Poul-Henning,
On 07/14/2015 06:16 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
--------
In message <55a4ac81.1030...@rubidium.dyndns.org>, Magnus Danielson writes:
The safety is
relative, in that it takes quite a bit of more infrastructure compared
to the jamming of GPS, and that lies in the wavelength of the signal
than anything else.
If the goal is a reliable backup for GPS, there are smarter ways to
use the 100kHz band than Loran-C pulses, and there really isn't much
reason to stay compatible with Loran-C receivers.
True. I would look at PRN-codes if I where to do such a system today.
What may be an issue is the amount of sidebands allowed, as it would put
limits on the chipping-rate of PRN-codes or for that matter other forms
of modulations.
I think another approach was being considered for the LORAN-rebuild in
the US. I don't remember from the top of my head when it was discussed
or link to the article.
Cheers,
Magnus
_______________________________________________
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.
