So I read the following article (it's from 2014)
Basically, if I'm reading it correctly (and I'm far from being able to read the specifics of it), it's telling me that the eCal is as accurate as using mechanical standards.
Here, we still use mechanical standards. They tell me that's because the eCal isn't repeatable/accurate enough. My thought is that they got this impression back when they first started using the PNAs (about 10 years ago) and eCals were pretty new (I'm guessing).
I realize that mechanical standards are more accurate but I also believe that the eCal is probably accurate enough for what we're doing and would save us tons of time performing calibrations.
Is there something in addition to the paper above that would help me convince them? Have the eCals improved much since about 10 years ago?