHF navigation system and the auto-throttle quadrant.

1.1.1 Strapdown Inertial Navigation System (INS):

The strapdown INS consists of three accelerometers and gyroscopes
connected to the aircraft. Each of the three gyroscopes are used to get information about
the direction of the aircraft. With information from these sensors, the speed and position
of the aircraft can be calculated. See figure 1 for the layout of a standalone INS
adjustment system.

Compared with the traditional gimbal navigation system, the strapdown system
does not require inputs or external devices. However, due to fabrication errors and
propagation errors in the inbuilt calculation, especially in low-cost systems. Due to these
mis-calibrations, different types of problems are induced by the sensor in calculation
and computation of the result.

16
 Figure 5:Strapdown INS schematic [5]

1.1.2 INS Structure and working:

The major elements of the typical inertial measurement units are the
accelerometers, gyroscopes, IMU (Inertial Measurement Unit) processor, a calibration-
parameters storing unit, temperature sensor and power supplies. As discussed earlier,
most of the reference units contain three pair of gyros and accelerometers. But, in some
cases the IMU will incorporate certain additional inertial sensor outputs in order to
protect the unit from single sensor failure.

Angular parameters

Figure 6: INS structure [3]

The IMU processor performs unit transformation on the inertial sensor outputs.
It provides the compensated value for the errors detected by the inertial sensors. The
17
unit transformation changes the inertial sensor efficiencies from current power, current,
or explicit power pulse outputs and angular velocity outputs. It may also use rebalance
control or forced closed-loop feedback for the accelerometers as well as the gyros. This
type of unit conversion will convert/ transform the outputs provided by the inertial
sensors to units of specific force and rate dependent on the angle. Most IMUs produce
this angular rate over the interval Ƭ, producing;

𝑡
𝒗𝑏𝑖𝑏 (𝑡) = ∫𝑡−𝑇 𝑓𝑖𝑏𝑏 (𝑡 ′ )𝑑𝑡 ′ , 𝒂𝒃𝒊𝒃 (𝑡) = ѡ𝑏𝑖𝑏 (𝑡′)𝑑𝑡′ (2.1)

Where, t is sampling interval, 𝒗𝑏𝑖𝑏 - velocity rates & 𝒂𝒃𝒊𝒃 - attitude increments.

The IUD generates certain forces or an integral part of the IUD. Let the output
signal usually fluctuate between 100 and 1000 Hz. Inertia sensors have a permanent
error that can be disabled in the laboratory and stored in memory, which allows you to
use the IMU processor correctly. Production errors can be recorded depending on the
temperature. Temperature, sensitivity, temperature and sensitivity of the measurement
sensor. However, a separate sensor does not match the temperature of the IDU.
Calibration is performed with a different temperature range, since the IMU is equipped
with a temperature sensor. Nevertheless, each sensor provides a variable temperature,
so it does not necessarily indicate the exact temperature of the environment of the IMU.
In some cases, the IMU can display temperature control instead. Equalization costs can
be limited by applying a similar arrangement of correction factors to all clustering
sensors. In any case, the best performance is achieved thanks to the individual setting
of each sensor or IMU, which regulates the level of the IMO, is expected to fully meet
unconfirmed transient connections. The Kalman filter can be used to receive express
payments from evaluation information. This procedure is known as laboratory
calibration to recognize it during calibration. In the main, the selected hub-
accelerometer IMU rewards the processor - it's impact sizes. To plot the route response
for one item in space, measurements of speed and angular strength must also be applied
to one control accuracy. In any case, the inertia sensors require adjustment of most
centimeters. This does not affect gyroscopes. However, it accelerometer around the
perpendicular axis will tend to create centripetal force, which is proportional to its

18
 positioning from the axis of impression. The resulting centripetal force, creating at the
end of the accelerometer, differs from that at the initial point, therefore, the error is
restored, and every force, the change at the starting point, is equal to [5],
2
[(ѡ𝑏𝑖𝑏,𝑦 ) + (ѡ𝑏𝑖𝑏,𝑧 )2 ]∆𝑥𝑏
2 2
∆𝑓𝑏𝑖𝑏 = [(ѡ𝑏𝑖𝑏,𝑧 ) + (ѡ𝑏𝑖𝑏,𝑥 ) ]∆𝑦𝑏 (2.2)
2 2
[(ѡ𝑏𝑖𝑏,𝑥 ) + (ѡ𝑏𝑖𝑏,𝑦 ) ]∆𝑧𝑏
( )

Where, ∆𝑥𝑏 , ∆𝑦𝑏 𝑎𝑛𝑑 ∆𝑧𝑏 are displacements of each accelerometer from the
reference point along the axis it is sensitive at. The displacements can be obtained from
the IMU by getting the gyros measurement of the angular rates and IMU design. Thus,
it can be easily compensated by the IMU processor.

Table (2.1)

Typical Accelerometer & Gyro biases for different grades [4]

Accelerometer Bias Gyro Bias

IMU Grade mg ms-2 Hr-1 Rad s-1

Marine 0.01 10-4 0.001 5*10-9

Aviation 0.03-0.1 3*10-4-10-3 0.01 5*10-8

Intermediate 0.1-1 10-3-10-2 0.1 5*10-7

Tactical 1-10 10-2-10-1 1-100 5*10-6-5*10-4

Automotive >10 >10-1 >100 >5*10-4

From table (2.1) we can clearly differentiate the bias levels present in the
aviation grade.

1.2 Very Low Frequency (VLF)/Omega radio navigation:

The Omega system is essentially a VLF (very low frequency) ground radio
navigation system used by the United States in cooperation with six other countries.
This system works between an internationally distributed frequency (10-14 kHz). The
purpose of this omega system is to provide an accurate navigation environment and a

19
 signal that is delivered in a continuous stream. First, this system was introduced on the
air and sea ocean and inland navigation route. This system has an accuracy of 2-4Nm
(nautical miles).

In addition, he was able to provide navigation services to weather data around

the world using eight integrated stations on the ground that generate very low frequency
continuous wave signals. This standard was intended to ensure the propagation of time,
which is a standard controlled by atomic frequency. These signals provide accurate, less
accurate frequency readings. The Omega receiver determines the location from the
measurement range taken on the basis of the collected signal development phase from
two or more Omega station zones or a phase comparison between selected Omega
station pairs producing crossover lines.

Omega created a study on the largest computerized routing system between and
after World War II. Omega operating stations began sending signals about the route in
the early and mid-1970s, and in 1982 to the installation of the last eight stations. Omega
consists of three main elements:

• Gearboxes
• Signals in the Earth's ionosphere
• Recipients and navigation computers.

Although each of these key components may be an isolated substance, the overall
implementation of the frame and the ability of the Omega to study the unheard depends on the
action of each element. There are eight Omega transmitters in the world. Broadcasters were
found in Norway (on the ice circle) in Tsushima, Japan (Monrovia) in Japan; Argentina (Golfo
Nuevo) La Gathering Island (Indian Sea) Australia (Victoria) is located in the United States in
North Dakota and Hawaii (Oahu). In 1991, the Omega user community was around 26,500.
When this system was used, LORAN-c was the leading navigation system that was used mainly
(LORAN-c studies can be found later in this report). However, the Omega system had a useful
coverage ratio for those with LORAN-c.

Although Loran-C coverage was present for many parts of the world, the vast expenses
of oceans was not a favorable design for Loran-C. In this case it was the Omega system that
came to rescue seafarers and oceanic travelers.
20
 Figure 7: OMEGA transmitting stations

The above figure represents the transmitter stations that were placed at specific points
on the globe. This arrangement was keen at they had their signals converging to the main
transmitter from where they were able to decipher the signals and provide navigational
efficiency. In simple terms, a single common frequency source will provide the ideal signal
where the transmission from each of the stations available will be done at the same time with
the exact same phase. But, since each of the transmitter is placed almost thousand miles around
the world so it is impossible to keep that receiver part to one signal. That is where the LOP
(Line of Position) come into play.

Figure 8: Stations Transmitting single point signal [7]

21
1.2.1: Dead- reckoning equation:
Death reckoning navigation is used for all types of transport (air, land and sea).
In an airplane, an air data system sensor will be the solution that will be obtained. This
is a three-dimensional inertial navigation system. * (This equation is important and will
be used again).

The calculated dynamic dynamic equations are numerically integrated with profitability
and position. The following formula is a local-level geographic and body-level
reference system. Believe:

υ ^ n = C_b ^ n v ^ b (2.4)

If zero, the transformation matrix is obtained by converting from the body frame to the
geographic frame.

Conversion from a geographic to a body using matrix C_b ^ n can be done using the
heading rix matrix. Equation (2.4) Indicates the geographical components of frame rate. Width
(Φ) and length (λ) to:

Φ = v_north / (R_meridian + h) (2.5)And

𝑣𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡
𝜆= (2.6)
(𝑅𝑛𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 +ℎ)𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃

Figure 9: local-level geographic and body frames [8]

Heading, is used to provide the result of transformation in the equation
(2.4) and therefore we obtain the output by numerically integrating the rate gyro;

𝜓 = 𝜓𝑡𝑜 + ∫ 𝜓 𝑑𝑡 (2.7)

Therefore, ignoring contributions from these rates gives an equivalent

value to that of a gyro bias error. In order to receive the correct value of the
22
 dead-reckoning, the initial heading 𝜓𝑡𝑜 must be given from a sensor or on a prior
knowledge.

Thus, taking into account these indicators, such a survey is approaching

the fact that it is a mistake in the tilt of the gyroscope. The range will be Information
provided by the Commission is based on a special range of ranges. In order to do this,
compulsory work is a way to send a collector, which could be done through wider ways.
To resolve the ambiguity of the path, the relapses will be expanded. As a rule, this is
done when the stations transmit at (13,6,11,3,10,2) kHz [7]. Other additional repetitions
are identical to each other. 13.6 kHz gives a bandwidth of 6 miles. This value is equal
to three bands of 10.2 kHz. An investigation with the calculation of a larger bandwidth
of simple calculations of the difference between two frequencies of 3.4 kHz. This is a
larger frequency with a track. A similar can be calculated for a range from 11.3 to 10.2
kHz

Figure 10: Omega data transmission [7]

1.3 Long Range Radio Navigation (LORAN):
Loran is part of a terrestrial radio navigation system. For the first
time he was invented by Alfred Loom during World War II. On October 1, 1940, Alfred,
the chairman of the microwave committee, began the idea of creating a hyperbolic
navigation system. He even suggested that this system can provide efficiency accuracy
of at least 300 feet to 200 m (320 km) no more than 300-500 miles away. As a result of
this meeting, Mas Project 3 was created (the first project leading to the development of
LORAN systems.) LORAN systems are outdated, but they are still operating unlike the
unopened Omega system. such as (GLONASS, GPS, BEIDOU) Currently, LORAN is

23
considered a substitute for GNSS systems because bounce modes are different from
GNSS. using the transmitter and receiver location together.

LORAN has been calling for many years. With this electronic system, LORAN travelers
can accurately and quickly determine day and night conditions. It can be used in
virtually any weather or sea conditions. Essentially, this system provides donor stations
that are strategically located on shore, on ships and on aircraft. Its accuracy is
comparable to good celestial observations. LORAN signals are available to navigators
within 24 hours. They cover major sea routes and global growth.

1.3.1 Hyperbolic navigation system:

Navigation, using a hyperbolic curve network, was the first serious development
in the art of navigation in 1764 after the invention of the John Harrison archway in Great
Britain. however, it played an important role in the great victories during World War II.
The famous Robert Watson-Watt and a group of scientists and engineers took on the
task of developing a radar shield to protect the United Kingdom. His team included an
electronic master named Robert J. Dippe who was a creative genius. To propel British
bombers safely back to their bases, they often proposed developing a hyperbolic curve
grid system with a short-range navigation system. At that time, a radar was rejected
because it was not associated with the protective shield.

Later, the general of the team, DM Budd, had problems with bombers at night, which
made it difficult to target enemies. Dippe's idea about the idea of hyperbolic navigation
has emerged and the family of distant navigation systems has been effective. The
hyperboli produced by the two station pairs form a grid. The observer can make
measurements by considering double differences. The hyperbolic lines expand outward,
cross the paths on both sides of the station, so they communicate with both stations.
Therefore, both stations will satisfy the measurements, and any uncertainty is almost
negligible. Three independent measurements of the time difference are not clear.

1.3.2 Operation LORAN (two station examples):

Now think of two points as stations. One is known as the main station and the
latter - the slave. For a moment, we will see these stations as simultaneous pairs and
simultaneously leave a short radio energy impulse. By leaving both stations at the same

24
time, a double impulse in all directions goes into space. These signals move at a constant
speed of approximately 86,000 m / s (almost at light speed). In this case, the pulse from
the nearest station will reach the receiver (planes, ships) faster than the receiver that is
faster than a minute. The LORAN vessel measures this distance by calculating the
arrival time of both signals. It only determines how long a pulse will reach the receiver
compared to the other pulse.

The same time intervals will be observed at many points within two coastal stations.
And when these points are connected, they form a hyperbola known as the location of
the lop. (Figure 11)

LOP with respect to the vessel

Figure 11: LORAN Line of Position [10]

This Line of position can be determined by navigators and can obtain a fixed
point. A specially created chart contains accurately plotted lines of position of the
various time differences encountered in an area. Having one line of position we then
obtain readings from another pair of stations. An accurate fix is established at the
intersection of the two lines of position.

1.3.3 LORAN vs GEE:

Amid the 1940s, Britain had come up with the GEE where the real standing for
network framework which utilized route with the assistance of utilizing frameworks
to find and transmit information to the collector. It was a radio route framework that
was utilized by the RAF (Illustrious Discuss Constrain) the WWII. The Grid was

25
measured employing a time delay between two radio signals which in the long run
would create a settle. The precision of this framework was recorded to be at almost
350miles(560km). Respected as the primary hyperbolic system to have been
operational, since entering the RAF aircraft command within the year 1942. The
individual behind the LORAN Robert Dippy, formulated GEE considering it the
short-range daze landing framework in-order to make strides the operations of
aircrafts amid the night. Afterward on, after certain testing and investigate, an
investigation was concluded making Gee into a long-range common route
framework. GEE had an incredible precision and was utilized for bombarding
expansive scale cities at night without the require of a bombsight or other references.
GEE had been a major user till the development of LORAN had come into effect
(which was the actual inspiration for the LORAN system). When compared to the
LORAN:

(Table 2.2)

Basic characteristics of GEE and LORAN system.[13],[14]

Characteristics GEE LORAN

Operational 30Mhz 1.85-1.95Mhz

Frequency

Range of operation Upto 350 Upto 1500miles (2400km)

miles(560km)

Navigational Short Range Long Range

Benefits

Expense Cheap Costly

26
 (l) GEE (R) Loran Indicator

Figure 12:GEE airborne equipment, with the R1355 receiver on the left and the
Indicator Unit Type 62A on the right. [11]

Loran A

Figure 13: Interior view of the AN/APN-4 Loran A receiver. [14]

The development of these systems went about during the WWII era and was majorly being used
for warfare. Further in this report, LORAN system shall be explained in detail with major focus
on the LORAN-c system.

