Hi
> On Apr 8, 2019, at 12:54 PM, jimlux wrote:
>
> On 4/7/19 10:37 PM, Peter Monta wrote:
>>>
>>> Does NIST publish the transmitter bandwidth? I've never seen it, but I
>>> haven't done a serious search.
>>>
>>> Maybe somebody near enough to get a clean signal could measure it. What
>>> d
On 4/7/19 10:37 PM, Peter Monta wrote:
Does NIST publish the transmitter bandwidth? I've never seen it, but I
haven't done a serious search.
Maybe somebody near enough to get a clean signal could measure it. What
does a spectrogram look like?
Some of the KiwiSDR receivers are close enough
>
> Does NIST publish the transmitter bandwidth? I've never seen it, but I
> haven't done a serious search.
>
> Maybe somebody near enough to get a clean signal could measure it. What
> does a spectrogram look like?
>
Some of the KiwiSDR receivers are close enough to get an excellent signal.
Coi
tsho...@gmail.com said:
> As a frequency standard I have no major disagreement with the PTTI article.
> But the 100 microsecond number they give for absolute time transfer seems to
> be based entirely on propagation characteristics and ignores the difficulty
> I've always had in resolving the mus
jimlux,
thanks for the info cross correlation. That's sort of how i imagined it
should work, but I wasn't sure. I guess it really helps that we live in
the age of fast computation.
Wayne
On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 10:00 AM jimlux wrote:
> On 4/7/19 4:30 AM, Wayne Holder wrote:
> >> Hi Wayne,
> >>
On 4/7/19 4:30 AM, Wayne Holder wrote:
Hi Wayne,
Great to see you found my presentation!
The paper is available here:
https://www.kevincroissant.com/WWVB/WWVB_PTTI_2018_paper.pdf
Kevin, thanks for the link to the paper. I'd like to know more about how
correlation works and how you were able
> Hi Wayne,
> Great to see you found my presentation!
> The paper is available here:
> https://www.kevincroissant.com/WWVB/WWVB_PTTI_2018_paper.pdf
Kevin, thanks for the link to the paper. I'd like to know more about how
correlation works and how you were able to use to to sync with the WWVB
bit
Wayne, there was a superb 2015 QEX article by KD2BD on his WWVB disciplined
frequency standard. Full article is online here:
http://www.arrl.org/files/file/QEX_Next_Issue/2015/Nov-Dec_2015/Magliacane.pdf
As a frequency standard I have no major disagreement with the PTTI article.
But the 100 micros
Hi
After the passing of Clive Green HCD Research has taken over the Quartzlock
business mid 2016
Regards
Bernd DK1AG
> Not personally, but in the UK a company called Quarztlock made both MSF
(similar to WWVB) and 198kHz (a frequency-standard broadcast station) that
were popular frequency standar
Hi Wayne,
Great to see you found my presentation!
The paper is available here:
https://www.kevincroissant.com/WWVB/WWVB_PTTI_2018_paper.pdf
I traveled to CO and met with NIST people there and gathered more data
then. We're planning to put out another paper soon (I'm finishing up my
bachelor's righ
Wayne good read on the paper.
All of the spectracoms and such were rendered useless by the new BPSK
modulation. Though now that 5 years or so have passed not so new. Unless
the modulation is accounted for they can't track the carrier. There are
external modifications and other approaches that have
Not personally, but in the UK a company called Quarztlock made both MSF
(similar to WWVB) and 198kHz (a frequency-standard broadcast station) that
were popular frequency standards in labs.
They still exist but have replaced those products with Rubidium and GPS
based standards.
http://www.quartzloc
Hi
The gotcha with WWVB is correcting for the day / night ionosphere issues. Since
they are not
100% predictable, it’s not a real easy problem to solve. Toss on top of the the
ambiguous status
of WWV or WWVB ( = will it be there next year …. if so in what format ….)
there layers and
layer
13 matches
Mail list logo
