![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]() peter wrote: Mxsmanic wrote: "Jim Macklin" writes: they give altitude, accurate to within a few feet. Unfortunately, no, they do not. GPS is accurate for lateral navigation, not vertical navigation. GPS altitudes can easily be off by as much as 200 feet at ground level in comparison to a correctly set altimeter, and at altitude the disparity can reach 500 feet. The reason for this is that the angles used for triangulation of lateral positions are large and permit a high level of precision, but the angles for triangulation of altitude are very small and it's very easy to be off by a wide margin. This indicates a basic lack of understanding of GPS technology. The GPS receiver never deals with measurement of any angles nor with triangulation. What is measured are the precise times of arrival of the signals from the satellites. Since the satellites encode the signals with timing information from their sychronized atomic clocks and also send detailed orbital data to define their own positions, the receiver is able to determine the relative distances to the various satellites based on the speed of light/radio and the observed relative signal delays. Using this distance information together with the known positions of the satellites then allows for a determination of the position of the receiver. Note that this never involves a measurement of any angles. It is true that altitude measurements are generally somewhat less accurate than horizontal position measurements due to the basic geometry of receiving satellite signals from only the satellites that are above you. Ideal measurement of altitude would also involve some satellites below you but of course their signals are blocked by the earth. Similarly, east-west positions are a bit better accuracy than north-south since the satellites are equally likely to be east and west of you but there's a greater likelihood of them being to the south rather than the north (at least from the northern hemisphere). My long-term evaluation of GPS altitude accuracy has shown that I get values within 35' of accurately surveyed altitudes at least 95% of the time ever since Selective Availability was turned off. Using the WAAS correction data improves this to get the accuracy down to 20' with 95% confidence. Both of these are based on having a reasonably unobstructed view of the sky (which generally isn't hard in an aircraft unless the antenna is poorly positioned). Your impression is supported by the published nominal accuracy of GPS: +/- 10m horizontal, +/- 20m vertical. The reduced vertical accuracy comes from the fact that although the sats are at ~20,000 km their horizontal spacing can be much larger than that. As you say, the fix is 3D and it always is a 3D solution once the minimum 4 sats are acquired for the solution. In addition, if your receiver can hold more than 4 sats it may be able to average the data to improve the fix. On my 12 channel boat GPS I see a HDOP of ~1m these days. More important perhaps is that the aviation nav. chart I use is not referenced to WGS84 which is strange as all my sailing charts are. I understant that the "powers that be" are trying to settle which geoid to use but I would imagine that the height corrections could be quite large when it all gets sorted out. Is that why the peak obstacle height over the sea is never marked as 0' (i.e. MSL is not conforming to the geoid of reference)? Cheers MC(student pilot) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
DR wrote:
On my 12 channel boat GPS I see a HDOP of ~1m these days. HDOP is unitless. Ron Lee |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Ron Lee wrote: DR wrote: On my 12 channel boat GPS I see a HDOP of ~1m these days. HDOP is unitless. Good point. I'm sorry that I was being so loose. But you could descibe the 1 sigma dilutuion of precision in terms of distance at your position and time -right? I was actually amazed to see that my Ryatheon GPS put my boat right in the center of the correct dock -implying 2m accuracy (or better)! Cheers MC |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
DR wrote:
On my 12 channel boat GPS I see a HDOP of ~1m these days. HDOP is unitless. Good point. I'm sorry that I was being so loose. But you could descibe the 1 sigma dilutuion of precision in terms of distance at your position and time -right? I was actually amazed to see that my Ryatheon GPS put my boat right in the center of the correct dock -implying 2m accuracy (or better)! Cheers MC I have to think about it. Position accuracy is given by this generic equation: DOP x UERE x 2 = position accuracy (2 sigma or 95%) where UERE is the combination of the space and user equipment error sources. Ron Lee |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
terminology questions: turtledeck? cantilever wing? | Ric | Home Built | 2 | September 13th 05 09:39 PM |
I Hate Radios | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 9 | June 6th 05 05:39 PM |
(sorta OT) Free Ham Radio Course | RST Engineering | Piloting | 43 | January 24th 05 08:05 PM |
1944 Aerial War Comes to Life in Radio Play | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | March 25th 04 10:57 PM |
Ham Radio In The Airplane | Cy Galley | Owning | 23 | July 8th 03 03:30 AM |