Bob, Thanks for the nice, concise, summary of the screwing the new WWVB format will inflict on the timing community, especially because LORAN-C is dead.
The only "benefit" to the NIST/XW scheme I can see is creating a monopoly for Xtendwave in precision TOD marketplace for those not relying on GPS. When, due to governmental action, people are thrown out of a job, the government often funds millions and millions in "retraining", "outplacement" and other forms of aid. IMO, the very least the government, NIST specifically, could do is provide a vetted design so that the installed base of receivers will continue to function. YMMV, -John =============== > Hi > > Ok, to *try* to bring this back together. > > There is indeed a valid Time Nuts need for something other than GPS. In > reality there are many reasons. One that has not been mentioned is to > check on the validity of your long term GPS time estimate Small errors > that accumulate can be a really nasty thing > > If you live in the mainland US, there aren't a whole lot of alternatives > to WWVB. Propagation is a reality that no amount of wishing will > eliminate. HF isn't going to do you much good. Other LF signals just > don't get here in any sort of useful condition. > > The only rational way to get time information off of WWVB is to look at > carrier phase over many days. We have decades of information about that. > Unless they implement a fancy modulation scheme (which they very much > > have not) we are stuck with phase. > > Making this all happen (or not) with legacy gear is an independent issue > of the basics above. I believe that if you can extract phase by some > technique, you can re-broadcast a signal that the old gear will work > with. Maybe it's easier that that, I hope so, but have not proven that > by doing it. > > IF you want to simply do a new phase tracking receiver, there are a lot > of bits and pieces you can use. None of them are terribly expensive. The > "radio" part of the system (not the antenna, not the frequency standard, > not the other boxes that input to the system) likely can be done for > $50 in raw parts. Weather that's a $5,000,0000 receiver or a $200 > receiver depends on your markup. > > Back when I bought them new, *none* of the legacy WWVB receivers cost > $200. I don't remember any of them being much under $2,000. Would I pay > $2,000 for one today? Nope, no more than I'd pay the same for a Loran-C > receiver. Just for the record, I wouldn't pay $2,000 for a GPS either. > > Would I dive into a receiver project *before* we see the patent > filings? - > no. I'm not independently wealthy. Financing the challenge(s) to the > likely stupid series of patents isn't something I want to fund. Easy or > hard technically has nothing to do with it. It's not worth going broke > for > . > > Bob _______________________________________________ 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.
