From clark@tomcat.gsfc.nasa.gov Thu Oct 01 10:44:17 1998 Received: from aleph.gsfc.nasa.gov (aleph.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.201.86]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA11080 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 10:44:15 -0500 (CDT) Received: from tomcat.gsfc.nasa.gov (scheat.gsfc.nasa.gov) by aleph.gsfc.nasa.gov; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 11:44:10 -0400 Message-Id: <3613A349.552D40EE@tomcat.gsfc.nasa.gov> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:44:10 -0400 From: "Dr Thomas A Clark (W3IWI)" Reply-To: clark@tomcat.gsfc.nasa.gov X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: TACGPS Mailing List Subject: Leap Second Pending Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit There was some erroneous info going around that there was to be a leap second on Oct.1 -- this is/was incorrect info -- the next leap second will be 1999.0 (i.e. Dec.31 '98 with an added second named 23:59:60). To explain what leap seconds are all about, the following is taken from ftp://hpiers.obspm.fr/iers/bul/bulc/BULLETINC.GUIDE: > UTC is defined by the CCIR Recommendation 460-4 (1986). It > differs from TAI by an integral number of seconds, in such a way that > UT1-UTC stays smaller than 0.9s in absolute value. The decision to > introduce a leap second in UTC to meet this condition is the > responsability of the IERS. According to the CCIR Recommendation, first > preference is given to the opportunities at the end of December and > June,and second preference to those at the end of March and September. > Since the system was introduced in 1972 only dates in June and > December have been used. Since 1972, Leap Seconds have been added on these dates, on average 18 months apart: 1972 JUL 1 1973 JAN 1 1974 JAN 1 1975 JAN 1 1976 JAN 1 1977 JAN 1 1978 JAN 1 1979 JAN 1 1980 JAN 1 -- GPS-UTC= 0 sec (1980 JAN 6 -- Zero-point for GPS time -- GPS-UTC == 0 sec) 1981 JUL 1 -- GPS-UTC= 1 sec 1982 JUL 1 -- GPS-UTC= 2 sec 1983 JUL 1 -- GPS-UTC= 3 sec 1985 JUL 1 -- GPS-UTC= 4 sec 1988 JAN 1 -- GPS-UTC= 5 sec 1990 JAN 1 -- GPS-UTC= 6 sec 1991 JAN 1 -- GPS-UTC= 7 sec 1992 JUL 1 -- GPS-UTC= 8 sec 1993 JUL 1 -- GPS-UTC= 9 sec 1994 JUL 1 -- GPS-UTC= 10 sec 1996 JAN 1 -- GPS-UTC= 11 sec 1997 JUL 1 -- GPS-UTC= 12 sec 1999 JAN 1 -- GPS-UTC= 13 sec The reason for Leap Seconds is that the RATE of UTC is defined as the same as AT, i.e. defined by atomic frequency standards (specifically the ~9.2 GHz Cesium hyperfine resonance). But the earth does not rotate at a "perfect" (i.e. atomic) speed -- the length of a day is influenced by tidal drag from the moon orbiting the earth (over time scales like millenia), changes in the rotation properties of the molten core of the earth (over decadal time scales), seasonal re-distribution of mass on the surface of the earth (like snow/ice cover, soil moisture, etc), and the angular momentum associated with atmospheric winds and ocean tides (and some other smaller effects). All these geophysical effects (except for tidal dissipation) come about because the rotating earth system must conserve angular momentum. As the winds speed up, the earth slows down (and the same applies to the other effects I listed). As a recent example, last winter's El Nino caused the length of day to increase by ~600 usec/day for ~100 days. By July 1 '98, this summer's La Nina speeded up the earth by ~500 usec/day from the nominal value -- i.e. a change from last winter to this summer of about 1 msec/day! Both our human existence (making the sun be overhead at local noon) and scientific studies (testing ocean and atmosphere models) requires us to keep time related to the real rotation of the earth -- UT1 [my group here at NASA specializes in this type of research -- see http://lupus.gsfc.nasa.gov and http://cddisa.gsfc.nasa.gov for some more details. We are now able to measure the length of a day to a few usec, and to do this with ~1 hour time resolution using radio telescopes observing quasars at the far fringes of the universe.]. AT and GPS time keep an unbroken record of time with no discontinuities. UT1 follows the minute vagaries of the rotation of the earth, irrespective of AT. UTC provides the bridge between AT & UT1 by defining a clock that runs at the atomic time rate, and which has discrete jumps to keep within ~1 second of the wanderings of the earth. 73, Tom From jpringle@tampabay.rr.com Mon Oct 05 09:45:50 1998 Received: from mail-atm.tampabay.rr.com (tampabay.rr.com [24.92.0.1]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA10893 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 09:45:48 -0500 (CDT) Received: from john (dt0c1n33.tampabay.rr.com [24.92.30.51]) by mail-atm.tampabay.rr.com (8.8.7/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA29560 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:38:55 -0400 (EDT) From: "John K. Pringle" To: "TAC-2 mail list" Subject: PBS Special Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:45:37 -0400 Message-ID: <000001bdf06e$d1162480$331e5c18@john.tampabay.rr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Tomorrow (Tuesday) at 8 PM PBS will air a special "Nova": "Lost at Sea: The Search for Longitude" based on Dava Sobel's excellent book "Longitude" which most of us have read. Time well spent. 73 John W4SF From reg@dwf.com Mon Oct 12 14:15:44 1998 Received: from clemens.dwf.com (clemens.dwf.com [204.134.2.1]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA26374 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:15:41 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from reg@localhost) by clemens.dwf.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA20658 for tacgps@tapr.org; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:14:58 -0600 (MDT) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:14:58 -0600 (MDT) From: Reg Clemens Message-Id: <199810121914.NAA20658@clemens.dwf.com> To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1855] Leap Second Pending In-Reply-To: Mail from '"Dr Thomas A Clark (W3IWI)" ' dated: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 10:45:02 -0500 (CDT) I posted this in reply to Tom Clark's posting on 1Oct. I just realized that I never saw a reflection from the list. Sorry if you see two copies of this. --- Tom: > There was some erroneous info going around that there was to be > a leap second on Oct.1 -- this is/was incorrect info -- the next > leap second will be 1999.0 (i.e. Dec.31 '98 with an added > second named 23:59:60). My vague recollection is that they USED to start advertising the leap second was going to be added by turning on the leap-second indication less than a month before the time the second would be added (early December for the December/January second, early June for the June/July second). The confusion at the moment seems to be partially due to the fact that the leap-second indication is on now, 3 months ahead of the intended event and was on most of September, if not earlier. Any Idea why it was turned on so early? Surly no one needs that much time to `plan' for the event. Reg.Clemens reg@dwf.com From tvb@veritas.com Mon Oct 12 17:10:47 1998 Received: from athena.veritas.com (athena.veritas.com [192.203.46.191]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA03678 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:10:44 -0500 (CDT) Received: from megami.veritas.com (megami.veritas.com [192.203.46.101]) by athena.veritas.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA23692 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:10:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from v-tomvb6 by megami.veritas.com with smtp (Smail3.1.29.0 #7) id m0zSqAn-0000OIC; Mon, 12 Oct 98 15:10 PDT Message-ID: <36227DA4.1DAA@veritas.com> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 15:07:32 -0700 From: Tom Van Baak Reply-To: tvb@veritas.com Organization: VERITAS Software X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1857] Re: Leap Second Pending References: <199810121914.NAA20658@clemens.dwf.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reg Clemens wrote: > Tom: > > > There was some erroneous info going around that there was to be > > a leap second on Oct.1 -- this is/was incorrect info -- the next > > leap second will be 1999.0 (i.e. Dec.31 '98 with an added > > second named 23:59:60). > > My vague recollection is that they USED to start advertising the leap > second was going to be added by turning on the leap-second indication > less than a month before the time the second would be added (early December > for the December/January second, early June for the June/July second). > > The confusion at the moment seems to be partially due to the fact that > the leap-second indication is on now, 3 months ahead of the intended event > and was on most of September, if not earlier. Can you explain what you mean by the "indication is now on"? Do you mean the written announcement has been made? Or that the next leap second is already in page 18 of subframe 4 of the GPS signal? Here also is a recent three minute log of WWVB subcode; the leap second pending bit is still off and I wouldn't expect it to turn on until the beginning of December. 1998 281 19:38 201101000200010100120010010002000100010200100100121000000112 1998 281 19:39 201101001200010100120010010002000100010200100100121000000112 1998 281 19:40 210000000200010100120010010002000100010200000100121000000112 > Any Idea why it was turned on so early? Surly no one needs that much time > to `plan' for the event. > > Reg.Clemens > reg@dwf.com I think an advance notice of several months is not unusual. Here's a summary of the last three leap second announcements: USNO announced the 20th leap second (1995-12-31) on August 2, 1995 USNO announced the 21st leap second (1997-06-30) on February 6, 1997 USNO announced the 22nd leap second (1998-12-31) on July 23, 1998 /tvb From peter@vandaalen.demon.nl Mon Oct 12 17:15:18 1998 Received: from post.mail.nl.demon.net (post-10.mail.nl.demon.net [194.159.73.20]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA04065 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:15:17 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [195.173.232.80] (helo=vandaalen.demon.nl) by post.mail.nl.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 2.02 #1) id 0zSqFG-0003TB-00 for tacgps@tapr.org; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:15:14 +0000 Message-ID: <36228D83.81964646@vandaalen.demon.nl> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 00:15:15 +0100 From: peter van daalen X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: specs ? Rohde&Schwarz freq.standard References: <36228563.E1B8EBC1@vandaalen.demon.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello all, > Does someone happen to know what are the specs ( a.o. short/long > stability, phase noise ) of the > Rohde & Schwarz frequency standard XSD BN 444114 ( 0,1-5-10 Mhz , 1 V > emf , front tweaking dF/F in 1 to 999 ppe11 ) ? > > The vendor ( army contractor ) assures me that the stability in 10 days > is better than 2 parts e10 and the 100 days stability better than 2 > parts e11. ( specs off the manual (?) which the vendor can't show ). > > Those specs suggests a rubidium xtal steering. However, the vendor says > it's - only - chrystal based. Is this possible ? I don't believe so ( > some time > ago Tom Clark posted some learning on the xtal subject but I lost that > mail) . I was not allowed to dismantle the case in order to look inside. > Since this R&S standard is avaliable out here ( Holland ) it would cost > me less than importing an Efratom Rubidium standard ex. US ( no shipping > to Europe, no import duties/Vat etc. ). > > I want to buy this R&S but I don't dare without reliable information. > > Who can help me ? Thanks very much > > Peter PE1ECM. From ebs@lanl.gov Mon Oct 12 19:17:31 1998 Received: from lawyer.lanl.gov (root@lawyer.lanl.gov [128.165.205.222]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA18944 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 19:17:29 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [128.165.7.147] (transitory53.lanl.gov [128.165.7.147]) by lawyer.lanl.gov (8.8.8/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA14174 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:17:21 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <199810130017.SAA14174@lawyer.lanl.gov> Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1859] Re: specs ? Rohde&Schwarz freq.standard Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:18:20 -0600 x-sender: ebs@biophysics.lanl.gov x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: Brooks Shera To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Peter wrote... >> Does someone happen to know what are the specs ( a.o. short/long >> stability, phase noise ) of the >> Rohde & Schwarz frequency standard XSD BN 444114 ( 0,1-5-10 Mhz , 1 V >> emf , front tweaking dF/F in 1 to 999 ppe11 ) ? >> >> The vendor ( army contractor ) assures me that the stability in 10 days >> is better than 2 parts e10 and the 100 days stability better than 2 >> parts e11. ( specs off the manual (?) which the vendor can't show ). >> >> Those specs suggests a rubidium xtal steering. However, the vendor says >> it's - only - chrystal based. Is this possible ?..... I don't have the specs on the XSD... but I think the values you quote are entirely consistent with a good ovenized xtal. For example, the Austron 1250 spec is 1 part in e10/24hours after 30 days and 5 parts in e11 after 90 days. In my experience, the Austron and other xtals exceed these specs. A very good xtal can get to the 1-2 parts in e12 level. An aging curve for the Austron (which hasn't been updated for a while) is on my webpage www.rt66.com/~shera Brooks From reg@dwf.com Mon Oct 12 22:58:48 1998 Received: from clemens.dwf.com (clemens.dwf.com [204.134.2.1]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA26312 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 22:58:45 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from reg@localhost) by clemens.dwf.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id VAA04358 for tacgps@tapr.org; Mon, 12 Oct 1998 21:58:09 -0600 (MDT) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 21:58:09 -0600 (MDT) From: Reg Clemens Message-Id: <199810130358.VAA04358@clemens.dwf.com> To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1858] Re: Leap Second Pending In-Reply-To: Mail from 'Tom Van Baak ' dated: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:16:00 -0500 (CDT) > Can you explain what you mean by the "indication is now on"? > Do you mean the written announcement has been made? Or that > the next leap second is already in page 18 of subframe 4 of > the GPS signal? > Well, since I dont have any reason to believe that the ONCORE is lying to me, I havent actually gone back to `page 18 of subframe 4' to look but the ONCORE @@Bj command is a Leap Second Pending Status Message, and it returns clemens% grep Bj typescript ONCORE: Send @@Bj 3 ONCORE: 906292715.924764 >>@@Bj 01 This is from data I saved back on 20 September. Acording to the ONCORE User's Guide, the one byte message is 0 - No leap second pending 1 - Addition of 1 second pending 2 - Subtraction of 1 second pending So the above response says +1second is pending. Looks like GPS and WWVB are updated by different folks at different times. -- Reg.Clemens reg@dwf.com From barnie@flash.net Tue Oct 13 23:05:53 1998 Received: from centurion.flash.net (centurion.flash.net [209.30.0.22]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA08641 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:05:52 -0500 (CDT) Received: from flash.net (p156.utc3.dialup.tus1.flash.net [209.30.43.156]) by centurion.flash.