I have a doubt that I think that all those who have the trimble 5700 gps should have it ..., software update 2.32 will be the last for these 5700 gps ?, what will happen after ?, will be totally obsolete ?, I think they are very Good questions for the experts of this forum ...
tengo una duda que creo que todos los que tienen el gps trimble 5700 la deben de tener..., la actualizacion del software 2.32 sera la ultima para estos gps 5700?, que sucedera despues?, seran totalmente obsoletos?, creo que son muy buenas preguntas para los expertos de este foro...
5700: Still works, still collects GPS (only). Older firmware has incorrect date (1997), but that can be fixed before processing. I have several older receivers, 2 4700's (use them a lot), 2 5700's (infrequently), and one 4400 (hardly ever). But they all still work. I use them along with newer models (R8's, R10), no problem. Trimble I think would like them to be obsolete (to sell more new receivers). They are a victim of their own success. Same as the GPS satellites themselves, they have greatly exceeded their design life. No difference in the quality of the post processed positions. In fact, for static work, I prefer to do GPS only. Other GNSS does not seem to help. But, for RTK, it is a big benefit to have multiple constellations, at least GPS+Glonass.
John Hamilton, post: 430115, member: 640 wrote: In fact, for static work, I prefer to do GPS only.
I've never done much static here in Belgium, but you made me curious, can you enlighten why?
Christof.
christ lambrecht, post: 430183, member: 284 wrote: can you enlighten why?
John will undoubtedly have his own reasons, but an L1 fixed GPS solution is still the gold standard for space-based positioning in my book.
Jim Frame, post: 430186, member: 10 wrote: John will undoubtedly have his own reasons, but an L1 fixed GPS solution is still the gold standard for space-based positioning in my book.
Not L1/L2 dual frequency fixed?
Mike Marks, post: 430191, member: 1108 wrote: Not L1/L2 dual frequency fixed?
L2 is used to calculate the iono delay, but if you can fix the L1 integers you're golden.
I understand FS is superior to RTK speaking for the precision (not for costs), but I'm curious to hear why the Glonass birds have no additional value for FS?
