Eric Henriksen wrote -

> On Wednesday, August 06, 1997 4:47 PM, Rob Saecker
> [SMTP:rsaecker at thurston.com] wrote:
> > >For the first time, $200 models (that track 10+ satellites) can
> > >take quick readings in deep forest -- all that they lacked to
> > >make them ideal for natural history use.
> > >
> > Really? As it was explained to me, the problem in forests is that the
> > antenna has to be above the trees in order to accurately "see" the
> > satellites. How have they gotten around that?
> >
> > Rob Saecker
> > Olympia
> >
>
> If I remember correctly, it's the moisture content present in the green
> vegetation that distorts the signal. This, of course, presents a
> year-round problem here in WA forests. Traditionally antennae height was
> the answer.

Have the military relaxed the civil specs for GPS units, or are they still
limited to ~100m range accuracy?

- Jack



Jack Bowling
Prince George, BC
jcbowling at mindlink.bc.ca