27
1.4 Global Positioning System (GPS):
The Global Positioning System is the most commonly used navigation system that is
currently being used by the majority of the world. Right from road to air transport and also
random people walking with their mobile phones on have GPS system embedded in their hand
devices. The main reason for the success behind GPS is the possibility to provide accuracy and
speed in their location services. Basically, just like the other navigation systems GPS also
initially was not implemented for worldwide use. It was conceived for various military
applications.

1.4.1 How it started:

Back when high-class (classified) projects were in development, the military had
initiated a development and implementation of the GPS (Global Positioning System)
system. The satellite network project for determining coordinates in real time anywhere
in the world was named NAVSTAR (Navigation system with timing and timing),
whereas the abbreviation GPS appeared later. Initially, the system was used only for
defense but later on it was provided to civilians as well (A point to be noted that the
accuracy level which civilians is much lesser to what the military standards are equipped
with for obvious reasons.).

The first steps to deploy a navigation network were taken in the mid-seventies,
while the commercial operation of the system in its current form began in 1995. At
present, there are 28 satellites in the work, evenly distributed in orbits with a height of
20,350 km (24 satellites are enough for full-scale operation).

Looking ahead a little bit, I’ll say that the truly key moment in GPS history was
the decision of the US President to abolish the so-called selective access mode (SA -
selective availability) on May 1, 2000, the error artificially introduced into satellite
signals for inaccurate civilian GPS receivers. From this point on, the amateur terminal
can determine coordinates with a precision of several meters (previously, the error was
tens of meters).

28
 Errors in frequency Hike

Figure 14: Errors in GPS before and after disabling Selective Access (SA) mode [15]

The above image represents the differences between the error in GPS
before/after SA removal. Let's try to understand in general terms how the global
positioning system is arranged, and then we will touch on a number of user
aspects. Consideration will begin with the principle of determining the distance that
underlies the operation of the space navigation system.

1.4.2: GPS Functionality:

In essence, the GPS control segment (also known as OCS) consists of a base
earth station, six atomic clock monitoring stations and circulates around the Equatorial
region around the Equatorial District (base station in Colorado) and four Earth
Observation Stations. transmission of information to satellites. The most important tasks
of the management segment are:

• Delivery to ephemeral (simple data related to small satellite details).

• Watch the clock and change their behavior.

• Satellite time synchronization on board.

• Transmission of accurate and approximate (transmitted) data to all existing

satellites.
29
 • health conditions and errors such as clock errors, etc.

Each satellite GPS continuously generates two radio frequencies - L1 = 1575.42

MHz and L2 = 1227.60 MHz. The transmitter power is respectively 50 and 8 W. The
navigation signal is a pseudo-random random code (pseudo-random code) controlled by
the phase. There are two types of PRN: first C / A code (coarse code - coarse code) used
in civilian receivers, second P code (exact code - exact code) - for military purposes,
sometimes for geodesy and cartography. Frequency L1 is modulated as C / A and P
codes, L2 frequency is transmitted only by P-code. In addition, there is a code Y that is
encrypted using P-code (during the war, the encryption system may differ).

One of the technical problems described above is the synchronization of the

clock on the satellite and the receivers. Even the smallest standard error can make a big
mistake in determining the distance. Each satellite has a very precise atomic clock. Of
course, such a case cannot be installed on each receiver.

30
 2. LORAN INFRASTRUCTURE EVOLUTION
2.1 LORAN Build and Equipment:
Loran was exceedingly sought after for very numerous years. Earlier stages of the
LORAN equipment had faced some difficulties since the vacuum tube size and power
requirements, subjected LORAN to be initially used in ships and not so much in aircrafts. But,
by the year 1943, an airborne LORAN was developed (APN-4) which was small considering
its marine counterpart and was used to be carried by bombers and patrol aircraft. The APN-4
was built in the measurements (1ft*2ft by 2.5ft[14]).later on, advancements were made to the
system and the team working behind LORAN were able to develop much more lighter and
efficient equipment By methods for this LORAN electronic framework, a pilot can decide his
position precisely and rapidly, either amid day or amid the night. It is accessible to pilots
practically under any states of climate or ocean. Fundamentally, this framework includes
deliberately found transmitting stations on the shore, recipients on boats and flying machines.
Its precision can be contrasted and great heavenly perceptions. LORAN signals are
broadcasting live, accessible to guides, 24 hours every day. They spread significantly to both
marine and aviation transport throughout the world.

2.2 Early Stages of LORAN:

The previous LORAN words were later found in Lard's US Secretaries and Military
References. The first of these publications is the tactical use of radar on board B, which was
published in 1945, based on radar bulletin number 2. It was specifically reported to the head of
the US Department of the Navy. sir. Cooke C Books.

It was one of Laurent's first words. Using a system called ed Loran (LO-ng RA-gge), position
and edge lines can be adjusted with approximate accuracy. 1% external. To distinguish a ship
from some Laurent stations. " Most factors do not contain relevant information, but with energy
and frequencies, the standard lift depends on the river navigation system and the range is the
average values of sea water transport and reception. In the waves of the country, the effective
range is reduced from 70 to 150 nautical miles and from 1000 to 1,300 nautical miles from the
sky [16]. A LORAN system basically comprises of three elements:

• A transmitter (Which are arranged in pairs).

• A Loran indicator (receiver section).

31
 • Tables (or Loran charts for reference).

These Loran transmitters are located in areas of islands and coastal areas, which are a
high point of the earth that flows mainly into a large volume of water. They transmit low
frequency short pulses from their adjusted positions. And somewhere in the middle of the sea,
the time difference of the reception of the signals from the earlier mentioned pair of transmitters
will be measured and displayed on the cathode-ray tubes (in other words, scope display). A
specially prepared chart will be present, the chart is prepared in accordance with LORAN.

Below is the table depicting the difference in the range and efficiency of LORAN
systems at day and night times.

(Table 3.1)

LORAN range at Day/Night [16]

NAUTICAL MILES
DAYTIME 700
NIGHTIME 1400

Loran advantages are considered as:

• Its use is weather-proof and unaffected.

• There is no transmission of the aircraft or vessel. The radio does not indicate the
location of the aircraft because of its commitment to silence.
• A more efficient and accurate set of RDF systems.
• It's a quick but accurate way to get the fix. Three jobs can be obtained in about
5 minutes.
• Craft use is limited because the only aircraft equipped with the appropriate
equipment can receive pulsed signals and measure the time difference.

32
 Loran
station

Observer

Figure 15: Loran working Sketch [image courtesy Stanford university(gps.stanford.edu))

The above picture represents how the signals from the previously mentioned transmitter
station provides the signal to the ships (including vessels and aircrafts) and the signals returning
back to the mother transmitter station. The signals transmitted and received will give rise to
new line of positions to determine the intersection point and conclude the position of the
receiver accordingly.

2.3 Principles of Operation (General Infrastructure):

During the Second World War, there were a number of navigation systems focused on
military purposes. But when LORAN is found, the accuracy, length and speed of the navigation
system will be stunning. With that in mind, we might assume that there is a high complexity
within the framework of loran, but it is very simple. In fact, there are radio stations. This
message is either a short flag or a stroke. These signals are not essentially continuous, but they
are irregular, and these attacks are the first in the world.

Impulses from two transmitters. This is a lasting moment (I think). The center of all points has
a given line of position. There are extraordinary charts. These schedules are in operation. Login
to the system Point of entry to the station. With this calculated time difference, he can design
his position line (Lop). Where the "R" can be an AC station that has a dual pulse leading
station), which is common to both pairs "Q" and "R" who are stationed. With Laurent cards,
navigator.

Also, the main advantages of the LORAN system were long-range navigation systems. See the
picture below. In the picture, we can understand the heavenly waves. The received signals have
a certain frequency. However, this was a question that most navigators never thought of.

33
 Figure 16: LORAN signals Day/Night [16]

The detailed description of the advantages of LORAN systems are as follows:

2.3.1 Range:
The LORAN system range has values that range between 500 and 1400
miles. We know that there are two types of signals received, ground and sky
signals. The maximum effective range that can be obtained in the ground waves
over a water body is approximately around 500 to 700 nautical miles and during
the day, the maximum effective range is calculated approximately at about 350
to 500 nautical miles during the nighttime. (Further explanation for the nighttime
sky waves can be found in figures 11 & 12)

There are several conditions that affect the radio waves range.
Conditions like the weather, the time and year of the day and night, output power
of the transmitting station and basic nature of the earth’s surface (whether it is a
land of a water body). Not much information is available about most factors, but
with energy and frequency currently in use, the standard Laurent is primarily a
water-based navigation system and the range values provided are average values
34
for transmission over sea water. The effective range is reduced from 70 to 150
nautical miles on land, to waves of the Earth, and from 1000 to 1300 nautical
miles. [16]

2.3.2 Accuracy:
In a general statement, it is somewhat difficult to determine Lauren's
accuracy, as there are many factors. The accuracy to which the LORAN Locator
s available depends primarily on the type of signals (earth or sky waves) and the
location of the aircraft for the two transmitting stations. Other factors are
weather conditions, accuracy of station synchronization, accuracy of plans,
operator skills.

2.3.3 Timing and Fix:

Under favorable conditions, an experienced operator can obtain position
line indication (time difference) in less than a minute. Evidence can be taken on
two or three lines of lines and positions (ix is built in 3-5 minutes.) Under the
most unfavorable conditions it may take 3 or 4 minutes to get one proof of the
time difference. it is a simple process that an average operator will easily do in
2 or 3 minutes. Compared to heavenly navigation, the average time required to
determine Laurent's three lines is between 3 and 5 minutes, unlike the average
heavenly instillation time from three angles. first 20 to 25 minutes. The speed
with which one can be exact bound is one of the most valuable features of the
plane Laurent.

HOPS occurring
due to the
presence of
atmospheric
substances.

Atmospheric Particles

Figure 17: HOP at day / night [16]

35
 From the above figure, we can clearly see the hopping of the sky waves
affecting the signal strength. The space between the ionospheric layers are also
very significant for the transmitting waves as for each HOP, depending upon the
time of the day or night, loran signals may follow either ground waves, they may
be reflected from ionospheric layers (known as skywaves which I shall describe
after this), or a combination of the received signals consisting of both the ground
and sky waves.

2.3.4 Homing:
Homing is possible with loran, as in other forms of radio navigation.
Loran, however, offers one important additional feature: it is possible to home
to any geographical point within range of the transmitting stations. The
advantages of this function are obvious compared to RDF or a radio compass,
in which self-control is limited by the speed of the transmitting station.
Sometimes the cause of habitat can also be the reason why waves reflect and
reflect rays on Earth from the ionosphere. The ionospheric layer of the earth’s
atmosphere is charged electrically, and it is does not take shape of the curvature
of the earth for it isn’t limited. This layer cause problems for long range
communications. Due to this phenomenon, during the summer months, the AM
broadcast, distant FM’s and TV stations were receiving signal shortages and
problems during the late 40’s.

Each Hike representing a HOP

Figure 18: Distortion signals perceived at the display [16]

36
 In the above figure (figure 18), from the left side to the end of the right
side, we can see the order in which various kinds of loran signals will appear on
the display scope. The hopping of the signal is what is the spikes we receive on
the receiver CRT. The time difference reading is taken from both the stations
and the general time difference is to be derived by the formula:

𝑇𝐷 = 𝐵 + 𝑞 + 𝐾(𝐿𝑞 − 𝐿ϋ) (3.1)

Where, B= The length of the baseline in microseconds.

(or)

The length of the baseline k times the original in nautical miles.

q = Coding delay

K = 6.18 microsecond/ nautical mile

Lq= Distance from the transmitting point to slave station in

nm (nautical miles).

Lϋ = Distance from the master to point the transmitting point in

nm.

2.3.5 LORAN operation and repetition periods:

As we discussed earlier, the LORAN operating frequency is in the band
of 1750-1950 Khz (earlier cited as kc(kilocycles)). There are Four frequency
channels of which three are in use:

• Channel 1- 1950Khz
• Channel 2- 1850Khz
• Channel 3- 1900Khz
• Channel 4- 1750Khz (This was discontinued after WWII)

Considering each station transmitting one pulse per station, each pair will
be assigned to a pulse repetition rate.

37
Problem 1: Consider the three basic repetition rates 20,25 & 33. In order
to find the specific pulse repetition rate (SPRR) what is to be done?

Solution 1: In order to analyze the SPRR, we must assign these rates

certain corresponding values S, L, H with each character’s periods as
50,000, 40,000 & 30,000 microseconds. And by the subtraction of
multiples of 100 microseconds from the basic repetition periods we can
receive (0-7) Specific repetition periods. See illustrated table below:

(Table 3.2)

LORAN Specification Repetition Periods [17]

Basic PRR
Specific S L H
PRR
0 50000 40000 30000
1 49900 39900 29900
2 49800 39800 29800
3 49700 39700 29700
4 49600 39600 29600
5 49500 39500 29500
6 49400 39400 29400
7 49300 39300 29300

From the table we can realize that if a Loran pair denoted 1L4, it
means that a Loran-A (also LORAN) pair having the frequency of 1850
Khz on the basis repetition rate of 30cycles per second and a specific
repetition period of 39600 microseconds. The pulse is in the shape of a
cosine square pulsed and defined by a rise time and a pulse width. The
amplitude specifications are:

38
 (Table 3.3)

Low Power (us) High Power(us)

RISE TIME 21±1 us 20±1 us
PULSE WIDTH 40±1 us 42±1 us

2.3.6 LORAN phase coding and coding delay:

Loran-C is a multipurpose hyperbolic navigation system operating at
90-110 kHz. frequency range. The term "multi-pulse" is used to denote the
transmission of pulse groups in each repetition period compared to the Loran-A
technique, which consists of transmitting one pulse to the station in each
repetition period. The benefits of multi-pulse work are the increased power
emitted from each transmission, that is, eight pulses over a period versus one
pulse per period, and the provision of a unique identification code for each type
of station by changing the phase of pulses and pulse groups.

Changing pulse pulses of Loran-C is an important aspect of the system's

operation. The phase change, commonly referred to as phase coding, simply
indicates that the phase information in the bypass pulse varies from pulse to
pulse and from pulse group to pulse group in a pre-organized sequence. The used
sequence was obtained in such a way as to provide the following scheme codes
of phases used in the Loran-C system:

(Table 3.4)

Master Pulses Within Group [17]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1st 0 0 180 180 0 180 0 180
2nd 0 180 180 0 0 0 0 0
3rd Repeat
1st
4th Repeat
2nd

39
 (Table 3.5)

Slave Pulses Within Group [17]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1st 0 0 0 0 0 180 180 0
2nd 0 180 0 180 0 0 180 180
3rd Repeat
1st
4th Repeat
2nd

Repetition periods are selected to allow maximum number of pulses to

be radiated without simultaneous transmission by two or more stations (overlap).
Each interval must be long enough to contain three time periods are: the time
required to actually transmit the signals, the time required by various
equipment’s for switching functions between intervals, and the time required to
propagate the signals from station to station. Signal time for the master station
is approximately 10,000 microseconds, resulting from eight pulses spaced 1000
μsec, a ninth pulse 2000 μsec after the eighth pulse, 300 μsec to transmit the 9th
pulse and 700 μsec to allow for skywave delays. Each slave requires 8000
microseconds since it has only eight pulses.

