Year of manufacture estimated 1984/85, from date code on ic's. I notice that the tube is from FTS, the same construction as in the FTS 4060, but different part number and wonder if this was original fitment, or has been replaced at some stage... Regards & Thanks Chris Quayle Oxford, England .

On 7 Feb 2015 19:18, "Tom McDermott" wrote: > Has anyone on the list measured or otherwise estimated the active antenna > delay including the amp and filters? > > -- Tom, N5EG I have never done this, but suspect that using a VNA is the best way to go.

The timing report and estimator is just to make sure that a synchron design will work. The type of jitter/noise that you see is kind of typical. It's not that I don't like FPGA, I love it, but I just don't trust it for precision timing like that. Cheers, Magnus

Ole's estimate of 1-2k/yr is much closer to the truth than your $161/yr. /tvb

What we call "carrier phase" is just using the information from that subsystem to get a better estimate for the time differences. Attila Kinali -- It is upon moral qualities that a society is ultimately founded.

. > However, if you're going to post process data using something like Gipsy-X, they have "better estimates" of the time base for all the systems, so you can get a combination. I suppose when you process you tell it which one is your favorite base, and it adjusts to that.

Have you considered using the UBX-TIM-TP qErr correction (the receivers own estimate of the quantisation error for the TIMEPULSE output) instead of sawtooth filtering? I have played with it a little on a u-blox M8, and it sure seemed to smooth things out, but I haven’t made any real measurements on the result. Anders, Thanks for sharing your results!

I am glad you could confirm my rough estimate. The critical point when measuring SC-cut crystals at room temperature is, that their f(T) response is rather steep at room temperature. There even minor temperature variations during the sweep (or between two sweeps) will cause a shift of the impedance response.

NTP is using the PPS and my stats look good, but when I run     ntpq -c kerninfo my output is:     associd=0 status=0118 leap_none, sync_pps, 1 event, no_sys_peer,     pll offset:            0.00753     pll frequency:         -10.4492     maximum error:         0.012     estimated error:       1e-06     kernel status:         pll nano     pll time

With around one watt being dissipated inside, 50C is probably a low estimate of the worst-case ambient temperature inside an enclosed TNS-BUF. My personal design limit would be a dissipation of no more than 150mW for each TO-92 (less if h/w tests showed internal ambient temperature > 50C).