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA23178 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 23:05:49 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <3624231C.CBA9467E@flash.net> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:05:51 -0700 From: Jeff Vollin X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: DGPS Error Characteristics Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have been gathering data on position error using DGPS and I am interested in what others may have found. I assume that the differential operations remove most or all of the human- injected (SA) errors leaving true signal-related errors. My setup is: Oncore VP with TAPR DGPSIB as DGPS reference. Reference location is the result of 10 separate averages each taken over roughly 1 week each. Garmin 40 GPS receiver of the RTCM signal on a direct cable to the ONCORE Update rate of 10 seconds on the RTCM data. DGPS data gathered by SA Watch at 15 second intervals. Separate active GPS antennas with nearly horizon-to-horizon visibility. Antennas separated horizontally by 8.1 m and vertically by 10 m. I gathered a total of 4096 data points and SA watch reports the 2-sigma (95%) error radius to be 14 m. The mean position correctly indicates the horizontal separation to better than 0.1m (resolution limit of SA watch). I plotted the latitude error and the longitude error separately and they both appear to be gaussian distributions. The GPS40 gives a 2 sigma error of 50m without the RTCM input. I then further analyzed just the latitude error by running an FFT. The spectrum is flat from the lowest frequency of 16 microHz (17 Hrs period) up to .003 Hz (5.3 Min period) where there appears to be a rolloff at 20 dB/decade. Might this be the Kalman filter cutoff frequency for a stationary Garmin GPS30? An autocorrelation function shows the data is correlated out to about 3 min where the correlation value falls into the general noise level. Is this the Kalman filter again? I have read many descriptions of the SPS error, with SA of course, but I have found very little discussion of the errors expected from DGPS. I do not have other receivers to use in place of the Garmin, so I don't have any other standard for comparison. Comments, anyone? Jeff Vollin, KC6WFU From davem@cs.ubc.ca Wed Oct 14 00:03:29 1998 Received: from pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (root@imap.cs.ubc.ca [142.103.6.53]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA18794 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:03:27 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [198.162.38.159] (davem.home.cs.ubc.ca [198.162.38.159]) by pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (8.8.8/8.6.9) with ESMTP id WAA10940 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:03:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: davem@mail.cs.ubc.ca Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3624231C.CBA9467E@flash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:03:27 -0700 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: Dave Martindale Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1862] DGPS Error Characteristics >I gathered a total of 4096 data points and SA watch reports the 2-sigma >(95%) error >radius to be 14 m. >Comments, anyone? You would probably find it interesting to compare the 40 to the newer Garmin 12-channel receivers. They seem to be *much* less noisy, a fact which is revealed clearly when SA is off. I did some tests gathering data for about 1 hour with and without differential corrections using several receivers. The differential correction source is a Canadian Coast Guard beacon transmitter that is only a few km from the receiver, so there should be minimal error due to distance between reference station and observing station. I tested an GPS 45XL and GPS 20, both older single-channel receivers that are probably the same as your GPS 40. All of the positions reported in that hour were within about a 50x100 m rectangle for the 45XL, and a 30x20 m rectangle for the GPS 20. The standard deviations of latitude and longitude observations were 13 and 10 m for the 45XL, 4.2 and 3.9 m for the 20. In comparison, for a GPS 12XL, II+, and GPS 25 (12-channel units), all of the positions were within a 10x8 m rectangle for the 12XL and II+, and a 13x6 m rectangle for the 25. Standard deviations were 2.1/1.4 m for the 12XL, 1.6/1.2 m for the II+, and 1.9/1.1 m for the 25. (The plot of the 12XL/II+ data is weird, because latitude and longitude are quantized to 0.001 minute of arc in the NMEA output, so only a few discrete values of lat and long show up for the entire hour. The 25 has an extra digit of resolution, so its plot is more reasonable looking and the statistics probably more meaningful). In other words, both worst-case and average error was several times larger for the single-channel receivers than for the 12-channel ones. I don't know why the 45XL was so much worse than the 20, though. Dave From davem@cs.ubc.ca Wed Oct 14 00:09:27 1998 Received: from pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (root@pedigree.cs.ubc.ca [142.103.6.50]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA19364 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:09:25 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [198.162.38.159] (davem.home.cs.ubc.ca [198.162.38.159]) by pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (8.8.8/8.6.9) with ESMTP id WAA11084 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:09:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: davem@mail.cs.ubc.ca Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <3624231C.CBA9467E@flash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:09:28 -0700 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: Dave Martindale Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1863] Re: DGPS Error Characteristics At 0:04 -0500 14/10/98, I wrote: >You would probably find it interesting to compare the 40 to the newer >Garmin 12-channel receivers. They seem to be *much* less noisy, a >fact which is revealed clearly when SA is off. That's not what I meant. I meant "when differential corrections cancel SA and most other sources of position error as well, you can see a large difference between the performance of the older single-channel Garmin receivers and the newer 12-channel ones. Of course SA isn't the only source of errors that are reduced or eliminated by differential corrections. Dave From glittle@awod.com Wed Oct 14 06:33:53 1998 Received: from sumter.awod.com (sumter.awod.com [208.140.99.1]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA06045 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 06:33:52 -0500 (CDT) Received: from chs0098.awod.com (chs0085.awod.com [208.140.96.85]) by sumter.awod.com (8.8.7/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA07699 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 07:33:49 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from glittle@awod.com) Message-Id: <3.0.5.16.19981014073751.3457d6dc@awod.com> X-Sender: glittle@awod.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (16) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 07:37:51 -0400 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: Glenn Little Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1859] Re: specs ? Rohde&Schwarz freq.standard In-Reply-To: <36228D83.81964646@vandaalen.demon.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" The R&S XUA has an internal freq std. This is a 100 kc crystal oscillator. In the manual the following is listed: Frequency fluctuations due to external influences less than 2 to 8 parts in 10e8. Mean day to day frequency drift after a service time of 10 days less than 5 parts in 10e8. For 100 days less than 2 parts in 10e8. Warm up period for obtaining an accuracy of better than 1 part in 10e6 approx 60 minutes. This is a unit that was built in the early 1960's and is all tubes. At 05:16 PM 10/12/98 -0500, you wrote: > Hello all, > >> Does someone happen to know what are the specs ( a.o. short/long >> stability, phase noise ) of the >> Rohde & Schwarz frequency standard XSD BN 444114 ( 0,1-5-10 Mhz , 1 V >> emf , front tweaking dF/F in 1 to 999 ppe11 ) ? >> >> The vendor ( army contractor ) assures me that the stability in 10 days >> is better than 2 parts e10 and the 100 days stability better than 2 >> parts e11. ( specs off the manual (?) which the vendor can't show ). >> >> Those specs suggests a rubidium xtal steering. However, the vendor says >> it's - only - chrystal based. Is this possible ? I don't believe so ( >> some time > >> ago Tom Clark posted some learning on the xtal subject but I lost that >> mail) . I was not allowed to dismantle the case in order to look inside. > >> Since this R&S standard is avaliable out here ( Holland ) it would cost >> me less than importing an Efratom Rubidium standard ex. US ( no shipping >> to Europe, no import duties/Vat etc. ). >> >> I want to buy this R&S but I don't dare without reliable information. >> >> Who can help me ? Thanks very much >> >> Peter PE1ECM. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Glenn Little glittle@awod.com QCWA LM 28417 Amateur Callsign: WB4UIV wb4uiv@amsat.org AMSAT LM 2178 QTH: Goose Creek, SC USA (EM92xx) ARRL TAPR --------------------------------------------------------------------------- From srbible@gate.net Wed Oct 14 18:09:45 1998 Received: from onondaga.gate.net (root@onondaga.gate.net [198.206.134.31]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA28681 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:09:45 -0500 (CDT) Received: from avatar (kngga3-43.gate.net [207.36.2.106]) by onondaga.gate.net (8.8.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA84684 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 19:08:03 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981014191043.00992c40@pop.gate.net> X-Sender: srbible@pop.gate.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 19:10:43 -0400 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: "Steven R. Bible" Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1862] DGPS Error Characteristics In-Reply-To: <3624231C.CBA9467E@flash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Jeff, Tom Clark, W3IWI had I exchanged many emails on the expected accuracy of the TAPR DGPSIB (for which I am the designer). Besides the errors Differential Corrections remove and the assumptions made in using DGPS, one item of concern using a low cost receiver such as the Oncore, is its crystal oscillator. I haven't tried it, but Tom suggested making measurements and altering the temperature of the Oncore and note the changes. You might try temperature stablizing your reference station and see what changes you see then. The more expensive commercial DGPS reference stations use a much more accurate crystal oscillator to keep better time. Time is of the essense to DGPS. Tom also introduced me to Zero-Baseline testing, for which you can see the results of on http://www.tapr.org/gps/dgps/ Find the link "Performace" to see SA Watch plots. Zero-Baseline testing is simple in concept, connect the reference station and remote (receiving) receivers on the same antenna using a splitter. These are available commercially (from WR, Inc. http://www.fleetpc.com/accessories/accessories.html )or you might find one on the surplus market. Be careful not to mix the +5V sent up the coax to power the antenna. You need to isolate all but one receiver from doing this. Then Phil Karn KA9Q thought that multipath might have an input to the errors. So he lent me a choke ring antenna. Alas, the measurement remained the same, thus leading us to the conclusion and theory that the local crystal oscillator is the limiting component in the TAPR DGPS Reference Station. - Steve (n7hpr@tapr.org) From k4jpj@appstate.campus.mci.net Wed Oct 14 20:29:39 1998 Received: from aus-f.mp.campus.mci.net (aus-f.mp.campus.mci.net [208.140.84.26]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA12122 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:29:38 -0500 (CDT) Received: from donaldha (s23-pm19.snaustel.campus.mci.net [208.140.81.90]) by aus-f.mp.campus.mci.net (8.9.0/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA05176 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:27:26 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981014212742.0081bce0@appstate.campus.mci.net> X-Sender: k4jpj@appstate.campus.mci.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:27:42 -0400 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: "Donald E. Haselwood" Subject: GPS Receiver xtal stability factor: GPS-30 In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981014191043.00992c40@pop.gate.net> References: <3624231C.CBA9467E@flash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Re: [TACGPS:1866] >Jeff, ... >I haven't tried it, but Tom suggested making measurements and altering the >temperature of the Oncore and note the changes. You might try temperature >stablizing your reference station and see what changes you see then. The >more expensive commercial DGPS reference stations use a much more accurate >crystal oscillator to keep better time. Time is of the essense to DGPS. Speaking xtal stability (for osc steering), here are a couple of observations & thots: a) I noticed lately that my GPS-30 (located outside) konks-out early evening (no sats locked). Now with lower humidity, the board temp "plummets" when the sun drops behind the mtn. b) I remember plots I made of 3 days-worth of GPS-30 1 pps v Rube showing a roughly 24 hour repetitive pattern. (I need to dig back into that...[when time frees up!].) The peak-to-peak wasn't big (1-2 us as I remember), but the rate-of-change was worse than Rube specs (hence, a number of days were required if the Rube were to be steered, or a get an Oncore [as Tom recommends]). c) Looking at a smoked GPS-30 (sigh), I find a DS1620 IC (temp sensor) next to the xtal inside the RF section can. I assume that's where the reported board temp in the RS232 record originates. Could it be...Garmin attempts some sort of temp correction for xtal drift in the software and if the temp sensor v xtal temps get too far different (rapid temp change) it loses lock on the sats. And,...the 1 pps has a phase error due to temp (hence the daily variation). For osc steering purposes would be wise to "ovenize" the GPS receiver (regardless of mfg'r)? 73's Don, W4DH From davem@cs.ubc.ca Wed Oct 14 20:54:47 1998 Received: from pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (root@pedigree.cs.ubc.ca [142.103.6.50]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA13117 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:54:46 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [198.162.38.159] (davem.home.cs.ubc.ca [198.162.38.159]) by pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (8.8.8/8.6.9) with ESMTP id SAA22922 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:54:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: davem@mail.cs.ubc.ca Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981014212742.0081bce0@appstate.campus.mci.net> References: <3.0.5.32.19981014191043.00992c40@pop.gate.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:54:48 -0700 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: Dave Martindale Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1867] GPS Receiver xtal stability factor: GPS-30 >Could it be...Garmin attempts some sort of temp correction for xtal drift >in the software and if the temp sensor v xtal temps get too far different >(rapid temp change) it loses lock on the sats. And,...the 1 pps has a >phase error due to temp (hence the daily variation). Garmin handhelds use software compensation for oscillator drift; the compensation table is apparently developed during burn-in and updated during normal use. Garmin has said as much in a posting warning people about using the "test" mode in the handhelds in the presence of real satellite signals. So I wouldn't be surprised to find the same software compensation scheme in the board receivers. Garmin also warns against fan cooling of the board receivers, because it can cause too rapid temperature change. Again, compensation in software is consistent with this. Does the Oncore use a TCXO? By the way, while we're talking about oscillators, anyone know who distributes the Rakon TCXOs, or similar good but cheap oscillators? I'd like to replace the uncompensated 10 MHz oscillator in my frequency counter with something more stable. The counter is capable of resolving 1 part in 1e8, but the oscillator drifts about 1 part in 1e6 during warmup and continues to drift with room temperature changes. Dave From tac@clark.net Wed Oct 14 22:39:22 1998 Received: from majordomo.clark.net (mail@majordomo.clark.net [168.143.190.238]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA16171 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:39:21 -0500 (CDT) Received: from loas.clark.net [168.143.0.13] by majordomo.clark.net with esmtp (Exim 1.92 #1 (Debian)) id 0zTeFz-0006i6-00; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:39:19 -0400 Received: from clark.net (tac.clark.net [168.143.32.123]) by loas.clark.