• Triad:
M(Master)

(Slave)X Y(Slave)

40
 • WYE:

M(Master)

X Y

• STAR:

X W

M(Master)

Y Z

The letters “X, Y, Z, W” all represent one slave station from another.
Also, their chains represent their repetition rate and are subdivided into pairs.
So, when we consider the time difference reading for the W baseline on a SH-7
chain would represented as ASH-7W, where “A” denoted Loran-A (Also, the
basic Loran system). W must receive all the M signals and prior to its
transmission perform the necessary switching function. X must receive all of M
and all of W prior to transmission. Thus, the system as shown in the following
example:

M interval = 10000 μsec (3.2)

Coding delay for W slave = 11000 (10000 + switching) (Note that

propagation time is not considered for W coding delay).

W= observed at M= 11000 + 3 ßMW. (3.3)

W= observed at X = ßMW – ßMX + 11000 + ßWX (3.4)

41
X coding delay = ßMW - ßWX + 11000 + 9000 + 1000 (3.5)

And is rounded to the next larger even 1000 μsec

The coding delay for Y and Z are determined in a similar manner. The
total repetition interval must be greater than ;

ßMW+ ßWX + ßXY + ßYZ + ßMZ + 11,000+4X9,000+4X1000. (3.6)

Simple Loran-C triads with short baselines, these baselines use the
LORAN A repetition rates. But in case of LORAN c (We shall discuss
further about LORAN-c) the repetitions periods are twice as long as
LORAN A.

42
 3. LORAN-C
3.1 CYTAC:
CYTAC was a tactical bombing system developed by the Rome Center for Air
Development (RADC), a long-range system based on all weather conditions [18]. In 1952,
CYTAC progress began. Some time ago the frame was officially discharged, a number of
unpredictable events occurred in the field test frame. The reason we consider CYTAC under
LORAN-C is that CYTAC is the main idea behind the development of Loran-c. The reason for
this CYTAC program is to test a long-range navigation system known as Loran-C. CYTAC can
be a weapon frame. As a result, she had the excess ability to bomb a number of pre-selected
targets. To accomplish this, there was a special-purpose digital computer that was used to direct
the aircraft to explode a special focus, collecting data from the CYTAC collector. In addition
to the navigation information, the ballistic data of the destination will be provided by some
other information on all vehicles in the aircraft.

(Table 4.1)

CYTAC SPECIFICATIONS & OPERATING SYSTEM [18]

Frequency of operation 100KHz
Data code 8Pulse phase coded
Pulse spacing 1200 μsec between a group of eight
Equipment AN/FPN-15 LF LORAN Transmitters

The eight-phase code was originally a SECRET level and it was not authorized during
testing.

The transmission antenna was placed by a balloon during the test period. It was raised to a
height of about 2500 feet for signal reception. Below are the master and slave stations of the
system (Fig 23, 24, 25).

43
Figure 19:North Carolina beach Master station (Photo from Google Earth). [18]

Transmitting antenna

Figure 20: The Jupiter Slave station 1 station 1957 (Image courtesy Google) [18]

44
 Slave Station 1 was initially located at Carrabelle, Florida. Later it was relocated to
Jupiter for the then developed Loran-C project. The station was radiating at a pulse power of
60Kw.

Station and Antenna of Martha’s

Vineyard

Figure 21: Martha's Vineyard Station during construction. (From NBS monograph 1972)
[18]

The Slave station 2 was initially located at Forestport, New York. Later again this station
had been moved to Martha’s Vineyard in the year 1957. The pule power radiated is 220Kw and
on-air tests were conducted during the years 1952-1957 till they were relocated permanently.

3.1.1 CYTAC Operational test:

Initially the operational test of a system called CYCLAN (not necessary
for detailed explanation), there was a two-frequency scheme that was used. It
was not only complex and difficult to stabilize; the system uses a nominal
bandwidth of 40 KHz. This posed difficulties for military purposes. In the
CYTAC system, the testing was done with a single frequency bandwidth and

45
 through an international agreement, the bandwidth of 90-110 KHz was agreed
upon and was used for experimental navigation use.

Figure 22:Sperry technique for marking a point on the Loran-C pulse. [18]

The success or failure of the test will eventually revolve around the fact that the ambiguity of
the flag can be avoided using a single repetition, as well as not exceeding the target range
available. In order to overcome this, Sperry created a plot that distinguishes the cycle. This was
done by stamping a point on the leading edge of the battle shell, taking away the envelope
waveform from its subordinate (see Fig. 22) [18]. The intersection of the rotation of the
resulting waveform gave a point that was free of envelope completeness. By studying the
resulting waveform with the contract door within the margin of the intersectional node, the error
voltage can be determined to provide the servo control of the test input position. Carrying out
the same operation both on Tuzov and on the driven blows, the contrast of time on the envelopes
was essentially a time interval between the test porches. The relative stage between the two rf
signals was measured by testing the output of the stage. The voltage error obtained from the
samples of the main phase was used to shift the phase of the reference voltage to maintain the
ratio of the quadrature phase with the input signals and, thus, the establishment of a phase lock.
The voltage error from the slave phase samples was used to operate the second phase shifter to
indicate the relative phase.

46
 The measurements of the carrier phases and the pulse envelope were fully
calculated in dependence, except that they were made at one point of the pulse. To
maintain the strategic distance from the cycle ambiguity, the time difference coverage
should have an accuracy of + 1/2 rf cycle or better. There was a small question that such
a figure could be satisfied from an instrument point of view, but it was to a certain extent
questionable how much the carrier cycles move relative to bending around the run when
the flag was spread. This last point was one of the most important issues that needs to
be solved recently, continuing full-scale promotion of the framework. The author's
approach to solving the cycle (regularly called “beat the NBS”) was a much less
complicated device, but he expected, mainly, to introduce an oscilloscope, and not to
programmed circuits. He used an adequate balance and an adjusted backup period to
ensure the design, as shown in Figure 23, when the signals were seen on an oscilloscope.
Instead of a regular, uniform repetition period, each other period was shortened by
exactly one or two complete cycles. Long and short periods were characterized by a
combination with pulses, and their amplitudes were adjusted so that two positive peaks
of the half cycle were superimposed along the leading edge.

Variations of
amplitude
in NBS scheme

Figure 23: NBS Pulse scheme [18]

To understand the identification of the signal cycle, this scheme was

tested in 1952. The idea was to get specific data on the cycle. Forestport, an
innovative transmitter, was built to send 100 kHz. The Circuit features needed
to change the repetition frequency were easy to reach, mainly because of an
47
 antenna with 1200 feet of insulation (insulation) offering a wide range of
radiation efficiency.

At the same time, the receiver equipment consisted of a 100 kHz

integrated broadband TRF amplifier with a marine DAS-4 indicator built into
the laboratory. It was convenient and mobile. Observations were made within a
radius of 100 meters from the transmitter. The identification of the cycle was in
most cases obvious. No overlapping peak peak or pulse shape changes were

NBS Pulse
1.5

0.5

Signal 1
0
-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Signal 2

-0.5

-1

-1.5

observed. Figure 23 shows a graphical representation of the signals. Above the

bias of both signals, they just moved from the border, and overlapping signals
that crossed the border are relatively small and can be considered insignificant.

The only criticism was that the tests were not carried out over long
distances. The signal to noise ratio would allow a distance of 500-600 miles or
more. However, the experiment has proven that cycle identification is valid and
possible for about 100 miles. Furthermore, if the distance is increased, it can be
identified or even more effectively identified. Thus, it provided evidence that
we can trust the frequency of the received signal without disconnection or signal
failure.

48
 Figure 24: NBS Stations [18]

The Standards Office has indicated that delays in Skywave can be slightly
shorter than 100 kHz than in higher frequencies. Given that the delay was recognized
as a critical parameter, the Bureau tried to identify delays and to provide the equipment
available. Skin recovery with a recovery time of about 60 μs and a 200 kW boost could
be transferred from Forestport, but the available equipment received limited data
reception to see the oscilloscope signals. With enough ethics of radiated control, beating
began with a reasonable assurance of separation from 400 to 500 miles. It was well
known that the exact beginning of the sky wave was not visible in the oscilloscope,
especially during the day. The Skywave and Soil Wave components are easily mixed
until part of the sky wave is sufficient to provide a certain change in the impulse.
Observations were made in Michigan and North Ohio. Despite the rather rough
measurement methods, the data was surprisingly consistent and pointed to a virtual
height that was reflected during the day at about 70 km and about 85 km at night. The
70-kilometer figure was smaller than most people, but she was pleased that pulse time
requirements were recognized at the start of the system. Based on a virtual height of 70
kilometers, it was first calculated that the first jump delay at altitudes of 1,000 to 1,200
miles is only 25 to 30 μs depending on the conductivity of the track. More detailed
digital computer calculations showed 35 to 40 μs later - real delays.
49
3.2 LORAN-c Operation:
During operation, Cytac worked, its functional principle was to provide remote
navigation operations. Meanwhile, a team of expensive guards worked on Laurent's
unique class to help you get the signal you received. They were labeled (A, B, C). The
classified version of Cytac is Loran-C. One of the engineers at Jansky & Bailey, Inc.
(Dickson, 1959):

"To get stable time difference measurements in the immediate vicinity of

transmitters, there is a need for a lot of engineering practice that applies to both the
master and the slave." Consider the satisfactory adjustments of slaves and master
families does not require absolute precision. but requires stability if the time difference
measurements are stable and reliable, the accuracy problem can be taken into account
during the initial calibration of the system. "[17]

A statistical report describing the operation and cause of the interruptions was
compiled. This report was compiled by Jansky & Bailey. The report was the main result
of both tables, one part covering the percentage of data used and the other the percentage
of days.

(Table 4.2)

Table representing time and data percentage - (03.02.1958-28.08.1958) [17]

Percentage of Usable Data On Percentage of Days

100 5.6
97 20
95 32
90 40
85 55
80 61
62 82
56 90
38 95

50
 The above table (Table 4.2) shows the percentage of data recorded by the receiver
station that was usable. This was recorded during the period from February 3 to August 28,
1958. The percentage of usable data corresponds very closely to the percentage of time in which
properly synchronized signals were transmitted. Now the below table (Table 4.3) contains the
typical causes/reasons for the interruption to take place. Around 362 interruptions were said to
have been recorded in the master-station log. The first four causes were about 60.5% of the total
interruptions and also had the need of more reliable equipment for operational use.

(Table 4.3)

Transmitter Interruptions for period June 2 to July 3, 1958. [17]

Cause of Interruption No of Occurrences Percentage of Total

1. Transmitter Power Supply 64 17.7
2. Phase Code errors 55 15.2
3. Divider Jumps 55 15.2
4. Unexplained jumps 45 12.4
5. Inadequate communications 33 9.1
6. Commercial Power failure 23 6.4
7. Operator error 20 5.5
8. Component failure 18 5.0
9. 400-cycle generator faults 11 3.0
10. Inadequate commercial power 7 1.9
11. Oscillator drift 7 1.9
12. Atmospherics 7 1.9
13 High ambient temperature 6 1.7
14. All others 11 3.1
Totals 362 100

It is not a surprise that the system performance was not so perfect at the first trail. It is
to be understood that the original transmitters and receivers and the equipment that were
associated with the transmission of signals were pressed into service to have the signals out at
the earliest possible date. A lot of built-in phase corrections were implemented and anticipated.
51
These built-in phase corrections had proved to be a success. With reasonable phase stability at
the transmitters, the monitors, especially those on the slave baseline extensions, could notify
the nearby slave of any needed adjustment of the coding delay to restore the proper time-
difference reading at the monitor. Carrying out that procedure is merely performing the
functions of a servo loop. In principle, it might seem that drifts would be relatively unimportant
as long as effective control could be exercised. In practice, however, the servo control seems to
be practical only when the system stability is good enough that the servo is scarcely needed.
Monitoring, as an independent check on system operation, is virtually indispensable, but it is
fundamental that the fewer the errors to be corrected, the better the system performance. Loran-
C is a very precise measuring system.

Bermuda station

Figure 25: Bermuda Station Scatters and Fixes. [17]

As discussed earlier, the changes in phase can be a result of various weather

phenomenon, supposedly as an outcome of changes in the atmospheric refractive index. Jansky
and Bailey, Inc. had performed a number of system tests and analysis. The reports suggested
that a considerable amount of flight tests was to be made during the spring to summer season.
The main objective of these tests was to explore the advantage of using skywaves over
groundwaves by determining the useful range of groundwaves over seawater. Two sets of
flights were made: the first, in March and April, and the second, in June and July. In the first
set, measurements were made in Bermuda, Puerto Rico, Trinidad, and Brazil. The second set
of flights included measurements of interfering signals in the North Atlantic and Mediterranean
areas where additional chains were being planned. The East Coast chain was not considered All

52
the accurate packets were put in place until new transmitters were installed checks made. The
time-difference errors could be converted to fix-errors, but several of the sites are poorly fixed.
Also, due to the uncertain ground conductivity and variation in the landscape scenario, thus
may lead to a lot of propagation path variations and lead to unpredictable errors. Since most of
the propagation is over sea water, however, it is clear that the predicted readings are quite
accurate and, if needed, measured corrections can be used near shorelines and islands.

(Table 4.4)

Table of Measured and Predicted TDs. [17]

Site Prediction Error

Xμs Yμs
Otis AFB, Mass. -0.30 +0.50
SuffolkAFB, N. Y -0.50 +0.05
Atlantic city, N. Y -0.00 +0.10
Wildwood, N.J. -0.38 +0.01
Salsbury, Md. -0.01 -0.14
Elizabeth City, N.J. -0.14 +0.14
Cherry Pt., N.C +0.13 +0.04
Beaufort, N.C. +0.32 +0.35
Brunswick, Ga. -0.03 +0.04
Jacksonville, Fla. -0.05 +0.04
St. Petersburg, Fla. -0.11 -0.02
Kindley AFB, Bermuda -0.04 -0.08
Monitoring site, Bermuda +0.03 -0.24
Eleuthera, BWI -0.06 -0.30
Mayaguaua, BWI +0.17 -0.28
San Juan, P. R -0.09 +0.07

The table (4.4) is a comparison the measured time differences with the predicted
readings at a number of sites (information was collected from the report (USCG EE- Rpt. L-
33, app. 1962)) Since the varying amount is land disorientations and propagation paths, the
53
errors on certain states like Wildwood, N.J. have shown considerable amounts of time
difference when compared to the other systems. But, inland calibrations on the measurements
were not made, but it was presumed that there might be larger variations of errors than the
ones that are depicted in table 4.4. Plans to install other chains were started essentially at the
beginning of the Loran-C program. Nothing could be done immediately, however, as
considerable time was required to develop and manufacture new equipment and also to
negotiate with other governments for transmitter sites.

