[time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly

[Bob Camp]

Hi

I don't have a problem with going after a known format. What I have been
worried about is the existence of a portion of the format that we simply do
not know about (yet). 
Of less concern are the minor details about the actual transmission. For
instance: Added AM modulation (or not) to zero carrier at the point of phase
change is as yet unmentioned. 

Bob 

-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces at febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces at febo.com] On
Behalf Of Poul-Henning Kamp
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 2:05 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Now a Monopoly

In message <50633BF8.9050705 at ussc.com>, Clint Turner writes:

>In reviewing the NIST document, I don't see anything particularly 
>difficult about the new format - either in terms of extracting the time 
>or phase/frequency information from the transmissions. 

As a somewhat seasoned VLF SDR radio-nut, I must admit that I find
the yelling of bloody murder over a so simple and well documented
transmission format.

Class action suit because they *improve* your VLF time/freq reference
signal and document the new format ?

Really ?

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

_______________________________________________
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.