Re: Roughtly converting DOP to metric error
- From: claudegps <claudegps@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 01:18:15 -0700 (PDT)
On 8 Mar, 21:36, "David L. Wilson" <dwilson...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[cut]
DOP only includes satellite geometry (not signal strength).
And you can mix all the situations like bad signal with good
dop... :)
But may be you knew that.
Rigtht. DOP only includes satellite geometry. That's why I say that
can't be used for error estimation (at least, not in a reliable
way! :) ) but you need to consider other parameters.
Anything in my post that let think something else?
Maybe I missed something in my examples of error estimation...
Someone could read your orignal wording as saying that good signal is a
requirement for good DOP but good signals from each satellite (as you are
aware) is not a contributor to good DOP as it only based on the geomentry
not the quality of the signal.
David, thanks for the clarification.
.
- References:
- Roughtly converting DOP to metric error
- From: speleoluc
- Re: Roughtly converting DOP to metric error
- From: claudegps
- Re: Roughtly converting DOP to metric error
- From: speleoluc
- Re: Roughtly converting DOP to metric error
- From: Nick
- Re: Roughtly converting DOP to metric error
- From: claudegps
- Re: Roughtly converting DOP to metric error
- From: David L. Wilson
- Re: Roughtly converting DOP to metric error
- From: claudegps
- Re: Roughtly converting DOP to metric error
- From: David L. Wilson
- Roughtly converting DOP to metric error
- Prev by Date: For All your FREE GIS Data needs...
- Next by Date: Re: Re-use Sky satellite box??
- Previous by thread: Re: Roughtly converting DOP to metric error
- Next by thread: Re: BBC - Sat-nav to aid disabled motorists
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|