T3 as base vs. LS as base

David M. Simolo

Active Member
Hi All,

I just want to update this thread with my decision.

I would have been able to deal with the extra steps to use the LS as a base but it was expressed to me that it wasn't setup to bluetooth to a radio nor was it able to broadcast to a repeater. I can't depend upon cellular service in my area so that is not a viable option for broadcasting corrections.

I decided therefore to get a T3 which apparently I can use with my 35 watt radio when needed.

I might add that Javad did a fantastic job of processing my order and shipping the unit. As I recall it was ordered on a Thursday evening and was in my hands across the country on the following Monday afternoon.

Thanks again for all of the feedback.
 

John Evers

Well-Known Member
5PLS
David,

I am seeing results that are nothing short of incredible after switching from my T2 to the new T3 for my base.
I got the 1 watt internal UHF radio, and the cell module. 99% of my work will be with internet based corrections.
One very nice thing about this upgrade from the T2, to the T3 is being able to use our old transmitters as repeaters. I have always had the HPT401 (1 watt) UHF radio with the built in battery, now it is a very nice repeater :)
 

David M. Simolo

Active Member
I am seeing results that are nothing short of incredible after switching from my T2 to the new T3 for my base.
Hi John,

What constellations are you currently using? I feel like the T3 is more punchy than the T2 even though I am only still using GPS & Glonass.
 

David M. Simolo

Active Member
I'm under the impression this is not available on the release version yet. It's definitely something I want to be doing, though. I just can't afford to muff up my productivity by getting something messed up by not knowing what I'm doing.
 

John Evers

Well-Known Member
5PLS
Hi John,

What constellations are you currently using? I feel like the T3 is more punchy than the T2 even though I am only still using GPS & Glonass.
David,

I am using GPS, Glonass, Galeliou, and BeiDou.
I am on the Pre-Release version today (01-02-20), and two days ago like everyone here, my RTK engines were only supporting GPS and Glonass. Also two days ago, I was selecting testing locations on the overgrown river bank, and I had determined that a particular location was simply virtually impossible to get a shot on. I spent two hours and had 5 shots, none of which agreed.

Yesterday and today I have been testing the Two Engine RTK option, which uses three constellations per engine, with each one configured to be different.

I went back to the impossible spot today.
I decided to have my shots consist of 7 resets in phase one, and 180 epochs for phase two. I did not use validate.
The bad news is that I did get one bad shot. I am sure of this, because I also got 125 awesome shots!! in a location I had determined to simply be unsuitable for GNSS.

The bar has not only been raised, it is gone!

With the one bad shot removed from the data, take a look at this. In a location we could not go at all two days ago.
formerly impossible.png
 

John Evers

Well-Known Member
5PLS
David,

Lets get together this weekend, and I will make sure you stay productive, and get even more productive.
 

John Evers

Well-Known Member
5PLS
The answer to that is any. Javad publishes the command and control code language.

However, the LS is unique. it can not be controlled by third party vendors.

In my opinion this is a good thing because it forced me to use J-Field as opposed to the data collector I had previously developed. J-Field absolutely beats the data collector I had created hands down. Not even a contest.
 
Top