> Good points, and You got 4 1/2 out of five correct, Not bad at all.
Ha ha - thank you teacher!
Fairy nuff, yes, your plots show the long-term effects. I would like
to know what the best time-constant is to use. I appreciate that
everyone's will be different, depending on individual characteristics
of the Thunderbolts, and also (perhaps more importantly) the aerial
and its position. However, I think it would be interesting to at
least see the relative differences for one location. I recently
learnt that our national mapping organisation (The Ordnance Survey)
average the results from their L1/L2 Leica 1200 system receivers, for
two hours. Is the oscillator in the Leica significantly worse than
that in out Thunderbolts, or could we also benefit from a
time-constant of longer than 1000 seconds?
I will try to find a quiet rubidium, and do some comparisons against
that - the results should, at least, be valid out to a few thousand
seconds. I also plan to try reducing the signal level threshold (from
the current 4AMU) as recently suggested, and try to see some
quantifiable results.
TTFN,
Peter Vince (G8ZZR, London, England)
_______________________________________________
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.
