W2HX wrote:
Ahh. Very interesting explanation. So is it somewhat correct to assume (yes,
I know) that for a stationary (non-mobile) environment, these extra sats
don’t make much difference? This seems to be what the explanation is saying.
Depends on your antenna location and type. The extra satellites help
reduce the effect of multipath. And, the overall variance of the
nav/timing solution is reduced when you put more signals into the
solution (e.g. a sqrt(N) sort of thing)
Ok. So let me see. For a frequency standard for use in lab equipment, it
appears that short term, phase noise and other sources of noise are the
things to be concerned with to get better results. These seem to really be
accomplished with a good oxco. However, if I want a very accurate
time-of-day clock for long periods of time, then I need long term stability
which is where the GPS comes in. Do I have this right?
Yes.
So if I want a really souped-up freq standard for my lab, then I should
concentrate on finding the best oxco I can (which may be disciplined by the
GPS or manually occasionally calibrated to GPS), and use the best power
supply I can find. These seem to be what I should concentrate on rather
than more channels.
Yes.
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