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA16254 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:39:30 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <36256E4F.AC8AE64E@clark.net> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 03:38:55 +0000 From: "Dr Thomas A Clark (W3IWI)" Reply-To: tac@clark.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5b2 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1867] GPS Receiver xtal stability References: <3.0.5.32.19981014212742.0081bce0@appstate.campus.mci.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Steve Bible commented, quoting me: >I haven't tried it, but Tom suggested making measurements and altering the >temperature of the Oncore and note the changes. You might try temperature >stablizing your reference station and see what changes you see then. The >more expensive commercial DGPS reference stations use a much more accurate >crystal oscillator to keep better time. Time is of the essense to DGPS. Let's keep the focus on the topic Steve responded to. He was commenting on clock performance of the ONCORE when used for DGPS corrections. The point at issue for DGPS was variations of a few METERS corresponding to timing wandering at levels of < 10 NANOSECONDS. The issue Don Haselwood raised subsequently referred to timing at levels ~ 1 MICROSECOND. When the ONCORE operates in the zero-D mode to make DGPS signals it still has to calibrate its internal clock. If it is observing N satellites it produces its estimate of the PR & PRR corrections for all N satellites, but it has had to use ~(1/N) of the data from each satellite to calibrate the clock. What this means is that, although the SA modulation from the satellites are incoherent & uncorrelated, the PR/PRR for the different satellites data will exhibit a correlation coefficient of ~(1/N). My comment to Steve was that the DGPS corrections might be improved if the ONCORE's internal clock was made better on time scales of ~1 minute and shorter. This might be accomplished by thermally isolating the DGPSIB from the outside world. Mine here is wrapped in about 5 layers of "Bubble Paper" for just this reason. Steve also mentioned trying a lower multipath choke-ring antenna. FYI, I now have built a really cheap choke ring antenna using $10 worth of parts from the local hardware store and one of the Motorola Antenna97 antennas that TAPR has for sale. As a part of a program I have to do really high accuracy calibrations of geodetic GPS antennas, I ran my "$50 special" and it looked really good. Is there any interest? Don Haselwood then responded with some issues not relevant to the DGPS accuracy thread, but which I feel compelled to answer: > Speaking xtal stability (for osc steering), here are a couple of > observations & thots: > a) I noticed lately that my GPS-30 (located outside) konks-out early > evening (no sats locked). Now with lower humidity, the board temp > "plummets" when the sun drops behind the mtn. Since the GPS30 is the same receiver as the G-20, I refer you to the myriad plots of G20 stability in different modes that I have posted on aleph. The G20 exhibits bizzare, strange jumps of upwards of 1 usec. IMHO, the G20/30 should NEVER be used for a timing application that has requirements at the sub-usec level. I have said it before, and I say it again -- as a timing receiver, the G20/30 works, but it must be regarded as a toy. If you haven't looked at aleph, the URL is ftp://aleph.gsfc.nasa.gov/GPS/totally.accurate.clock/ > b) I remember plots I made of 3 days-worth of GPS-30 1 pps v Rube showing a > roughly 24 hour repetitive pattern. (I need to dig back into that...[when > time frees up!].) > > The peak-to-peak wasn't big (1-2 us as I remember), but the rate-of-change > was worse than Rube specs (hence, a number of days were required if the > Rube were to be steered, or a get an Oncore [as Tom recommends]). Again, I would suggest that you >>>NEVER<<< use the words "Rube" and "G20/30" in the same sentence! > c) Looking at a smoked GPS-30 (sigh), I find a DS1620 IC (temp sensor) next > to the xtal inside the RF section can. I assume that's where the reported > board temp in the RS232 record originates. Yes, Garmin uses a temperature sensor in all their receivers. > Could it be...Garmin attempts some sort of temp correction for xtal drift > in the software and if the temp sensor v xtal temps get too far different > (rapid temp change) it loses lock on the sats. And,...the 1 pps has a > phase error due to temp (hence the daily variation). > > For osc steering purposes would be wise to "ovenize" the GPS receiver > (regardless of mfg'r)? Since I was so disparaging of the G20/30, let me again point out that, at levels ~20-30 NANOSECONDS, the ONCORE can be trusted to be a good timing engine, without the need to resort to ovenizing. Just take a look at the various ONCORE vs Hydrogen Maser or Cesium plots that have been on aleph for a couple of years now -- and most of them were taken with the older 6-channel "PVT-6" flavor of the ONCORE. Then Dave Martindale added: > Does the Oncore use a TCXO? Yes, it is a TCXO. It runs at 9.54*2 = 19.08 MHz and can be seen by popping the shield lids on your ONCORE. The 9.54 MHz frequency is what is clocked out to give the 1 PPS signal, which is the reason that the ONCORE 1PPS has a few second sawtooth behavior with +/- 52 nsec range (104 nsec peak-to-peak = 1/9.54 MHz). > By the way, while we're talking about oscillators, anyone know who > distributes the Rakon TCXOs, or similar good but cheap oscillators? > I'd like to replace the uncompensated 10 MHz oscillator in my > frequency counter with something more stable. The counter is capable > of resolving 1 part in 1e8, but the oscillator drifts about 1 part > in 1e6 during warmup and continues to drift with room temperature > changes. Rakon is in New Zealand and sells directly. It is their 10 MHz TCVCXO that is used in my (very slowly evolving) TOC. Their oscillators are among the best and cost in the $50 range. FYI -- The dual-frequency TurboRogue that has worked in orbit on the GPSMET experiment for a couple of years uses the Rakon, and it was Mike Exxner (who designed GPSMET) that put me onto them. You can see their product line at http://www.rakon.com If there are replies, don't expect answers from me for a couple of weeks. I'm off tomorrow morning to the AMSAT meerting in Vicksburg and fly direct from there to Groningen in the Netherlands for YAFM (Yet Another F***ing Meeting). 73, Tom From pat.kilroy@gsfc.nasa.gov Wed Oct 14 22:50:51 1998 Received: from popd.gsfc.nasa.gov (popd-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.102]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA16523 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:50:50 -0500 (CDT) Received: from PKILROY.GSFC.NASA.GOV (pkilroy.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.144.225]) by popd.gsfc.nasa.gov (8.8.8/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA07834; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:50:46 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981014235046.007b56d0@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov> X-Sender: plkilroy@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) X-Priority: 1 (Highest) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:50:46 -0400 To: amsat-dc@amsat.org, garc-bb@garc.gsfc.nasa.gov, tacgps@tapr.org From: Pat Kilroy Subject: Phase 3D in Maryland Cc: simsat@listserv.gsfc.nasa.gov Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Wednesday, October 14, 1998 Phase 3D in Maryland The AMSAT P3D spacecraft arrived safe and sound! Preparations are underway for thermal-vac testing to begin soon at the Orbital Sciences Corporation complex in Germantown, Maryland. Come and see! There are some opportunities to visit the P3D spacecraft. You must act quickly, however, because the window of opportunity is narrow! While it is in the thermal-vac test chamber the spacecraft is not visible. VISITOR SCHEDULE First group: Thursday, October 15, 6:30 p.m. EDT. Second group: Thursday, October 15, 7:30 p.m. Third group: Sunday, October 18, 2:00 p.m. Fourth group: Sunday, October 18, 3:00 p.m. Each group tour will last about 40 minutes, plus or minus some depending on the number of visitors. The best time is the soonest! On Sunday some key AMSAT personnel, including Lou McFadin W5DID, will NOT be present to make your visit that much more exciting. LOCATION Orbital Sciences Corporation ("OSC" or "Orbital") 20301 Century Blvd. Germantown, MD 20874 Phone: 301-428-6477 Web: http://www.orbital.com/Gtown/docs/defense/facil.htm http://www.orbital.com/Gtown/docs/defense/facily/map.htm The Germantown facility is located immediately west of I-270 about half-way between the Capitol Beltway (I-495) and Frederick, Maryland (I-70). DIRECTIONS: From Washington, D.C. take the Capital Beltway (I-495) to I-270 North. Exit Route 118 West. Go right onto Aircraft Drive at the first traffic light. Take the first right at the stop sign onto Century Blvd. Orbital is located to the right at 20301 Century Blvd. See sign of the OSC Fairchild Defense Division. Take the second right, into the large parking lot. (It's the first right after you pass Cloverleaf Center Drive on your left.) Coordinates are N 39 11.474, W 077 15.832. Park and proceed on foot to Building 5 on the right to check in with security. An escorted group is limited to ten or fewer visitors in the facility at one time. Legal picture ID is required. The deadline to process a foreign national visitor authorization has passed. As time allows, a tour of this OSC complex that is rich in space history may be conducted during your visit. Contact me by e-mail and include your contact information, callsign, number in party, citizenship of each, and specify your preferred time if you haven't already. Those who RSVP will be first in line. NOTES. Visitors may wish to note that the nozzle, fuel tanks, some antennas, MLI blankets, and solar array panels have been left at home in Orlando. The P3D spacecraft will be clearly visible through cleanroom glass panels. One or more spacecraft outer surface panels will be removed to display some of the P3D inner beauty. Unmoderated talk-in is on 146.955 MHz FM, the Montgomery (County) Amateur Radio Club repeater, KV3B/R. The AMSAT-DC mail list will be the forum for most of the discussion regarding visiting P3D, performing volunteer shift work during test, running errands, and decoding the spacecraft telemetry that will be broadcast while in test. You may subscribe to the AMSAT-DC list for only for the duration of the testing in Maryland if you wish. See the easy steps to subscribe and unsubscribe at . Assisting as a backup to me is Dan Schultz, N8FGV , but he is on his way to Vicksburg, Miss. to attend the AMSAT Space Symposium and Annual Meeting. Dan cannot check his e-mail remotely on this trip. Send any e-mail regarding your visit or the upcoming work schedule to me at . E-mail is my first, second and third modes preferred to handle this. The fourth and riskiest is by phone at 301-286-1984. Thank you for your understanding. I have an e-mail from N1SS, K3VDB (Group 2), KA1LM, KA2UPW (6 for Group 3), NB2F (2 for Group 3), KM4ML (3), K9SLQ, N2AER (3), and WB2TNL. Exact times were not provided to me by some and therefore a "Group number" (see above, i.e., first group, second group, etc.) is not assigned. Please advise me of your day and time. Or just show up on Thursday night and take the chance. Details about the schedule for workers as well as the live telemetry broadcast reception are forthcoming. See bulletin, "Phase 3D to Visit Maryland", dated October 9, 1998. Don't forget to visit the AMSAT Phase 3D Lab web site at . See some great photos by Bob Davis KF4KSS, Chuck Green N0ADI, and Rick Leon KA1RHL while "on the road" in Maryland! Sincerely, Pat Kilroy, WD8LAQ AMSAT Area Coordinator - MDC NASA-ARRL-AMSAT-TAPR-GARC =================================================================== Patrick L. Kilroy (ex-743) SSPP Hitchhiker I&T Engineer Phone: 301-286-1984 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Fax: 301-286-1673 Building 5, New Mail Code 568 E-mail: pat.kilroy@gsfc.nasa.gov Greenbelt, Maryland 20771 Web: http://sspp.gsfc.nasa.gov =================================================================== Visit SimSat at http://garc.gsfc.nasa.gov/~simsat/index.html From bdcst@vermontel.net Wed Oct 14 23:04:03 1998 Received: from raptor.vermontel.net (raptor.vermontel.net [204.164.106.5]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA16860 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:04:01 -0500 (CDT) Received: from vermontel.net (b-78.vermontel.net [207.1.47.82]) by raptor.vermontel.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA21649 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:00:23 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <36257431.64666CA4@vermontel.net> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:04:01 -0400 From: "Ira A. Wilner" Reply-To: bdcst@vermontel.net Organization: Wilner Associates X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win98; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1869] Re: GPS Receiver xtal stability References: <36256E4F.AC8AE64E@clark.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dr Thomas A Clark (W3IWI) wrote: > Steve also mentioned trying a lower multipath choke-ring antenna. FYI, > I now have built a really cheap choke ring antenna using $10 worth of parts > from the local hardware store and one of the Motorola Antenna97 antennas > that TAPR has for sale. As a part of a program I have to do really high > accuracy calibrations of geodetic GPS antennas, I ran my "$50 special" > and it looked really good. Is there any interest? Yes! If you're hardware store special isn't too heavy. :-) --Ira From prossen@znet.com Wed Oct 14 23:06:40 1998 Received: from sd.znet.com (sd.znet.com [207.167.64.5]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA17078 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:06:40 -0500 (CDT) Received: from pete-s-486 (sdts1-46.znet.net [207.167.64.46]) by sd.znet.com (8.9.1/8.9.1/jjb-sd) with ESMTP id VAA14774 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:06:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810150406.VAA14774@sd.znet.com> From: "Pete Prossen" To: "Tapr GPS list server" Subject: Community Service Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:31:47 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1161 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Readers A heated argument has broken out in this rural community between frustrated, irate homeowners and general aviation pilots who fly out of our local airpark. At the heart of the matter are allegations of deviations from the noise-abatement flight pattern and excessive propellor RPM during takeoff and turnout. I don't know about the pattern, but I can affirm the propellor noise problem. A few persons on each side of the argument are still rational and have proposed some test flights and observations, perhaps with some real-time data acquisition of position and sound pressure levels. Here is an opportunity to use amateur radio frequencies to perform community service work. I can provide differential GPS corrections for the area so we can track the test planes accurately. If we do a few "reality check" settings we should also be able to obtain reasonably accurate altitude measurements along the pattern. We can then correlate the path to landmarks on the ground, and hopefully corresponding show sound pressure levels at the critical points. My question is this: Would APRS be usable for this task? Does it make any provisions for logging altitude in addition to lat/lon? I am APRS incompetent, and would appreciate any and all guidance on this issue before I stick my neck out with an offer of help. Regards Pete Prossen WA6ZUH From buoy@redshift.com Wed Oct 14 23:19:09 1998 Received: from mail.redshift.com (redshift.com [209.54.200.6]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA17676 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:19:08 -0500 (CDT) Received: from buoy.mcktech.com (pm3-135.sal.redshift.com [207.204.198.135]) by mail.redshift.com (8.9.1/8.9.1a) with SMTP id VAA24137 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:19:06 -0700 Message-ID: <000e01bdf7f1$d39861c0$87c6cccf@buoy.mcktech.com> From: "Doug McKinney" To: Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1869] Re: GPS Receiver xtal stability Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:10:43 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 -----Original Message----- From: Dr Thomas A Clark (W3IWI) To: tacgps@tapr.org Date: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 8:47 PM Subject: [TACGPS:1869] Re: GPS Receiver xtal stability >Steve also mentioned trying a lower multipath choke-ring antenna. FYI, >I now have built a really cheap choke ring antenna using $10 worth of parts >from the local hardware store and one of the Motorola Antenna97 antennas >that TAPR has for sale. As a part of a program I have to do really high >accuracy calibrations of geodetic GPS antennas, I ran my "$50 special" >and it looked really good. Is there any interest? What a silly question! Okay Tom, I AM INTERESTED!!! How do you make a CHEAP choke ring antenna? I have not considered such a project, because I didn't understand the what was critical and what was not critical in the choke ring antenna design and I ASSUMED (mainly do to cost) that the choke rings designs where hard to duplicate!! 