1. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 FERNS Status and Future Tamotsu Ikeda Erik Johannessen Linn Roth

2. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 What is FERNS ? The Far East Radionavigation Service (FERNS) The agreement made on the 22nd December 2000, Between  People’s Republic of China,  Japan,  Republic of Korea, and  Russian Federation On an international program for the establishment of a joint radionavigation service in Far Eastern waters of Loran C and Chayka station

3. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 Coverage 100°140°110°130°120°170°150°160°180° 20° 30° 40° 50° Attu Petropavlovsk Alexandrovsk Tokatibuto Niijima Minamitorishima Gesashi Raoping Chongzuo Hexian Xuancheng Rongcheng Helong Okhotsk Pohang Kwangju Ussuriisk

4. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 During the week of 29 Sep. to 3 Oct. 2003 FERNS held the 12 th session of The Council of the Far East Radionavigation Service and as a special program: Meeting of Experts on the Back up System of GPS

5. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 Council Discussion and Considerations Included: Presentation by each country on operational status Coordination of off airs planned for 2004 Discussion of other services (i.e. N/DGPS) Technical matters for coordination  System enhancements  Eurofix  Need for appropriate receiver technology

6. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 The background Members gave the background to the problems being experienced in the Country by the reduction of users of Loran C and explained that they were of the opinion that the introduction of Eurofix functions to FERNS chains and the introduction of a hybrid GPS/Loran C would probably attract significantly more users. The presentation also made reference to the discussion on this subject at the 9th FERNS Council Session held in 2000 and the agreement then that a decision on the matter would be made at the 10th Session

7. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 Meeting of Experts Sponsored by Ship and Ocean Foundation of Japan Volpe report has given international recognition to GPS vulnerability Goals of the meeting  Ideas on international standards and cooperation  Exchange of opinion with people related to maritime affairs and receiver manufacturers Format of the meeting  6 full presentations  Panel discussion

8. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 MARITIME RADIONAVIGATION Measures taken by International Organizations Mr. Torsten Kruuse IALA Secretary General

9. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 Vulnerability Assessment of the Maritime Transportation Relying on GPS Mr. Stewart Shoulta Far East Radionavigation Service Council Session Tokyo, Japan - October 1, 2003

10. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 Ongoing Loran Evaluations at the Federal Aviation Administration and the US Coast Guard Mitchell J. Narins Systems Engineer Federal Aviation Administration Navigation Integrated Product Team 12 th FERNS COUNCIL – EXPERTS MEETING 1 October 2003 Tokyo, Japan Presented by Erik Johannessen – LORIPP Member Original Brief July 23, 2003 AND Program Management Review - FAA Headquarters, Washington, DC

11. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 ”Present situation and subjects of NELS - Loran C in Europe - vulnerability of GPS” By Kirsten Ullbæk Selvig Chairmann Northwest European Loran C system - NELS

12. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 Meeting of experts on the vulnerability and back up systems of GPS The French proposal Tokyo, 29 September, 1-3 October 2003 Jacques MANCHARD METLTM-DAMGM Lighthouses and Buoys Division

13. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 Loran in 2003 and Beyond - Standardization of Loran as the Most Complementary, Necessary Backup to GNSS by G. Linn Roth, Ph.D., FRIN President

14. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 Panel Discussion

15. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 Definition of GNSS backup system During the expert meeting held on 1st Oct concerning the vulnerability of GPS the question was raised whether there is a need for a common understanding on a definition of a backup system. The question was addressed to FERNS, USCG and NELS. On the initiative of the Chairman of NELS it was decided to arrange for an informal discussion on the matter during lunchtime on 2nd Oct. Vulnerability of GPS ought to be replaced by vulnerability of GNSS, in more detail the need for a backup system/the need for more than one available system, the difference between backup system and augmentation system, minimum requirements to Loran C as a backup system and additional functions, the situation in each of the countries/ organisations. It was clear that a critical point for a backup system is the users/the lack of users.

16. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 The Following Definitions were Presented: A truly REDUNDANT system provides the same functionality as the primary system, allowing a seamless transition with no change in procedures; A BACK-UP system ensures continued operation, but not necessarily with the full functionality of the primary system and may necessitate some change in procedures by the user; A CONTINGENCY system allows safe completion of a manoeuvre, but may not be adequate for long-term use. Recognizing the importance of the matters covered under the discussion, the variety in the approach and the need for a more thoroughly analysis: It was agreed that to have a global approach, IALA should arrange for a meeting to provide further analysis and discussion on the matters. It was also recognised that the analysis should be performed as soon as possible.

17. 32 nd International Loran Association November 3-7, 2003 Following Activity Agreed that a meeting addressing the “Future of Loran-C/Chayka in a GNSS environment” would be held in Korea on November 27 and 28, subsequent to the Symposium on 100 years of aids to navigation services of Korea. NELS, the USCG, IALA and Canada would be invited to be represented at the meeting which would consider the extent of the risk to GNSS by deliberate interference, and:  What is understood by a back-up to GNSS?  Does GNSS need a back-up? If so, what is the justification?  Do Loran-C and Chayka qualify to provide the services required?