Hello Peter The aim of our study was to characterise the performance of single frequency receivers for time-transfer. The F9P was a late addition to our study and extending our software to dual frequency was too much work at the time. Having a measured ionosphere was not such a huge improvement anyway, because there are other ways to get an improved ionosphere correction when post-processing.
Regards Michael On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 7:03 am, Peter Vince <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Michael, > > Thank you for your Powerpoint presentation slides - if the paper you > mentioned added some descriptive words, I would love to see that. > > Might I ask why you didn't use the F9P in dual-frequency mode, as I > understood that gives a much better result, being able to (almost?) > eliminate ionospheric effects? > > Regards, > > Peter > > > On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 at 01:00, Michael Wouters <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > We did some work on single-frequency time-transfer with the F9P earlier > > this year which we presented at IFCS-EFTF in April. > > http://www.openttp.org/downloads/Multi-GNSS_IFCS-EFTF_2019.pdf > > There's a paper too, which I should upload. > > In short, the F9P is very suitable for code-based time-transfer, and we > > will be using it , or the F9T, in the next iteration of our time-transfer > > system. > > ... > > Regards > > Michael > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe, go to > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > and follow the instructions there. > _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com and follow the instructions there.
