maybe he should switch to Number Juan Tequila http://numberjuantequila.com/
Jaime Solorza Wireless Systems Architect 915-861-1390 On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Bill Prince <[email protected]> wrote: > It's all that vodka. > > bp > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> > > > On 8/12/2015 10:52 AM, Vlad Sedov wrote: > > Having lived around Soviet RFs for many years, I can tell you first hand > that they are the laziest RFs with the worst work ethic. > > > Vlad > > On 8/12/2015 12:42 PM, Mathew Howard wrote: > > We don't need any stinkin' commie RF! > > Добрий День товарищ! > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Shayne Lebrun <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Nyet, Tovarich. Superior SOVIET RF works four times as hard as any lazy >> capitalist RF, and without exploiting the proletariat photons. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jaime Solorza >> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 12, 2015 1:22 PM >> *To:* Animal Farm >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GPS Timing >> >> >> >> not to worry Comrade RF is universal >> >> >> Jaime Solorza >> >> Wireless Systems Architect >> >> 915-861-1390 >> >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 9:52 AM, George Skorup < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> Cambium is using a new receiver on the 450APs that does GPS+GLONASS. I >> assume it's from Global-Top, but I haven't opened up a new AP to look. I'm >> not real excited about using the Russian signals, but with so many >> satellites available, it does acquire lock very fast. Have you thought >> about doing the same for your 'Pipes? I think it would be beneficial. >> >> >> >> On 8/12/2015 5:34 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote: >> >> Ok, if you really want to know, I finally found a (somewhat data) >> document which describes this in semi-understandable terms. >> >> And yes, the real time does fall out of the equations (see watch error - >> which is how fast or slow your reference clock is). >> >> http://www.maa.org/sites/default/files/pdf/cms_upload/Thompson07734.pdf >> >> What I'm hearing from my GPS module vendor is effectively that since they >> don't really have to do any additional work to output a 1PPS signal from a >> 3d lock, they feel comfortable in doing so. Adding the complexity of >> surveying an location to an useful accuracy and then using that to compute >> the time is a lot of additional work with a lot of variability they don't >> want to try to deal with without additional demand. I do know that a >> while back we tried some shortcuts to get there, but they were not all that >> useful. >> >> >> >> -forrest >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Sean Heskett < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> the satellites are constantly moving tho and since they are moving faster >> in orbit than we are here on earth you need to account for relativity. >> knowing where you are doesn't give you enough information to know where >> the satellite is and therefore you can't accurately calculate the >> relativity offset. once you have 3D lock with 4 satellites you can >> accurately calculate the relativity offset and therefore calculate the >> accurate time for where you are on earth. >> >> >> >> shoulda taken the blue pill ;-) >> >> >> >> -Sean >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Bill Prince < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> That's what I thought too. Once one of these little beggars has been >> online for a half hour or more, the location should be "set" so to speak. I >> would then expect them to hold time sync even with 1 satellite in view. >> Knowing that the location is static and unmoving, I would expect that >> maintaining time lock would be gravy. >> >> Sadly, this does not seem to be the case. >> >> >> bp >> >> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >> >> >> >> On 8/11/2015 10:48 AM, Chuck McCown wrote: >> >> Interesting, I guess you need to know where you are to calculate the >> delay. Had not considered that. But if you know where you are and have >> ephermis data, you should be able to calculate the delay and arrive at a >> pretty accurate timing pulse with one satellite. >> >> >> >> *From:* Forrest Christian (List Account) <[email protected]> >> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 11, 2015 11:39 AM >> >> *To:* af <[email protected]> >> >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GPS Timing >> >> >> >> You need an accurate 3d position to get accurate timing. To have an >> accurate 3d position using GPS alone, you need four satellites. Three >> only gets you a 2d lock, and less than that you don't get a lock at all. >> >> There are receivers out there which will survey a position and then use >> that position to be able to continue to provide a timing signal if you >> subsequently lose lock but still have sats in view. As far as I know, >> this type of receiver is not in use in any commercially available timing >> product for the cambium radios. In fact I think we've almost all ended up >> using the exact same GPS modules, at least for any recently designed >> product. >> >> Some of the earlier products would attempt to preserve the sync signal >> across a GPS lock loss with various levels of success. For instance the >> cmm micro in early releases provided a wildly incorrect sync pulse even >> without a lock. Same with early syncpipes. The CTM has a holdover >> timer. And so on. I think most of us have moved away from this in newer >> designs. >> >> On Aug 11, 2015 8:36 AM, "Dan Petermann" < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> What is the minimum amount of satellites needed for a proper GPS sync >> pulse? >> >> And does that differ across products (CMM, CTM, SyncPipe, etc.)? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> *Forrest Christian* *CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.* >> >> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 >> >> <[email protected]>[email protected] | http://www.packetflux.com >> >> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian> >> <http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux> >> >> >> >> >> > > > >
