Advantages of dual frequency GPS over single frequency

OPUS.

Within the limits of L1 range, there is no accuracy improvement.

Also, dual frequency receivers have become ridiculously inexpensive in the past couple of years.

For a long time I had a mix of L1 receivers and L1/L2 receivers. I ran into two separate instances where I had issues with GNSS Solutions reading the rod heights in rinex files, causing a 2 meter bust on two separate projects.

One of those projects was a commercial project, and it could have been bad. After the second instance, I decided to move to all L1/L2 receivers, and use OPUS and OPUS-RS as blunder checks.

I sold my Promark 3 units, that worked flawlessly, and upgraded to two, OPUS X90 receivers. I have been very impressed, and have not had any issues. I have not used GNSS Solutions very much at all since the rod height issues last year.

Another advantage of all L1/L2 receivers is if you attend an OPUS Projects Manager's class, you can have 2 hours of observations, and use OPUS Projects which is a free service, and is very good.

I am using GNSS solutions for processing so I am curious about the problem you encountered. Is this a known issue?

I normally enter my antenna heights manually when importing the files into GNSS.

Dual frequency receivers can nearly eliminate ionospheric delay. That's the only true difference, besides acting as a backup when you are in areas of L1 interference. This impacts GNSS survey methods in different ways.

Jonathan,

Here is the link to the previous thread:[msg=210077]GNSS Solutions Issue[/msg]

I think GNSS Solutions is a good program, but there appears to be an issue when importing some rinex files. When I implemented the process outlined in the previous thread, everything seemed to work out okay.

I have since obtained all dual frequency receivers, and use OPUS as a blunder check.

Feel free to ask questions. The email address in my profile is good.

Thanks for that. I will have to keep an eye on that.