On 03/13/2011 08:33 AM, b...@lysator.liu.se wrote:
The military is the one service that won't be affected by this
interference.
They run on a different band, and their modulation is more robust than
the civilian side.
Could you deliberate a bit? I suspect that military receivers use L1 C/A,
Mahlon wrote:
You're thinking it'll be like current cell phone technology, which
it doesn't have to be. They probably don't even know themselves yet
how they're going to do it, but they certainly have the resources to do it.
The Lightsquared terrestrial network will be LTE, same as most
Hi,
From: Mike S mi...@flatsurface.com
Measuring the jitter of the unit's own clock isn't particularly useful or
interesting for anything other than checking for proper operation.
I agree for the purpose, but the noise mesured is not only the clock noise.
It's the sum of all noises. Not only
Le 13/03/2011 10:28, Charles P. Steinmetz a écrit :
Mahlon wrote:
The Lightsquared terrestrial network will be LTE, same as most
carriers are migrating to. They will almost certainly use GPS timing
receivers at the cell sites for network timing.
and their timing receivers antenna will
I'll quote this from a wiki, since it is already out in the open:
Military (M-code)
A major component of the modernization process is a new military signal. Called the
Military code, or M-code, it was designed to
Fellow clock-watchers,
I've become the proud owner of a Datum 9390-56110 GPS standard with a
rubidium oscillator. I was informed, by the seller, that the unit's firmware
kind of lost its collective mind when confronted with the GPS epoch rollover.
Would anyone happen to have a
hello list!
last friday being my birthday, i found myself at the albuquerque auction.
there it was...
so i brought the fts 4060 home and began reading... (many thanks to brooke
clark)
put it all back together and fired it up.
now it has been running for many hours. no lock. the readings are
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Coalition to Save GPS
From:b...@lysator.liu.se
...I suspect that military receivers use L1 C/A,
L1 P(Y) and L2 P(Y). This is the exact same signals civilian geodetic
receivers has been using since about the Ashtech Z12 and its z-tracking.
Once upon a time, all
On 03/14/2011 12:06 AM, J. Forster wrote:
I don't know what portion of all the GPS receivers deployed by the DoD now
have direct-P(Y)-acquisition capability.
If they would be forced to shift in direct-P(Y) earlier if LightSquared
caused them trouble, then it would hurt a bit, but I would
On one of my older FRS I tightened the cover to much blowing in the process
the TIP 31 and the 2N4021. Any idea where to get a 2N4021 or what would be
a substitute.
Thanks Bert Kehren
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe,
Bert
Who knows what these2n4021s cost but they have a 800 number and 3 in stock
http://chipstech.com/NATIONAL-SEMICONDUCTOR/2N4021/prod_2649.html
http://chipstech.com/NATIONAL-SEMICONDUCTOR/2N4021/prod_2649.htmlregards
Paul
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 7:30 PM, ewkeh...@aol.com wrote:
On one of my
At 07:30 PM 3/13/2011, ewkeh...@aol.com wrote...
On one of my older FRS I tightened the cover to much blowing in the
process
the TIP 31 and the 2N4021. Any idea where to get a 2N4021 or what
would be
a substitute.
I think it's a 2n4091, from the parts list and schematic. 2N4021 is a
PNP
Thank you, yes it is a 2N4091, my fingers are getting bad. I think I am
going to try a TIP122, I have plenty of TIP31C's, to much trouble and money
for a single 2N4091 when you take into consideration the age of the unit
and lamp voltage shows 6 volt.
Bert Kehren
In a message dated
http://www.onthemedia.org/episodes/2011/03/11
http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/2011/03/11/06
They were talking to David Hambling who wrote the New Scientist article that
I mentioned last week.
He covered LORAN. He said it cost less than one GPS satellite, but it wasn't
clear what costs
14 matches
Mail list logo