73's Doug From bruninga@nadn.navy.mil Wed Oct 14 23:48:00 1998 Received: from arctic.nadn.navy.mil (arctic.nadn.navy.mil [131.121.8.1]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA20545 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:47:59 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (bruninga@localhost) by arctic.nadn.navy.mil (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA00264 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:48:48 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: arctic.nadn.navy.mil: bruninga owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:48:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Bob Bruninga X-Sender: bruninga@arctic To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1872] Community Service In-Reply-To: <199810150406.VAA14774@sd.znet.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Pete Prossen wrote: > local airpark. At the heart of the matter are allegations of deviations > from the noise-abatement flight pattern and excessive propellor RPM ... > My question is this: Would APRS be usable for this task? Does it make any > provisions for logging altitude in addition to lat/lon? I can speak for APRSdos which will log the posit and altitude if the GGA sentence is used. But then it lacks course and speed. If you use RMC, then you get posit, course and speed but no altitude. If you transmit both, then you will get both in the data log file, but only the latest one will ever show on the map at any instant. Also, APRSdos has a 3D display so you can see the airplane height above the ground map... Mac/WinAPRS/+SA do similarly and have more detail maps, but require WIndows laptops.. SImple matter of a modern TNC, a GPS, and a 2 meter HT in the aircraft. On the ground, a radio, TNC and APRS software running on a PC will do it.. bob From barnie@flash.net Thu Oct 15 00:19:58 1998 Received: from centurion.flash.net (centurion.flash.net [209.30.0.22]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA28522 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:19:57 -0500 (CDT) Received: from flash.net (p61.utc6.dialup.tus1.flash.net [209.30.53.61]) by centurion.flash.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA22006 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 00:19:54 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <362585FF.9F3B6162@flash.net> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:19:59 -0700 From: Jeff Vollin X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1866] Re: DGPS Error Characteristics References: <3.0.5.32.19981014191043.00992c40@pop.gate.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I would propose the following experiment: Place the DGPS Ref Station in a chamber and cycle the temperature with a 1 hour period. Gather error data from a DGPS receiver connected to the ref station for several hours. Fourier analyze the error data and look for a 1 hour periodicity in the error. The amplitude of this should show the sensitivity of the errors to temperature. The FFT should reject most of the short term noise. Sound reasonable? I will try it soon and report results. Jeff Steven R. Bible wrote: > Jeff, > > Tom Clark, W3IWI had I exchanged many emails on the expected accuracy of > the TAPR DGPSIB (for which I am the designer). Besides the errors > Differential Corrections remove and the assumptions made in using DGPS, one > item of concern using a low cost receiver such as the Oncore, is its > crystal oscillator. > > I haven't tried it, but Tom suggested making measurements and altering the > temperature of the Oncore and note the changes. You might try temperature > stablizing your reference station and see what changes you see then. The > more expensive commercial DGPS reference stations use a much more accurate > crystal oscillator to keep better time. Time is of the essense to DGPS. > > Tom also introduced me to Zero-Baseline testing, for which you can see the > results of on > > http://www.tapr.org/gps/dgps/ > > Find the link "Performace" to see SA Watch plots. Zero-Baseline testing is > simple in concept, connect the reference station and remote (receiving) > receivers on the same antenna using a splitter. These are available > commercially (from WR, Inc. > > http://www.fleetpc.com/accessories/accessories.html > > )or you might find one on the surplus market. Be careful not to mix the > +5V sent up the coax to power the antenna. You need to isolate all but one > receiver from doing this. > > Then Phil Karn KA9Q thought that multipath might have an input to the > errors. So he lent me a choke ring antenna. Alas, the measurement > remained the same, thus leading us to the conclusion and theory that the > local crystal oscillator is the limiting component in the TAPR DGPS > Reference Station. > > - Steve > (n7hpr@tapr.org) From jimread@earthlink.net Thu Oct 15 20:20:21 1998 Received: from goose.prod.itd.earthlink.net (goose.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.18]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA23163 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 20:20:20 -0500 (CDT) Received: from jread (pool048-max9.ds16-ca-us.dialup.earthlink.net [209.179.6.198]) by goose.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA20471 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <001201bdf8a3$22614680$b50101c0@jread> From: "Jim Read" To: Subject: TAC2 and the Motorola Oncore Remote GPS Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 18:20:08 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000F_01BDF868.70C52F20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01BDF868.70C52F20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello all. Just a quickie. Has anyone put this GPS/clock combination together = before? I have just built the clock and thrown the antenna up on the = roof. What landmines am I just about to tread on (the two aren't = connected yet while I figure it all out. Any assistance gratefully received. Regards. Jim ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01BDF868.70C52F20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello all.
Just a quickie.  Has anyone put = this=20 GPS/clock combination together before?  I have just built the clock = and=20 thrown the antenna up on the roof.  What landmines am I just about = to tread=20 on (the two aren't connected yet while I figure it all out.
Any assistance gratefully = received.
Regards.
Jim
 
------=_NextPart_000_000F_01BDF868.70C52F20-- From mtech@airmail.net Thu Oct 15 22:25:50 1998 Received: from mail.airmail.net (mail.airmail.net [206.66.12.40]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA27926 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:25:47 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mike from [207.136.53.163] by mail.airmail.net (/\##/\ Smail3.1.30.16 #30.255) with smtp for sender: id ; Thu, 15 Oct 98 22:25:44 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <003101bdf8b4$c8e08140$017b7b7b@mike> From: "M.L. McCauley" To: Subject: Oncore VP BBRAM question Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:26:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 I am installing an Oncore VP (hardware REV 1.5, from TAPR) onto a TAC-2 board to replace a Garmin that lightning blew out. I notice that, contrary to my docs, the VP has a rechargeable battery onboard. I'm wondering... - Is this onboard battery charged by the +5 that runs the VP, or do I need to charge it using external power supplied thru the "+BAT" pin via optional charging components R6 and its LED and 1N4148? - I assume that this onboard battery takes the place of the optional BBRAM battery mentioned in the docs and that the external battery should not be installed...True? Thanks in advance for the help! Mike, WB5MYY From buoy@redshift.com Fri Oct 16 00:23:16 1998 Received: from mail.redshift.com (redshift.com [209.54.200.6]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA11260 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:23:15 -0500 (CDT) Received: from buoy.mcktech.com (pm3-152.sal.redshift.com [207.204.198.152]) by mail.redshift.com (8.9.1/8.9.1a) with SMTP id WAA05231 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:23:13 -0700 Message-ID: <002201bdf8c3$e4d7c8e0$98c6cccf@buoy.mcktech.com> From: "Doug McKinney" To: Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1877] Oncore VP BBRAM question Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 22:14:26 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 -----Original Message----- From: M.L. McCauley To: tacgps@tapr.org Date: Thursday, October 15, 1998 8:33 PM Subject: [TACGPS:1877] Oncore VP BBRAM question > >I am installing an Oncore VP (hardware REV 1.5, from TAPR) onto a TAC-2 >board to replace a Garmin that lightning blew out. I notice that, contrary >to my docs, the VP has a rechargeable battery onboard. I'm wondering... > >- Is this onboard battery charged by the +5 that runs the VP, or do I need >to charge it using external power supplied thru the "+BAT" pin via optional >charging components R6 and its LED and 1N4148? The onboard battery is charged from the ONCORE when the ONCORE gets power. > >- I assume that this onboard battery takes the place of the optional BBRAM >battery mentioned in the docs and that the external battery should not be >installed...True? That is correct. > >Thanks in advance for the help! > >Mike, WB5MYY > 73's Doug > From DBorcher@GI.com Fri Oct 16 08:31:21 1998 Received: from rock.gic.gi.com (gicout4.gic.gi.com [198.102.88.4]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA02540 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 08:31:20 -0500 (CDT) Received: by rock.gic.gi.com; id JAA23049; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:38:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from htsmtp.gic.gi.com(168.84.143.23) by rock.gic.gi.com via smap (3.2) id xma022663; Fri, 16 Oct 98 09:37:16 -0400 Received: from htxchng4.gic.gi.com by HtSMTP.BNG.NLvl.com (PMDF V5.1-7 #23321) with SMTP id <01J3181YVG4W0024ON@HtSMTP.BNG.NLvl.com> for tacgps@tapr.org; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:31:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: by htxchng4.gic.gi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52) id <01BDF8E5.548BF6E0@htxchng4.gic.gi.com>; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:14:08 -0400 Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:30:04 -0400 From: "Borcher, David (NG-EX)" Subject: RE: [TACGPS:1871] Re: GPS Receiver xtal stability To: "'tacgps@tapr.org'" Message-id: <01BDF8E5.548BF6E0@htxchng4.gic.gi.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52 Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BDF8E5.548E40D0" X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: <01BDF8E5.548BF6E0@htxchng4.gic.gi.com> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDF8E5.548E40D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dr Thomas A Clark (W3IWI) wrote: > Steve also mentioned trying a lower multipath choke-ring antenna. FYI, > I now have built a really cheap choke ring antenna using $10 worth of parts > from the local hardware store and one of the Motorola Antenna97 antennas > that TAPR has for sale. As a part of a program I have to do really high > accuracy calibrations of geodetic GPS antennas, I ran my "$50 special" > and it looked really good. Is there any interest? I am interested - Where can I get more info on the choke-ring antenna? Dave K7NG ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDF8E5.548E40D0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IgkNAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQWAAwAOAAAAzgcKAA8ACgAeAAQABAAeAQEggAMADgAAAM4HCgAQ AAkACgAKAAUAEQEBCYABACEAAAAyODZFRDQ2MkE3NjNEMjExOUZGQzAwNjA5N0M1MTBEMAAJBwEN gAQAAgAAAAIAAgABBIABADIAAABSRTogW1RBQ0dQUzoxODcxXSBSZTogR1BTIFJlY2VpdmVyIHh0 YWwgc3RhYmlsaXR5ALQPAQOQBgDMCwAAKQAAAAMABYAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAFKFAAB0 EAAAHgAVgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAVIUAAAEAAAAFAAAAOC4wMgAAAAADAAmACCAGAAAA AADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAABhQAAAAAAAAsAAIAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAAOFAAAAAAAACwAZ gAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAADoUAAAAAAAADAAKACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAQhQAA AAAAAAMAGoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAABGFAAAAAAAAAwAcgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYA AAAAGIUAAAAAAAAeACuACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAA2hQAAAQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAHgAsgAgg BgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAN4UAAAEAAAABAAAAAAAAAB4ALYAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAA ADiFAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAADAAYQq8lkXwMABxCsAQAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAARFJUSE9NQVNBQ0xB UksoVzNJV0kpV1JPVEU6U1RFVkVBTFNPTUVOVElPTkVEVFJZSU5HQUxPV0VSTVVMVElQQVRIQ0hP S0UtUklOR0FOVEVOTkFGWUksSU5PV0hBVkVCVUlMVAAAAAADABAQAAAAAAMAERAAAAAAAgEJEAEA AADfBgAA2wYAAEAPAABMWkZ1c2hjWgMACgByY3BnMTI1cjIMYGMxAzABBwtgbpEOEDAzMw8WZmUP kk8B9wKkA2MCAGNoCsBzhGV0AtFwcnEyAACSKgqhbm8SUCAwAdCFAdA2D6AwNTA0FCHzAdAUEDR9 B20CgwBQA9T7Ef8TC2IT4RRQE7IY9BTQiwcTFeQ3EY4yMzgXVOIgB20gQ0UV5BuRGp3nFEAbrxy1 eXICgwwBEZ1cMTYWMR7/A4JHCdFrvyB0FjEhDg5QIi8Dc1QIcGcgdCVhIQ04NiV/HLRC/QdAdA3g IHQPwBZdG3gHE/0dBjIewSsdHrcslSBWKKH/Fmwh6CyUI4kaYTBOJWYslP8m5xuRME0olyyUKiYC kQjmqjsJbzA4v2UOMDU56v87ATq/O8k51DvyOl8+Lz3t/z1vO5857xBgNWBDukTRRI//RZk51EXC RC9H/0e9Rz9Fb/1JNDkOUEyETeFGA03gAoJQc3R5bAeQaAngdMMAAAPwZGN0bAqxAGCYZGp1T1AF EGdoBUI7FjIMAWMJwFAgAzBzbnxleBcwB7AFsADAAnNzmQBQc2ItYAFAc2ET8PRcawngcAuQUBgI YFBQ9QuAZU+AdlXAAUBQuwww31GEG5BUYASgC4BnNWFSBvRiYRcQZAIgUsBSZk+w81CwV/EgMU8T DlBTv1TP/1XTAFFWXACgUY5Y31nmTwT/D8Ba71v/VdMOUFZPXq9fv+1aEzMCghMQY1OAZoFQsCda ECpQVfAgRAEQYXUpKkAgUArAYQnAYXA4aCBGAiFTREMgZml6LQ+QOAFAVZBrE1AYYj0LIHIJUGxy FqBscnc0+0MhFwBwAdBoUlDfZX9mhm9qsGlwBRACMC1qEANhOoUpEG9x0FN1YmoFkIJ0cdBEYXRl OlNE/yihav9sD20fbixPoFoDDiHfZoFXFg5Qb49wnlJV4RcB/CBIWfEEkFNEGmFzr3S/v3XPVV93 Dw+BghAI0GIKsPx0OGTaD1QtYXkvcJWCoPN7MAtQeS9qIHYQCxF7pf5zU0QbkXyvfb9+z24vbz/f hM+F2XHycZRyyTlQD4slHYJTOYt/jI+RwERvY/51B4ACMAXQaeA34xMQONCCdgJRIHtVbmsTULp3 FdJCBbAW0ASQLHKxAnZSMShORy1FWPYpN+EBVTNiEZABlgCQMPuJMQGAbnJQAGAJ8GiAlCB3AgFT AHeyZQDwlCBPYHCtPGBclxAH0GsLgGQewP+bUgTwB0AQYQFADgCJAlnie5y1AhBvBUIXIRLycuBt RwtRcuAdADpcXHEgb71pwW1qEAMQB5CfYE0N4MkDYHNvAYAgTwEgDeC1mqBcoRZFAMADEC5mUL50 l+AXEJAwUkGAEnhh0Xui0mkUY5WREwIAgAWQbP52XUFicA5wUwCksgGQACD/pUKboZRhAcGksRbg D3AAAOdicAzQAZAgLpTkpMYOUP+lYipAUJCl36bvp/8PwGJwbwWBqZ+qr6u/bB7AYnBs96lfrh+v JSmoLEMgrP+x3/2vFGKXQAKRsv+k8yigsK//tW+2f7ePpSAaYLjSpa+6P/+7T6gsG5C4375fv2/A f6Ug/4/gvV/C78P/xQQK+aMSx8J/kA+LP1IxCMEAQVIDUsBEIRLyYmtta8bTIF8nlKADEHLBYX0F wFRomwNxBCBBHQALYHJrl0AAVzNJV0kpIHf3A2By4QqFPgYAcuBo0QdAtaDAIJRSaQIgCYAgy/Du eVoir3AJAHcEkNLQaUGvBSBy0GoAFtBvYkAtcTFH09ECMAnwbmEuahBZ5Eks0adJIJXxWdCXAPkT gGJ1AxAFQK9wONAHQHeF0NUBWfBw1QTYQNWJIOvL0FoiJGgxdwkRagCg0PIgCrF0c9GnA1LTcE+w /9QBnEHXcQsghjETgE9QBbC/0nGZwNtAUoDbQtyyTZ3wlwWwBvCvcEHV1Dk31baP28jU4HLQKRBB UFLXcd8EIJoh3dCcUdYwQQQgr3B/24LbQuMhn5XXINeD3fAg+2ZQ2EZozBHRpwDQlDBpoPZj2KEH QGmJAHLQ0yEEILnbUWdlBHEqUSNwUAXwX+BmltDXIGmgA6Bt2KAi3iR4QYpgBZAHMSLl6N5RX2ig 1AHVMVJA2FVnneBk/dYwSQQg3LHeE9igcUHtYf1PUD8KhTgCAEGVQQQACYAvlTJpMNTg7zNkAkBt LecZcRRQmGA1N1g1UsDONv+Zsc8J7nYK86MSmGXLPwVAf+7/8A/xHdcgn9Ht5tNRXOeZsWYgagAg V+1TnEADoP/XIOgABUAEYN2xC4ACEN5xe9yj1R9h7mYKhZbxE4AgPEs3l2Du5c217nZ9AAEA8AAD AC4AAAAAAAsAAgABAAAAHgBwAAEAAAAuAAAAW1RBQ0dQUzoxODcxXSBSZTogR1BTIFJlY2VpdmVy IHh0YWwgc3RhYmlsaXR5AAAAAgFxAAEAAAAbAAAAAb338dTFYtRn52OnEdKf/ABgl8UQ0AAVneNQ AB4AQhABAAAAPwAAADwwQTdGMDhEQ0ZBRkZEMTExOUZFNjAwNjA5N0M1MTBEMDQ5MDkyQ0Bub2dh bGVzeGNoLm5vZy5naS5jb20+AABAADkAHsPWTEj4vQEDAPE/CQQAAAMAJgAAAAAAAwA2AAAAAAAD AP0/5AQAAAMAgBD/////HgA1EAEAAAA/AAAAPDBBN0YwOERDRkFGRkQxMTE5RkU2MDA2MDk3QzUx MEQwNDAxNDJDQG5vZ2FsZXN4Y2gubm9nLmdpLmNvbT4AAAIB+T8BAAAARwAAAAAAAADcp0DIwEIQ GrS5CAArL+GCAQAAAAAAAAAvTz1HSS9PVT1QSU9ORUVSL0NOPVJFQ0lQSUVOVFMvQ049REJPUkNI RVIAAB4A+D8BAAAAFwAAAEJvcmNoZXIsIERhdmlkIChORy1FWCkAAAIB+z8BAAAARwAAAAAAAADc p0DIwEIQGrS5CAArL+GCAQAAAAAAAAAvTz1HSS9PVT1QSU9ORUVSL0NOPVJFQ0lQSUVOVFMvQ049 REJPUkNIRVIAAB4A+j8BAAAAFwAAAEJvcmNoZXIsIERhdmlkIChORy1FWCkAAEAABzDC1ZEhSPi9 AUAACDB4IrhNBvm9AQMADTT9PwAAAgEUNAEAAAAQAAAAVJShwCl/EBulhwgAKyolFx4APQABAAAA BQAAAFJFOiAAAAAACwApAAAAAAALACMAAAAAAAIBfwABAAAAKAAAADwwMUJERjhFNS41NDhCRjZF MEBodHhjaG5nNC5naWMuZ2kuY29tPgBlog== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BDF8E5.548E40D0-- From pat.kilroy@gsfc.nasa.gov Fri Oct 16 15:35:53 1998 Received: from popd.gsfc.nasa.gov (popd-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.102]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA18519 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 15:35:21 -0500 (CDT) Received: from PKILROY.GSFC.NASA.GOV (pkilroy.