Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Farm Machinery
Precision Farming & GPS
Annual costs
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Northern farmer" data-source="post: 6508973" data-attributes="member: 4568"><p>The comment on L2P got me puzzled because my knowledge on that area is nil. WIKI says L2P capable receivers usually track L2C first for faster fix and then move to tracking L2P. However, now we are talking about RTK where the receiver does not track any of the codes but the actual carrier wave. While the P code is much more accurate than the C code, there is nothing that would be as accurate as the carrier wave itself.</p><p></p><p>I understand RS2 could be less accurate than say a modern Trimble, Topcon or Novatel receiver when they operate in a code tracking mode. But when any of these is working in the carrier tracking mode (RTK), the codes make no difference.</p><p></p><p>Uploading was referring to an issue with an RS2 receiver as an RTK base and a Trimble or Topcon rover. In this case the base is not transmitting any information about the P-code (be it P-code capable or not). I simply do not understand how the P-code capability would affect RTK compatibility in his scenario. Then again, there are so many other things that I don't understand. <em>Anyone please correct me where I was guessing wrong.</em></p><p></p><p>Considering the RTCM 1008 issue that Briantee refers to, my VarioGuide (Topcon AGI4) finds an RTK fix from a non-Topcon base even if RTCM 1008 (nor 1007) was not broadcast, but only at times. This Topcon receiver needs RTCM 1008 (RTCM 1007 too recommended by the manufacturer) to identify that the base transmits RTK correction data as specified by the standard (not including a minor deviation as Topcon itself does). This is specifically an issue with a dual constellation (GPS + GLONASS) scenarios. </p><p></p><p>Now I don't understand why Trimble does not find an RTK fix without RTCM 1008 but does with a dummy RTCM 1008. Perhaps they default to "Trimble like" only after seeing RTCM 1008 but not finding any familiar brand info while Topcon appears to default to "Topcon like" unless an RTCM message specifically names another brand that it identifies. </p><p></p><p>Hopefully the issues Uploading faced were along the message type format or message set rather than complete incompatibility because of no L2P capability on the RS2.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Northern farmer, post: 6508973, member: 4568"] The comment on L2P got me puzzled because my knowledge on that area is nil. WIKI says L2P capable receivers usually track L2C first for faster fix and then move to tracking L2P. However, now we are talking about RTK where the receiver does not track any of the codes but the actual carrier wave. While the P code is much more accurate than the C code, there is nothing that would be as accurate as the carrier wave itself. I understand RS2 could be less accurate than say a modern Trimble, Topcon or Novatel receiver when they operate in a code tracking mode. But when any of these is working in the carrier tracking mode (RTK), the codes make no difference. Uploading was referring to an issue with an RS2 receiver as an RTK base and a Trimble or Topcon rover. In this case the base is not transmitting any information about the P-code (be it P-code capable or not). I simply do not understand how the P-code capability would affect RTK compatibility in his scenario. Then again, there are so many other things that I don't understand. [I]Anyone please correct me where I was guessing wrong.[/I] Considering the RTCM 1008 issue that Briantee refers to, my VarioGuide (Topcon AGI4) finds an RTK fix from a non-Topcon base even if RTCM 1008 (nor 1007) was not broadcast, but only at times. This Topcon receiver needs RTCM 1008 (RTCM 1007 too recommended by the manufacturer) to identify that the base transmits RTK correction data as specified by the standard (not including a minor deviation as Topcon itself does). This is specifically an issue with a dual constellation (GPS + GLONASS) scenarios. Now I don't understand why Trimble does not find an RTK fix without RTCM 1008 but does with a dummy RTCM 1008. Perhaps they default to "Trimble like" only after seeing RTCM 1008 but not finding any familiar brand info while Topcon appears to default to "Topcon like" unless an RTCM message specifically names another brand that it identifies. Hopefully the issues Uploading faced were along the message type format or message set rather than complete incompatibility because of no L2P capability on the RS2. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Farm Machinery
Precision Farming & GPS
Annual costs
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top