[time-nuts] HP 117/10509a...

[Bob Camp]

Hi

I'd bet at least a cold order of fries that what ever chip comes out of this is going to be a cheap one. At least that will be true after a couple years. The target market is wall clocks…

Bob

On Jul 8, 2012, at 10:29 AM, paul wrote:

> To be very clear here.
> There is not a box coming from NIST.
> They do not want the responsibility to maintain what ever it would be.
> 
> The reason to make the change to the format is for better frequency and time distribution by this channel.
> It seeks to improve overall system gain and attempts to negate interference from MSF at least in regions of the east.
> 
> Whats very interesting is that the silicon would in some way recover a carrier to recover the data. If that carrier happened to be on a pin of the chip then you might take advantage of this new method and it could then be used perhaps to drive the old equipment. I certainly have no problem with such an approach.
> 
> But suspect the rcvr will be multi-$$$$ and have to saythats not in the ole budget.
> 
> Further
> wwvb has not been a great way to distribute frequency for 20 years.
> We time-nuts all have done far better with GPS. Granted no way to check it against anything else.
> So I simply do not understand the why of all of this. Not throwing stones here.
> Its just thats one big electric bill every month and there has to be a bit more clever alternate national freq dist method that would be far more economical and deliver better coverage and interference rejection.
> Think about it, this new modulation method with say 5 transmitters at lower power. Central site to control stability though at that point lots of other approaches come into play. Oh thats LORAN C sorry.
> 
> Just very curious as to why the two approaches, especially since we also know eloran is also being explored.
> 
> All of this is getting wayyyy off topic.
> Regards
> Paul
> 
> 
> On 7/8/2012 6:50 AM, Bob Camp wrote:
>> Hi
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 8, 2012, at 1:17 AM, David J Taylor wrote:
>> 
>>> As an observer from across the pond:
>>> 
>>> - presumably, the vast majority of users would not be affected.
>> Yes, the wall clock and wrist watch people (I use both) would not be impacted according to NIST. I have seen no reports of, and not observed any impact on my stuff.
>> 
>>> - is there a technical solution which would be compatible with both old and new methods?  Some alternative modulation scheme?
>> The whole format of the change has been under the guise of a government investment in a technology company. That's taken the whole debate about modulation formats out of the public eye. The goals of the new modulation scheme are a bit unclear, so it's difficult to evaluate alternatives. One would *assume* that the cost of silicon to demodulate the new format is a major part of the decision on the new approach. That said, yes there has to be another way to do this that does not nuke the old gear.
>> 
>>> - is there not a testing period, where results can be fed back as to the compatibility or otherwise of the new scheme?
>> There have been tests. There is no official / formal feedback mechanism for the tests. It's not totally clear what any of the testing results are. One would *guess* that they are testing a silicon implementation of their receiver in the field. One would also *guess* that nothing "important" is impacted by the modulation.
>> 
>>> - has there been any official response to your comments that the new scheme stops existing equipment working properly?
>> The response has been: Yes we know this breaks your stuff. They have put that in writing. There is a somewhat vague promise that a box that "translates" the new format to one the old gear can use could / would / might be developed. No idea at all what such a box would look like or cost. Also no idea how well it would perform.
>>  
>>> - can you involve your members of the legislature, or would the be either inappropriate or a waste of time?
>> Based on past experience - waste of time, even in an election year. The subject is to hard to understand and not enough voters are impacted.
>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> David
>>> -- 
>>> SatSignal Software - Quality software written to your requirements
>>> Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
>>> Email: david-taylor at blueyonder.co.uk
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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.