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.144.225]) by popd.gsfc.nasa.gov (8.8.8/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA08803; Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:34:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981016163412.0080fa00@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov> X-Sender: plkilroy@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:34:12 -0400 To: BernDavid@aol.com From: Pat Kilroy Subject: Re: Phase 3D in Maryland > Thursday & Followup Bulletin Cc: APAlpern@aol.com, amsat-dc@amsat.org, garc-bb@garc.gsfc.nasa.gov, p3dlab@amsat.org, wb3v@arrl.org, wt3p@arrl.org, n3efn@arrl.org, rlindquist@arrl.org, sford@arrl.org, kb1sf@amsat.org, martha@amsat.org, tacgps@tapr.org In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 07:38 AM 10/16/98 EDT, BernDavid@aol.com wrote: >My son and I want to thank you for giving us the opportunity >to visit P3D. My son >was very enthusiastic about it when we got home last night and >told Mommy all about it. > >73, > >David N2AER Hi David, You're welcome indeed! Glad to help out. - Pat WD8LAQ FOR THOSE WHO MISSED ... BULLETIN Friday, October 16, 1998 First P3D Visitors Are Pleased Last night we had a nice little turn out of folks to visit the Orbital Sciences complex to see the Phase 3D test facilities and see the P3D spacecraft in waiting for the thermal-vac testing. We have some openings for a visit this Sunday. The third group will meet at 2 p.m. and the fourth group at 3 p.m. See the bulletin, "Phase 3D in Maryland", dated Wednesday, October 14 for directions to OSC and their ground rules. Currently, there is room for eight more visitors on Sunday in the Third group and four more in the Fourth group! Joining David N2AER and his son, Adam, last night were Dick Rucker KM4ML and his friends Jim Wilcox W3WV and Les Cramer, Steve Cavallo KB3BWP, Charlie Heisler K3VDB, Bill Onuska NI3E, and Rick Hambly WB2TNL and friend. AMSAT members Harold Price NK6K and Chuck Green N0ADI came into town yesterday to help the Phase 3D Lab team of Lou McFadin W5DID, Bob Davis KF4KSS and Rick Leon KA1RHL. More are coming in soon, including the Phase 3D team from AMSAT-DL (Germany). If you can be spontaneous this weekend then come join the fun. Please RSVP to save a spot! Hope to see you soon! Sincerely, Pat WD8LAQ AMSAT Area Coordinator - MDC NASA-ARRL-AMSAT-TAPR-GARC =================================================================== Patrick L. Kilroy (ex-743) SSPP Hitchhiker I&T Engineer Phone: 301-286-1984 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Fax: 301-286-1673 Building 5, New Mail Code 568 E-mail: pat.kilroy@gsfc.nasa.gov Greenbelt, Maryland 20771 Web: http://sspp.gsfc.nasa.gov =================================================================== Visit SimSat at http://garc.gsfc.nasa.gov/~simsat/index.html From barnie@flash.net Mon Oct 19 00:25:48 1998 Received: from centurion.flash.net (centurion.flash.net [209.30.0.22]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA01535 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:25:46 -0500 (CDT) Received: from flash.net (p63.utc2.dialup.tus1.flash.net [209.30.43.63]) by centurion.flash.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA20796 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 00:25:43 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <362ACD5E.29E78DD3@flash.net> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 22:25:51 -0700 From: Jeff Vollin X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1863] Re: DGPS Error Characteristics References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I borrowed a 12xl this weekend and repeated my previous experiment. I did not find the error nearly as small as Dave did. I had a 2D standard deviation for the Garmin 40 to be 7.5m and with the Garmin 12XL the standard deviation was 4.9m. I took data every 15 sec. for 24 hrs. In Dave's case, his DGPS reference was a Coast Guard station, and in mine it was the Oncore+DGPSIB. This may be the difference. I have heard of CORS stations which provide continuous data on GPS errors. Could this be used to evaluate the Oncore ref station? Anyone know how to do this? Has anyone else found similar results using the Oncore ref station? Jeff Vollin Dave Martindale wrote: > >I gathered a total of 4096 data points and SA watch reports the 2-sigma > >(95%) error > >radius to be 14 m. > > >Comments, anyone? > > You would probably find it interesting to compare the 40 to the newer > Garmin 12-channel receivers. They seem to be *much* less noisy, a > fact which is revealed clearly when SA is off. > > I did some tests gathering data for about 1 hour with and without > differential corrections using several receivers. The differential > correction source is a Canadian Coast Guard beacon transmitter that > is only a few km from the receiver, so there should be minimal error > due to distance between reference station and observing station. > > I tested an GPS 45XL and GPS 20, both older single-channel receivers > that are probably the same as your GPS 40. All of the positions > reported in that hour were within about a 50x100 m rectangle for the > 45XL, and a 30x20 m rectangle for the GPS 20. The standard deviations > of latitude and longitude observations were 13 and 10 m for the 45XL, > 4.2 and 3.9 m for the 20. > > In comparison, for a GPS 12XL, II+, and GPS 25 (12-channel units), all of > the positions were within a 10x8 m rectangle for the 12XL and II+, and a > 13x6 m rectangle for the 25. Standard deviations were 2.1/1.4 m for the > 12XL, 1.6/1.2 m for the II+, and 1.9/1.1 m for the 25. (The plot of the > 12XL/II+ data is weird, because latitude and longitude are quantized to > 0.001 minute of arc in the NMEA output, so only a few discrete values of > lat and long show up for the entire hour. The 25 has an extra digit of > resolution, so its plot is more reasonable looking and the statistics > probably more meaningful). > > In other words, both worst-case and average error was several times > larger for the single-channel receivers than for the 12-channel ones. > I don't know why the 45XL was so much worse than the 20, though. > > Dave From mtech@airmail.net Mon Oct 19 22:53:40 1998 Received: from mail.airmail.net (mail.airmail.net [206.66.12.40]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA27994 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:53:39 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mike from [207.136.45.244] by mail.airmail.net (/\##/\ Smail3.1.30.16 #30.255) with smtp for sender: id ; Mon, 19 Oct 98 22:53:37 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <000501bdfbdd$38986ea0$017b7b7b@mike> From: "M.L. McCauley" To: "TAC/GPS sig" Subject: need help with Oncore VP problem Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:53:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 I have a brand new Oncore VP in a TAC-2 which seems to have either partially locked up or partially failed. I installed the receiver on a TAC-2 board a couple of days ago to replace a Garmin that lightning got. The received started right up no problem and has run connected to an old AT laptop running SHOWTIME (the computer that runs TAC-32 is on another assignment for a while), remaining locked 100% of the time. I noticed a couple of hours ago that SHOWTIME indicated that the receiver had totally lost lock. I tried to restart SHOWTIME, and then tried the Oncore utilities and a terminal program; seems that data is going out to the receiver but nothing is coming back. The receiver has power and the TAC-2 1 PPS LED is blinking. Ideas? Thanks in advance! Mike, WB5MYY From buoy@redshift.com Tue Oct 20 01:03:48 1998 Received: from mail.redshift.com (redshift.com [209.54.200.6]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA10900 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:03:47 -0500 (CDT) Received: from buoy.mcktech.com (pm3-133.sal.redshift.com [207.204.198.133]) by mail.redshift.com (8.9.1/8.9.1a) with SMTP id XAA08323 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:03:42 -0700 Message-ID: <000801bdfbee$2ae23d20$85c6cccf@buoy.mcktech.com> From: "Doug McKinney" To: Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1882] need help with Oncore VP problem Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:54:52 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 -----Original Message----- From: M.L. McCauley To: tacgps@tapr.org Date: Monday, October 19, 1998 8:58 PM Subject: [TACGPS:1882] need help with Oncore VP problem > >I have a brand new Oncore VP in a TAC-2 which seems to have either partially >locked up or partially failed. I installed the receiver on a TAC-2 board a >couple of days ago to replace a Garmin that lightning got. The received >started right up no problem and has run connected to an old AT laptop >running SHOWTIME (the computer that runs TAC-32 is on another assignment for >a while), remaining locked 100% of the time. > >I noticed a couple of hours ago that SHOWTIME indicated that the receiver >had totally lost lock. I tried to restart SHOWTIME, and then tried the >Oncore utilities and a terminal program; seems that data is going out to the >receiver but nothing is coming back. The receiver has power and the TAC-2 1 >PPS LED is blinking. > >Ideas? > >Thanks in advance! > >Mike, WB5MYY > These are not easy to answer. My first area to look at is the MAX232. If you have a RS232 tester with indicating LEDs you can verify data to and from the computer. Well, is the old AT Laptop still functioning? The ONCORE has very seldom the problem, so assume the ONCORE is good and the laptop or TAC2 or cable/connector is faulty. I am the person who has designed and built the ONCORE and GARIN interface boards. So let me know how the hunt goes!! 73's Doug KC3RL From mtech@airmail.net Tue Oct 20 08:30:30 1998 Received: from mail.airmail.net (mail.airmail.net [206.66.12.40]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA00390 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:30:29 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mike from [207.136.57.52] by mail.airmail.net (/\##/\ Smail3.1.30.16 #30.255) with smtp for sender: id ; Tue, 20 Oct 98 08:30:29 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <002501bdfc2d$d5383380$017b7b7b@mike> From: "M.L. McCauley" To: Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1883] Re: need help with Oncore VP problem Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:30:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 -----Original Message----- From: Doug McKinney To: tacgps@tapr.org Date: Tuesday, October 20, 1998 1:26 AM Subject: [TACGPS:1883] Re: need help with Oncore VP problem > >-----Original Message----- >From: M.L. McCauley >To: tacgps@tapr.org >Date: Monday, October 19, 1998 8:58 PM >Subject: [TACGPS:1882] need help with Oncore VP problem > >Doug KC3RL > > Doug, Thanks for your offer of help. I haven't had a chance to take the breakout box or the scope to it yet, but I can tell you that all the ICs on the board have been replaced. The same hit that got the Garmin took out the MAX232, so once I determined that I just "shotgunned" everything on the board except for the 7805 and the diodes, which I checked. Ditto on the MIMIC in my homebrew patch antenna, which was also smoked. I'll check it out further and get back to you. Again, thanks! Mike, WB5MYY From buoy@redshift.com Tue Oct 20 09:43:43 1998 Received: from mail.redshift.com (redshift.com [209.54.200.6]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA03470 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:43:42 -0500 (CDT) Received: from buoy.mcktech.com (pm3-149.sal.redshift.com [207.204.198.149]) by mail.redshift.com (8.9.1/8.9.1a) with SMTP id HAA28289 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 1998 07:43:40 -0700 Message-ID: <000c01bdfc36$cf761da0$95c6cccf@buoy.mcktech.com> From: "Doug McKinney" To: Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1884] Re: need help with Oncore VP problem Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 07:30:01 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 -----Original Message----- From: M.L. McCauley To: tacgps@tapr.org Date: Tuesday, October 20, 1998 6:43 AM Subject: [TACGPS:1884] Re: need help with Oncore VP problem > >-----Original Message----- >From: Doug McKinney >To: tacgps@tapr.org >Date: Tuesday, October 20, 1998 1:26 AM >Subject: [TACGPS:1883] Re: need help with Oncore VP problem > > >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: M.L. McCauley >>To: tacgps@tapr.org >>Date: Monday, October 19, 1998 8:58 PM >>Subject: [TACGPS:1882] need help with Oncore VP problem > > > > > >> >>Doug KC3RL >> >> > >Doug, > >Thanks for your offer of help. I haven't had a chance to take the breakout >box or the scope to it yet, but I can tell you that all the ICs on the board >have been replaced. The same hit that got the Garmin took out the MAX232, so >once I determined that I just "shotgunned" everything on the board except >for the 7805 and the diodes, which I checked. Ditto on the MIMIC in my >homebrew patch antenna, which was also smoked. > >I'll check it out further and get back to you. Again, thanks! > >Mike, WB5MYY > Holy SMOKES!!! 