`
`

Figure 26: LORAN -c Chains [17]

LORAN-c stations appeared (Fig. 26). The East Coast remains in the normal chain in
1962. In any case, geological contrasts and chains, as well as their separation between the
available transmitter chains, complicate the configuration. To ensure satisfactory signals along
the baselines, greater control is required. By expanding the wire height of the receiver from 625
feet to 1,300 feet, the radiation efficiency was increased by about 4 to 1 to provide a 1.2 MW
high voltage flag with AN / FPN-42 transmitters. Transmissions of the fourth century used with
the 1300-foot AN / FPN-45 cable also contain a flagpole with an area of about 4 MW. The
South East Asia Chain has been registered to become the largest chain of network
communications with a short base and strong exchange of funds. The adriatic chain is different
from all others, since there is a greater transmission permeation. Indeed, despite the fact that
the habit does not affect the rigid quality or repetition, it is more difficult to expect the system
54
and requires more orderly correction and repeatability. The Jan-Mayen station resembles the
terrible authority of Loran LF, but in this case they overcome the obvious deployment problems
and operate in the extreme north. In some cases, tropical storms and storms fail to transmit radio
waves in the unfortunate, 1,300-foot tower at Iwo Jima Station was a mechanical
disappointment that actually crashed into life. Indeed, despite the fact that this issue is taken
into account, the risk and error rates can be estimated at about 2-5%. Despite the technical and
mechanical shortcomings of the Loran-C system, the system was at the highest level in terms
of the purpose and requirements for which it was originally created. The main advantage and
important aspect of the Loran-C system is that the requirements for the spectrum of the system
are related to an international agreement with the frequent costs required for other radio stations.
However, there is consensus on whether there should be remote means of navigation (such a
quote, ending on page 86, taken from the report of Jansky and Bailey in 1962): [17]

1. It is best to use day and night anywhere in the world, and to deploy and use it in all
season’s large marine areas and in all weather conditions.
2. Provide fully navigable navigation data that does not contain significant uncertainty of
at least 95% of the planned coverage.
3. Be free to those who want to use it.
4. Provide an unlimited number of users in a manner compatible with the performance of
their ships.
5. Ensure that the system is malfunctioning.
6. Complies with applicable radio regulations. "

With regard to the accuracy of the required positioning, the report of the Ad Hoc Committee of
RTKM 3 shows:

"Oceanic areas need a positioning system with accuracy of up to 5 miles or percent distance,"
which is lower. With regard to aviation requirements, the report of the Special Committee,
RTCA 67, states: "As a direct target for error detection, 95% of the indication to 2,000 nautical
miles from a remote fixing station is below 5 miles of the sea or + 1% higher."

The table below (table 4.5) lists the following navigational requirements established at
IMARAMN (International Maritime Navigation) meeting. Databases and their requirements:
[17]

55
 (Table 4.5)

Ranges Functions Distance (n. mi) to Accuracy Time Available to

Nearest Source of establish position
danger
Long Transocean More than 50 ± 1% 15 mins
Navigation
Medium Aid to approaching 50-3 1/2n.mi to 5-1/2 mins
land, to coasting 200m
and general port
approach
Short Aids to harbors and Less than 3 ±50 meters Immediate
entrances

ICAO stated (ICAO document 7625) that, regardless of time or weather, the desired
interval is 1500 miles. Accuracy must be such that the positioning error does not exceed 10
miles in at least 95% of cases. A statement by the United States on requirements for aviation
operations is contained in document ACC / 9.1 of the Air Trafficking Coordination Committee,
May 27, 1957. This document notes that accuracy should be within 95% of the time. ACC 58 /
9.1 The Committee document should contain complete information on operational aviation
requirements.

Key US policies on assistance in long-distance navigation are set out in Air Traffic
Coordination Committee document 58/12. IE from December 30 to December 19, 59 These
are: [18]

1. To advance as a working goal, nationwide and universal standardization of one type of

radio stations on the ground and separately helps to focus on the needs of all users (air,
surface and sub-surface). Meanwhile, standardizing on the smallest number of types
contributes to the vital satisfaction of the needs of different users.
2. Recognize the complementarity between the short, remote and remote territory and the
independent autonomy in controlling the route and activities.

56
 3. Promote the logical and specialized assessment of all residential and external benefits,
as well as support the rapid promotion and assessment of those that are financially
possible and, possibly, the competences of the meeting, recognized by operational
requirements. The United States will not endorse or recognize any standards that
provide for a monopoly or elite preference for any nation or trade or group of companies.
Encourage and facilitate the international exchange of technical information on
visionary navigation tools.
4. Support and promote national and international standardization of the basic
characteristics of testing standards for standardized care.
5. Conduct sound planning for the deployment and development of facilities in order to
preserve the frequency, the global economy and avoid double unsuitability.
6. establish assistance to meet the needs of different users, as far as possible, before
accepting and implementing standard assistance; Current long-range on-board long-
range navigation tools based on current plans: Loran-A, Loran-C, non-directional
beacons and console.
7. To support and facilitate the international adoption and implementation of such
assistance tools or schemes, more appropriately comply with the requirements of users
and which can be technically, expeditiously and economically justified by a single
national radio and remote international navigation assistance is adopted and
implemented.

Responsibility for marine navigation assistance is governed by Section 81 of Section 14 of the

United States Code of Conduct. According to this provision, the US Coast Guard is responsible
for the creation, support, and operation of the maritime navigation assistance required by the
US military and commerce. According to this statutory authority, the US Coast Guard adopted
Loran-C as a standard item in the US Satellite Shipping System.

Since pulsed transmissions are used in all Loran systems, some interference with other radio-
frequency spectrum services was inevitable. There are relatively few problems in North
America, but in other parts of the world it is difficult to reach international spectrum
agreements. The report to the Coast Guard Jansky and Bailey (Jansky and Bailey, 1962)
concluded the “History of Laura regulation”. The rest of Section 6 is also cited from this report
with minor corrections for accuracy and technical consistency.
57
 4. Loran-C. Structure diagram, operating algorithm, parameters
Loran-C have been in use after dissipating the time component from the very beginning.
That kind of system had only been developed later into the future (15 years later). In truth, the
only aim and goal was toward achieving the best possible navigation system with the
navigational accuracy at the greatest possible range. The time and distance of the speed and
velocity of the propagation waves were to be taken into consideration during the development
of this system. Needless to say, the objective had been to develop a timing system in order to
provide an accurate navigational data output.

4.1 Loran-C Component description and Structural schematics:

Basically, an entire Loran- C component is quite large and complex system. Almost
around 1/4th of a square kilometer. It was typical to use around two buildings to cover the Loran-
C equipment. The base of the transmitter building housed only the antennas that transmitted the
signals and the equipment that were used to radiate the Loran-C pulse. The power building
contained Radio-Frequency screened room with synchronizers that recorded and tested the
equipment. Each station had a high-powered pulse transmitter, a transmitter synchronizer and
an associated equipment. Basically, all do the similar functions, but the master stations work at
a different manner than that of the slave stations. Two synchronizers, two transmitters and a
switching & control equipment along with the transmitting/receiving antenna were the number
of equipment that were present in the Loran-C system. Usually, one of the synchronizers and
transmitter are only in operation meanwhile the other ones are kept as standby in order to make
sure they are in a reliability operation. Also, the standby synchronizer monitors the functions
of the system.

4.1.1 Technical description of Transmitting component(s):

The below figure (Figure 32) is a schematic representation of the Loran-
C equipment. There have been a lot of changes that were made to the Loran- C station
equipment. And in every new equipment and installation, the transmitters and the
receivers were located at about 1000 feet away and within the same building, the
synchronizers were also present. The new equipment had installations that were located
at the base to minimize transmission loss and to reduce stray coupling between the
synchronizers and transmitters. A total of three generations were in use. CYTAC, the
one we discussed in the earlier chapter, an equipment that had been in control of the
58
east-coast chain. The AN/FPN-15(XW-1) transmitters, they had excellent transmitting
and synchronizing quality but were quite expensive. Also, the second generation of this
equipment had some into use, the AN/FPN-38 & AN/FPN-39.

Figure 27: LORAN C EQUIPMENT DIAGRAM

From figure 32 we can understand the working of the receiver signals.

The newer equipment AN/AFP 40,41 have much stable and powerful synchronizers that
makes well use of the signals provided and makes transmission of signals possible
enough. There is a unit which synchronizes the receiving signals from both the stations
and will compare them trying to test and provide a specific controlled signal. The
signals are being sent into the transmitter control block where the signals are fed into
the block in the form of pulse triggers and phase coded bits. The control block contains
generators that generate signals at a preferred frequency providing the input to the
amplifiers. The amplifiers are fed through a high-power voltage supply. These
amplifiers send out a signal with more than twice the amplitude of the ones that were
fed initially. All the amplified signals are then sent into the coupler where the signals
are phases coded and will be matched and coupled into a greater wavelength
transmitting signal. Through the help of the transmitters, the signals will be sent out to
the required receiver to receive and decode the signals accordingly.

59
 4.1.2 Technical description of Receiver Component:
A typical Loran-C receiver is capable of receiving and utilizing
a maximum accuracy that is intended to be used by the Loran-C system. That is, they
are capable of both envelope and cycle techniques. In addition to the automatic envelope
and cycle matching receiver, the following types of LORAN-C receivers have been built
or are under development:

1. Visual or manual envelope and cycle matching.

2. Visual or manual envelope matching.

Loran C receivers have a center frequency of 100kHz which is fixed

tuned. The acceptance bandwidths are between 3db & 6db points are approximately
25kHz/s & 33Khz/s, respectively. This bandwidth provided is comparatively large and
it is utilized to ensure that the relative phase and amplitude od the required spectral
components from the received pulses. These pulses are not so significantly attenuated
by the circuits tuned by the receiver component. Below shown is the simplified
schematic of the Loran-C receiver system (Fig 35).

Figure 28: Loran-C Receiver Block Diagram [18]

Loran-C pulses from short receiver antennas are amplified and simultaneously applied
to two common servo loop systems. Loops 1 and 2 compromise the system used to

60
measure envelope time difference, and loops 3 and 4 threaten the system that measures
the phase difference between RF cycles. Basically, two steps are taken in this process:

• Servo 1: it receives a signal from the PRR generator (pulse repetition rate) and supplies
it for time matching. This happens when the signal is synchronized with the envelope
of the received main signal.

• Servo loop # 2 operates with a variable delay frame to provide unexpected test pulses
that match the received signals. The amount of delay reported (by filling in the delay
between the main and famous pulses) is shown on the gross delay indicator.

• Servo loop # 3 runs reference oscillator cycles of 100 kHz / s for stationary ratios of
radio frequency / kHz / s cycles within the main pulse.

• The Servo loop # 4 measures the phase contrast between 100 cc / s reference oscillator
cycles and selects 100 cc / s cycles in received pulses and displays these measurements
in the Fine Delay Marker. Since the reference oscillator cycles were entered at a fixed
stage with eye overflow cycles, the Servo loop # 4 measures the phase difference
between the selected RF cycles in the main and slave pulses at the moment of impact.

Additional features not shown in the simplified diagram are associated with most
automatic such receivers and will be displayed. All receivers that are programmed today
are constantly distinguished by two simultaneous timing differences so that the exact
fixation data is permanently available when the receiver observes it. Two-time
difference calculations can be transmitted electrically to an additional computer or
recorder to program processing in any desired frame, such as corner, width and length,
or location. The typical method of using a LORAN-C manifold is to study the time
differences and current positions in the LORAN-C diagram.

When the receiver is synchronized with LORAN-C signals and follows the nature, all
the benefits of the LORAN-C core process are available. Envelopes and cascade
detectors perform simultaneous detection and integration of 16 frames (8 of the master
and 8 of the slave) in each repetition period. Servo systems are designed for zero error,
so measuring the time difference will really be a change, despite the fact that the receiver
is moving in the vehicle. Vehicle acceleration, such as maneuvering planes, can cause

61
 errors, but integration time can be reduced, so the error is quickly reduced with increased
speed. All recipients of the program are prepared carefully. One of the precautions
indicates loss of signals from any LORAN-C station. Another type of warning shows
when the receiver follows the tide with wave-wave composite land and skywave flag.
The third type of warning is cautious about the misunderstanding caused by the
mechanical difference between the envelope and loop counters. If the error between the
envelope calculation and the cycle exceeds 5 microseconds, the warning indicator lights
up. The nature of the difference can be studied directly from the scale. Signs of non-
compliance are valuable on the station's screen to help support the zero-envelope cycle
by mistake and will not be regularly provided to customer receivers.

4.2 Loran-C operational analysis & performance:

For each navigation system, the following factors are worried:

• Accuracy of the system,

• reliability;
• coverage

Given these factors in the Loran-C system, the system provides navigation services
using the globe and sky. Initially, during the rise of the system only the components of
the waves of the Earth were used. The Skywave component subsequently deployed in
the system, but most of the inputs and operations were carried out using the components
of the ground wave. In addition, there are errors in the system. Using the system will
lead to errors in the wrong placements. The system depends on three things:

1. Geometric configuration of receiving and transmitting stations.

2. Prediction errors.

3. Violation of the device caused by the user on the ground and in the equipment.

Previously, we discussed various arrangements (Triads, Wye, Star, etc.) that are
commonly defined for Loran-C radio stations. Therefore, different models are
considered, since each of these configurations has advantages and disadvantages in
terms of coverage and accuracy of the system. In order to determine which mode of
operation can give the desired accuracy, it is important that this scientific connection
62
exists between the radial error and the geographic or geometric installation of the ground
station. Since the various hyperbola differences generated by the two stations affect the
stabilization and the alternating angle between each set of hyperbole, the accuracy of
the location guarantee and the distribution error vary in the region. This problem is
studied and revealed in the general case of hyperbolic systems.

The Coast Guard has developed a nomogram to match the radial error profile
with three hands. The values of and1 and use1 use the nomogram (Figure 36). This value
is calculated in feet per foot. Thus, for a given time error, the radial leg error for different
profiles can be determined.

(Figure 37) The various contours of the specified value of the Td error are
displayed. The error profile should be applied to a small conformal Lambert or
Gnomonic projection, since a large circle is represented by a straight line so that the
angle can be determined with sufficient accuracy. Using Mercator's projection gives a
clear and obvious distortion. [18]

63
 Contours follow the above equation

Figure 29: Nomograph for computing contours of geometric accuracy. [18]

Figure 30: Geometric accuracy Contours [18]

64
4.3 Groundwave component:
The Loran-C system was developed in such a way where both the groundwaves
& the skywaves of the system performance varied widely depending on what kind of
mode of propagation the system was using earlier. Initially, Loran-C systems were
designed to make use of the groundwaves input for precise navigation. Since, the
skywaves component had not been much of a success due to lack of technological
advances, the synchronization of the ground station was considered through the usage
of these groundwaves.

