[time-nuts] LORAN-C demise

Mark Spencer mspencer12345 at yahoo.ca
Sun Nov 29 20:25:06 UTC 2009


The main difference is that receiving lf signals is challenging in many areas built up areas and the doppler shift of hf via sky wave reduces the accuracy considerably, while there are already a large number of exisiting high power transmitters that can be locked to an external time base and have line of site paths to many locations in a typical metropolitan area.   If a sutiable receiver existed this might be a feasible means of distributing accurate frequency info and then with a suitable reciever you could generate a 1 pps signal.  That being said a dedicated uhf or shf transmiter that could send accurate 1 pps signals (as well as providing a very accurate carrier frequency) might be an easier solution.  In any event if there was a market for such a system I believe it would have emerged by now.   
I imagine you could even design a gps timing receiver that could also receive terristerial signals as a backup, but again it does not seem there is a market for this (:

Lux, Jim (337C) wrote: 
> On 11/29/09 11:40 AM, "Mark Spencer" <mspencer12345 at yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> Any thoughts on how complex a receiver would need to be to produce a 1 pps
>> signal that was locked to the carrier frequency it was receiving ? Lot&#39;s
>> of comercial transmitting equipment is designed to use an external frequency
>> standard and if a transmitter at a high altitude site was locked to a cesium
>> source it could serve a typical metroplitan area.   Locking an existing
>> transmiiter to a cesium standard would not require any special signals or wave
>> forms to be transmitted.  To be usefull the receiver would need to produce a
>> standard 1 pps output.
>> 
>> Stanley Reynolds wrote:
>>> How about the Volunteer Association of GPS Backup for Timing, VAGBT ?
>>> Propose of the group is to provide backup distribution of timing information
>>> for GPS users, via armature radio and cesium clocks. To develop many local
>>> transmit stations as possible and low cost receivers with both extended
>>> holdover and comparison to GPS to measure backup accuracy. Many low power
>>> transmitters would be required as the cost of continuous operation would be
>>> lower for each station, and the identification of less accurate stations
>>> possible if several in each location was avabile.
> And how is this is different from time stations like WWV or WWVB?  They're
> driven by cesium clocks (or an ensemble of clocks).  The atmospheric
> propagation uncertainty means that the received instantaneous frequency
> might be off by 1E-7 or so (for HF WWV, at least), but I would imagine that
> averaged over a long time, it's quite a bit better (one NIST doc says 1E-9),
> but apparently it's tough to do straight averaging. The station clocks at
> WWV is is good to something like 1E-13  (adev of 1E-13 at tau of 10,000
> seconds, down to about 2E-13 at tau of 1E6 seconds)
> WWVB at 60kHz is different.. It's from the same master clock, but the NIST
> doc says that received phase is stable to 1E-8 at tau of 2 seconds, down to
> 1E-9 at a tau of 1000 seconds, with a WWVB disciplined oscillator getting
> down to around 1E-12 for averaging over a day (which NIST says is about 1
> order of mag worse than a GPS disciplined oscillator)
> Of course http://tf.nist.gov/general/pdf/1969.pdf says they use common view
> GPS to sync the WWV transmitter to the clocks in Boulder. It doesn't use GPS
> for time, just as a source visible to both at the same time)  The same
> document claims that 0.1 millisecond absolute time uncertainty should be
> achievable with the received signals of WWV/WWVH and perhaps <1 microsecond
> for WWVB.
> One can propose, say, VHF or UHF signals radiated from a high location which
> would potentially have better instantaneous frequency stability (because the
> propagation is more stable), but at some point, you're still going to have
> to deal with things like SNR and propagation.  Granted a lot of those issues
> are "solved" in some sense (e.g. You could set up a GPS pseudolite, like
> they do for approach/landing navigation experiments)
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.



      __________________________________________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! 

http://www.flickr.com/gift/



More information about the time-nuts mailing list