73's Doug From mpetz@ccm.stlcc.cc.mo.us Wed Oct 21 09:04:14 1998 Received: from ccm.stlcc.cc.mo.us (ccm.stlcc.cc.mo.us [198.209.221.106]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA09580 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:04:14 -0500 (CDT) Received: from MPetz.stlcc.cc.mo.us ([198.209.221.145]) by ccm.stlcc.cc.mo.us (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-13191) with SMTP id AAA96 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:06:28 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19981021090412.0e0fadf2@ccm.stlcc.cc.mo.us> X-Sender: mpetz@ccm.stlcc.cc.mo.us X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: tacgps@tapr.org From: mpetz@ccm.stlcc.cc.mo.us (Michael Petz) Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1882] TACGPS digest 341 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:06:28 -0500 I had this happen once. The receiver would not lock even after a reset. I started to look at the data coming out on the serial port. What I found was that the GPS clock time had changed and the GPS receiver was looking for satellites that were not there. I reset the time and the receiver locked onto the first bird within a minute. The unit aquired 5 satellites within 10 minutes. Check the GPS units time. Michael Petz KA9HNT mpetz@ccm.stlcc.cc.mo.us At 12:33 AM 10/20/98 -0500, you wrote: >Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:53:37 -0500 >From: "M.L. McCauley" >To: "TAC/GPS sig" >Subject: need help with Oncore VP problem >Message-ID: <000501bdfbdd$38986ea0$017b7b7b@mike> > > >I have a brand new Oncore VP in a TAC-2 which seems to have either partially >locked up or partially failed. I installed the receiver on a TAC-2 board a >couple of days ago to replace a Garmin that lightning got. The received >started right up no problem and has run connected to an old AT laptop >running SHOWTIME (the computer that runs TAC-32 is on another assignment for >a while), remaining locked 100% of the time. > >I noticed a couple of hours ago that SHOWTIME indicated that the receiver >had totally lost lock. I tried to restart SHOWTIME, and then tried the >Oncore utilities and a terminal program; seems that data is going out to the >receiver but nothing is coming back. The receiver has power and the TAC-2 1 >PPS LED is blinking. > >Ideas? > >Thanks in advance! > >Mike, WB5MYY > > From mtech@airmail.net Fri Oct 23 23:16:55 1998 Received: from mail.airmail.net (mail.airmail.net [206.66.12.40]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id XAA01289 for ; Fri, 23 Oct 1998 23:16:54 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mike from [207.136.46.243] by mail.airmail.net (/\##/\ Smail3.1.30.16 #30.255) with smtp for sender: id ; Fri, 23 Oct 98 23:16:53 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <000601bdff05$372da6e0$017b7b7b@mike> From: "M.L. McCauley" To: Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1883] Re: need help with Oncore VP problem Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 23:17:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 >-----Original Message----- >From: M.L. McCauley >To: tacgps@tapr.org >Date: Monday, October 19, 1998 8:58 PM >Subject: [TACGPS:1882] need help with Oncore VP problem > > >> >>I have a brand new Oncore VP in a TAC-2 which seems to have either >partially >>locked up or partially failed. I installed the receiver on a TAC-2 board a >>couple of days ago to replace a Garmin that lightning got. The received >>started right up no problem and has run connected to an old AT laptop >>running SHOWTIME (the computer that runs TAC-32 is on another assignment >for >>a while), remaining locked 100% of the time. >> >>I noticed a couple of hours ago that SHOWTIME indicated that the receiver >>had totally lost lock. I tried to restart SHOWTIME, and then tried the >>Oncore utilities and a terminal program; seems that data is going out to >the >>receiver but nothing is coming back. The receiver has power and the TAC-2 1 >>PPS LED is blinking. >> >>Ideas? >> >>Thanks in advance! >> >>Mike, WB5MYY >> Doug, As the old phrase goes, check the simple stuff first. The problem was a loose connection in the RS-232 cable on the TAC-2 enclosure end. I used a VERY small 4 pin connector on the enclosure end and a DB-9 on the other. A wire popped loose from the TX pin on the small connector. Thanks very much for the offer of help, at any rate. Have a great weekend! Mike, WB5MYY From eac@shore.net Sat Oct 24 18:08:38 1998 Received: from siren.shore.net (siren.shore.net [207.244.124.5]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA14865 for ; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:07:41 -0500 (CDT) Received: from netlynn-s01-87.port.shore.net (netlynn-s01-87) [207.244.109.87] by siren.shore.net with smtp (Exim) id 0zXClQ-0000wr-00; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 19:06:46 -0400 Message-ID: <36325D51.35E5@shore.net> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 18:05:53 -0500 From: "Eric A. Cottrell" X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (OS/2; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1861] Re: Leap Second Pending References: <199810130358.VAA04358@clemens.dwf.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reg Clemens wrote: > Acording to the ONCORE User's Guide, the one byte message is > > 0 - No leap second pending > 1 - Addition of 1 second pending > 2 - Subtraction of 1 second pending Hello, I seem to remember they always add leap seconds. Have they ever subtracted one or is it just to be symetrical? 73 Eric eac@shore.net WB1HBU From dan.hinz@ieee.org Sun Oct 25 22:43:52 1998 Received: from dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.9]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA12501 for ; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:43:51 -0600 (CST) Received: (from smap@localhost) by dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id WAA03188 for ; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 22:43:18 -0600 (CST) Received: from sji-ca5-164.ix.netcom.com(209.109.234.164) by dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3) id rma003118; Sun Oct 25 22:42:41 1998 Message-ID: <3633FDDF.DDA1D7CC@ieee.org> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 20:43:11 -0800 From: "Dan Hinz, Jr." X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: No 1PPS signal w/Garmin GPS25 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I need some ideas.... I do not get the 1PPS signal out of the TAC card: Stats: Garmin GPS25-LVS s/w 2.21 I am getting fixes, verified by monitoring the output on the RS-232. I don't see pulses at the 1PPS line of the TAC card or at the GARMIN directly. The assembly went smoothly and all testing passed w/o any difficulty. I have and LED attached at the header on the TAC card and when I energize the card, I notice 1 quick flash. I did remove the GPS receiver, removed the 04's and 132 chips. I waited about 2X as long as I did previously to track the satellites and still no pulse on the 1PPS line of the GARMIN. I don't know if I actually acquired the satellites as I couldn't drive the PC's serial port. Do I need to enable the 1PPS output? if so, how? One other question: what program do people use to control the serial ports in Win95? On my other computer, I boot to DOS and use PROCOMM. I'd prefer to stay in W95 (as much as I dislike it) and talk/monitor the serial ports directly. Thanks & 73, Dan, W6LSN From davem@cs.ubc.ca Sun Oct 25 23:34:02 1998 Received: from pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (root@smtp.cs.ubc.ca [142.103.6.52]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA16236 for ; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 23:34:01 -0600 (CST) Received: from [198.162.38.159] (davem.home.cs.ubc.ca [198.162.38.159]) by pedigree.cs.ubc.ca (8.8.8/8.6.9) with ESMTP id VAA12188 for ; Sun, 25 Oct 1998 21:33:58 -0800 (PST) X-Sender: davem@mail.cs.ubc.ca Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3633FDDF.DDA1D7CC@ieee.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 21:33:51 -0800 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: Dave Martindale Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1889] No 1PPS signal w/Garmin GPS25 >Do I need to enable the 1PPS output? if so, how? Yes, you do. For some reason, the GPS 25 seems to use one channel's worth of DSP power generating the 1 PPS output. So either you get 12 receiver channels and no 1PPS (default config) or you get 11 channels plus 1PPS. Just get the serial port working, then send something like the following to the receiver. Then power off and back on, and you should have 1 PPS. $PGRMC,,,,,,,,,,,,2,4, $PGRMCE Note that you need to send CR/LF after each line. The "2" in the above enables the 1 PPS output, and the "4" programs a 100 ms "high" duration for the 1 PPS output. The PGRMCE command tells the GPS to send you its current settings, so you can verify that the change happened OK. All this is explained in the GPS 25 LP manual. It also explains how to put the GPS in 2D mode (3D is default) with a specified altitude; this probably increases the accuracy of the 1 PPS output. You can turn output sentences on and off to get just the ones you want. And you can enable raw data (pseudorange and phase) on the other serial port. Dave From srbible@gate.net Mon Oct 26 17:30:40 1998 Received: from onondaga.gate.net (root@onondaga.gate.net [198.206.134.31]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA04910 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:30:39 -0600 (CST) Received: from avatar (kngga2-20.gate.net [207.36.2.20]) by onondaga.gate.net (8.8.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA58510 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 18:28:46 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981026183157.00a508c0@pop.gate.net> X-Sender: srbible@pop.gate.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 18:31:57 -0500 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: "Steven R. Bible" Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1890] Re: No 1PPS signal w/Garmin GPS25 In-Reply-To: References: <3633FDDF.DDA1D7CC@ieee.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Or you can use TAC32 to do all this for you. Info about TAC32 available from http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/tac32.html - Steve At 11:39 PM 10/25/98 -0600, you wrote: >>Do I need to enable the 1PPS output? if so, how? > >Yes, you do. For some reason, the GPS 25 seems to use one channel's worth >of DSP power generating the 1 PPS output. So either you get 12 receiver >channels and no 1PPS (default config) or you get 11 channels plus 1PPS. > >Just get the serial port working, then send something like the following >to the receiver. Then power off and back on, and you should have 1 PPS. > >$PGRMC,,,,,,,,,,,,2,4, >$PGRMCE > >Note that you need to send CR/LF after each line. The "2" in the above >enables the 1 PPS output, and the "4" programs a 100 ms "high" duration >for the 1 PPS output. The PGRMCE command tells the GPS to send you >its current settings, so you can verify that the change happened OK. > >All this is explained in the GPS 25 LP manual. It also explains how >to put the GPS in 2D mode (3D is default) with a specified altitude; >this probably increases the accuracy of the 1 PPS output. You can >turn output sentences on and off to get just the ones you want. >And you can enable raw data (pseudorange and phase) on the other >serial port. > > Dave > > > - Steve (n7hpr@tapr.org) From g13216@email1.wes.mot.com Tue Oct 27 13:06:58 1998 Received: from motgate2.mot.com (motgate2.mot.com [129.188.136.102]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA06193 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:06:57 -0600 (CST) Received: from pobox2.mot.com (pobox2.mot.com [129.188.137.195]) by motgate2.mot.com (8.8.5/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id NAA19827 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:08:54 -0600 (CST) Comments: ( Received on motgate2.mot.com from client pobox2.mot.com, sender g13216@email1.wes.mot.com ) Received: from email1.wes.mot.com (email1.wes.mot.com [192.93.6.3]) by pobox2.mot.com (8.8.5/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id NAA28222 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:06:18 -0600 (CST) Received: by email1.wes.mot.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3) id <45Q5Q70N>; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:06:52 -0600 Message-ID: <51F347B016ADD011963200805FC145620340E235@email1.wes.mot.com> From: Mastenbrook Gary-G13216 To: "'tacgps@tapr.org'" Subject: Motorola UT+ receivers? Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:06:50 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3) Content-Type: text/plain I wonder how many of the TAC users are running a UT+ receiver? Also, I wonder which battery backup people are using for this receiver type? (I'm putting together a TAC with a UT+ which does not have the on-board battery on the GPS unit.) Gary N8DMT From jjjohnson@saiph.hpl.hp.com Tue Oct 27 15:16:15 1998 Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com (root@hplms26.hpl.hp.com [15.255.168.31]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA11373 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:16:13 -0600 (CST) Received: from saiph.hpl.hp.com (saiph.hpl.hp.com [15.9.144.186]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.6 HPLabs Relay) with ESMTP id NAA00173 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:16:08 -0800 (PST) Received: (from jjjohnson@localhost) by saiph.hpl.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.6 HPLabs) id NAA00271 for tacgps@tapr.org; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:16:02 -0800 (PST) From: Jim Johnson Message-Id: <199810272116.NAA00271@saiph.hpl.hp.com> Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1892] Motorola UT+ receivers? To: tacgps@tapr.org Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 13:16:02 PST In-Reply-To: <51F347B016ADD011963200805FC145620340E235@email1.wes.mot.com>; from "Mastenbrook Gary-G13216" at Oct 27, 98 1:10 pm X-Mailer: Elm [revision: 109.19] > > I wonder how many of the TAC users are running a UT+ receiver? Also, I > wonder which battery backup people are using for this receiver type? > (I'm putting together a TAC with a UT+ which does not have the on-board > battery on the GPS unit.) > Gary N8DMT > > Hi Gary, I have a UT+ up and running with TAC32 Ver. Beta 13 at the moment, but I don't have the battery backup connected - sorry I can't be of help on that one. The Beta 13 works beautifully and the whole rig makes a very nice timing receiver. 73, Jim W6SC jjohnson@hpl.hp.com From pat.kilroy@gsfc.nasa.gov Wed Oct 28 14:14:22 1998 Received: from popd.gsfc.nasa.gov (popd-f.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.251.102]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA20694 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:14:17 -0600 (CST) Received: from PKILROY.GSFC.NASA.GOV (pkilroy.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.144.225]) by popd.gsfc.nasa.gov (8.8.8/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA12090; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:13:21 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981028151321.008585b0@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov> X-Sender: plkilroy@pop700.gsfc.nasa.gov X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:13:21 -0500 To: amsat-dc@amsat.org From: Pat Kilroy Subject: P3D Thermal-Vac Winding Down Cc: p3dlab@amsat.org, w5did@amsat.org, ghendric@fcc.gov, pschmidt@mindspring.com, peter.you@jnt.com, phyoung@erols.com, garc-bb@garc.gsfc.nasa.gov, NN0DJ@amsat.org, sford@arrl, n1rl@arrl.org, w3abc@arrl.org, wb3v@arrl.org, wt3p@arrl.org, N1SS@aol.com, wa4sir@amsat.org, bonuska@CapAccess.org, ka3hdo@amsat.org, cavallo.john@orbital.com, tacgps@tapr.org, amsat-bb@amsat.org In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19981027190306.006f7404@pk.pop.crosslink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Wednesday, October 28, 1998 @ 1800 UTC P3D THERMAL-VAC TEST WINDING DOWN The local P3D TLM "broadcast" is now turned off, according to Phase 3D Lab Manager Lou McFadin, W5DID, a few moments ago. It was a good test. Lou was glad to hear that some did indeed copy it okay! The observed frequency drifting slightly was expected, due to the large temperature changes in the chamber. In fact, it would have been a challenge to track of the signals over the duration of the test, Lou said, because the RUDAK and spacecraft teams were QSYing around, including many band changes. Stacey Mills, W4SM, P3D Ground Controller, was very helpful in explaining to Steve Greene, KA1LM, and Eric Rosenberg, W3DQ, some of the details of his beta P3D telemetry software. They succeeded in copying the S7-S9 signals from Northern Virginia and Washington, D.C. respectively. Thank you, gentlemen! Thermal-vac stops tonight, with chamber break set for tomorrow morning. The volunteer overnight scheduling has stopped. No more shift work is needed. Thank you to all who rose to the occasion to cover the wee hours, and often multiple shifts! By name: Perry Klein W3PK, Dan Schultz N8FGV, Bill Onuska NI3E, Gary Hendrickson W3DTN and yours truly. Thanks to those in the wings about to cover a shift: Pete Young, K3IN, and Art Feller, W4ART. We are looking for two or three volunteers to meet me tomorrow morning at the chamber to help the team pack up. (Lou would like to start the trip back to Orlando first thing Saturday morning.) To make the security clearances easier, the volunteer overnight "sat sitters" would be a first choice in the packing tasks. Please contact me ASAP to confirm. There were a whole score of AMSAT names from out of town during this test phase that you would readily recognize. See the many team members by going to the P3D Lab web site at . Check back often to keep track of the P3D spacecraft until it returns for vibration testing in the winter at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. An important part of this group was the P3D RUDAK (packet radio) team. Go to and see some of their outstanding and memorable photos! And don't forget ... Visit AMSAT-DC http://garc.gsfc.nasa.gov/~simsat/ssamsatdc.html Visit AMSAT-NoVA http://garc.gsfc.nasa.gov/~simsat/ssamsatnova.html Way to go! Sincerely, Pat WD8LAQ NASA-ARRL-AMSAT-TAPR-GARC =================================================================== Patrick L. Kilroy (ex-743) SSPP Hitchhiker I&T Engineer Phone: 301-286-1984 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Fax: 301-286-1673 Building 5, New Mail Code 568 E-mail: pat.kilroy@gsfc.nasa.gov Greenbelt, Maryland 20771 Web: http://sspp.gsfc.nasa.gov =================================================================== Visit SimSat at http://garc.gsfc.nasa.gov/~simsat/index.html From bruninga@nadn.navy.mil Wed Oct 28 21:14:23 1998 Received: from arctic.nadn.navy.mil (arctic.nadn.navy.mil [131.121.8.1]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA15719 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:14:20 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (bruninga@localhost) by arctic.nadn.navy.mil (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA08479 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 22:16:17 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: arctic.nadn.navy.mil: bruninga owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 22:16:17 -0500 (EST) From: Bob Bruninga X-Sender: bruninga@arctic To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: DGPS beacon Set Up? