Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : PN - Pelorus Navigation partner with Honeywell -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bernard Elbaum who wrote (81)	5/21/1998 2:10:00 AM
From: Step1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 115

Good points, hard to answer, only time will tell ... >>>most major US airports having GPS capability by 2005, and all of them by 2010.<<< Obviously the most important thing is to agree on a standard first. Then orders should come in over the years. >>There seem to be several potential hitches to this projection. 1. The government will have to spend some money for the airports to pay for new GPS capability. However, it's not a lot of money for ground installations. << Infrastucture projects are never cheap. The ground part only may be relatively cheap, although the FAA is looking at having a seamless Future Nav System incorporating many other technologies. >>> 2. The airlines have to pay much more money for GPS cockpit avionics. If they feel cash poor and would rather make do with what they have, the airlines could lobby for delay, though their own public pronouncements to date are supportive of GPS in a general sense.<<< GPS saves them money in fuel and improves their safety overall I think. >>> 3. The FAA site also refers to some lobbying by other nations to slow down the move to GPS, though the IR person for Pelorus tells me that the international aviation authority has been lobbying for speeding things up.<<< I spoke to him too. He seemed to be quite knowledgeable about the aviation industry in general. I remember seeing something about ICAO pushing for implementation of GPS sooner than later. >>>4. There could be some technological hitch.<<< >>> The most worrying of these potential hitches strikes me as #2. Any idea what the major US airlines think about switching over to GPS?<<< This is an awfully difficult question to answer at this point. The majors reaction has been mostly against Loran C (as a back up to GPS). They are not equipped and don't want to spend the money on it. They would rather keep their DME/VOR/ILS compatible on board equipment (as a back up). At least that is what I gather from the articles I saw in Flight International. Some may oppose it at first feeling it may put them in a difficult financial situation against their richer competitors but I would say that something that has the ability to improve their efficiency and safety records should not encounter too much opposition. They quarrel a lot among each others and always attempt not to give a competitor an edge they can't have or can't afford , but usually come around pretty quickly once they see something as inevitable. If you are Canadian and remember what happened when Canadian Airlines wanted to leave the reservation system they co-owned with Air Canada (Gemini) to move into American Airlines 'camp (with SABRE), then you will recall how much dealing went on. AC opposed it until they felt they could clinch their own deal and then it was not an issue anymore. I was sent an incident report a couple of days ago (Tail skid contacted the runway and aft part of fuselage was damaged on a 767) . The airport was not equipped with an ILS and both pilots flying the approach had not had much practice with non-precision approaches in a long time. (767 are large aircraft and they usually fly schedule service into airports equipped with ILS in North America anyway) Anyway, no injuries and not really endangering the life of the passengers but nevertheless a very costly glitch in a carrier flight and maintenance schedule. Had the airport been equipped with GPS SLS (and the aricraft as well) this would have probably prevented the incident. This airport was relatively small and therefore could hardly justify the cost of an ILS, especially since you need one for each runway end (essentially doubling the cost ). hope this helps, I was commenting on your message more to add info than to correct anything as we both seem to belive in PN despite the price performance... later sg

To: Bernard Elbaum who wrote (81)	6/28/1999 11:47:00 AM
From: David Michaud	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 115

Pelorus Navigation Systems Inc - Pelorus Navigation Systems wins DME order from Nav Canada Pelorus Navigation Systems Inc PN Shares issued 8,392,027 1999-06-16 close $0.75 Thursday Jun 17 1999 Mr. Mikel Damke reports Pelorus Navigation Systems has received an order for five Pelorus Model 8900 Distance Measuring Equipment (DME) systems with complete spares from Canada's aviation services provider, Nav Canada. These systems will be delivered in the fiscal year ending May 31, 2000, for immediate installation in several of Canada's major international airports. "Pelorus is delighted to continue its long-term relationship with Canada's aviation services provider as a valued supplier of world-class ground-based navigation aids," said Michael Beamish, president and chief executive officer, Pelorus Navigation Systems. "This order, which is worth slightly less than $1-million will be delivered over the next 12 months. It will generate in excess of 10 person years of Canadian employment and will help return Pelorus to profitability in 2000." The Pelorus Model 8900 DME is designed to meet the stringent requirements of Transport Canada and meets or exceeds the requirements of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Pelorus Navigation Systems Inc. has a 16-year track record as a specialist in ground-based navigation systems for airports and has supplied navigation systems to more than 200 airports on six continents.