[time-nuts] 10 mhz accuracy for a satellite system

Wed Feb 6 00:14:14 UTC 2019

Hi All 

I have just pulled out of redundant stock a Trimble 2102 Plus satellite
navigation unit for an aircraft can this be used as a frequency standard at
such as  1/5/10 Mhz

Paul B

-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-bounces at lists.febo.com] On Behalf Of Bob
kb8tq
Sent: 05 February 2019 19:12
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] 10 mhz accuracy for a satellite system

Hi

If the sticker on the OCXO (not the label on the outside of the box) has a
date code 
in 2006, that should be fine. I've seen cases on . errr . various sites .
errr .
where the stuff inside the box did not match up very well with the labels on
the outside
of the box. No idea why ..

Bob

> On Feb 5, 2019, at 12:26 PM, Richard Solomon <w1ksz at outlook.com> wrote:
> 
> The two I have are Trimbles with Red & Black Labels with White letters.
> It's marked D/C 0635, which if I assume is the Date Code puts them in
> 2006.
> 
> 73, Dick, W1KSZ
> 
> Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>
> ________________________________
> From: time-nuts <time-nuts-bounces at lists.febo.com> on behalf of Bob kb8tq
<kb8tq at n1k.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 8:32 AM
> To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] 10 mhz accuracy for a satellite system
> 
> Hi
> 
> The parts we typically call TBolt's  were produced from about 1997 through
about 2006.
> The date codes on the parts are one way to work out how far along the uint
you have is
> in that sequence. There are other parts that Trimble produced (produces)
under the same
> Thunderbolt brand. Those can be quite different beasts depending on which
one you
> happen to be looking at.
> 
> The early parts had OCXO's labeled "PIEZO" on them. The later parts had a 
> generic "TRIMBLE" label on them. The PIEZO labels have a date code stamped

> on them sort of randomly. The TRIMBLE labels have a field marked "date 
> code". In all cases I have seen it's a two digit year followed by a two 
> 
> digit week. Anything with a PIEZO label is "early". Anything from about
2003 on should be a pretty good
> OCXO.  There are no guarantees, but that's a pretty good guess.
> 
> There are also changes in the temperature sensor IC and mods to the 
> firmware along the way. The novel approach to a precision DAC and the 
> resulting "noticeable" temperature coefficient seems to have been a 
> constant through the entire production run. They also have various little.
> spurs and noise bumps that some people get into cleaning up
> The good news is that they all (from the first unit to the very last) run.
> very well with LH *That* more than any other factor makes them a really 
> good choice. When tuned up,set up, and monitored with LH, they do much
better than they would just running on their own.
> 
> Bob
> 
>> On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:23 AM, Richard Solomon <w1ksz at outlook.com> wrote:
>> 
>> How does one tell the difference between "early" and "later" ?
>> 
>> S/N, Rev # ??
>> 
>> 73, Dick, W1KSZ
>> 
>> Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>
>> ________________________________
>> From: time-nuts <time-nuts-bounces at lists.febo.com> on behalf of Bob kb8tq
<kb8tq at n1k.org>
>> Sent: Monday, February 4, 2019 7:23 PM
>> To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
>> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] 10 mhz accuracy for a satellite system
>> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> One thing to watch on the TBolts - the ocxo's used in them got better as 
>> the years went by. An early one likely will not do quite as well as a 
>> later one. They also updated the firmware as time went by, same basic 
>> issue - later is probably better ..
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
>>> On Feb 4, 2019, at 8:51 PM, Richard Solomon <w1ksz at outlook.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> There have been some Trimble Thunderbolts over on that auction site
>>> that were being sold for $80 each (not surplus Telcom ones).
>>> I grabbed two and they work.
>>> 
>>> My antenna was a "hockey puck" style antenna sitting on the window
>>> sash, facing South.
>>> 
>>> 73, Dick, W1KSZ
>>> 
>>> Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: time-nuts <time-nuts-bounces at lists.febo.com> on behalf of Grant
Hodgson <grant at ghengineering.co.uk>
>>> Sent: Monday, February 4, 2019 11:15 AM
>>> To: time-nuts at lists.febo.com
>>> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] 10 mhz accuracy for a satellite system
>>> 
>>> Paul
>>> 
>>> The keyword is GPSDO - GPS disciplined oscillator.  The vast majority of
>>> these will give a 10MHz output.  The long term accuracy is the same as
>>> the GPS navigation system, which for most purposes is similar to that of
>>> national standards.  GPSDOs are more stable than most rubidium standards
>>> in the long term, and GPSDOs are extremely common in most laboratories.
>>> 
>>> The Trimble Thunderbolt is very common and available on the surplus
>>> market, as is the HP Z3801A.  James Miller (G3RUH) used to sell an
>>> excellent GPSDO.  There are other home-brew designs available if you
>>> want to build.   These have all been extensively characterised if you
>>> want the details.
>>> 
>>> If you want to buy new, then there are products such as the Fury and
>>> Firefly from Jackson Labs; , U-Blox have many offerings (not sure if
>>> they do a GPSDO though).
>>> 
>>> Google GPSDO or GPS frequency standard, or check the leapsecond.com
>>> website for more information - there's loads out there, it's just a case
>>> of using the right term in the search engine.
>>> 
>>> regards    Grant
>>> 
>>>> Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 23:43:10 -0000
>>>> From: "Paul Bicknell" <paul at bicknells.f2s.com>
>>>> To: "'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement'"
>>>>     <time-nuts at lists.febo.com>
>>>> Subject: [time-nuts] 10 mhz accuracy for a satellite system
>>>> Message-ID: <D1F28D64EDD440EC834753538090F381 at precision380>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain;     charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>> 
>>>> Dear all
>>>> I currently use a 198 Khz off air standard but I can no longer use 60 
>>>> khz since it moved from Rugby
>>>> I have herd a lot about varies frequency references that use satellites
>>>> This technology has improved immensely & become more affordable over 
>>>> the past 5 years
>>>> 
>>>> So can a standard locked to a satellite be as good as a Rubidium ?
>>>> 
>>>> What accuracy can I achieve for a satellite system below ?800 as I am 
>>>> not familiar with the latest that are on offer?
>>>> 
>>>> Regards Paul Bicknell  South Coast UK