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I received this from a foreign station trying to set up a DGPS station. Can anyone answer these? Quote ---------------------------- I have bought DGPS reference station kit and Motorola on core GPS receiver from TAPR. I am constructing it. I am going to experiment it for APRS-DGPS beacon. I have KPC-3 version 6.0 (too old). How should I setup these equipment? I think.... 1) Set the call sign in KPC-3. 2) Set the unploto DGPS via WIDE 3) Set KPC-3 to converce mode. 4) Disconnect the PC from KPC-3. 5) Connect the DGPS unit to KPC-3 Is that right? But how to set a interval time of beacon? -------------------------- unquote Thanks de WB4APR From prossen@znet.com Wed Oct 28 23:03:47 1998 Received: from sd.znet.com (sd.znet.com [207.167.64.5]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA19183 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 23:03:46 -0600 (CST) Received: from pete-s-486 (sdts2-88.znet.net [207.167.64.88]) by sd.znet.com (8.9.1/8.9.1/jjb-sd) with ESMTP id VAA04029 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:03:43 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199810290503.VAA04029@sd.znet.com> From: "Pete Prossen" To: Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1895] DGPS beacon Set Up? Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:04:13 -0800 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1161 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I don't know if the 6.0 firmware honors all of the commands below, but here's one way to get it working. My reference station also receives NMEA back from rovers, so I must disallow the input echo and echo of transmitted packets. MYCALL UNPROTO DGPS (or whatever you want to use for the dummy name) BTEXT BEACON E 1 (an example that sends the explanation beacon every 1 minute) CONMODE CONVERS PMODE CONV (so TNC will power up in conversational mode) NOMODE OFF (otherwise CONMODE won't work) ECHO OFF (don't echo the input data) MXMIT OFF (don't send transmitted packets back out the async port) STREAMSW $00 (see explanation below) It is important to re-define the stream switch character. The default is $7C which occurs in normal RTCM data. So if you don't change to some value below $40 (out of the range of RTCM characters), your TNC will periodically stop transmitting because it has been told to switch streams. It might be a good idea to get an update EPROM for your KPC-3. The most recent version I'm aware of is 8.3. This version has a new command named MYDGPS. It won't help with the reference station, but is useful for a rover trying to receive DGPS while the TNC is in the GPS mode. Regards Pete Prossen WA6ZUH > I have bought DGPS reference station kit and Motorola on core GPS > receiver from TAPR. I am constructing it. > I am going to experiment it for APRS-DGPS beacon. I have KPC-3 > version 6.0 (too old). How should I setup these equipment? > > I think.... > 1) Set the call sign in KPC-3. > 2) Set the unploto DGPS via WIDE > 3) Set KPC-3 to converce mode. > 4) Disconnect the PC from KPC-3. > 5) Connect the DGPS unit to KPC-3 > > Is that right? > But how to set a interval time of beacon? > > -------------------------- > unquote > > Thanks de WB4APR From dan.hinz@ieee.org Wed Oct 28 23:07:45 1998 Received: from dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.2]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA19426 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 23:07:44 -0600 (CST) Received: (from smap@localhost) by dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id XAA11382 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 23:07:11 -0600 (CST) Received: from sji-ca12-01.ix.netcom.com(205.186.214.129) by dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3) id rma011372; Wed Oct 28 23:06:58 1998 Message-ID: <3637F7F2.F8D85CBF@ieee.org> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:06:58 -0800 From: "Dan Hinz, Jr." X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1890] Re: No 1PPS signal w/Garmin GPS25 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks, it is working like a charm. Now to mount the antenna permanently. 73, Dan Dave Martindale wrote: > >Do I need to enable the 1PPS output? if so, how? > > Yes, you do. For some reason, the GPS 25 seems to use one channel's worth > of DSP power generating the 1 PPS output. So either you get 12 receiver > channels and no 1PPS (default config) or you get 11 channels plus 1PPS. > > Just get the serial port working, then send something like the following > to the receiver. Then power off and back on, and you should have 1 PPS. > > $PGRMC,,,,,,,,,,,,2,4, > $PGRMCE > > Note that you need to send CR/LF after each line. The "2" in the above > enables the 1 PPS output, and the "4" programs a 100 ms "high" duration > for the 1 PPS output. The PGRMCE command tells the GPS to send you > its current settings, so you can verify that the change happened OK. > > All this is explained in the GPS 25 LP manual. It also explains how > to put the GPS in 2D mode (3D is default) with a specified altitude; > this probably increases the accuracy of the 1 PPS output. You can > turn output sentences on and off to get just the ones you want. > And you can enable raw data (pseudorange and phase) on the other > serial port. > > Dave From edu@kender.es Thu Oct 29 01:46:54 1998 Received: from tass.kender.es (tass.kender.es [195.55.163.10]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA03119 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 01:46:49 -0600 (CST) Received: from tximbo (ppp4.kender.es [195.55.163.134]) by tass.kender.es (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA05750 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:46:13 +0100 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981029084438.00803790@kender.es> X-Sender: edu@kender.es X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:44:38 -0100 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: Eduardo Jacob Subject: Windows Motorola Configuration program Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I have received my new Motorola Oncore VP from Tapr and I have two cuestions: Is there a windows program for configurating the Oncore to use instead the dos progam supplied? I haven't read throughfully the docs, but it seems there is not documentation about the carrier phase option. Is it available? Eduardo/EA2BAJ From mhuslig@idir.net Thu Oct 29 08:38:08 1998 Received: from mail.kc.net (mail.kc.net [209.242.64.52]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA20661 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:38:07 -0600 (CST) Received: from port07.max2.law.idir.net (port07.max2.law.idir.net [209.172.208.81]) by mail.kc.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id IAA09925 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:37:58 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19981029153919.19e76042@pop3.idir.net> X-Sender: mhuslig@pop3.idir.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:39:19 -0600 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: Michael Huslig Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1896] Re: DGPS beacon Set Up? Version 8.3 is available for the KPC3+ only. The latest version for the original KPC3 is 8.2 Mike (mhuslig@kantronics.com) At 11:04 PM 10/28/98 -0600, you wrote: >I don't know if the 6.0 firmware honors all of the commands below, but >here's one way to get it working. My reference station also receives NMEA >back from rovers, so I must disallow the input echo and echo of transmitted >packets. > >MYCALL >UNPROTO DGPS (or whatever you want to use for the dummy name) >BTEXT >BEACON E 1 (an example that sends the explanation beacon every 1 minute) >CONMODE CONVERS >PMODE CONV (so TNC will power up in conversational mode) >NOMODE OFF (otherwise CONMODE won't work) >ECHO OFF (don't echo the input data) >MXMIT OFF (don't send transmitted packets back out the async port) >STREAMSW $00 (see explanation below) > >It is important to re-define the stream switch character. The default is >$7C which occurs in normal RTCM data. So if you don't change to >some value below $40 (out of the range of RTCM characters), your TNC will >periodically stop transmitting because it has been told to switch streams. > >It might be a good idea to get an update EPROM for your KPC-3. The >most recent version I'm aware of is 8.3. This version has a new command >named MYDGPS. It won't help with the reference station, but is useful >for a rover trying to receive DGPS while the TNC is in the GPS mode. > >Regards > >Pete Prossen > >WA6ZUH > > > >> I have bought DGPS reference station kit and Motorola on core GPS >> receiver from TAPR. I am constructing it. >> I am going to experiment it for APRS-DGPS beacon. I have KPC-3 >> version 6.0 (too old). How should I setup these equipment? >> >> I think.... >> 1) Set the call sign in KPC-3. >> 2) Set the unploto DGPS via WIDE >> 3) Set KPC-3 to converce mode. >> 4) Disconnect the PC from KPC-3. >> 5) Connect the DGPS unit to KPC-3 >> >> Is that right? >> But how to set a interval time of beacon? >> >> -------------------------- >> unquote >> >> Thanks de WB4APR > > From tac@clark.net Thu Oct 29 09:13:55 1998 Received: from aleph.gsfc.nasa.gov (aleph.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.201.86]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA21608 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:13:53 -0600 (CST) Received: from clark.net (tac.clark.net) by aleph.gsfc.nasa.gov; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:13:50 -0500 Message-Id: <3638862B.B382BF81@clark.net> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:13:47 +0000 From: "Dr Thomas A Clark (W3IWI)" Reply-To: tac@clark.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5b2 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en Mime-Version: 1.0 To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1898] Windows Motorola Configuration program References: <3.0.5.32.19981029084438.00803790@kender.es> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Eduardo Jacob wrote: > > I have received my new Motorola Oncore VP from Tapr and I have two cuestions: > > Is there a windows program for configurating the Oncore to use instead the > dos progam supplied? > > I haven't read throughfully the docs, but it seems there is not > documentation about the carrier phase option. Is it available? > > Eduardo/EA2BAJ Eduardo -- Rick's (WB2TNL) TAC32 Windows software is what you want. Fetch it from either TAPR or CNSSYS: http://www.tapr.org or http://www.cnssys.com It's much more "user friendly" than the Motorola software, and much more robust than my antique SHOWTIME program. Regarding carrier phase, you can check to see what options are available in TAC32. Hit [VIEW][RCVR ID MESSAGE] where the top of the display will looks something like > @@Cj > COPYRIGHT 1991-1997 MOTOROLA INC. > SFTW P/N # 98-P36830P > SOFTWARE VER # 10 > SOFTWARE REV # 0 > SOFTWARE DATE 24 Sep 1997 > MODEL # B8221Z1116 > HDWR P/N # _ > SERIAL # SSG0258495 > MANUFACTUR DATE 7M17 > OPTIONS LIST IBC On the last line, the BC options show that this receiver has all the "special" outputs available, while "I" eans that the receiver has 1PPS output with full TRAIM support. The same message is also available from the Motorola controller and SHOWTIME. 73, Tom From jjjohnson@saiph.hpl.hp.com Thu Oct 29 10:55:37 1998 Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com (root@hplms26.hpl.hp.com [15.255.168.31]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA25144 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:55:36 -0600 (CST) Received: from saiph.hpl.hp.com (saiph.hpl.hp.com [15.9.144.186]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.6 HPLabs Relay) with ESMTP id IAA07699 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:55:35 -0800 (PST) Received: (from jjjohnson@localhost) by saiph.hpl.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.6 HPLabs) id IAA12333 for tacgps@tapr.org; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:55:34 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:55:34 -0800 (PST) From: "James L. Johnson" Message-Id: <199810291655.IAA12333@saiph.hpl.hp.com> To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: TAC32 Beta 15 I have the TAC32Beta15 up and running with a UT+ receiver and all is looking good so far. This is a very fine piece of work by Rick Hambly. Jim Johnson W6SC jjohnson@hpl.hp.com From edu@kender.es Thu Oct 29 14:06:26 1998 Received: from tass.kender.es (tass.kender.es [195.55.163.10]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA01981 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 14:06:24 -0600 (CST) Received: from tximbo (ppp1.kender.es [195.55.163.131]) by tass.kender.es (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA14065 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:06:21 +0100 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981029210617.00825bf0@kender.es> X-Sender: edu@kender.es X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:06:17 -0100 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: Eduardo Jacob Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1900] Re: Windows Motorola Configuration program In-Reply-To: <3638862B.B382BF81@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >It's much more "user friendly" than the Motorola software, and much more >robust than my antique SHOWTIME program. Yes, I know of it. I think I'll be registering it soon. Another nice utility is SA Watch. I was thinking of something to program the Oncore and see the results, more or less like the GPS Control Program in the diskette. I got a nice program for the garmin SL20. >Regarding carrier phase, you can check to see what options are available in >TAC32. Hit [VIEW][RCVR ID MESSAGE] where the top of the display will looks >something like ... >On the last line, the BC options show that this receiver has all the >"special" outputs available, while "I" eans that the receiver has 1PPS output with >full TRAIM support. Yes, mine is the same. I was thinking about information about the carrier option pahse, what does it really mean. Btw, any good news about TOC?, I am still thinking of assembling a good frec. reference, but the rub approach seems a little expensive to me. Regards Eduardo/EA2BAJ From k4jpj@appstate.campus.mci.net Thu Oct 29 20:11:05 1998 Received: from aus-f.mp.campus.mci.net (aus-f.mp.campus.mci.net [208.140.84.26]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA23069 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:11:05 -0600 (CST) Received: from donaldha (s10-pm51.snaustel.campus.mci.net [206.96.232.87]) by aus-f.mp.campus.mci.net (8.9.0/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA25443 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 21:06:46 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981029202943.00831460@appstate.campus.mci.net> X-Sender: k4jpj@appstate.campus.mci.