[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
RE: Re: GPS signals
- To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: Re: GPS signals
- From: "Ian Willoughby" <ian@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:45:19 -0000
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
This is correct SA just returned a random inaccuracy with the cooridinates
returned from the satellites. An average of 20+ readings would yield a
fairly accurate position, of course if you were an international terrorist
that would have given the US time to launch a cruise missle at you before
you had an accurate enough fix from your handheld non military GPS :-)
R's
Ian
-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Lowe [mailto:ian@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Mon 17/11/2003 15:37
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Cc:
Subject: Re: [ukha_d] Re: GPS signals
I honestly don't know, I only ever had a GPS after selective availability
was turned off.
personally, I would have expected a DoP to still let you see 12 sats, but
with less accuracy..
----- Original Message -----
From: "White, Peter" <peter.white@xxxxxxx>
To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 3:20 PM
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Re: GPS signals
> This did cross my mind, but would that not just mean that the accuracy
is
> reduced, rather than the satellites not actually being available?
Either
> way, I'll wait and see if the new antenna fixes it.
>
> Thanks, Pete
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|