Hi Didier,
the drawback of this approach is that everything is connected together as
one big circuit, and thus processor noise can get into the GPS front end and
reduce the sensitivity and cause other errors..
For RF performance, it's probably better to have the GPS receiver sit all by
Somebody had to pose this question... given the respective sizes of the Trimble
Thunderbolt and the HP Z3801A, the
simplicity of the first and the complexity of the second, it comes natural to
ask ourselves, what advantages does the HP
unit have to justify the differences ? Is the Z3801A
In a message dated 20/07/2008 23:33:28 GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Somebody had to pose this question... given the respective sizes of the
Trimble Thunderbolt and the HP Z3801A, the
simplicity of the first and the complexity of the second, it comes natural
to ask
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 20/07/2008 23:33:28 GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Somebody had to pose this question... given the respective sizes of the
Trimble Thunderbolt and the HP Z3801A, the
simplicity of the first and the complexity of the second,
Nuts
Subject: [time-nuts] Thunderbolt vs Z3801A
Somebody had to pose this question... given the respective
sizes of the Trimble Thunderbolt and the HP Z3801A, the
simplicity of the first and the complexity of the second, it
comes natural to ask ourselves, what advantages does the HP
unit
Dear Didier,
Didier Juges wrote:
In my unqualified opinion, Trimble did something very smart with the
Thunderbolt.
Most previous GPSDOs use a stand alone GPS receiver, with its own CPU clock,
to generate the 1PPS signal, to which a separate OCXO is servoed via PLL and
occasionaly smart
