What's Going to Happen When High-Accuracy GPS is Cheap?

[Papa-Bear-NYC]

I caught this on another forum and I thought there would be interest here:

 

Article from GPS World

 

Maybe someone could post it to the appropriate Geocaching forum about which I am totally clueless.

 

Rg

[+LSUFan]

I caught this on another forum and I thought there would be interest here:

 

Article from GPS World

 

Maybe someone could post it to the appropriate Geocaching forum about which I am totally clueless.

 

Rg

 

If it works out the way the author of the article says it will, I guess a lot of us will be able to submit HandHeld 1 coordinates to the NGS.

[+t4e]

I caught this on another forum and I thought there would be interest here:

 

Article from GPS World

 

Maybe someone could post it to the appropriate Geocaching forum about which I am totally clueless.

 

Rg

 

i think the right section is quite obvious GPS and Technology

[Papa-Bear-NYC]

i think the right section is quite obvious GPS and Technology

Done

[+frex3wv]

Here is what it means to me:

 

1) When these do become "affordable" to us hobbyists - it would make sense to revisit our favorite marks and get new readings for the sake of accuracy! Doing so with "scaled" marks will in affect provide those who care with "adjusted" accuracy coordinates.

 

2) Probably would not make much sense for anyone in the benchmark/geocaching hobby world to get a currently "high end" consumer receiver as prices will probably begin to decline as we get closer to these newer models.

[Bill93]

I'm not buying a newer GPS until the LightSquared interference fiasco is settled one way or another.

 

Presently, to get cm level accuracy, surveyors either sit on a point for hours, or else get real-time correction data (better than WAAS) over a cell phone or internet link. Won't L1/L5 receivers need similar correction data to get the cm level accuracy he was quoting?

[southpawaz]

I had the same reaction to this article as you did, Bill.

[+dfx]

Presently, to get cm level accuracy, surveyors either sit on a point for hours, or else get real-time correction data (better than WAAS) over a cell phone or internet link. Won't L1/L5 receivers need similar correction data to get the cm level accuracy he was quoting?

 

Not necessarily. As I understand it, a dual-frequency L1/L5 receiver would be able to deduct atmospheric delays that affect the signals from the received timing differences between the two frequencies, which allows it to apply precise corrections all by itself, without a need for external augmentation data. Apparently dual-frequency L1/L2 receivers can already do that. Plus, the L5 signal would be twice as powerful as the L1 signal is now.

[+DukeOfURL01]

At one point, I actually considered buying a Trimble Juno, but shortly realized "what was I thinking?" I can't wait until high-accuracy units become affordable. You would think now that GLONASS is available, more satellites are "visable" at any given time, between the GPS sats and them, that high-accuracy would be here already. You would think...