John Miles wrote: > No; per year. The 10811(D?) in a late-model 8662A I owned a few years ago > was a serious outlier. If I remember correctly, it was about 3E-10 off > after being left on for a year. I'll never find the notes I kept on it > now, > but it was definitely better than 1E-9.
It probably wandered around much more than that during the year and you just happened to measure it when it was close to the starting point. Kind of like the broken clock that keeps perfect time every 12 hours. In any event, I can safely say, having looked at thousands of 10811's, that I have never seen one that had anything like that level of aging. Rick Karlquist N6RK _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts