Emlid

Community Forum

RS+ to RS2 Trade-In


(Michael Lambert) #21

This may help clarify some of confusion on how the multi-path/frequency/channel works.

It is a great sign though that the RS2 is ready for L5. Of course that could change in a bad way over the next 18 months.


#22

@chascoadmin Thank you.


(Timd1971) #23

Yes thank you @chascoadmin for the great, yet simple reading.


(Michael Lambert) #24

No problem guys. I keep quite a bit of this for training our rover hands and pilot training. Quite a bit easier reading than some lab test or college thesis… Most of the guys I have trained have little to no practical GPS systems knowledge so we’ve got to revisit fairly often. I came into this forum with experience in PPK and am very comfortable thanks to all the guidance here.

In my experience 90% of my fix issues come from losing satellites on the rover. The software then floats and you have to get back to the minimum required number of satellites to be eligible again. When the Reach RS+ goes I have to get to a good area and sit for a minute to reacquire. The Topcon actually regains connection as I’m walking through the trees and takes seconds when I get to an acceptable window.


(WSURVEY) #25

what base station are you using in these instances?


(Michael Lambert) #26

Two completely different setups. Emlid RS+ base/rover in one test and Topcon Hiper V’s in the other.


#27

This behaviour is what I’m really excited to observe from the RS2 :slight_smile:


(Tobias Dahms) #28

Sorry, I’m doing aerial mapping and I’m thinking in PPK. I think that might be the reason why their is some confusion.

I want to determine the position of the base with PPK (with base stations 100km away) or PPP and I think for this a dual frequency receiver is superior. The results of the Reach M1 are not satisfying for this task. Since I measure 25 gcps on the site at maximum I do not care toomuch about the 60 seconds I have to spend at each point. I also do not map areas with closed tree cover.

So my idea is: I use a ZED-F9P as base and several Reach RS/M/M+/M1 as rover.

Of course it would be better to have all receivers being a ZED-F9P but I’m quite satisfied with the performance of the Reach M1.