4.3.1 Groundwave propagation error & anomalies:

In the discussion of the components that promote false positives, they
say about the waiting error. The LORAN-C time difference is calculated based on the
station sections on the ground and missing ground conductivity and dielectric constants.
On the contrary, the stations were found on the culmination circle, which has the same
conductivity and dielectric stability, and the difference in signal propagation time at
each geographical point can be calculated with a high degree of accuracy. Ideal
conditions can be realized if the proliferation is completely above water. However,
under viable conditions, masses arrive and have heterogeneous properties found in the
paths from the transmitting stations to the user receiver. Calculations based on the
assumption of uniform conductivity and dielectric stability can cause three to five
microseconds of contrast between the predicted and detected hyperbolic grids. To
reduce this prediction error to 0.5 microseconds or less, the calculations for each
LORAN-C frame point are based on the best conductivity and dielectric constant nodes
in the propagation paths between this point and the hyperbolic line of the LORAN-C
station. In addition, this error is reduced by comparing the predicted and measured time
difference values for certain selected geographic locations for which accurate location
information is available. In regions such as the United States where geographic locations
are known precisely, the definition of such points is usually simple, and prediction errors
can be reduced by calibrating with 0.05 µs. In other areas, such as Bermuda, geographic
instability, by reference to a specific date, far exceeds the vulnerability caused by the
calculation of errors.

65
 In regions where land waves are used to provide time differences, it has
been found that the disruption of distribution is much lower than the instrumental errors
of the ground station and the customer's equipment. Later, he thinks about the system's
operation in the Mediterranean and the Pacific and shows no decisive instability in the
major sunrise and sunset periods. Regular breeds in these regions were also not central.
In the North Atlantic region, the winter kernel roads are above the hard ocean water and
summer roads above defrosted sea water.

4.3.2 Area Monitors & Geographic Accuracy of Ground equipment:

At LORAN-C ground stations, it's important that the timer synchronizer
checks the presence of signals close and far to ensure accurate synchronization. 100 kHz
/ s, one wavelength is 9848 ft. Practical physical constraints block the antenna area of
the clock reception outside the wiring field of the neighboring receiver. Synchronizing
the sync pulse then checks the remote field flag from the remote station and connects
the near-field flag and the remote field from its transmitter. It is obvious that successive
microsecond (0.03-0.06 microseconds) old synchronization oscillations appear daily
after the difference between the relative size of the near field and the distance field and
phase obtained in the neighboring signals. To remove this structural error source, the
range monitor monitors the synchronization level maintained by the storage location
and provides these stations with corrective information to prevent structural errors in
the service area. From the discourse on prediction and propagation errors, it is obvious
that LORAN-C geolocation networks are very precise and very stable. In continental
regions, where the geographic location is closely related to a specific geodetic reference
point, the LORAN-C network and the geodetic network can be compared using a
calibration of 0.06 μs. In all unlimited areas of the ocean, the LORAN-C network now
offers the best geographic location.

4.3.4 Loran-C position measurement and Instrumental errors:

Instrumental errors of the grounding station and user equipment are part
of the received time difference errors. Earlier instrumental errors were caused by
obvious errors in the estimation method, subject to purely signal conditions, and also by
damaged or variable errors caused by noise and LORAN-C noise. In each case, the exact
error of both the ground station and the equipment was reduced to less than 0.02 µs.
66
 Noise and resistance to the required LORAN-C signals are ideal for the envelope system
and loop parts. Since the range is from the receiver to each station, the signal-to-noise
ratio is distorted, and the deviation / delay time differences are calculated. When the
signal / noise level decreases and the obstacles increase, the envelope deviations
increase faster than the cycle deviation. This effect occurs by determining the loss cycle
for a given signal-to-noise ratio and limiting the successful range for each particular
station. At present (1961), the limitations are based on a signal-to-noise ratio of -20 dB.
The figure below (Fig. 38) shows the noise and interference in the loop and curving
channels. The effects of systemic abnormalities on LORAN-C are reduced by several
variables. The frame uses extremely stable transmission, repeating one portion at 10 ±
0 ° of the day. The methods of phase stitching and coding completely reject the huge
frequency range from 90 to 110 cfu when the dynamic range of the receiver is not
exceeded. At synchronous frequencies, the normal speed of ships and airplanes using
the Doppler shift method, thus, prevents frequency synchronization only if the necessary
conditions are met. Otherwise, the vehicle’s normal speed and directional variations will
essentially eliminate the synchronous effects. Currently, the device is intended only for
operating conditions with a signal-to-noise ratio of 35 dB (interference range 85-115
kHz). There are also adjustable loop filters to reduce the very strong signal effect.

4.4 Skywave Equipment Performance:

In the Groundwave performance, it is understood that the groundwave grid prediction
is with dependence to certain factors which can be determined wither through an
analytical calculation or by experimenting with a high degree of accuracy. With the
results that produce errors due to propagation anomalies are reduced to a small factor –
about the order of magnitude which is considered as the instrumental errors. In the
context of skywaves, the propagation anomalies which produce errors which
predominate the other ones. In respect to stability, the short-term stability of the
skywave propagation is extremely efficient. This is efficient even though there are a
wide variation during the change in seasons. The predicted variations are charted down
and can be used in the measurement in-order to form the skywaves.

67
4.4.1 Skywave Discriminations:
By using skywaves mode, the effective range of the working of Loran-C
can materially increase generally considering it in the field of marine or in aviation.
Nevertheless, special precautions are to be undertaken in-order to obtain the desired
result. In particular, it is often required to take personal care in discrimination of the
energy that is being received by a particular skywave and the energy that is being sent
to the groundwave or to the other order of the skywave modes. This can be done by
differentiating the arrival time of the different energy levels through different modes.
Complications arise because of the time-differences which are comparatively less than
the pulse width for Loran-C.

NOISE ERROR VALUES

Figure 31:Nighttime Skywave Field Intensity. [18]

In order to utilize a specific skywave mode, it must be transcendent over the

preceding mode so that errors presented by reception of prior mode signals are
diminished to a satisfactory value. For example, the first hop skywave starts to seem at
400 miles from a specific station. It does not become transcendent over the groundwave
until a run of approximately 1100 miles from the station is come to. Additionally, the
second hop skywave starts to come in approximately 1100 miles but does not ended up
transcendent over the first-hop wave until the run 1800 to 2000 miles from the station.
In the figure (Figure 39) the signal conditions are explained. To compensate for
skywave variations, skywave adjustments must be connected to signals from each
68
 station included in an estimation. The resultant redresses are generally complex.
Specific care and judgment are required of the administrator when deciding beginning
position settle within the skywave range. From there on, with the collector following
ceaselessly and positions plotted methodically, the move of a station signal from one
mode to another is promptly clear.

4.5 Operational theory:

In Loran navigation, the line of position is defined by attaining the locus of
points of constant differences between the transmitters stations and he distance between
the observers. If we assuming that the electromagnetic radiation in the atmosphere has
the propagation speed which is a fixed constant, the time difference of the arrival of the
propagated waves from both the transmitting sites is proportional to the distance
between the both the transmitter sites. This thereby creates a hyperbola on the earth’s
surface. This proportionality can be demonstrated by the following equation:

Distance= Velocity * time.

Or, through the use of algebraic symbols,

D=c*t (5.1)

C- Velocity (Constant).

D- Distance.

t- time.

Therefore, when the velocity(c) is constant, the distance between the

transmitting stations and the ship (even aircraft) will be directly proportional to the time
delay detected at the ship that has pulse difference of electromagnetic radiation received
from the two transmitting stations.

69
 Figure 32: Loran-C Lop depiction [6]]

In the above figure (Fig 40), the illustration of the signals is perfectly shown.
Assuming the two Loran transmitting stations, the master station and the slave stations
(the secondary stations), are situated along with the observer in the cartesian coordinate
system where their units are represented in nautical miles. From the above picture, we
assume that the master station ‘M’ is located at coordinates M (x, y) = M (-200, 0) and
the slave station ‘X’ located at coordinates X(x, y)= X(+200,0). The observes who is
capable of receiving the electromagnetic waves is positioned at any point ‘A’ whose
coordinates are defined as (Xa, Ya). The hyperbolic labels are normalized for
mathematical convenience so that they are perpendicular to the baseline labelled ‘zero’,
with both the negative and positive difference values. By using the Pythagorean
theorem, we can determine the distance between the master station and the observer
location. The distance between the observer and the slave station also can be obtained
by the same.

Distanceam = [( xa + 200)2 + ya2]0.5 (5.2)

70
Distanceax= [(xa-200)2+ya2]0.5 (5.3)

The difference between the distances (D) is:

D= Distanceam – Distanceax (5.4)

Substituting all,

D= [( xa + 200)2 + ya2]0.5 - [(xa-200)2+ya2]0.5 (5.5)

Every hyperbolic LOP in the figure (40) represents a locus of points for which
the distance D is held as a constant. In case the observing vessel is located at (300,300)
then the distance between the observer and the secondary station would be 583.095NM.
And likewise, the observer’s distance from the master station would be 316.227NM.
and the function D will simply be the difference of the two or 266.868.

If the hyperbolic lines are separated by a distance of 50NM, the point of the
observer’s location will be either 250NM or 300NM away or before the adjacent LOP
(Line of position).

This isn’t the end of our solution. We must locate a fix and that can be done by
the help of another secondary station assuming a point ‘Y’ in the map and recalculating
it with respect to the value that is calculated by the master station. With the help of the
data by the secondary station we can get two corresponding distances;

D1= [(x𝑎 + 200)2 + (y_a^2)]〗^0.5 − [(x𝑎 − 200)2 + (y_a^2)]〗^0.5 (5.6)

D1= [(x𝑎 + 200)2 + (y_a^2)]〗^0.5 − [(x𝑎 − 50)2 + (ya − 500)]^2〗^0.5

(5.7)

The distances D1 & D2 are known because the time differences measured by the
receiver and the secondary are observed and converted into these equations (5.6) &
(5.7).

We will further in the next chapter calculate a fix and relate its efficiency with a
traditional methodology used by the Chayka system. In order to do that, we need the
signal transmission time of the signal from the base station and to the observer vessel
and also with respect to the values we receive from the master station.

71
 5. Calculating the various possibilities existing in Loran-C
5.1: Determining the position:
Earlier, in chapter 5 under section 5.5, the operational theory explained how the
particular fix of the given station was achieved. We are going to calculate a similar fix by the
use of the loran station present in India (GRI 5543) also known as the Calcutta chain.

In this calculation, we must note the point that two stations were used Master station
(Patapur (West Bengal)) and a Slave station (Coconada (Andra-Pradesh)). The basic idea is to
calculate the position of the particular vessel which has set shore and also on one vessel which
is being docked. Below, please find the table that contains the relevant information pertaining
to the details of the stations and the receivers.

(Table 6.1)

CALCUTTA CHAIN
GRI= 5543 STATION Φ(N) Λ(E) Coding delay (Cd)
(Master) M Patapur 20˚26’50.62’’ 85˚49’38.67’’ 36.542.78
(Slave) V Coconada 16˚55’06.30’’ 82˚14’24.00’’ 18210
(Secondary) Y Balasore 21 ˚29’11.02’’ 86 18510
˚51’10.60’’
(Secondary) Z Puri 19°48’12.40’’ 85°51’10.60’’ 18356
(Secondary) Char Chapli 21°47’12.40’’ 90°09’08.90’’ 32456
W Island
(Secondary) U Diamond 22°10’20.42’’ 88°12’15.80’’ 36000
Harbour

(Table 6.2)

Observer (X) Decimal distance (x) Decimal distance(y)

Bay of Bengal 15.0068 89.183070

72
5.1.1 Normal determination using Pythagorean theorem and determination of fix:
Below in figure (41) you can find a map that is common to the one shown
in figure (41). I have taken the coordinates of two working loran stations, a master
station(Patapur) and a Slave station(Coconada) with a receiving station that is a vessel
located in the Bay of Bengal in a cartesian coordinate system. The units of the distance
are taken in nautical miles. Further the Master station is located at coordinates in degree
in decimal. Therefore,

Conversion of M(Degrees) to coordinates;

Master station M(in decimal): 20.447394, 85.827408

Slave station V(in decimal): 16.918417, 82.24

Therefore,

M(x,y)= (20.447394, 85.827408) ; (6.1)

V(x,y)= (16.918417, 82.24); (6.2)

Also, Observer’s location is noted down as :

X(xa,ya)= (15.0068, 89.183070); (6.3)

Observer
X(xa,ya)

Figure 33: Master-Slave station (Patapur-Coconada)[19]

73
 The above is the map according to the coordinates corresponding to the ones of the
Loran chain in India. Now we have to determine the distances between the observer ‘X’ and
the master, slave stations which provide the initial signal reception.

Distancexm =〖[(x𝑎 + 20.447394)2 + (x_𝑦^2)]〗^0.5 (6.4)

Distancexs =〖[(x𝑎 − 16.918417)2 + (x_𝑦^2)]〗^0.5 (6.5)

Distance(D) must be calculated;

𝐷 = Distancexm - Distancexv (6.6)

= [(x𝑎 + 20.447394)2 + (x_𝑦^2)]〗^0.5 − [(x𝑎 − 16.918417)2 + (x_𝑦^2)]〗

^0.5

Now, we need to compare the given grid map of the stations and the and the known
geographic positions of the master and slave station. The unknowns of the observer can be
assumed with the grids that follow through. The distance measured is in Nautical miles(NM).
In this case the coordinates of our observer are found to be:

Observer(X(xa,ya))= 15.0068, 89.183070

Therefore, applying (6.7) in (6.3), we can find;

Distancexm= [(𝑥𝑎 + 20.447394)2 + 𝑦𝑎2 ]0.5

= [(15.0068 + 20.447394)2 + 89.183070]0.5 (6.7)

= 95.97197428 NM.

And, applying (6.7) to (6.4), we can determine;

Distancexv = [(𝑥𝑎 + 200)2 + 𝑦𝑎2 ]0.5

= [(15.0068 − 16.918417)2 + 89.183070]0.5 (6.8)

= 89.20355517 NM.
Therefore, total difference of the distance D: (From 6.6)

D1= [(x𝑎 + 20.447394)2 + (y_a^2)]〗^0.5 − [(x𝑎 − 16.918417)2 + (y_a^2)]

〗^0.5 (6.9)

74
 D1= [(15.0068 + 20.447394)2 + (89.183070)^2]0.5 -[(15.0068 − 16.918417)2 +
89.183070]0.5

D= 6.7684 NM.

D2 = [(xa + 20.447394)2 + ya2]0.5 – [(xa- 16.918417)2+ (ya-82.24)2]0.5 (6.10)

D2=[(15.0068 + 20.447394)^2 + (89.183070)^2]^0.5-[(15.0068 −

16.918417)2 + (89.183070 − 82.24]0.5

D2 = 88.771 NM.

Each hyperbolic L.O.P (Line of position) basically represents a locus of the points for which
the difference in distance (D) is kept constant. When the observer we found was located at
(15.0068, 89.183070) then the distance of the observer and the secondary (slave station) was
found to be : 89.92387 NM. And the distance to the master station was found to be : 96.64186
NM.

For every other point along the hyperbola the values can be estimated accordingly. Now, let
consider a few other secondary stations. Using these stations, we will be able to find a fix.

