## 3 Results  
### Detailed Analysis for MAS100 ESP Station  
In this subsection, results for only one station, MAS100 ESP for 39 DoY, was presented. Similar analysis was performed for the rest of the stations but is not showed here. The MAS100 ESP station was chosen as a station showing the average observation conditions for the Galileo system. A minimum of 5 satellites from both the GPS and the Galileo systems were observed throughout the day. Most epochs had more GPS satellites observed, but there were some epochs with more Galileo satellites observed. On average, 9.9 of GPS satellites and 7.5 of Galileo satellites were observed. On average, 17.4 satellites using both systems were observed. When observing daily variations for PDOP, the PDOP value provided was more stable when both systems were used, unlike those of GPS-only or Galileo-only. The signal strength (SNR) and multipath code combination (MP) for the Galileo E1 and E5a observations and for the GPS L1 and L2 observations was presented in Figures 2 and 3, respectively. SNR for the Galileo observations are higher than the GPS observations, especially for E5a observations, which is higher than the L2 observations, with averages of 44.3 dBHz and 36.5 dBHz, respectively. The E1 observations have slightly lower SNR than the L1 observations, i.e., the SNR is 42.8 dBHz and 44.3 dBHz, respectively. We also noticed that Galileo observations, at lower elevation angles, have significantly higher SNR than GPS observations, due to the multipath effects (Figure 3) [71], whereas Galileo observations have higher performance with lower noise [20; 72]. In addition, for L2 observations, it can be seen that some of the GPS satellites have a higher SNR. These satellites belong to the new satellite blocks (IIF and IIIA), which is in line with the goal of GPS modernization, i.e., improved accuracy, signal strength and observation quality [73]. In this study, the convergence time is described as the time when the station position reaches an accuracy of 20 cm and does not exceed this level thereafter. Figures 4 and 5 present the time series of the first four hours for the Up component, horizontal (2D) and spatial (3D) errors for all analyzed weighting functions. The strong dependence of the error on used weighting functions is noticeable, especially for the first epochs. Moreover, the errors for the G and E have different behavior. For the E, the best results were obtained for Function_3, with 5 mm, 22 mm and 25 mm accuracy for the U component, 2D and 3D errors, respectively, whereas for the G, the best results were obtained for Function_7, with values of -1 mm, 10 mm and 16 mm, respectively. The shortest convergence time of 14 min was obtained for Function_8 for the E and 19 min was obtained for Function_7 for the G. In addition, for G, the slightly longer times were also obtained for Function_1, Function_2, Function_3 and Function_4. For the GE, the best results were obtained for Function_2, with 3 mm, 12 mm and 15 mm, respectively, and similarly for the GE1, with an accuracy of 3 mm, 13 mm and 16 mm, respectively. The best convergence time was obtained for Function_6, with 13 min for the GE, and for Function_1, Function_2 and Function_7, with  
Figure 3: Multipath code combination (MP) for the E1 and E5a observations for the Galileo and L1 and L2 observations for the GPS for the MAS100 ESP station for the 39 DoY with function of elevation angle. Figure 2: Signal to noise ratio (SNR) for the E1 and E5a observations for the Galileo and L1 and L2 observations for the GPS for the MAS100 ESP station for the 39 DoY with function of elevation angle. 18 min for the GE1. For all cases, the GE1, where lower precision for Galileo observations was adopted, had worse results than the GE. Based on the obtained results, it can be seen that the best results were obtained for Galileo-only (blue line) and the worst for GPS-only (orange line). The use of both systems together resulted in an improvement in the results relative to GPS-only.