![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It's many miles. Nanosecond accuracy is required for the current ~10
meter accuracy. Linear extrapolation would lead to ~10 kilometers. The speed of light is about 30 cm per nanosecond (a foot, give or take a bit) so 10 meters calls for a resolution of about 30 nsec. Not really a big deal these days (I design systems that must resolve to better than 0.5 nsec). But the extrapolation to 10 km (which is indeed how far light travels in 38 microseconds) doesn't work. GPS receivers don't rely on an internal, independent clock. They synchronize to the satellite - which is a sloppy way of putting it anyway. The real issue is the difference between travel times of signals from different satellites, not the absolute travel time. Thus what matters here (to a first approximation, anyway) is that the satellites are synchronized to each other, not to any earthbound clock. To a second approximation, it is important that the almanac be right. In other words, the satellite needs to be where it is expected to be at the time it transmits. However, now the errors measured in microseconds are much smaller - the key parameter is not how far light travels in those microseconds (about 10 km as you noted), but how far the satellite travels in those microseconds (more properly measured in centimeters rather than kilometers). Of course the error, if not corrected, is cumulative. After a few weeks it would be quite significant. Michael |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|