I think it died pretty quickly from all of the stuff I had seen at hamfests.
Thats how I picked up my 6 X lucent RBs for nothing pretty much. Also my
180 watt rf amplifier.
Regards
Paul
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 1:38 AM, b...@lysator.liu.se wrote:
Dont you have GPS/Cs locked cell networks anymore
...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On
Behalf Of b...@lysator.liu.se
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 1:38 AM
To: j...@quikus.com; Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly
Dont you have GPS/Cs locked cell networks anymore in the US?
http
On 9/26/12 7:11 PM, J. Forster wrote:
But if someone here designed and built a $100 receiver and offered it to
the group, that could well violate some of their IP.
As to building a home brew receiver and certifying a onsie so your lab's
cal is traceable, I'd certainly not trust a cal done that
In the real world, if GPS does not work, the WWVB change means you either
have to buy the XW stuff or go do something else.
YMMV
-John
=
On 9/26/12 7:11 PM, J. Forster wrote:
But if someone here designed and built a $100 receiver and offered it to
the group, that could
Dont you have GPS/Cs locked cell networks anymore in the US?
http://www.endruntechnologies.com/cdma.htm
--
Björn
In the real world, if GPS does not work, the WWVB change means you either
have to buy the XW stuff or go do something else.
YMMV
-John
=
On 9/26/12
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 07:38:03AM +0200, b...@lysator.liu.se wrote:
Dont you have GPS/Cs locked cell networks anymore in the US?
http://www.endruntechnologies.com/cdma.htm
Björn,
Past experience with CDMA TOD references here is that they
fare much worse than WWVB TOD
I just received this in reply to a query ablot the availability of
receiver designs for the new WWVB format:
Original Message
Subject: Re: WWVB Protocol Notification
From:John Lowe l...@boulder.nist.gov
Date:Wed, September 26, 2012
-
From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On
Behalf Of J. Forster
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 12:47 PM
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: [time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly
I just received this in reply to a query ablot the availability of
receiver designs
Class action suit anyone?
- Original Message -
From: J. Forster j...@quikus.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 12:46 PM
Subject: [time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly
I just received this in reply to a query ablot the availability of
receiver designs for the new
: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 12:55 PM
To: j...@quikus.com; Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly
Class action suit anyone?
- Original Message -
From: J. Forster j...@quikus.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012
, 2012 12:46 PM
Subject: [time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly
I just received this in reply to a query ablot the availability of
receiver designs for the new WWVB format:
Original Message
Subject: Re: WWVB Protocol Notification
From
Miller
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 12:55 PM
To: j...@quikus.com; Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly
Class action suit anyone?
- Original Message -
From: J. Forster j...@quikus.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent
In reviewing the NIST document, I don't see anything particularly
difficult about the new format - either in terms of extracting the time
or phase/frequency information from the transmissions. With
undersampling, carrier recovery (to determine phase and amplitude
information) should be
On 26 Sep, 2012, at 10:03 , J. Forster wrote:
You go after everything. Soup to nuts, including the contract agreements.
IMO, this is potentially very, very big money, because Xtendwave may also
have patent protection, and henceforth control all the precise digital
clock market. This is
Two comments:
First is a matter of principle... the 'upgrade' was done with public
money, taxpayer money. We bought and paid for it. It should be freely
available. Xtendwave is essentially taxing a public service.
If Xtendwave wants a monopoly on time, they should build their own
transmitter,
In message 50633bf8.9050...@ussc.com, Clint Turner writes:
In reviewing the NIST document, I don't see anything particularly
difficult about the new format - either in terms of extracting the time
or phase/frequency information from the transmissions.
As a somewhat seasoned VLF SDR radio-nut,
measurement
time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly
In message 50633bf8.9050...@ussc.com, Clint Turner writes:
In reviewing the NIST document, I don't see anything particularly
difficult about the new format - either in terms
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 06:05:14PM +, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Class action suit because they *improve* your VLF time/freq reference
signal and document the new format ?
Speaking for myself, I'm mostly annoyed that our government was
lobbied with its own money for this*.
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly
In message 50633bf8.9050...@ussc.com, Clint Turner writes:
In reviewing the NIST document, I don't see anything particularly
difficult about the new format - either in terms of extracting the time
or phase/frequency information from the transmissions
.
Regards,
Tom
- Original Message -
From: Bob Camp li...@rtty.us
To: 'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement'
time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 5:06 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly
Hi
I don't have a problem with going after a known format
'
time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 5:06 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly
Hi
I don't have a problem with going after a known format. What I have been
worried about is the existence of a portion of the format that we simply
do
not know about (yet).
Of less
On 9/26/12 9:46 AM, J. Forster wrote:
I just received this in reply to a query ablot the availability of
receiver designs for the new WWVB format:
No sir, the government does not have a receiver design. The design has
been created by Xtendwave under an SBIR grant. Their design is
What would annoy me is less-than-full disclosure of the transmitted
signal and its properties. For example, there's a claim in the paper
that the (31 26) Hamming code used can detect double-bit errors in the
encoded time.
You are right. The standard Hamming code: detect and correct 1
(3,1)
And would anybody accept the results as accurate?
-John
==
On 9/26/12 9:46 AM, J. Forster wrote:
I just received this in reply to a query ablot the availability of
receiver designs for the new WWVB format:
No sir, the government does not have a receiver design. The design has
Hi
Last time I checked, you can build one for your own use and are allowed to use
what ever you want, regardless of it's patent status.
Bob
On Sep 26, 2012, at 7:15 PM, Jim Lux jim...@earthlink.net wrote:
On 9/26/12 9:46 AM, J. Forster wrote:
I just received this in reply to a query ablot
On 9/26/12 4:26 PM, J. Forster wrote:
And would anybody accept the results as accurate?
why not.. the transmit signal specification is published, you could
analytically prove what the receiver performance should be and verify
your implementation against it
We do this all the time with
On 9/26/12 5:15 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
Last time I checked, you can build one for your own use and are allowed to use
what ever you want, regardless of it's patent status.
not precisely true..there's some restrictions on that process (e.g. you
can practise an invention in the course of
But if someone here designed and built a $100 receiver and offered it to
the group, that could well violate some of their IP.
As to building a home brew receiver and certifying a onsie so your lab's
cal is traceable, I'd certainly not trust a cal done that way.
Doing spacecraft communications is
26, 2012 10:11 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly
But if someone here designed and built a $100 receiver and offered it to
the group, that could well violate some of their IP.
As to building a home brew receiver and certifying
29 matches
Mail list logo