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:29:43 -0500 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: "Donald E. Haselwood" Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1901] TAC32 Beta 15 In-Reply-To: <199810291655.IAA12333@saiph.hpl.hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Jim, Did you get your UT+ from Synergy Systems? I have been debating whether to get the UT+ from them ($190) versus VP thru TAPR. I'm mainly interested in frequency/steering and the UT+ looks as good as the VP for this purpose, and a lower cost. 73's Don, W4DH At 11:00 AM 10/29/98 -0600, you wrote: > > I have the TAC32Beta15 up and running with a UT+ >receiver and all is looking good so far. This is a very >fine piece of work by Rick Hambly. > >Jim Johnson >W6SC >jjohnson@hpl.hp.com From jjjohnson@saiph.hpl.hp.com Fri Oct 30 12:47:43 1998 Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com (root@hplms26.hpl.hp.com [15.255.168.31]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA06222 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 12:47:42 -0600 (CST) Received: from saiph.hpl.hp.com (saiph.hpl.hp.com [15.9.144.186]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.6 HPLabs Relay) with ESMTP id KAA07906 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:47:35 -0800 (PST) Received: (from jjjohnson@localhost) by saiph.hpl.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.6 HPLabs) id KAA10287 for tacgps@tapr.org; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:47:34 -0800 (PST) From: Jim Johnson Message-Id: <199810301847.KAA10287@saiph.hpl.hp.com> Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1903] Re: TAC32 Beta 15 To: tacgps@tapr.org Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:47:33 PST In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981029202943.00831460@appstate.campus.mci.net>; from "Donald E. Haselwood" at Oct 29, 98 8:13 pm X-Mailer: Elm [revision: 109.19] > > Jim, > > Did you get your UT+ from Synergy Systems? I have been debating whether to > get the UT+ from them ($190) versus VP thru TAPR. I'm mainly interested in > frequency/steering and the UT+ looks as good as the VP for this purpose, > and a lower cost. > > 73's > Don, W4DH > Hi Don, No, we obtained it through Motorola/HP channels. The VP is the better receiver (and more expensive) but if you're looking at ham radio applications (as opposed to a professional calibration laboratory), the UT+ should be just fine. 73, Jim W6SC Hewlett-Packard Laboratories Palo Alto, CA From g13216@email1.wes.mot.com Fri Oct 30 13:32:02 1998 Received: from motgate.mot.com (motgate.mot.com [129.188.136.100]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA07710 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:32:01 -0600 (CST) Received: from pobox.mot.com (pobox.mot.com [129.188.137.100]) by motgate.mot.com (8.8.5/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id NAA23871 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:32:00 -0600 (CST) Comments: ( Received on motgate.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender g13216@email1.wes.mot.com ) Received: from email1.wes.mot.com (email1.wes.mot.com [192.93.6.3]) by pobox.mot.com (8.8.5/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id NAA12012 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:31:59 -0600 (CST) Received: by email1.wes.mot.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3) id ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:31:58 -0600 Message-ID: <51F347B016ADD011963200805FC145620340E24C@email1.wes.mot.com> From: Mastenbrook Gary-G13216 To: "'tacgps@tapr.org'" Subject: RE: UT+ vs. VP? Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:31:57 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3) Content-Type: text/plain Jim & all, The UT+ should have better RF performance (due to the extra filtering in the frontend) as well as equivalent (or better) timing performance than the VP. The UT+ is a newer model than the VP and is optimized for low cost high performance GPS timing applications. If I was putting together a TAC/TOC, I'd use a UT+ over a VP if one was available just to get the better RF rejection performance at my 'radio-active' laboratory. If you're trying to "do it all" and intend to implement a DGPS REF STATION along side your TAC, then you'll need the VP as it includes that functionality in the SW load. I believe that the UT+ also has more 1 PPS pulse flexibility than the VP and also includes some other output timing capabilities on the 1 PPS pin. The UT+ also has a site survey mode where it can automatically average its location for a set number of samples, then switch to timing mode for precise timing applications. Note that the UT+ and the VP are not the same hardware unit with just a different code load. Instead, the UT+ product is the newer hardware/software version of the older VP product. (Motorola also makes a vehicular applications version called the OnCore GT which is similar hardware wise to the UT+, but has NMEA capability added instead of the TRAIM and other timing functions used in the UT+. The VP had combined both of these into one receiver...) 73's Gary N8DMT > > Jim, > > Did you get your UT+ from Synergy Systems? I have been debating whether to > get the UT+ from them ($190) versus VP thru TAPR. I'm mainly interested in > frequency/steering and the UT+ looks as good as the VP for this purpose, > and a lower cost. > > 73's > Don, W4DH > Hi Don, No, we obtained it through Motorola/HP channels. The VP is the better receiver (and more expensive) but if you're looking at ham radio applications (as opposed to a professional calibration laboratory), the UT+ should be just fine. 73, Jim W6SC Hewlett-Packard Laboratories Palo Alto, CA From wd5ivd@tapr.org Fri Oct 30 14:32:38 1998 Received: from [128.83.74.103] (edb536j-2.edb.utexas.edu [128.83.74.103]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA09416 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:32:37 -0600 (CST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199810301847.KAA10287@saiph.hpl.hp.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19981029202943.00831460@appstate.campus.mci.net>; from "Donald E. Haselwood" at Oct 29, 98 8:13 pm Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:32:06 -0600 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1904] Re: TAC32 Beta 15 TAPR offers the UT+ as well. Cheers -- Greg >> >> Jim, >> >> Did you get your UT+ from Synergy Systems? I have been debating whether to >> get the UT+ from them ($190) versus VP thru TAPR. I'm mainly interested in >> frequency/steering and the UT+ looks as good as the VP for this purpose, >> and a lower cost. >> >> 73's >> Don, W4DH >> > >Hi Don, > > No, we obtained it through Motorola/HP channels. The VP is the >better receiver (and more expensive) but if you're looking at ham >radio applications (as opposed to a professional calibration >laboratory), the UT+ should be just fine. > >73, > >Jim W6SC >Hewlett-Packard Laboratories >Palo Alto, CA ----- Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From jjjohnson@saiph.hpl.hp.com Fri Oct 30 16:53:51 1998 Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com (root@hplms26.hpl.hp.com [15.255.168.31]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA15053 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 16:53:50 -0600 (CST) Received: from saiph.hpl.hp.com (saiph.hpl.hp.com [15.9.144.186]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.6 HPLabs Relay) with ESMTP id OAA19745 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:53:49 -0800 (PST) Received: (from jjjohnson@localhost) by saiph.hpl.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.6 HPLabs) id OAA20497 for tacgps@tapr.org; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:53:47 -0800 (PST) From: Jim Johnson Message-Id: <199810302253.OAA20497@saiph.hpl.hp.com> Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1905] RE: UT+ vs. VP? To: tacgps@tapr.org Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 14:53:46 PST In-Reply-To: <51F347B016ADD011963200805FC145620340E24C@email1.wes.mot.com>; from "Mastenbrook Gary-G13216" at Oct 30, 98 1:33 pm X-Mailer: Elm [revision: 109.19] > > Jim & all, > The UT+ should have better RF performance (due to the extra filtering in > the frontend) as well as equivalent (or better) timing performance than > the VP. The UT+ is a newer model than the VP and is optimized for low > cost high performance GPS timing applications. If I was putting > together a TAC/TOC, I'd use a UT+ over a VP if one was available just to > get the better RF rejection performance at my 'radio-active' laboratory. > If you're trying to "do it all" and intend to implement a DGPS REF > STATION along side your TAC, then you'll need the VP as it includes that > functionality in the SW load. I believe that the UT+ also has more 1 > PPS pulse flexibility than the VP and also includes some other output > timing capabilities on the 1 PPS pin. The UT+ also has a site survey > mode where it can automatically average its location for a set number of > samples, then switch to timing mode for precise timing applications. > > Note that the UT+ and the VP are not the same hardware unit with just a > different code load. Instead, the UT+ product is the newer > hardware/software version of the older VP product. (Motorola also makes > a vehicular applications version called the OnCore GT which is similar > hardware wise to the UT+, but has NMEA capability added instead of the > TRAIM and other timing functions used in the UT+. The VP had combined > both of these into one receiver...) > 73's > Gary N8DMT Hi Gary and all, Yes indeed, the points you make about the added features and lower cost are quite true, but my colleague makes the point that in his work he is able to average below the level of SA, and at that level the VP is a "quieter" receiver than the UT+. This could be the result of the lower cost chipset as you pointed out. I guess this reinforces my point that for ham radio applications, the UT+ is probably the better choice because of the lower cost and richer feature set than the VP, and the quieter performance of the VP would never be seen outside of a sophisticated laboratory. Speaking of features, apparently the VP does not have the feature that flags a disconnected antenna, whereas the UT+ does have this. Thanks again for your input on these receivers. 73, Jim W6SC From k4jpj@appstate.campus.mci.net Fri Oct 30 21:25:45 1998 Received: from aus-a.mp.campus.mci.net (aus-a.mp.campus.mci.net [208.140.84.21]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA02991 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 21:25:44 -0600 (CST) Received: from mbh (s13-pm63.snaustel.campus.mci.net [206.96.233.210]) by aus-a.mp.campus.mci.net (8.9.0/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA25794 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 22:19:26 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981030175014.007c0b70@appstate.campus.mci.net> X-Sender: k4jpj@appstate.campus.mci.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 17:50:14 -0500 To: tacgps@tapr.org From: "Donald E. Haselwood" Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1906] Re: TAC32 Beta 15 In-Reply-To: References: <199810301847.KAA10287@saiph.hpl.hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I rummaged around www.tapr.org, but didn't find UT+ material. Did I miss something? 73's Don, W4DH >TAPR offers the UT+ as well. >----- >Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas >wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From tac@clark.net Fri Oct 30 23:15:54 1998 Received: from aleph.gsfc.nasa.gov (aleph.gsfc.nasa.gov [128.183.201.86]) by tapr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA06358 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 23:15:53 -0600 (CST) Received: from clark.net (tac.clark.net) by aleph.gsfc.nasa.gov; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 00:15:50 -0500 Message-Id: <363A9CFF.D8593EC9@clark.net> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 05:15:43 +0000 From: "Dr Thomas A Clark (W3IWI)" Reply-To: tac@clark.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5b2 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en Mime-Version: 1.0 To: tacgps@tapr.org Subject: Re: [TACGPS:1907] RE: UT+ vs. VP? References: <199810302253.OAA20497@saiph.hpl.hp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Responding to some comments from Gary (N8DMT) and Jim (W6SC): First Gary -- > The UT+ should have better RF performance (due to the extra filtering in > the frontend) as well as equivalent (or better) timing performance than > the VP. The UT+ is a newer model than the VP and is optimized for low > cost high performance GPS timing applications .... [snip] The UT+ was really designed for time/freq synchronization at cellular phone sites, which (IMHO) was the reason that Motorola tightened up on the filtering. However, it is my understanding that the latest "B8" VPs (which is what TAPR has been providing for the past few months with Rev 10 firmware in them) have also had their RFI performance improved -- see http://www.synergy-gps.com/vponcore.html > If you're trying to "do it all" and intend to implement a DGPS REF > STATION along side your TAC, then you'll need the VP as it includes that > functionality in the SW load. I believe that the UT+ also has more 1 > PPS pulse flexibility than the VP and also includes some other output > timing capabilities on the 1 PPS pin. The UT+ also has a site survey > mode where it can automatically average its location for a set number of > samples, then switch to timing mode for precise timing applications. > [snip] IMHO, the "DGPS" option available in the VP (and not the UT+) is one of the major reasons to make the VP be the better choice. Even if you don't plan to use the VP as a DGPS base station (using N7HPR's TAPR DGPSIB), the DGPS output is very useful. One of the major research topics I did in formulating the basic TAC concept was to characterize the actual power spectrum of SA. To do this, I recorded the pseudorange (PR) and pseudorange rate (PRR) errors reported in the DGPS message, and then did a lot of power spectral analysis on the errors. This led me to the conclusion that SA was a band-limited process with spectral components ranging from a few seconds down to ~30 minutes. This information was invaluable in trying to optimize the filters that "remove" SA. There is no "added flexibility" in the UT+ 1PPS output. However it does offer the user the option of selecting a 100PPS output rate in lieu of the normal 1PPS output. Last spring I reported on an idea on how to add a second selectable rate with about $25 in parts (all DigiKey stock) and two ICs. The Timing Interpolator could be used to make rates like 50PPS, 1kPPS, 2kPPS, 10PPS etc in addition to the UT+ 100 PPS. Nobody showed much interest, but this design could be rejuvenated. If there is need for a GPS-referenced pulse generator (like as an interrupt generator, marker for seismograms, etc) please speak up. Regarding the "self-survey" in the UT+ -- this option has always existed in software in both my original SHOWTIME and Rick's TAC32. As I understand the UT+ self survey, it is fixed at 10,000 seconds. IMHO this is too short a period for a proper self-survey. My recommendation has always been a minimum of 1/2 day (43,200 sec) and 1 day if possible. You should also note that the VP does support "human readible" NMEA outputs in lieu of the faster and more flexible (but illegible) binary. For me, NMEA has been a valuable resource to have when I'm diagnosing performance. In reply, Jim added: > Yes indeed, the points you make about the added features and lower > cost are quite true, but my colleague makes the point that in his work > he is able to average below the level of SA, and at that level the VP is > a "quieter" receiver than the UT+ [snip] I presume this refers to some of Robin's efforts. Most of my detailed probing of timing performance has been with the VP, and my experience is that it is an incredible timing "engine". The low-cost other receiver that looks very promising is the Canadian Marconi "ALLSTAR" CMC-12. The CMC-12 seems to be a "winner" for carrier phase recovery applications. On the negative side (vis a vis the VP series), I have heard two persistent Motorola rumors -- which I wonder if anyone can confirm. Let me stress that these are only rumors and not factoids! (1) Motorola has been putting all their development efforts into the UT+ and GT platforms. I get the feeling that they think of the general-purpose VP as a dinosaur and they would like to concentrate on the newer engines. (2) There have been hints that Motorola is planning some sort of 12-channel "engine" in the near future, but have been rather mum about it since they don't want to have any erosion of the sales of the present GT/UT engines. The hint I heard was that this might be announced 4Q98 or 1Q99. And none of my rumor sources hint that the 12-channel will be a VP -- which in turn tells me that Motorola is trying to get out of the DGPS Base Station business. 73, Tom