Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ecanderson

  1. When I get into that ditch, which I have on a few multicaches, I do the math using my phone calculator and turn the result into how much north (or south) and how much east (or west) from my current position. Then I create a series of two waypoints with the Garmin - the first of which takes me the necessary N/S (0 or 180) distance from my current position, and the second after that the necessary E/W (90 or 270) distance of that first waypoint, and do it in feet. That gets me much greater accuracy than integer degrees for caches that aren't REALLY nearby.
  2. No, true. The article says "The following pseudo code shows how to perform the conversion..." The conversion MUST be done on the client side. Sending non-base31 characters will cause issues due to invalid objects. The server doesn't do this for you, hence HHL is correct in his statement.
  3. Sweet! Add one to the collection. As I recall, that just added one to the bucket for Netherlands before. I see GC245CW is still up and running, too.
  4. The only reason caches are deleted (pulled from public assess in the gc.com database) is because of some major issue that forced the reviewer to retract the listing. These days, this usually happens fast enough that few, if any, are able to log them. I doubt that you had many, if any, 'deleted' caches. No one can log them since don't 'appear' in the database. Vaporcaches! Apart from that, you can pull up your MyFinds PQ at gc.com, and use that data with GSAK to re-log all of them for a new account, yes. That will include any archived caches. With only 103 finds, it should go quite quickly.
  5. Not without at least a clue as to the device you are working with, no. It would be a little hard to guess the menu layout so we can direct you to a solution.
  6. The old Idaho RR series is definitely still intact. K13 didn't provide a reference, but here's the GC code for the topmost puzzle. You may want to look at one cache about in the middle, https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC3RK53 There are so many, that using the wrong map view in gc.com (radius limitations) won't show them all!
  7. Here's one starting point for you: https://www.geocacherscompass.com/geoart/ Quite the list.
  8. Yeah, but I'd wait a while for that, too. I see tomorrow will hit about +1F, and tomorrow's low is expected to be -15F. Not exactly golfing weather.
  9. Chuckle. You now have the hint for the most difficult - but not the way you think! Through a thoroughly unintended stroke of luck, there is a local situation that creates the most AMAZING red herring for that stage. Remind me to give you my phone number in case you get stuck.
  10. Amen to that. Here is my weekend in Colorado, and not even in the 'cold' part of Colorado (converted to °C just to make it look even worse!)
  11. I have a 'beacon' multi that uses 3 entirely different methods, and not one of them is a Chirp. As people are suggesting, you may want to think outside the box a bit. Lemme toss one out there that you might not have considered... Got an old 2.4GHz only WiFi router that you no longer use? Just imagine what it would look like if the SSID was made up of N and W coordinates. No need for a server at all. Of course, you'll need it at your home or a friend's business or home to plug it in and keep it dry. Too much of a power hog to run on batteries.
  12. One thing in this 3 year old article was worth further mention: "Why is this only happening now? 'Up to now there haven’t been enough L5 satellites in orbit'” Between Block IIF (12) and Block III (3), they have 15 of them up now. Under the most extreme spreads of the constellation, it is said that 24 need to be functional at any one time to provide worldwide service. That leaves a few to go. Lockheed/Northrup and SpaceX need to get busy. The schedule of record is for 3 more Block III in 2021, 2 more in 2022, and 1 more in 2023. My math tells me we'll still be short a few L5 capable birds by the end of Block III. Block IIIF doesn't fly until 2026. Still doesn't matter until we see "Healthy" reports with real data on L5 from any of them.
  13. Yes, that deals with cases where you can see the green, blue and purple signals, but what happens when you're in a situation (and I'd argue that their picture shows EXACTLY this problem if you think that green signal is going through a steel and reinforced concrete building - not) where the original green signal is obscured. The green signal isn't going to pass through a skyscraper. In a true 'urban canyon', or even a real one, there are usually more reflected signals than there are direct ones since the 'slot' through which there is line-of-sight to satellites is quite narrow, running along whatever axis the street runs, and only a small number of degrees wide - and runs narrower with taller buildings. The vast majority of the constellation is obscured from direct line-of-sight reception, and only their reflections are available. THAT'S where it gets really messy, and is where the L1/L2 differential that normally could assist simply cannot. I don't see how the addition of L5 changes that. Seems to me that there's no simple solution to that. That leaves us with a narrow corridor in the sky with available direct signals, which, no matter how many in the constellation happen to fall within that axis, is NOT an optimal geometry to work with for positioning accuracy.
  14. @Mineral2 Or worse, you don't even get two versions (direct and delayed) of the signal, but instead, you get one delayed signal off the side of a building or canyon face (or the whatever) while the original signal is obscured (no direct line of sight to the satellite). When in narrow confines with few satellites to work with, it can most definitely throw things off a good bit. It's one of the reasons that 'urban canyon' caching can be such a PITA. As to the earlier comments about frequency (band) vs. propagation speed, Capt. Bob has that right on the money. That's nice for dealing with ionospheric delays which we used to depend upon WAAS and EGNOS to deal with. Truth is, the newer birds (IIR and later) are all sending on L1/L1C (1575.42 MHz) and L2/L2C (1227.6 MHz) bands, and that's where the differential time to arrive is presently being computed to deal with the atmospherics. That was already enough frequency spread to do the computation. The fact that L5 is just a little lower yet (1176.45 MHz) isn't necessary to that job. None of which addresses the multipath issue, or how the addition of L5 is expected to help in that regard. The frequency difference between the two signals from the same bird won't have any significant impact on the time of arrival on the two reflected signals in the relatively tiny distance between you and that building over there. If it were that easy, the L1/L2 difference would already be making that solution possible. Still searching for clues here.
