Email Detail

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/DLW36NRSXWIEZ5QZUABHELDL2DOSXHSM/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "DLW36NRSXWIEZ5QZUABHELDL2DOSXHSM",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/V5WDPF4VXTYGDUDOYX2LQ5FBM5AK6ONM/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "rwmcgwier (a) comcast.net",
        "mailman_id": null,
        "emails": null
    },
    "sender_name": "Robert McGwier",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: SDX transponder timing delay measurements?",
    "date": "2006-09-12T18:31:17Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/TKQSHWHX4J55QOWBRYTPTWSV65UAN6E7/?format=api",
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "Howard Long wrote:\n> Hi Ken\n>\n>   \n>> As a design goal, it would be helpful to the \n>> OD process if the delay could be made consistent \n>> within about +/-5 micro-sec -- i.e., 1500 meters \n>> (smaller is better).  It is also important to\n>> quantify the standard deviation to that bias is \n>> since that is also factored into the OD process.\n>>     \n>\n> I may be wrong, but I can't think of a reason why it wouldn't be well under\n> this figure. I was thinking more in terms of 100's if not 10's of\n> nanoseconds.\n>\n> The SDX (a) takes a batch of samples, (b) does its processing, then (c)\n> outputs the processed batch of samples.\n>\n> Each of the three parts takes the same amount of time and all three are\n> executed in parallel like a production line using DMA for (a) and (c), and\n> the DSP CPU for (b). This time is dictated by the CPU's crystal oscillator.\n>\n> I am guessing any variation would be predominantly from the analog circuitry\n> (R's and C's changing value with temperature?), but Bob may have other\n> suggestions I hadn't thought of.\n>   \n\nRight on the money.  We can learn the variation in these parameters in a \njoint process with determination of the pseudo-ranges.  It is my opinion \nthat doing this joint estimation will yield very good results.  I would \nnot be surprised in the least if James and/or Stacey had not already \ndone this code.  Stacey has worked on a project he calls Ranger (for \nobvious reasons) and I have not yet studied all of the details but I \nknow ranging experiments have been done with it.\n\nBob\nN4HY\n> 73, Howard G6LVB\n>\n>\n>\n>   \n\n\n-- \nAMSAT VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL, TAPR, Packrats,\nNJQRP/AMQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR Wrk Grp Chairman\n\"You see, wire telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat.\nYou pull his tail in New York and his head is meowing in Los\nAngeles. Do you understand this? And radio operates exactly\nthe same way: you send signals here, they receive them there.\nThe only difference is that there is no cat.\" - Einstein\n\n",
    "attachments": []
}