Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Art Harris wrote:
Bill Baka wrote: So pretty much, if one is using the tones from a RELIABLE radio station, they can count on setting their watch approximately 5-10 seconds ahead(of that station) and probably be very close to WWVB or WWVH. Why not make that 'reliable' station WWV to start with? WWV at 10.000000 MHz has been my station since 1957 and even though the NBS has changed it's name to NIST, WWV remains untouched. Propagation delay is on the order of 1000/183,000 miles per second so that leaves about 5 milliseconds of error here in the sates. I find that my TV cable box display provides the easiest access to accurate time. Art Harris, N2AH Hah, I have had WWV on at the same time as my cable box and found up to 30 seconds difference. Where does the extra time come from? Bill Baka |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Signals Fading From Shortwave Bands | Antenna | |||
Propagation Sucks No Time Signals stations | Shortwave | |||
60kHz time signals in Israel? | Shortwave | |||
Decoding SSB/Shortwave signals using my soundcard and PC ? | Shortwave | |||
Shortwave signals on a simple $5.00 portable am-fm receiver? | Shortwave |