  15. My Samsung S20 has been indicating the presence of L5 signals, too, but don't know if the health status issue was still a factor in whether they were being used for position calculation. Your chart only indicates that the 2F and 3 satellites are in operation, and they are all 'multi-banders', so will look like that whether L5 is actually functional yet or not. It doesn't say specifically what the L5 messaging is at present. Haven't seen a peep out of the govt as to the current L5 status in a while. It had been 'Pre-operational' for eons. Search didn't turn up any new information, either. Even the govt page still shows 'Pre-operational' and "Unhealthy", but the page hasn't been updated since August 2020. https://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/modernization/civilsignals/
  16. Reminds me ... Have any of the 16 or so L5 capable systems started reporting anything but "Unhealthy" yet?
  17. Wrong scenario. It's when only the reflected signal is available at decent S/N that things start to go south. We're not talking about differentiation of the same signal with different time domains (and of course, that happens, too), we're talking about situations where the receiver is seeing only reflected signals in the wrong time domain because the line of sight signal is obscured. Receiver doesn't know that the signal it is receiving is the reflected (delayed) version. Common in urban canyons. It's still more than I can quite follow as to how L5 is expected to mitigate these issues, but that's the word going around.
  18. " Is there a GSAK type app available? " For what? Your phone? GDAK was once available, but I don't know if had anywhere near the slice and dice ability of GSAK.
  19. Indeed. Irrespective of the future enhancements to the system in the sky, current models aren't seeing numbers resolved to 0.0001 provide any benefit to the person staring at the screen. I just call it wishful thinking.
  20. We've been talking about L5 here in the forum for a while, and are looking forward to GPSIII satellites in the future as well. L5 should help to resolve some of the issues that degrade positioning performance. GPSIII will mean that we no longer need to depend upon ground based references like WAAS and EGNOS, which will be nice as well. And more birds in the sky has already improved ephemeris issues and the occasional lousy HDOP that we used to encounter for a couple of hours on particular days when the constellation was a bit whacked relative to our ground position. But there will still be challenges to getting the level of precision described in that talk in anything but ideal conditions. Multipath issues, which I think will likely be improved by L5, will always remain a bugaboo that has to be dealt with in software to some lesser or greater benefit. Quickly sorting whether a signal is direct or reflected is certainly something that continues to perplex some GPSr manufacturers now. S/N ratios will remain an ongoing technical challenge as well. Again, not an issue under ideal open sky conditions, but we don't always cache in an ideal environment. Heck, I don't even know if Garmin's clocks (or any others in consumer goods) are tight enough to resolve the levels that this guy is talking about (0.63m?) Would be interesting to know whether the GPSr chip manufacturers are going to have to improve their own specs to take advantage of this, and how difficult or costly it might be. They may be there now, or it could pose a hurdle. No way to know from where most of us sit. As an aside: Good on them for finally preparing to dump NAD83 in favor of a more realistic model. Long overdue.
  21. No, and for this technology, anything past the third decimal place in minutes is just silly. Makes about as much sense as dd.dddddd 1 minute of latitude is about 6068 feet. So... 0.001 minutes of latitude (N/S) equates to about 6 feet. You'd be lucky to get that kind of EPE on a good day. But 0.0001? 1/10 of 6 feet? 7 inches? Caching wouldn't be very challenging if we were there. 0.0001 minutes of longitude (E/W) is just as silly as using it for latitude at the equator, and gets even sillier as you go north or south from there since each 0.0001 gets smaller and smaller.
  22. Walking a county road easement where there are no paved alternatives isn't a violation of anything in this part of the world. It's a fact of life. Neither is parking on one unless prohibited by signage, which does occur in rare instances. We've certainly never been hassled about it, and it occurs fairly frequently -- usually several times on each cache run. Many of our COs are good enough to place them where there's a wide pull-out, which is a bonus, but is never assured. If we are ever ticketed for parking improperly (which has never happened) in such kinds of places, we'd just pay the ticket if it was legit. Honestly, I'd worry more about people who park for a GR cache and aren't clear of the through lane. Dangerous for both the cacher and any other traffic. That really would be worth a ticket. Commercial property can be an issue no matter how one presents. We want to cache, not get caught up in conversations or conflicts, which did occasionally occur when caching as 'civilians'. We don't want to have to deal with asking every CO if they've received permission, and who gave it to them (that's the reviewer's job) nor in the event that permission has been granted, find the right person in management to explain it to the local mall cop. Avoiding all of those kinds of issues was 99% of the point of our current method, and it has proven even more successful than we originally imagined. Five years with this method, thousands of caches, and NO negative contacts (not even 'mall cops' <g>) since the conversion.
  23. I guess that's where we keep running by each other. For what reason would we be discussing this with a judge? I thought I was clear earlier about trespassing issues and how we deal with them rather specifically. We don't do the search, and we post photos of the warning indicators in NM logs. Should probably post them as NA logs, but we like to give the CO a chance to explain, if there is an explanation to be had (e.g., "It's my property"). Sometimes, it's a matter of clarifying the situation in the description, and sometimes it's just not going to work. So if we remove probable cause for trespass, what's the next option in the arsenal? Seriously, I'm trying to understand, but not getting there. Understand that the ruse is for the rubes, not LEO. With them, we play it straight if questioned, which almost never happens anyway. I'm up to my wazoo in DFARS contracts at the moment, but am not at all concerned about clearances due to our caching methods.
  24. PM me with it, if you like. I won't be going after that specific cache in any case. A little outside of my caching territory!
  25. Haven't run across an online tool like that. There's a standalone *.exe called CryptoCrack that does a half decent job of ranking the most likely possibilities for cypher type. What is this online tool?
  • Create New...