Mark wrote:
Oh, and besides the lack of a binary message with satellite position/signal levels, there is none that reports the sawtooth error.
How in the world can they call it a "timing receiver" if it doesn't even support sawtooth correction?? Good grief.
Also, I see they claim 6nS accuracy. That is pretty much exactly 1/2 cycle of the main clock frequency, so +/- 6nS should be the expected theoretical best possible error envelope WRT the quantization error, *assuming the receiver's timing solution is always perfect.* Are we supposed to believe they achieve that accuracy in practice, despite all of the well-known sources of error in GPS timing solutions??
Best regards, Charles _______________________________________________ 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.
