3 ms·
Last time I looked at INS the state of the art was laser gyroscopes. They were pretty good at maintaining your position, but still suffer from error buildup li
by jandrese 5y ago
Last time I looked at INS the state of the art was laser gyroscopes. They were pretty good at maintaining your position, but still suffer from error buildup like any INS system. IIRC the drift became significant (more than 10m) over about a couple of hours of over-land driving. Very good by INS standards, but not something you can solely rely on.
- livueta 5y agoI don't really know anything about this stuff, but recalled a quote from a reasonably trustworthy article I read recently that seems to support your position: https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2021/06/12/quantum-weirdness-helps-design-better-accelerometers https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2021/06/12/... > even the best military-grade inertial-navigation systems, which employ lasers, but not atomic interference, drift by kilometres a day. Though with this new fancy quantum stuff, INS-only might get more viable.
- jandrewrogers 5y agoFWIW, state-of-the-art INS is not publicly available technology. No one knows what the real limits are, only that it is much less than what is available publicly. Cheap systems like guided bombs use conventional laser gyros but they don’t need to maintain their precision very long and they only accept GPS corrections within their drift error (a dozen meters?). When real precision is required, they tend to use laser guidance anyway.