unfortunately not all of them useful for reflectometry (i.e. the networks refuse to archive SNR data).
in at least one case i checkdd the archive is taking multi-GNSS files with many frequencies and tracking
modern GPS signals and yet only keeping low-quality L2P and L1. so in other words, they are
throwing out a lot of good gnss-ir data. the same archive has also zeroed out the receiver location from the header. So gnssrefl will not allow you to use these files without intervention. so if anyone wants
to add an archive to gnssrefl, that would be great, but keep in mind that there is no point adding an archive
that does not archive SNR data and doesn't have an apriori receiver location in it.
and i prefer you not waste your time adding archives that are duplicated
elsewhere, especially if those archives have better files. we do have a lot of duplication between unavco and sopac, but sopac does provide a lot of value by not forcing you to have a user account, so i plan to keep them.
is included in this paper by Stamps and Kreemer
unfortunately not all of them useful for reflectometry (i.e. the networks refuse to archive SNR data). in at least one case i checkdd the archive is taking multi-GNSS files with many frequencies and tracking modern GPS signals and yet only keeping low-quality L2P and L1. so in other words, they are throwing out a lot of good gnss-ir data. the same archive has also zeroed out the receiver location from the header. So gnssrefl will not allow you to use these files without intervention. so if anyone wants to add an archive to gnssrefl, that would be great, but keep in mind that there is no point adding an archive that does not archive SNR data and doesn't have an apriori receiver location in it.
and i prefer you not waste your time adding archives that are duplicated elsewhere, especially if those archives have better files. we do have a lot of duplication between unavco and sopac, but sopac does provide a lot of value by not forcing you to have a user account, so i plan to keep them.
k.