From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Positional accuracy of the M12+T Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 00:21:39 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Thu, January 4, 2007 22:56, Magnus Danielson said: > >> Can't wait for a civilian L2..................... > > > freq receiver. In future we might actually see L2/L5 receivers with no L1 > > since > > that might actually be more economic. L2 and L5 is only 51.15 MHz apart > > But you actually want the carriers far away from each other to get a good > iono compensation. Do not know much you will actually loose doing a L2/L5 > recevier instead. Now, didn't I say it was the cheaper solution? :-) You gain some and you loose some. The somewhat different RF paths, hazzle with different group delay etc. etc. as well as the cost of double RF paths and double frequency choke ring is reduced at the cost of a less accurate measure for the ion value. It will still be a fantastic improvement over single frequency model only receivers. So, in the future we can look forward to a much more diverse field of civil receivers: L1 only L2C only L5 only (I am not sure from the top of my head if this one is in ICD) L1&L2C combo L2C&L5 combo L1&L5 combo (I am not sure from the top of my head if this one is in ICD) L1&L2C&L5 combo Toss in creative use of all the measurements, dead reckoning on few sats etc. Cheers, Magnus _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list [email protected] https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