Considering the secondary station Y (Balasore) with our observers’ position,

Figure 34: Master-Secondary stations(Patapur- Balasore) [19].

Converting the coordinates to decimal points;

75
 Master station M(in decimal): 20.447394, 85.827408

Secondary station Y(Degree): 21 ˚29’11.02’’N, 86 ˚55’09.66’’

Conversion to decimal: 21.319722, 86.919444

Therefore, from (6.1) we get:

M(x,y)= (20.447394, 85.827408) ;

Z(x,y)= (21.319722, 86.919444);

The above is the map (fig 42) according to the coordinates corresponding to the ones of the
Loran chain (Balasore) in India. Now we have to determine the distances between the observer
‘X’ and the master, secondary station (Y) which provide the Secondary signal reception.

Distancexm = 95.97197428 NM. (from 6.4)

Distancexy = 89.40622439 NM. (6.11)

From the similar method we will get the following equations from (6.9) & (6.10):

D1 = [(xa + 20.447394)2 + ya2]0.5 – [(xa- 21.319722)2+ ya2]0.5

D2 = [(xa + 20.447394)2 + ya2]0.5 – [(xa- 21.319722)2+ (ya-86.919444)2]0.5

Therefore,

D1 = [(15.0068 + 20.447394)2 + (89.183070)2]0.5 - [(15.0068 – 21.319722)2 +

(89.183070)2]0.5

D2 = [(15.0068 + 20.447394)2 + (89.183070)2]0.5 - [(15.0068 – 21.319722)2 +

(89.183070- 86.91444)2]0.5

D1 = 6.56575 NM

D2= 89.2655 NM (The new fix of the Master-Secondary station)

Now, we consider the similar results with the Secondary Stations Z, W & U of the Calcutta
chain. The basic Idea is to consider the distances and the time differences of the signals received
from all the secondary stations accessing the vessel on marker ‘X’ so that we get the exact fix
on the hyperbola.
76
Therefore, Secondary station Z fix can be determined by,

Figure 35: Puri station (Secondary Z) [19]

Converting the coordinates to decimal points;

Secondary station Z(Degree): 19°48’12.40’’, 85°51’10.60’’;

Conversion to decimal: 19.803333, 85.853056 (6.12)

We know the observer’s location and we calculate the distance from the observer to the
secondary station Z with respect to the signal arriving from Master Station M. The above is the
map (fig 41) according to the coordinates corresponding to the ones of the Loran chain (Puri)
in India. Now we have to determine the distances between the observer ‘X’ and the master,
secondary station (Y) which provide the Secondary signal reception. Therefore,

From (6.4)

Distancexm =〖[(x_𝑎 + 20.447394)^2 + (y_a^2)]〗^0.5

Distancexz =〖[(x𝑎 − 19.803333)^2 + (y_a^2)]〗^0.5 (6.13)

Distancexm = 95.97197428 NM (we determined this value previously (6.4))

Distancexz = [(15.0068 – 19.803333)^2+(89.183070)^2]^0.5 (6.14)

Distancexz = 89.47046019 NM.

77
Following the previous method, we get the equations (6.9) & (6.10)

D1 = [(xa + 20.447394)2 + ya2]0.5 – [(xa- 19.803333)2+ ya2]0.5

D2 = [(xa + 20.447394)2 + ya2]0.5 – [(xa- 19.803333)2+ (ya-85.853056)2]0.5

Therefore,

D1 = [(15.0068+20.447394)2+(89.903551)2]0.5 – [(15.0068-19.803333)2 +
(89.903551)2]0.5

D1 = 6.66 NM

D2 = [(15.0068+20.447394)2 + (89.903551)2]0.5 – [(15.0068-19.803333)2 + (89.903551

-85.853056)2]0.5

D2 = 90.133 (the new fix of master secondary)

Again, for the W and U chain (Char-Chapli and Diamond Harbour) stations, we follow
the similar pattern of finding the distance and calculating the fix. Therefore, below is the figure
that depicts the Diamond Harbor station.

Figure 36: Diamond Harbor station(U) [19]

78
Similar to the previous techniques, even here we are to calculate the fix and the distance
between the station(s) and observer position so as to finalize the fix position from all of the six
stations approximately.

Therefore, Converting the coordinates of the master, secondary station(s) U and W;

Secondary Station U = 22°10’20.42’’N , 88°12’15.80’’E.

Conversion to decimal = 22.17222, 88.20444; (6.15)

Secondary Station W= 21°47’12.40’’N , 90°09’08.90’’E.

Conversion to decimal = 21.786667, 90.1525; (6.16)

Therefore, following the similar way we find for Diamond harbor station (U),

U(x,y)= (22.17222, 88.20444);

X(xa,ya)= (15.0068, 89.183070);

We know the observer’s location and we calculate the distance from the observer to the
secondary station U with respect to the signal arriving from Master Station M. The above is
the map (fig 42) according to the coordinates corresponding to the ones of the Loran chain
(Diamond Harbor) in India. Now we have to determine the distances between the observer ‘X’
and the master, secondary station (U) which provide the Secondary signal reception. Therefore,

From (6.4)

Distancexm =〖[(x_𝑎 + 20.447394)^2 + (y_a^2)]〗^0.5

Distancexu =〖[(x𝑎 − 22.17222)^2 + (y_a^2)]〗^0.5 (6.17)

Distancexm = 95.97197428 NM (we determined this value previously (6.4))

Distancexu = 89.47046019 NM

Following the previous method, we get the equations (6.9 & 6.10)

D1 = [(xa + 20.447394)2 + ya2]0.5 – [(xa-22.17222)2+ ya2]0.5

D2 = [(xa + 20.447394)2 + ya2]0.5 – [(xa- 22.17222)2+ (ya-88.20444)2]0.5

Therefore,
79
 D1 = [(15.0068 + 20.447394)2 + (89.183070)2]0.5 – [(15.0068 – 22.17222)2 +
(89.183070)2]0.5 (6.18)

D1 = 6.5015 NM

D2 = [(15.0068 + 20.447394)2 + (89.183070)2]0.5 – [[(15.0068 – 22.17222)2

+(89.183070 - 88.20444)2]0.5 (6.19)

D2 = 88.74 NM

Finally, we calculate for the W (Char-Chapli) stations, we follow the similar pattern of finding
the distance and calculating the fix. Therefore, below is the figure that depicts the Char-Chapli
station.

Figure 37: Char-Chapli & Diamond Harbour (U) [19]

The above figure (Fig 45) shows the joining of the stations U and W with respect to the master
station located at Kolkata (previously known as Calcutta). Similar to the previous techniques,
even here we are to calculate the fix and the distance between the station(s) and observer
position so as to finalize the fix position from all of the six stations approximately.

Therefore, Converting the coordinates of the master, secondary station W;

80
 Secondary Station W= 21°47’12.40’’N , 90°09’08.90’’E.

Conversion to decimal = 21.786667, 90.1525; (6.20)

Therefore, following the similar way we find for Char-chapli station,

W(x,y)= (21.786667, 90.1525); (6.21)

We know the observer’s location and we calculate the distance from the observer to the
secondary station w with respect to the signal arriving from Master Station M. The above is
the map (fig 43) according to the coordinates corresponding to the ones of the Loran chain
(Char-Chapli) in India. Now we have to determine the distances between the observer ‘X’ and
the master, secondary station (W) which provide the Secondary signal reception. Therefore,

From (6.4)

Distancexm =〖[(x_𝑎 + 20.447394)^2 + (y_a^2)]〗^0.5

Distancexw =〖[(x𝑎 − 21.786667)^2 + (y_a^2)]〗^0.5 (6.22)

Distancexm = 95.97197428 NM (we determined this value previously (6.18))

Distancexw = 89.44040793 NM. (6.23)

Following the previous method, we get the equations (6.9 & 6.10)

D1 = [(xa + 20.447394)2 + ya2]0.5 – [(xa-21.786667)2+ ya2]0.5

D2 = [(xa + 20.447394)2 + ya2]0.5 – [(xa- 21.786667)2+ (ya-90.1525)2]0.5

Therefore,

D1 = [(15.0068 + 20.447394)2 + (89.183070)2]0.5 – [(15.0068 – 21.786667)2 +

(89.183070)2]0.5 (6.24)

D1 = 6.5316 NM

D2 = [(15.0068 + 20.447394)2 + (89.183070)2]0.5 – [[(15.0068 – 21.786667`)2

+(89.183070 - 90.1525)2]0.5 (6.25)

D2 = 89.123 NM.

81
The above calculations were based on the distance in nautical miles. Since the navigator uses
tine difference (TD), we have to calculate the time differences of all the signals that are sent to
the observer and perform the Loran hyperbolic navigation. So, from the above calculations
performed,

Case 1: Master – Slave (V) - Observer (Coconada-vesssel M,V,X)

The distance travelled by the electromagnetic signal is 6.18μsec for each nautical
mile. Therefore, the speed of the signal is assumed ‘C’,

C= 6.18 μsec/NM.

Distancexm= 95.97197428 NM

Distancexv = 89.20355517 NM

The time that the signal take from the station to the observer can be calculated as,

Txm = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 95.97197428

Txm = 593.106801 μsec.

The above value is determined by the time calculated from the master station. There is
a base line difference from the master station to the slave station (Coconada ‘V’).

DXV = 6.7684 NM. (6.26)

Time taken for the signal along the base line is ,

Tmv = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 6.7684 (6.27)

Tmv = 41.82883011 μsec.

Now, we calculate the time received by the observer from both the master and the slave
station (X-V). This can be done by calculating the coding delay Therefore,

Coding delay of Master(CD)= 36,542.78 μsec.

TXMV =(6.18 μsec/NM) * 36,542.78

TXMV = 225834.3804 μsec. (6.28)

The total time for the signal to travel from the slave station (V) to the observer will be,
82
 Tmv = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 89.20355517

Tmv = 551.2779709 μsec. (6.29)

Therefore, the total time of transmission from the master to the signal received by the
slave station and to be picked up by the observer at point X is,

T = 225834.3804+551.2779709

T = 226385.6584 μsec. (6.30)

In order to receive the time-delay the receiver measures the delay using the signal
received by the master and the signal received by the slave station. The time quantity
therefore must be corrected by subtracting the value of the time required by the signal
from the master transmitter. Therefore, the master transmitter time received was:

Txm = 593.106801 μsec

The time-delay TD would then be :

TDmxv = 226385.6584 - 593.106801 (6.31)

TDmxv = 225792.5516 μsec.

Thus, the time delay of the signal with respect to the master and the slave station has
been calculated. This time delay is a function of the simultaneous differences between
the observer and the two corresponding stations distances. We can determine the best
strength amongst all the station by calculating the time differences and locating the
perfect fix for the Loran-C chain to the observer.

Case 2: Master – Secondary(Y) - Observer (Balasore-vesssel M,Y,X)

The time that the signal take from the master station to the observer can be calculated
as,

Txm = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 95.97197428 (6.32)

Txm = 593.106801 μsec.

The above value is determined by the time calculated from the master station. There is
a base line difference from the master station to the secondary station (Balasore Y).
83
 DXY = 6.565749895 NM.

Time taken for the signal along the base line is ,

Tmy = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 6.565749895 (6.33)

Tmy = 40.57633435 μsec.

Now, we calculate the time received by the observer from both the master and the slave
station (X-V). This can be done by calculating the coding delay Therefore,

Coding delay of Secondary(CD)= 18510.68 μsec.

TXMY =(6.18 μsec/NM) * 18510.68 (6.34)

TXMY = 114396.0024 μsec.

The total time for the signal to travel from the secondary station (Y) to the observer will
be,

Tmy = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 89.20355517 (6.35)

Tmy = 552.5304667 μsec.

Therefore, the total time of transmission from the master to the signal received by the
secondary station and to be picked up by the observer at point X is,

T = 225834.3804+552.5304667 (6.36)

T = 226386.9109 μsec.

In order to receive the time-delay the receiver measures the delay using the signal
received by the master and the signal received by the slave station. The time quantity
therefore must be corrected by subtracting the value of the time required by the signal
from the master transmitter.

The time-delay TD would then be :

TDmxy = 226386.9109 - 593.106801 (6.37)

TDmxv = 225793.8041 μsec.

84
 Thus, the time delay of the signal with respect to the master and the secondary station
has been calculated.

Case 3: Master – Secondary(Z) - Observer (Puri-vesssel M,Z,X)

The distance travelled by the electromagnetic signal is 6.18μsec for each nautical
mile. The time that the signal take from the master station to the observer can be
calculated as,

Txm = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 95.97197428 (6.38)

Txm = 593.106801 μsec.

The above value is determined by the time calculated from the master station. There is
a base line difference from the master station to the secondary station (Puri Z).

DXZ = 6.660011454 NM. (6.39)

Time taken for the signal along the base line is ,

Tmy = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 6.660011454 (6.40)

Tmy = 41.15887079 μsec.

Now, we calculate the time received by the observer from both the master and the
secondary station (X-Z). This can be done by calculating the coding delay Therefore,

Coding delay of Secondary(CD)= 36,542.78 μsec.

TXMZ =(6.18 μsec/NM) * 36542.78 (6.41)

TXMZ = 225834.3804 μsec.

The total time for the signal to travel from the secondary station (Z) to the observer will
be,

Tmz = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 89.31196282 (6.42)

Tmz = 551.9479303 μsec.

Therefore, the total time of transmission from the master to the signal received by the
secondary station and to be picked up by the observer at point X is,

85
 T = 225834.3804+551.9479303 (6.43)

T = 226386.3283 μsec.

In order to receive the time-delay the receiver measures the delay using the signal
received by the master and the signal received by the slave station. The time quantity
therefore must be corrected by subtracting the value of the time required by the signal
from the master transmitter. Therefore, the master transmitter time received was:

Txm = 593.106801 μsec

The time-delay TD would then be :

TDmxy = 226386.3283 - 593.106801

TDmxv = 225793.2215 μsec.

Thus, the time delay of the signal with respect to the master and the secondary station
has been calculated. Next, we have to calculate for station U (Diamond-Harbour).

Case 4: Master – Secondary(U) - Observer (Diamond Harbour-vesssel M,U,X)

The distance travelled by the electromagnetic signal is 6.18μsec for each nautical
mile. Therefore, the speed of the signal is assumed ‘C’,

C= 6.18 μsec/NM.

Distancexm= 95.97197428 NM

Distancexu = 89.47046019 NM

The time that the signal take from the master station to the observer can be calculated
as,

Txm = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 95.97197428

Txm = 593.106801 μsec. (6.44)

The above value is determined by the time calculated from the master station. There is
a base line difference from the master station to the secondary station (Diamond
Harbour).

86
 DXU = 6.501514085 NM. (6.45)

Time taken for the signal along the base line is ,

Tmy = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 6.6501514085 (6.46)

Tmy = 40.17935705 μsec.

Now, we calculate the time received by the observer from both the master and the
secondary station (X-U). This can be done by calculating the coding delay Therefore,

Coding delay of Secondary(CD)= 36000 μsec.

TXMU =(6.18 μsec/NM) * 36000 (6.47)

TXMU = 222480 μsec.

The total time for the signal to travel from the secondary station (Z) to the observer will
be,

Tmz = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 89.4706019

Tmz = 552.927444 μsec.

Therefore, the total time of transmission from the master to the signal received by the
secondary station and to be picked up by the observer at point X is,

T = 22480+552.927444. (6.48)

T = 223032.9274 μsec.

In order to receive the time-delay the receiver measures the delay using the signal
received by the master and the signal received by the slave station. The time quantity
therefore must be corrected by subtracting the value of the time required by the signal
from the master transmitter. Therefore, the master transmitter time received was:

Txm = 593.106801 μsec

The time-delay TD would then be :

TDmxy = 223032.9274 - 593.106801 (6.49)

TDmxv = 222439.8206 μsec.

87
Thus, the time delay of the signal with respect to the master and the secondary station has been
calculated. Next, we have to calculate for the final station of the chain W (Char-Chapli island).

Case 4: Master – Secondary(W) - Observer (Diamond Char-Chapli M,W,X)

The distance travelled by the electromagnetic signal is 6.18μsec for each nautical
mile. Therefore, the speed of the signal is assumed ‘C’. The time that the signal take
from the master station to the observer can be calculated as,

Txm = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 95.97197428 (6.50)

Txm = 593.106801 μsec.

The above value is determined by the time calculated from the master station. There is
a base line difference from the master station to the secondary station (Char-Chapli
island).

DXU = 6.531566345 NM.

Time taken for the signal along the base line is ,

Tmw = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 6.531566345

Tmw = 40.36508001 μsec.

Now, we calculate the time received by the observer from both the master and the
secondary station (X-W). This can be done by calculating the coding delay Therefore,

Coding delay of Secondary(CD)= 36542.78 μsec.

TXMU =(6.18 μsec/NM) * 36542.78

TXMU = 222480 μsec.

The total time for the signal to travel from the secondary station (Z) to the observer will
be,

Tmz = (6.18 μsec/NM) * 89.44040793

Tmz = 552.741721 μsec.

88
 Therefore, the total time of transmission from the master to the signal received by the
secondary station and to be picked up by the observer at point X is,

T = 22480+552.741721.

T = 223032.7417 μsec.

In order to receive the time-delay the receiver measures the delay using the signal
received by the master and the signal received by the slave station. The time quantity
therefore must be corrected by subtracting the value of the time required by the signal
from the master transmitter. Therefore, the master transmitter time received was:

Txm = 593.106801 μsec

The time-delay TD would then be :

TDmxu = 223032.7417 - 593.106801

TDmxu = 222439.6349 μsec. (6.51)

Thus, the time delay of the signal with respect to the master and the secondary station has been
calculated. Below are some of the graphs that have been deducted from the calculations.

Figure 38: Graph depicting the fixes of the secondary station to the observer (X)

Figure 38 depicts the distances of the fixes between all the stations in accordance with
the master station (M) and the observer. The points depicted in red are the fixes of the distances.

89
 Majority of the distances of were fixed at about a point that were between the points 88 – 91
NM.

8
Distance NM Distances, Patapur,
Distances, Distances, Balasore, Distances, Diamond
7 6.77 6.66
Coconada, 6.57 Distances, Puri, 6.50 harbour, 6.53

0
Patapur Coconada Balasore Puri Diamond harbour Char-chapli

Figure 39: Station distances values.

The above figure 47 depicts the distances of the stations with respect to their
corresponding distance to the observer’s position. This calculation was made using the equation
6.14 that is by calculating the distance by the help of the difference between the observer’s
position and the corresponding decimal lo48cation that was realized by each of the stations.

T in μsec Time Taken

600
593.106801
590 552.741721
552.927444
580

570 551.9479303
552.5304667
560 551.2779709
550

540
545 550 555 560 565 570 575 580

Figure 40: Graph depicting the time taken by each station.

90
T in μsec 226500
226000
225793.2215
225500
225000
225792.5516
224500 225793.8041
224000
222439.8206
223500
223000 222439.6349
222500
222000
221500
545 550 555 560 565 570 575

Time Differences of stations

Figure 41: Time differences of the signal.

The above figure 46 depicts the time taken by the signal. The time taken by the loran C
signal to reach the observers point of fix. The maximum fix is that of the master station at a
time of 593 μsec to reach the observers fix. (The usual speed is around 6.18μsec/NM), the
lowest time fix that has been calculated is (551.2779709 at XV), the master station at Patapur
and the slave station at Coconada

Slave Station Char-

Chapli (U)

Master Station
Patapur (M)

Observer Vessel (X)

Figure 42: Char-Chapli, Master, Observer triad

91
 The above figure (47) shows the time differences of the signals that have been send out
by the Loran C station from the chain. From the details we can notice that the lowest time
difference noted was 222439.6349 (That is from the Char-Chapli island station). Maybe due
to the varying terrain or nautical mile distance and also considering the the speed of the signal
travelled and the time coding delay of the station, we can estimate the fix for this position of
the observer to be the closest to the station. The figure (48) is the final map depiction of the
stations that are most efficient and are able to transmit signal to the vessel with the lowest time
difference with respect to all the other stations. The time difference for the Char-Chapli-
Patapur-Observer triad is calculated at a value of 223032.7417 μsec.

5.2 Estimating the fix and providing efficiency using the triangulation method:
In the previous case, we saw how the signal was being transmitted to a vessel observer
somewhere along the line of position in Bay of Bengal. Now, in this calculation we are going
to consider the secondary chain that is present in India which was known as the Bombay chain
(currently Bombay has been renamed to Mumbai, but the chain address still remains the same).

Here, we use three stations, one master station ‘M’ and two secondary stations, Y(Slave)
and X(Secondary). By the help of these stations, we can calculate the distance and the angle at
which the signal transmitted and sent can be obtained. By determining this angle, we will
consider various points where the signals can be sent across the three stations. From this we
will finally realize a graph which will correspond to the values in our hand and we will analyze
it with the previous fix determination method to prove that this is a major improvement in the
accuracy of the location that we have received.

Figure 43: Calculation of angle of signal transmission [20]

92
 In the above figure (51) we can understand that the stations (Y,M,X) are shown as the
master and the two secondary stations and ‘C’ is the observer station. With the help of these
values, we can determine a baseline distance. With the help of this distance and the given
formula for calculating the angle, we can find various values for different angles at different
distance ranges. In the following calculation below, we shall find out the various angles at
which the signal can be transmitted and received by the observer and find out the most efficient
fix that can be determined out of this.

Master Station
Surendranagar (M)
Slave station Dari
(B)

Secondary Station
Majigam (A)

Figure 44: Determining the fix and angle using the Bombay chain.

From the above figure (52) we will take the Bombay chain which is in operational in
India along with the Calcutta chain from which we discussed the previous calculation about
finding the fix position of the vessel using the observer position and the secondary stations. The
following are the values of all the points depicted in the diagram (Fig 52)

αo = Angle of the transmitted signal;

93
bOA = Distance between the observer OC to the station point A;

bOB = Distance between the observer OC to the station point B;

DB = Distance of the station point B to the master station M (Surendranagar);

DA = Distance of the station point A to the master station M (Surendranagar);

DO = The distance of the observer to the master station M;

Γ = The angle made by the distance DO and the normal between them;

Here in this calculation we are considering the Bombay chain. Below are the
corresponding values.

(Table 6.3)

Station Φ(latitude) Λ(Longitude)

Surendranagar 23˚16’ 71˚31’

Dari 20˚57’ 70˚20’

Majigam 20˚45’ 73˚02’

Also, from the figure we are going to calculate the distance among the stations and the
observer. As of now the distances between the stations can be calculated by taking their decimal
coordinates. Below is the table representing the coordinate.

(Table 6.4)

Station Latitude (E) Longitude (N)

Master (Surendranagar) 23.2666 71.51666
Dari (X) 21.3267 71.02185
Majigam (Y) 20.7572 73.04163

From the coordinates available we can determine the distance from the stations as well.
The following are the distances obtained from all of the adjacent stations

94
Master M(Surendranagar ) – Slave Y (Majigam) = 317km = 171.17 NM. (6.52)

Slave Y (Majigam) – Secondary X(Dari) = 1746 km = 942.7646 NM. (6.53)

Secondary X(Dari) – Master M(Surendranagar) = 1944 km = 1049.676 NM.

(6.54)

5.2.1: Case 1: Considering Master (M) and Slave (Y) stations :

From figure 50 we can realize the baseline of the Master to the slave station as :

O(c) = M(Surendranagar) ;

DMY (B) = 171.17 NM (6.55)

We will have to calculate the efficiency ‘K’ in order to do that we have to

calculate it by using the various angles of αo. For this we calculate using various angles
of αo such as :

1 ) αo = π/2;

2) αo = 0;

3) αo = π/4;

With these values of αo we can determine the following efficiency k by using the
equation;

2√2(𝐷𝑜/𝑏)2
𝑘= 1 (6.54)
(1+𝑠𝑖𝑛2αo)2

Therefore, by substituting the values we get :

When αo = 0;

DO = {200 – 2200} (Here we are considering the lowest and highest possible
range of the distance DO);

Therefore,

2√2(𝐷𝑜/171.17)2
𝑘= 1 (6.55)
(1+𝑠𝑖𝑛2(0))2

95
(Note: For the ease of calculations I have taken the Numerator and Denominator as N
& D)

(Table 6.5)

When αo = 0 Distance DO N D K(Error)

(NM) μ
200 3.861586935 1 3.861586935
400 15.44634774 1 15.44634774
600 34.75428242 1 34.75428242
800 61.78539097 1 61.78539097
1000 96.53967338 1 96.53967338
1200 139.0171297 1 139.0171297
1400 189.2177598 1 189.2177598
1600 247.1415639 1 247.1415639
1800 312.7885418 1 312.7885418
2000 386.1586935 1 386.1586935
2200 467.2520192 1 467.2520192

From the above table, we can realize the graph in such a way :

Distance vs Error when α=0

500
467.2520192
450
400
386.1586935
350
300 312.7885418

250 247.1415639
200 61.78539097
189.2177598
150 15.44634774
139.0171297
100 3.861586935 96.53967338
50
0 34.75428242
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Figure 45: Distance vs error when a=0.

96
 When αo = 45;

2√2(𝐷𝑜/171.17)2
𝑘= 1 (6.56)
(1+𝑠𝑖𝑛2(45))2

(Table 6.5)

When αo = 45 Distance DO N D K(Efficiency)

(NM) μ
200 3.861587 1.4142 2.730580495
400 15.44635 1.4142 10.92232198
600 34.75428 1.4142 24.57522445
800 61.78539 1.4142 43.68928791
1000 96.53967 1.4142 68.26451236
1200 139.0171 1.4142 98.3008978
1400 189.2178 1.4142 133.7984442
1600 247.1416 1.4142 174.7571516
1800 312.7885 1.4142 221.1770201
2000 386.1587 1.4142 273.0580495
2200 467.252 1.4142 330.4002398
From the above table, we can realize the graph in such a way :

Distance vs Error (when α=45)

350
330.4002398
300
273.0580495
250
221.1770201
200
24.57522445 174.7571516
150 2.730580495 43.68928791 133.7984442
100 98.3008978
10.92232198
50
0 68.26451236
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Figure 46: Distance vs Error when a=45°

When αo = 90;

97
 2√2(𝐷𝑜/171.17)2
𝑘= 1 (6.57)
(1+𝑠𝑖𝑛2(90))2

Table (6.6)

When αo = Distance N D K(Efficiency)

90 DO (NM) μ
200 3.861586935 0.445923047 8.65976082
400 15.44634774 0.445923047 34.63904328
600 34.75428242 0.445923047 77.93784738
800 61.78539097 0.445923047 138.5561731
1000 96.53967338 0.445923047 216.4940205
1200 139.0171297 0.445923047 311.7513895
1400 189.2177598 0.445923047 424.3282802
1600 247.1415639 0.445923047 554.2246925
1800 312.7885418 0.445923047 701.4406264
2000 386.1586935 0.445923047 865.976082
2200 467.2520192 0.445923047 1047.831059

From the table we can realize the graph in as:

Distance vs Error (When =90)

1200
1047.831059
1000
865.976082
800
701.4406264
600 77.93784738
554.2246925
400 34.63904328 424.3282802
311.7513895
8.65976082
200 216.4940205
138.5561731
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Figure 47: Distance vs Error when a=90

98
In a similar way by substituting the values of the baseline, and using the above method we can
find for the other station’s duo as well:

5.2.2 Case 2: Considering Master (M) and Slave (X) station:

Distance of stations M-Y ;

DMY = 1049.676 NM (6.58)

Following the similar techniques from the equation () we get the values:

When αo = 0;

2√2(𝐷𝑜/1049.676)2
𝑘= 1 (6.59)
(1+𝑠𝑖𝑛2(0))2

(Table 6.7)

When αo = 0 Distance N D K(Efficiency)

DO (NM) μ
200 0.12729 1 0.12729
400 0.50916 1 0.50916
600 1.14561 1 1.14561
800 2.036639999 1 2.036639999
1000 3.182249999 1 3.182249999
1200 4.582439999 1 4.582439999
1400 6.237209998 1 6.237209998
1600 8.146559997 1 8.146559997
1800 10.31049 1 10.31049
2000 12.729 1 12.729
2200 15.40209 1 15.40209
When αo = 45;

2√2(𝐷𝑜/1049.676 )2
𝑘= 1 (6.60)
(1+𝑠𝑖𝑛2(45))2

99
 (Table 6.8)

When αo = 45 Distance DO N D K(Efficiency)

(NM) μ
200 0.12729 1.4142 0.090008485
400 0.50916 1.4142 0.360033941
600 1.14561 1.4142 0.810076368
800 2.036639999 1.4142 1.440135765
1000 3.182249999 1.4142 2.250212133
1200 4.582439999 1.4142 3.240305472
1400 6.237209998 1.4142 4.410415781
1600 8.146559997 1.4142 5.760543061
1800 10.31049 1.4142 7.290687312
2000 12.729 1.4142 9.000848533
2200 15.40209 1.4142 10.89102673
When αo = 90;

2√2(𝐷𝑜/1049.676 )2
𝑘= 1 (6.61)
(1+𝑠𝑖𝑛2(90))2

Table (6.9)

When αo = 90 Distance DO N D K(Efficiency)

(NM) μ
200 0.12729 0.445923047 0.285452839
400 0.50916 0.445923047 1.141811357
600 1.14561 0.445923047 2.569075553
800 2.036639999 0.445923047 4.567245427
1000 3.182249999 0.445923047 7.13632098
1200 4.582439999 0.445923047 10.27630221
1400 6.237209998 0.445923047 13.98718912
1600 8.146559997 0.445923047 18.26898171
1800 10.31049 0.445923047 23.12167997

100
 Continuation of Table (6.9)

2000 12.729 0.445923047 28.54528392

2200 15.40209 0.445923047 34.53979354

We can therefore represent the chart graphically in such a way:

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Figure 48: Errors Vs Distance when B=1049.676 NM.

