They provide redundancy and for carrier phase surveying, probally
quicker solution times.
For timing, it would just be better redundancy
Brian
Tom Van Baak wrote:
>>Just curious on another topic : I have seen advertized GPS boards with
>>
>>
>20-channel
>
>
>>capability, Given that,
"Tom Van Baak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Just curious on another topic : I have seen advertized GPS boards with
> 20-channel
> > capability, Given that, at least based on my direct experience, even with
> a clear
> > horizon you rarely have 12 satellites in view, what does buy you having
> t
Alberto di Bene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just curious on another topic : I have seen advertized GPS boards with
> 20-channel
> capability, Given that, at least based on my direct experience, even with a
> clear
> horizon you rarely have 12 satellites in view, what does buy you having that
>
> Just curious on another topic : I have seen advertized GPS boards with
20-channel
> capability, Given that, at least based on my direct experience, even with
a clear
> horizon you rarely have 12 satellites in view, what does buy you having
that
> capability available? TNX.
Those are Glonass + G
From: Alberto di Bene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Jupiter GPS receiver
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 19:02:25 +0100
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Magnus Danielson wrote:
> >
> >>I looked in my data and their spec sheet shows +/- 1 microsecond. But
Magnus Danielson wrote:
>
>>I looked in my data and their spec sheet shows +/- 1 microsecond. But,
>>I beleive this was much better than that. I cannot find it, but I
>>beleive I seen a report where somebody compared the Jupiter and it was
>>in the 120 to 150 nanosecond class.
>
>
> +/- 1 m
From: Brian Kirby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Jupiter GPS receiver
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 20:59:13 -0600
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I looked in my data and their spec sheet shows +/- 1 microsecond. But,
> I beleive this was much better than that. I can
I looked in my data and their spec sheet shows +/- 1 microsecond. But,
I beleive this was much better than that. I cannot find it, but I
beleive I seen a report where somebody compared the Jupiter and it was
in the 120 to 150 nanosecond class.
Alberto di Bene wrote:
>Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Bjorn Gabrielsson wrote:
> Didier Juges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>What software do you use to interface the binary output to your NTP
>>server? If it happens to be Linux software and the source code were
>>available, I would be interested.
>
>
> ntpd/refclock_jupiter.c in the ntpd source
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> You need to time the 1PPS signal to get the precise time, the
> serial timecode alone, NMEA or not, doesn't do it.
>
Does anybody have reliable data on the jitter present on the 1pps signal
of the Rockwell/Navman GPS boards ?
I used in the past a 8-channel Motorola V
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Johan Swenker writes:
>I currently run my Jupiter in binary mode. According to ntpd the
>offset is generally a few microseconds. I have no independant way to
>check that claim.
You need to time the 1PPS signal to get the precise time, the
serial timecode alone, N
Didier Juges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> What software do you use to interface the binary output to your NTP
> server? If it happens to be Linux software and the source code were
> available, I would be interested.
ntpd/refclock_jupiter.c in the ntpd source tree.
For documentation read
Hi Johan,
I bought the Jupiter essentially to phase lock a 10 MHz reference, to be
used to phase lock my test equipment (generators and counters). It has a
10 kHz output that is much more convenient than the 1 pps of most other
receivers.
But, since I have the thing working and hooked up, I wa
Hello,
>>Hello Didier,
>>
>>The Jupiter GPS receiver (if used in NMEA and not binary mode) has a known
>>fault, that it can be 1 or 2 seconds delta to UTC, this is independent of
>>the "leap-second" situation.
>
I use my Jupiter GPS to synchronize my ntp-server. When I ran it in
NMEA-mode, I ha
Hello Mike,
> Can someone point me to the source where the"known fault" of the Jupiter
> listed below is documented??
Google has a "cached" copy of a discussion that I participated in, back in
Feb 2004.
Try this URL, I think it should work:
http://tinyurl.com/c6bfn
It contains the statement fr
jorn Gabrielsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement"
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 4:57 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Jupiter GPS receiver
"Geoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Didier Juges" wrote
"Geoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Didier Juges" wrote:
> > I am planning to let the GPS receiver run a while longer to see if it
> > corrects itself at some point, and if it does not, I'll reboot it.
>
> Hello Didier,
>
> The Jupiter GPS receiver (if used in NMEA and not binary mode) has a
"Didier Juges" wrote:
> I am planning to let the GPS receiver run a while longer to see if it
> corrects itself at some point, and if it does not, I'll reboot it.
Hello Didier,
The Jupiter GPS receiver (if used in NMEA and not binary mode) has a known
fault, that it can be 1 or 2 seconds delta t
I wanted to record the output from my Rockwell Jupiter GPS receiver
during the leap second, but got caught up in the New Years's eve events
and did not get it done (I am new at this :-)
The receiver has been running continuously since yesterday and is still
running (no reboot). At this moment,
19 matches
Mail list logo
