sailquik said..
>>>
The rotation appears to be 1 second. I think even slowing to 2 seconds a screen would make a big difference. I suspect any more than 3 seconds would be a bit too long and tedious.

decrepit said..
OK today I did another geostationary test, swapped from 5hz to 1hz about half way through. The device was on a table in our front yard, not perfect skyview, house and trees not that far away. Satelites varied between 8 and 10, predominately 9
5hz gave a distance gain of 64cm/min
1hz gave a distance gain of 47cm/min

doppler speed graph showed a dead flat 0 line, trackpoint speed graph shows intermitent small spikes.

sailquik said..
I also did a geostationary test today with the GW-52 next to (30cm from) a GT-31. GW-52 set to 1 second logging. I left them for just over 1hr. Comparing the Doppler results in RealSpeed: Apologies for the approximations rather than precise figures. It is more effort than I can muster to actually count the anomalous speed and SDOP readings out of thousands data points. GW-52: This GPS was using 9 sats for over 99% of the test. The Speed display was mostly zero with a display of 0.01 knots every now and then. At the very start there were a few higher readings but after less than 1 minute I did not see any higher than 0.01 knots for the next few minutes. RealSpeed data shows the Doppler speed varying from 0.000 to 0.019 knots with only a very few readings above that. The maximum was 0.039 knots. The total accumulated Doppler distance over about 64 minutes was 6.9km. Note that every speed reading will have a small distance added to the total distance but those distances are very random in direction and don't cover much more than a total of a Metre in any direction. The Trackpoint distance was over 27 KM! The SDOP error was correspondingly small. It was always under 0.019 after the first couple of minutes. GT-31: This GPS was using 8 satellites for most of the test but dropped to 7 a couple of times for a minute or so. The speed display varied a lot more and was between 0.01 and approx 0.20, with figures between 0.06 and 0.12 common for the time I watched it. RealSpeed shows Doppler speed varying between 0.019 and 0.058 for a large % of the time, but with significant data up to 0.078 at times. This surprised me because I expected to see it agree closer with the screen display. The SDOP error was consistently at 0.233 with little variation at all over the hour. The big surprise was that the accumulated Doppler distance was just over 82 KM! This was actually larger than the accumulated trackpoint distance of just over 56 km. The positional graph showed about double the spread in area of the GX-52 wanderings. It is difficult for me to quantify the 'wandering' area of the two GPS as RealSpeed only gives coordinates in Degrees and fractions thereof. But I can open both superimposed and see the scale of difference. I will see if I can do a better measurement in GPS-Results. Thats about all the useful info I can assimilate at the moment. I may well see some more significant things when my head stops hurting from this analysis! But, on first look it seems to support the GX-52 being significantly more accurate than the GT-31.More tests and time will tell.

decrepit said..
Yoyo's just asked me to check unfiltered doppler in real speed, but I'm not booting into windoze again today, it'll have to wait until next time it's absolutely necessary!

sailquik said..
>>>

Am I missing something?.

sailquik said..
>>>>

What were the SDOP values and range?

yoyo said..
notice some GW52 tracks to the east of GT31 and some to the west. Reminds me of the Cobblers walk I did with the GW52 and the position varied over a short time. Something that my GT11 did not do.

yoyo said..
notice some GW52 tracks to the east of GT31 and some to the west. Reminds me of the Cobblers walk I did with the GW52 and the position varied over a short time. Something that my GT11 did not do.

decrepit said..


Strange Andrew, thought I had the latest version of real speed, but mine stops at usog and ucog, no sdop or vspod.

decrepit said..
I'm trying to figure out the best way to display the 5 best 10s average, to give Locosys useful advice.
At the moment you get 5 best max speeds, then hitting the scroll button gives you the 5 best 10s average. But to fit all five on the display means very small font.
My personal opinion is we need the best 5 10s average but we don't really need the 5 best max speeds. So if we dispensed with the 5 best max speeds, the best five 10s could scroll through in large/larger font. I think scrolling thru the max speeds as well would take too long.
Any constructive thoughts on this?

sailquik said..
>>>>
Personally, as long as I can see the last run 10 sec after each run I have a pretty good idea in my head what my 5 x 10 sec is. If I really need to check I can still read the small font, just.

sailquik said..




I will send you my version by email, but I thought they were the same in that respect. Mine is slight different in another area.

decrepit said..
You can clear all data with the utility. There's a "log clear" button next to the "download" button, and a "top 10 speed clear" button beside it.
And you can clear the display by pressing the "adjust" button during the display, this will bring up a rubbish bin icon, just select yes and hit adjust again.