6.2.3 Considering Slave (X) and Secondary Slave (Y) station:

Distance of stations M-Y ;

DMY = 942.7646 NM (6.62)

Following the similar techniques from the equation () we get the values:

When αo = 0;

2√2(𝐷𝑜/942.7646)2
𝑘= 1 (6.63)
(1+𝑠𝑖𝑛2(0))2

(table 6.10)

When αo = 0 Distance N D K(Efficiency)

DO (NM) μ
200 0.12729 1 0.12729
400 0.50916 1 0.50916
101
 Continuation of Table (6.10)

600 1.14561 1 1.14561

800 2.036639999 1 2.036639999
1000 3.182249999 1 3.182249999
1200 4.582439999 1 4.582439999
1400 6.237209998 1 6.237209998
1600 8.146559997 1 8.146559997
1800 10.31049 1 10.31049
2000 12.729 1 12.729
2200 15.40209 1 15.40209

When αo = 0;

2√2(𝐷𝑜/942.7646)2
𝑘= 1
(1+𝑠𝑖𝑛2(0))2

Table (6.11)

When αo = 45 Distance DO N D K(Efficiency)

(NM) μ
200 0.12729 1.4142 0.090008485
400 0.50916 1.4142 0.360033941
600 1.14561 1.4142 0.810076368
800 2.036639999 1.4142 1.440135765
1000 3.182249999 1.4142 2.250212133
1200 4.582439999 1.4142 3.240305472
1400 6.237209998 1.4142 4.410415781
1600 8.146559997 1.4142 5.760543061
1800 10.31049 1.4142 7.290687312
2000 12.729 1.4142 9.000848533
2200 15.40209 1.4142 10.89102673
When αo = 90;

2√2(𝐷𝑜/942.7646)2
𝑘= 1
(1+𝑠𝑖𝑛2(90))2
102
 Table (6.12)

When αo = 90 Distance DO N D K(Efficiency)

(NM) μ
200 0.12729 0.445923047 0.285452839
400 0.50916 0.445923047 1.141811357
600 1.14561 0.445923047 2.569075553
800 2.036639999 0.445923047 4.567245427
1000 3.182249999 0.445923047 7.13632098
1200 4.582439999 0.445923047 10.27630221
1400 6.237209998 0.445923047 13.98718912
1600 8.146559997 0.445923047 18.26898171
1800 10.31049 0.445923047 23.12167997
2000 12.729 0.445923047 28.54528392
2200 15.40209 0.445923047 34.53979354

Similar to the previous problem when we graphically realize the above data from tables

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Figure 49: Graph distance vs errors when B=942.7646

103
5.3 ANALYZING THE POSSILIBILITY OF IMPROVING EFFICIENCY BY
DETERMINING THE ERROR PLOT AGAINST ALL ANGLES IN THE QUADRANT:
In this method we finally analyze the various error possibilities that can occur when the
given data is in a specific quadrant by determining the values for all angles. We have to
determine this value by considering all the possible angles within a particular quadrant.

We can do this by considering the following values :

Angle αo = {0-90} (Variation every 5 degree)

(6.64)

But, in-order to analyze all the angles, we will have to consider three distances in which we can
correspond the observer’s value so therefore,

Consider,

D1= 200;

D2= 600;

D3= 1200;

N values for each of the three baselines will be;

N1= 3.86158, N2= 34.7428, N3= 139.017 (when B=117.17) (6.65);

N1= 0.12729, N2= 1.14561, N3= 4.58243 (when B=924.76) (6.66);

N1= 0.10268, N2= 0.92412, N3= 3.69651 (when B=1049.7676) (6.67);

From equation (x) and also considering ‘D’ from equation () we get the values:

Table (6.13)

D N1/D N2/D N3/D

1 3.861586935 34.75428242 139.0171297
0.675262089 5.718649095 51.46784186 205.8713674
1.38309264 2.791994422 25.12794979 100.5117992
0.109400073 35.29784615 317.6806154 1270.722462
1.321027313 2.923169641 26.30852677 105.2341071

104
 Continuation of Table (6.13)

0.858851062 4.496224208 40.46601788 161.8640715

0.833780174 4.631420913 41.68278821 166.7311529
1.331874875 2.899361651 26.09425486 104.3770194
0.078175099 49.39663644 444.569728 1778.278912
1.376225513 2.80592599 25.25333391 101.0133356
0.702591175 5.496207573 49.46586815 197.8634726
0.977628417 3.949953651 35.54958286 142.1983314
1.257223602 3.071519601 27.64367641 110.5747056
0.264374828 14.60648489 131.4583641 525.8334562
1.407209885 2.744144266 24.69729839 98.78919356
0.533969634 7.231847444 65.086627 260.346508
1.104275898 3.496940342 31.47246308 125.8898523
1.160452263 3.32765686 29.94891174 119.795647
0.445923047 8.65976082 77.93784738 311.7513895

Similarly, for y we get ;

Table (6.14)

D N1/D N2/D N3/D

1 0.12729 1.14561 4.582439999
0.675262089 0.188504585 1.696541266 6.786165064
1.38309264 0.092032881 0.828295926 3.313183706
0.109400073 1.163527563 10.47174807 41.88699226
1.321027313 0.096356827 0.867211441 3.468845765
0.858851062 0.148209632 1.33388669 5.335546758
0.833780174 0.152666139 1.373995251 5.495981004
1.331874875 0.095572041 0.860148368 3.440593472
0.078175099 1.628267848 14.65441064 58.61764254
1.376225513 0.092492109 0.83242898 3.329715918
0.702591175 0.181172216 1.630549942 6.52219977

105
 Continuation of Table (6.14)

0.977628417 0.130202844 1.171825593 4.687302372

1.257223602 0.101246906 0.911222155 3.64488862
0.264374828 0.48147549 4.333279409 17.33311764
1.407209885 0.09045559 0.814100307 3.25640123
0.533969634 0.238384342 2.145459079 8.581836314
1.104275898 0.115270106 1.037430955 4.149723822
1.160452263 0.109689992 0.987209932 3.948839727
0.445923047 0.285452839 2.569075553 10.27630221

And for z we get: Table (6.15)

D N1/D N2/D N3/D

1 0.102681046 0.924129416 3.696517662
0.675262089 0.152061026 1.368549235 5.47419694
1.38309264 0.07424018 0.668161618 2.67264647
0.109400073 0.938582979 8.447246814 33.78898725
1.321027313 0.077728178 0.699553603 2.79821441
0.858851062 0.119556289 1.076006605 4.304026422
0.833780174 0.123151221 1.108360985 4.433443942
1.331874875 0.077095115 0.693856032 2.775424128
0.078175099 1.313475105 11.82127595 47.28510379
1.376225513 0.074610625 0.671495628 2.685982513
0.702591175 0.146146223 1.315316003 5.261264011
0.977628417 0.10503075 0.945276753 3.781107011
1.257223602 0.081672859 0.735055733 2.940222931
0.264374828 0.388391916 3.495527247 13.98210899
1.407209885 0.072967826 0.656710435 2.62684174
0.533969634 0.192297538 1.730677844 6.922711377
1.104275898 0.092984956 0.836864607 3.347458429
1.160452263 0.088483645 0.796352805 3.185411222
0.445923047 0.230266291 2.072396618 8.289586473

106
 Therefore, from the above tables we can analyze the graphs and understand how much
error is occurred in each of the specific distances when the observer is in movement towards
this chain.

2000
1800 1778.278912
1600
1400
1270.722462
1200
1000
800
600 104.3770194 142.1983314 119.795647
205.8713674 525.8334562
400 161.8640715 197.8634726
105.2341071 110.5747056 311.7513895
200 260.346508

0
-200 0 139.0171297
10 20
100.5117992
30 40
166.7311529
50
101.0133356
60 70 80 90
98.78919356 125.8898523
100

Figure 50: When Baseline is in M-Y duo(117.17NM)

Chart Title
50
47.28510379

40
33.78898725
30

20
4.433443942 3.781107011
5.47419694 13.98210899
2.672646472.79821441 2.685982513
10
6.922711377 8.289586473
2.9402229312.62684174
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
3.696517662 5.261264011
-10 4.304026422 2.775424128 3.3474584293.185411222

Figure 51: When Baseline is in M-X duo(1049.76)

107
70

60 58.61764254
50

40 41.88699226

30

20 17.33311764
3.468845765 6.52219977 4.149723822
4.582439999 5.335546758 3.3297159184.687302372 3.25640123
10 6.786165064 10.27630221
8.581836314
0
0 10 3.313183706
20 30 5.495981004
403.440593472
50 60 3.64488862
70 80 90 100
-10 3.948839727
Figure 52: When Baseline is in X-Y duo (924.7646)

108
 6. FUTURE ENHANCEMENTS
6.1 e-Loran:
From what we know of Loran-c, we can say that it is a;

• Hyperbolic navigation system operating between a 90 kHz – 110 kHz

frequency;
• Uses a tall antenna to broadcast usually groundwaves;
• Provides a fix by obtaining the lateral position of the observer.

In the e-Loran or the “enhanced Loran” system, we everything that the Loran-C has and
also offers even more improvements. Also, it is the best available backup to the Loran-
C system. There is a large coverage area, multiple transmitters, capable of receiving
input in e-Loran and a possibility of data entry in the United States. Loran could not be
fulfilled. Also, in terms of accuracy, we can get the following updates from e-Loran:

• Accuracy = 10-20 meters.

• Required navigation performance = 0.25 NM(Nautical Miles).
• 50ns timing accuracy.
• New infrastructure with SST (Solid-state-transmitters), state-of-the-art time and
frequency equipment and power sources without any interruptions or disruption.
• Interchangeable H-field antennas to switch to GPS and also process e-Loran
digital signals

There are some disadvantages when it comes to cost :

• 360M USD are being invested for the constructions (Also to make this
system global, it would take almost 5-8 years).
• Maintenance costs are quite high because these are ground based
systems.
• Nevertheless, the costs can be avoided (almost 150M USD) by stopping
the decommissioning of Loran-C infrastructure.

e-Loran has the major advantage of combining the working with the GNSS system as
well. It offers a solution to the problem that occurs in GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite
System), it also is a backup for the current system with integrity maintained. The
109
 expected accuracy of eLoran is better than than Loran-C. Therefore, we can say that
enhanced loran provides the accuracy, availability, integrity and continuity performance
requirements for aviation non-precision instruments as well as maritime harbor
entrances. It is independent to the GNSS,

even when their satellite services are not operational.

6.2 Working Flowchart:

Transmitting station

(1) Broadcasts own signals.

Monitoring Stations

(1)Receives signals and applies corrections.

Control
Figure 53: Typical Monitor
working Stations
of the e-Loran system

(1) Validates and stores corrections.

(2) Sends corrections to appropriate transmitting station.

Transmitting station
(1) Validates incoming signal from the control monitor stations.
(2) Formats signals and transmits on data channel.

110
 Figure 54: e-loran working
The working of the e-loran system uses a technique called the time of transmission
control. This timing is held constant at each of the sites. Also, since it is a self-correcting
system it doesn’t require a phase and timing corrector like the Loran-C system. The e-Loran
system acquires, tracks and manages all the stations like satellites, thus providing reliable
timing measurements that lead to accurate position calculation. Since, there are a number of
stations this concept increases coverage from any chain and can be selected by the receiver
which are within their range.

111
 CONCLUSION
Aircraft navigation, like all other navigation has been broadly created over long time
with unused and effective technique and gear. For the most part aviation route infers the
plausibility of a three-dimensional controlled movement. Through which we are able
achieve tall maximum speed and through comparable strategies and parameters of
movement, we are ready to accurately distinguish area and affirm their estimation. The key
figure to the improvement of such navigation conceivable outcomes is through the
advancement and studies within the field of route frameworks and sensors that play a
fundamental part in these systems. Nevertheless, the most reason behind these frameworks
is to supply unprecedented information and accurate measurement of distance to both the
users and the rest if the world. Loran C navigation system was a major breakthrough for
transport authorities specially during the world war II. Even though most of the systems are
decommissioned, nevertheless there are many chains which are still in operation and the
enhanced version of this Loran C (e-Loran) is supposedly the best back up that can be
provided to GNSS.

The second method of calculation of the efficiency is still under progress, but it shows the
improved range and predicts exact values that can be further used by navigators to pinpoint
their accurate location. By calculating the various possibilities pf error detection and
correcting them using the techniques used in the previous chapter, we can determine how
much error has been occurred in this system and what is the beneficial change that can be
done in order to make this system much efficient and have a value for its data.

Major research on this topic has been done keeping in mind the characteristic of a vessel or
of a ship. But these can be implemented on an aircraft as well and the navigational device
can be put to use the same way the system works in that of a naval ship. The futuristic
approach to this system is e-Loran. It can be a major breakthrough in the field of navigation
and since the information I have is not concrete when it comes to e-Loran (enhanced Loran)
system, in my further studied I shall focus more into it. I am grateful for the researchers
who have worked on Loran Systems which helped me make this report.

112
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1 Alexander V.Nebylov and Joseph Watson. Aerospace Navigation Systems. Published
2016 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
2 Enhanced Loran (eLoran). Dr.Sally Basker . General Lighthouse Authorities (GLA) pf the
UK and Ireland. Published January 2007.
3 J. Powell BA, C Eng, MIERE, GradIMA. AIRCRAFT RADIO SYSTEMS. Distributed
by: The English Book Store (The Aviation People).Reprinted in India by HIMALAYAN
BOOKS.
4 James Carroll, Performance Analysis of an Integrated Tracking System. Published by GPS
world in July 2006
5 LORAN SYSTEM OPERATING INSTRUCTIONS. UNITED STATES COAST
GUARD TREASURY DEPARTMENT. Published by OAN 30 december 1964.
6 “LORAN for Ocean Navigation" filmstrip. Produced 1947 by Coast Guards. Published by
Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum.
7 Paul D Groves. Principles of GNSS,Inertial, and Multisensor Integerated Navigation
Systems.- Artech House, Boston, London.- 305-318 pages.
8 Peter B. Morris Radha R. Gupta Ronald S. Warren Paul M. Creamer. Omega Navigation
System Course Book. Published by TASC in 1994.
9 Robert M.rogers. Applied Mathematics in Integrated Navigation Systems. Published 2007
by AIAA(American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics), Inc.
10 "The Tactical Use of Radar in Aircraft", Radar Bulletin,.Cooke, C. M.; et al. (1945), No.
2 A, Washington, DC: Naval Department.
11 THE LORAN-C SYSTEM OF NAVIGATION. Prepared for the U.S. Coast Guard by
Jansky & Bailey Washington, D. C. Published February 1962.
12 US Navy Training Film MN-10782A.
13 https://www.ivao.aero/training/documentation/books/PP_ADC_Navigation_instrument.p
df.
14 https://www.aircraftsystemstech.com/2017/05/vor-navigation-system.html.
15 https://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/long-range+navigation.
16 http://www.jproc.ca/hyperbolic/loran_a.html
17 https://www.ixbt.com/car/gps/gps.html

113