Most of the moving measurements aren't gravimeters. They're gradiometers. You don't actually get the same data out, and you can't use it in the same way. The

Most of the moving measurements aren't gravimeters. They're gradiometers. You don't actually get the same data out, and you can't use it in the same way. The key part isn't just the acceleration due to motion. It's that you have to know your absolute elevation very precisely if you're using a gravimeter. Otherwise, the data you get can't be corrected relative to your other measurements and is more or less useless. (The method mentioned in the article actually measures the geoid directly by measuring the sea surface, which is an equi-potential surface.) However, if we don't worry about the absolute acceleration due to gravity, and instead measure the local rate of change in gravity, we don't need to know elevation precisely. That's referred to as gradiometry. You can't use the data in the same way, but it's still very useful. In a nutshell, most of the movable gradiometry sensors work by using multiple accelerometers. Acceleration due to motion affects both equally (with some caveats when rotation comes into play). The differences in acceleration between the two accelerometers is therefore purely a result of the "tilt" of the geoid locally. It's difficult to integrate this back into an accurate picture of what the free air or Bouger anomaly would look like, but it's still useful information. We can't necessarily calculate the same things from it, but it's a great edge detector.