> I think that it should be a much better (in theory) than OCXO which > comes short therm stability (what I'm actually seeking for). It should > be much more accurate with long holdovers also.
Right, it all depends on what stability you're after. The OCXO will have much better short-term stability than the LPRO -- the LPRO is close to ten times worse. So do not replace the TBolt OCXO with a LPRO if short-term stability is your goal. See: TBolt OCXO plots: http://www.leapsecond.com/pages/gpsdo/ http://www.leapsecond.com/pages/tbolt-tc/ LPRO plots: http://www.leapsecond.com/museum/lpro/ However, if long-term, GPS-unlocked, holdover performance is the goal, then using a Rb would make a good choice. > This is very simple modification by the way. Infact my original plan was > to use the 1PPS to synchronize the LPRO C-field with separate control > ... See John Miles work to replace the Thunderbolt OCXO: http://www.thegleam.com/ke5fx/tbolt.htm /tvb > Here's a link for the log: > http://www.amigazone.fi/files/gpsdo/tbolt-lpro-test.log > (Log format: TOW, PPS offset, DAC voltage, Disciplining mode & activity) I'll have a look at this; but it's not accessible for some reason. /tvb _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.