1RTK1
Pattern Altitude
Damn salty, you got a hard on for Tom or what.
First Annual - problem with IA brewing...
- Thread starter Keith Diamond
- Start date
- Status
Damn salty, you got a hard on for Tom or what.
Salty
Touchdown! Greaser!
In my defense, he started it this time IMO
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
A smarty pants posting, should have known what they were talking about
Salty
Touchdown! Greaser!
I still don’t know why you think my example is different than yours.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Figure it out. I'm gone.
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
Na....you're not going anywhere's.
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
I grant the GPS receivers (most of them) have greatly improved. Not too long ago, tree leaves were sufficient to block the signals. The instruction manual for the old Garmin GPS III mentioned moving from under trees to get a signal. The GPS in my 7D2 camera is far from the greatest, and still needs a good view of the sky to work reliably. Still, I haven't seen many that work in a metal hangar. Yeah, they've increased the power from the old C/A only codes, but it's still a pretty weak signal.It will not matter. The GPS transmitter is reasonably strong and the GPS receiver is a marvel of sensitivity and multipath correlation. Perhaps inside a copper septic tank you'll not get a signal, but "metal roof"? Pshaw.
Jim
Last edited:
Salty
Touchdown! Greaser!
I did. And since you don’t want to correct me, I’ll continue with my understanding.
donjohnston
Pattern Altitude
Yeah. I've had two airplanes with WAAS GPS and neither get a signal in the hangar. I just assumed that's normal.
AKBill
En-Route
My Aera no work in hanger
Skip Miller
Final Approach
Do you really care? -Skip
Salty
Touchdown! Greaser!
If it teaches me something I didn’t know, yes. If it’s nitpicking nonsense, no. But I can’t know that until he actually says something beyond “figure it out”.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Because there is one hell of a big difference between the two.
Loran didn't get it's signal from a satellite, or hadn't you figured that out yet
Salty
Touchdown! Greaser!
Why does that matter?
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
When you don't understand that, you'll never understand the answer.
Palmpilot
Touchdown! Greaser!
They both get their signals from a source external to the aircraft. Whether the source is on the surface of the Earth or in orbit is immaterial. In both scenarios, functionality is prevented by external events, not by any defect in the aircraft's installed equipment.
Salty
Touchdown! Greaser!
How do you know? You haven’t even tried yet.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Point being 1 doesn't get a signal.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
I know futility
Salty
Touchdown! Greaser!
True that
Palmpilot
Touchdown! Greaser!
In one case, reception is prevented because signals are not being transmitted. In the other, reception is prevented by the transmission of interfering signals. Neither is the fault of the equipment installed in the aircraft.
Salty
Touchdown! Greaser!
And in neither case can you determine if the receiving equipment is working.
Palmpilot
Touchdown! Greaser!
If you could find someone who still has the appropriate equipment (such as the SM-708 mentioned on this Web page), the Loran receiver could be bench tested. I don't know if there is equipment for bench testing GPS receivers. If not, you could test it by flying out of the coverage area of the interference NOTAM.
- Status