Hi

On Jun 1, 2013, at 3:34 PM, Magnus Danielson <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 06/01/2013 09:02 PM, Scott McGrath wrote:
>> True
>> 
>> However with LORAN and to a lesser extent WWVB traceability process was 
>> well/known and documented and had been in place for decades and was easy to 
>> implement correctly     With GPS not so much especially with S/A. Supposedly 
>> the new satellites don't have S/A but since the GPS satellites are primarily 
>> military in nature how will precise positioning be denied in emergency 
>> situations.  Shut down L1?,  dither the signal ????  Or is S/A still there 
>> and how does a T/F user respond to GPS not running normally???
>> 
>> A colleague of mine runs a cal lab. Guy is a wizard with physical and 
>> electrical standards
>> 
>> I run some of my gear there in exchange for calibration of my instruments as 
>> lab has temp / pressure / humidity controls for physical standards so we 
>> both benefit.
>> 
>> Since the demise of LORAN and WWVB (although d-PSKer may allow us to bring 
>> spectracoms and 117a's back.
>> 
>> To achieve traceability we have been shipping our CS and some Rb standards 
>> under power to labs who have achieved traceability
>> 
>> This is is a pain to say the least.  The procedures currently are not well 
>> documented on achieving traceability in the age of GPS only.
>> 
>> And it's also true that most people confuse traceability with adjustment.  
>> In reality it's more of a chain of data with documented values all the way 
>> back to NIST or other national standards lab
> 
> NIST offers a calibration service which gives time and frequency calibration 
> to NIST using common view GPS. Essentially that's a box being placed at the 
> location you feed with your local signals and the box will communicate back 
> to NIST and create the calibration records.
> 
> The pieces in this, isn't all that magic and esoteric, but put together in 
> good way and with routines to put it all together.
> 
> How to do it properly when getting the NIST service is much more fuzzier. I 
> have not seen a description of how it should be done, but it should be 
> possible to achieve in principle.

You do the same thing they do. You both watch the same sat(s) and compare to it 
/ them. If you are in the US, you can do common view. There are LOTS of papers 
on how to do all that. 

Bob


> 
> Cheers,
> Magnus
> _______________________________________________
> 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.

_______________________________________________
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.

Reply via email to