![]() |
2009-04-26
, 10:36
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#11
|
![]() |
2009-04-26
, 13:25
|
Posts: 23 |
Thanked: 3 times |
Joined on Apr 2009
@ US
|
#12
|
in the end, you're basically throwing away a tablet, GPS receiver, cell phone, and solar panel, right?
![]() |
2009-04-26
, 14:13
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#13
|
Since it has a GPS and phone, it knows it's location, and if properly programmed, can use the phone to tell him about it. Then it can be found. Sounds like a fun geocaching end to the experiment
![]() |
2009-04-26
, 14:19
|
Posts: 23 |
Thanked: 3 times |
Joined on Apr 2009
@ US
|
#14
|
![]() |
2009-09-12
, 16:22
|
Posts: 34 |
Thanked: 0 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
@ Mendo
|
#15
|
iirc gsm has a range limit somewhere around 30km, not in signal but due to signaling... Comercial gps receivers probably refuse to work over 60k ft altitude (wouldn't want 50 dollar components usable for ballistic navigation etc)
You can start by making it all work in your freezer for 24 hours
![]() |
2009-09-12
, 16:49
|
Posts: 271 |
Thanked: 220 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
|
#16
|
The unit seemed to be confused as to exactly "where" I was but my guess is this is due to the difference in time dilation between 484MPH & 30,000Ft and sea level (give or take a few thousand feet) and traveling 70MPH on the ground GPS systems have to take into account that clocks on GPS satellites run a bit slower than clocks on Earth in order to get an accurate location fix.
![]() |
2009-09-12
, 18:31
|
Posts: 34 |
Thanked: 0 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
@ Mendo
|
#17
|
[digs engineering hat from the closet and puts it on]
um, no...relativistic effects have nothing to do with it with regards to the speed or altitude of the plane. If you were able to calculate both an altitude and a speed, the system knew exactly where you were. Accurate altitude determination requires a solid 4-sat fix minimum (4 unknowns require 4 equations/satellites) though due to geometric issues altitude determination will have a larger error bar. By accurate, I mean within the limitations of the CA code and use case. With a 3-sat fix you can get a good approximation of altitude (especially if stationary where you can average out errors to increase accuracy) depending on how clever the programmer was.
And speed requires that such a fix is maintained over time to get the deltas in position over time.The software you were using might not have properly displayed that information for some reason (intentional or otherwise), but that's a display issue and not a calculation one.
However, all that said....thanks for the observationIt's always interesting to see people doing novel things with these tablets
![]() |
2009-09-12
, 23:25
|
|
Posts: 1,648 |
Thanked: 2,122 times |
Joined on Mar 2007
@ UNKLE's Never Never Land
|
#18
|
...
Accurate altitude determination requires a solid 4-sat fix minimum (4 unknowns require 4 equations/satellites) though due to geometric issues altitude determination will have a larger error bar.
...
![]() |
2009-09-14
, 07:27
|
Posts: 540 |
Thanked: 387 times |
Joined on May 2009
|
#19
|
![]() |
2009-09-15
, 20:23
|
Posts: 8 |
Thanked: 1 time |
Joined on Sep 2009
@ UK
|
#20
|
![]() |
Tags |
n800 in space |
Thread Tools | |
|