[teqc] Leica Measurement Engine version in teqc
lou at unavco.org
Mon Feb 1 12:15:22 MST 2010
Alright, Mike, that settles the matter. :) Just to be clear, you want the
format the same as Spider presents it:
i.e. no whitespace around '/'?
> We do use TEQC for the translation for IGS sites.
> However I think it would be worthwhile including the ME; coincidentally
> we were discussing this here last week and were simply going to include
> the FW / ME in both the IGS log and in the RINEX header in the same
> format as Frank showed in his RINEX header: 7.70/3.018. As it turns out
> it is important to have this information as there is not necessarily a
> unique correlation in FW and ME versions - see for example
> IGSSTATION-3553: 7.53/3.017 upgraded to 7.53/3.018.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: teqc-bounces at ls.unavco.org [mailto:teqc-bounces at ls.unavco.org] On
> Behalf Of Lou Estey
> Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 10:41 AM
> To: teqc
> Subject: Re: [teqc] Leica Measurement Engine version in teqc generated
> Thanks, Frank. So, there is a difference between the translations that
> Spider does and that of Geo Office?
> One of my main concerns is what is being recording in IGS site logs for
> IGS sites with Leica receivers using MDB. I would not want to foul up
> IGS's comparison of IGS site logs to RINEX headers anywhere if teqc was
> in use to create the RINEX. (If teqc is _not_ being used for
> at any current IGS sites using Leica MDB, then I see no reason not to
> include the version of the measurement engine in the "VERS" field as
> Uwe proposed.)
> > Leica reference station products to write always both FW and ME
> > into the RINEX header when converting from MDB.
> > See here e.g. from GNSS Spider:
> > 2.11 OBSERVATION DATA M RINEX
> VERSION / TYPE
> > SPIDER V3,2,5,3239 LGS 2010 02 01 18:05 PGM / RUN
> BY / DATE
> > RUTH MARKER
> > 75607L001 MARKER
> > Martin Fuchs Leica Geosystems AG OBSERVER
> / AGENCY
> > 451101 LEICA GRX1200GGPRO 7.70/3.018 REC # /
> TYPE / VERS
> > LEIAX1202GG NONE ANT # /
> > So it should be fine for TEQC to do the same.
More information about the teqc