[time-nuts] Modern Rb atomic reference vs classic Cs

[Bob kb8tq]

Hi

Backing off a bit, as long as GPS is doing it’s part ( or your GNSS system of
choice …) an OCXO based setup may do as well as / better than your typical
“almost dead” used Cs standard. 

It is very easy to find a used Cs with a dead tube. It is quite hard to find one 
with a tube that is fully up to original specs / runs for years. Finding replacement
tubes is ( and always has been) a very involved process. There are way more 
used / dead tubes out there than used / working. 

Buying a new tube is in the “forget about it” price range. There also is no practical
way to rebuild one. You can do this or that trick to maybe get a bit more time out
of this or that tube … but maybe not. 

Thus the pair of dead 5061’s sitting in the basement.

Bob

> On Mar 14, 2020, at 12:06 AM, Peter Membrey <peter at membrey.hk> wrote:
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> Potentially a bit of a loaded topic, but I'm really curious as to what the consensus is on this. For the research I've been doing over the past few years, I've been predominantly using an SRS FS-725 (which uses the PRS-10) disciplined by a Microsemi S650 (with the Rb option, though it never went into holdover).
> 
> Modern Caesium references are expensive compared to the FS-725, but now and then more classic Caesium references become available such as the HP 5061A. These still aren't cheap (actually, not far off a brand new PRS-10) so I was wondering how do they generally compare with a modern Rb?
> 
> If I have a PRS-10 that's being disciplined by a good GPS source, would I see any benefit if I replaced the PRS-10 with an HP5061A (particularly in terms of stability)?
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> 
> Kind Regards,
> 
> 
> Peter Membrey
> 
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.