Yo Chris! On Wed, 8 Nov 2017 11:47:05 -0600 "Chris Caudle" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, November 8, 2017 10:45 am, Gary E. Miller wrote: > > No one here has yet bothered to address the issues I raise > > in Section 3.3.4. > > Sure they did. Why are you referencing the old version instead of the > newer version that Leo Bodner provided the link to? Because that was sent last night after I stopped reading email. I knew about the errata, I left out that detail to see when someone actually read my citation. Leo actually did, but not got to his email yet, I read email in reverse chrono order. > https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IRN-IS-200H-001+002+003_rollup.pdf What I said is correct, IS-GPS-200H is STILL the latest version of the GPS standard. Leo's link, which I found Monday, is to a copy of IS-GPS-200H with the errata applied. So not technically an update to IS-GPS-200H. > "The NAV data contains the requisite data for relating GPS time to > UTC. The accuracy of this data during the transmission interval shall > be such that it relates GPS time (maintained by the MCS of the CS) to > UTC (USNO) within 20 nanoseconds (one sigma). " So yes, UTC from a GPS is now 20 ns (one sigama). What I said about +/- 13 ns being noise relative to the spec still applies. Do you now see how measured GPS time/location can be very precise, but UTC from a GPS less so? Have you read the entire 3.3.4? RGDS GARY --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703 [email protected] Tel:+1 541 382 8588 Veritas liberabit vos. -- Quid est veritas? "If you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it." - Lord Kelvin
pgp8629VL0oiQ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ 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.
