Jump to content

Grasscatcher

Members
  • Posts

    1114
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Grasscatcher

  1. The only established (out here in the Real World) way of accurately determining how accurate a particular GPS unit is, is to compare that unit's coordinates for a specific Benchmark (Only Benchmarks with with OFFICIALLY ESTABLISHED and ADJUSTED coordinates qualify) , and then only with repeated visits over multiple days.
    I agree with repeated visits to a fixed, known location over multiple days. But how is "an established benchmark with officially established/adjusted coordinates" better than any other fixed, known locaction?

     

    The only advantage I see with an "established" benchmark is that I know what my GPS should read before I get there the first time. But after that? My mailbox isn't a moving target. If a GPS will routinely give the same coords for that spot (within a couple of metres), I think that's a good enough test.

     

    Come on Lee, surely with your experience you are smarter than that. If your GPS repeated EXACTLY at your mail box 237 times in a row, that proves ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about accuracy. It would only prove that your unit is consistent with itself. Consistently wrong is just as probable as consistently right.

     

    Only when you compare your "consumer grade GPS" coordinates to official Benchmark coordinates ("adjusted") which were established to accuracy tolerances that consumer grade equipment is incapable of achiving, can you start determining the accuracy of your unit.

    Also, only checking once, proves nothing. Why? Because "one in a row" does not make a pattern.

  2. Hm... If you can mark a property line as accurately as a professional surveyor, how come you've never found a geocache?

     

    Nothing like trying (unsuccessfully from this point of view) to tie two TOTALLY unrelated subjects together and make something derogatory out of it....

     

    Next thing you know, you'll be starting a post asking "What is the BEST GPS?" or " What are the BEST batteries?"...................Get the connection?...................................Neither do I !

  3. In Mapsource , select the Topo map segments that you want to send (don't send yet), then within Mapsource ,switch to City Select maps and select the CS segments that you want to send.

    You will notice ,in the left column, that both types are shown.

    Now go up and choose Transfer send to GPS.........

  4. Quote:

    At the risk of getting back on topic ...

     

    ONE reason why geocaching will remain a niche* for handheld dedicated GPS units

     

    * "Niche" in this sense is both an ecological and a market term -- a small area where conditions favor one kind of organism or product.

     

    Perfect analogy Lee....... A toy designed for a specific game.........

     

    OK, now back from the Fantacyland of Delorme domination to the real world.....Everyone have a Merry Christmas!

  5. pdogman,

     

    Someone sent me (I'm assuming) your gpx file of Mt Paterson.

    It has 98 separate track files in it.

     

    You do know, don't you , that when you join multiple tracks into one and put it back into your gps , it will be limited to 500 tp ( or whatever the limit is for your model GPS) for that single track . ( yes, you could put it back in named "Active Log" as long as you kept the total TP to <10, 000 assuming yours is a "newer" Garmin) I can absolutely guarantee that you would not like the degraded quality of your trail system due the the reduced number of trackpoints if very many tracks are joined as one.

     

    Your absolute best bet would be to take Bob Morphew up on his offer to make a custom map overlay of your gpx file trail system. No degrading of quality in the system and as simple as turning a map on or off.

  6. As you can see by my signature, I make maps based on tracklogs. I never average multiple logs. I find it better t manually build the "best" track.

     

    http://www.topofusion.com/ has nice tools for "merging" tracks via adjustable and complex math..

     

    No one is talking about "merging " tracks.

     

    I'm very sorry if I damaged your ego, but I'm not impressed with your signature, especially since I just got through doing what you say can't be done, and just sent examples to two other forum members.

     

    One main trail with six side branches , still considered as one track by Mapsource and will load into your GPS as one track, not 7........and NO straight lines joining the ends.

     

    THE END of this conversation.

  7. I hand drew 4 parallel tracks, selected all 4 in the track list (all blue), right clicked on the group of blue highlighted tracks, and......"Join selected tracks" is NOT available as a choice....it is greyed out.

     

    Using track join tool.....right clicking and choosing second track only will allow you to joint tracks at the ends ( either start or finish).

     

    I have only found that Mapsource will only join tracks at the ends....do you know another way??

     

    Of course it will only join at the ends. How else could it "join" tracks.

     

    If you want an averaged track, there are other programs available. Try Google....

     

    Imagine a tributary system, like a main river with E fork,W fork, Middle fork, N fork, S fork all coming into a main stream. The intersection, or confluence, is the end of the side "fork" but is the middle of the main stream.

    THAT'S HOW else tracks can be joined. ....with no straight lines joining all the ends.

  8. Bob M,

     

    I completely agree with your last paragraph, but the OP said he didn't want to go the custom map route unless he had to.

     

    Just for clarification, your first paragraph is absolutely and totally incorrect.

     

    Send your e-mail address to mine at the address I gave pdogman and I will send you an example.

  9. In Mapsource

     

    1) Select the tracks you want joined (CTRL-a) for all.

     

    2) Right click and select "join selected tracks".

     

    Done.

     

    Red,

    I hand drew 4 parallel tracks, selected all 4 in the track list (all blue), right clicked on the group of blue highlighted tracks, and......"Join selected tracks" is NOT available as a choice....it is greyed out.

     

    Using track join tool.....right clicking and choosing second track only will allow you to joint tracks at the ends ( either start or finish).

     

    I have only found that Mapsource will only join tracks at the ends....do you know another way??

     

    pdogman.....send your file to

    churst40@gmail.com

     

    I'll mess with it and get back to you.

  10. When I open a .gpx file in mapsource, I get 20+ individual tracks within that file. How do you combine all those tracks into 1 track? Some of these are 3 way intersecting segments. I wouild like to have all the individual tracks under one name.

    I have tried to copy-paste from the property menu, but I always get a long straight segemnt.

     

    I would like to have one track with several trails.

     

    Any help would be great.

     

    Thanks,

    Mike P

     

    I don't think what you want to do can be done in Mapsource....as you and others have found out.

     

    That "can" be accomplished in Expert GPS by Topografix. I just manually made a trail system shaped like a tree, with a main trunk trail and branch trails off both sides. All still listed as one track .

     

    If the trails intersect, then it can be done like the above, but if the trails are separated, then there will be connecting straight lines from the ends. If you can post your gpx file I'll take a look at it.

  11. Quote: "It's sort of amusing (and sad) to hear people complaining about how poorly their receiver works while it's in their pocket or a cave."

     

    Look thru the forum and find how many people are Amazed how "Absolutely Awesomely" their new GPS Fantastically locked onto satellites while they were INSIDE their house!!!!!!

     

    Of course, if they were able to accurately plot those coordinates obtained in that manner, they would probably find that the location described is actually out in their back yard, or next door in their neighbor's house!

     

    .....and,I agree you don't need WAAS coverage if you are only concerned with "good enough" accuracy for playing the Geocaching game.(Oregon REALLY doesn't do well on displaying WAAS reception)

  12. It's definitely the auto calculation that causes the problem. That's why I came to the conclusion that the only way you can make it work is to essentially put "blinders" on the auto calculation by specifying via points.

     

    Place a via point past the first "wrong" turn and on down the road around the corner on the "correct" road.

     

    Are you doing this on the Topo maps or do you have CN installed? If so, turn off the CN maps and use the GPX file method to see what it does on just the Topos. They are non-routable aren't they? That may force it to use the data between the first and last points in the GPX file (instead of the unit calculating)

     

    DUH ! I re-read the OP and saw that you have CN. Try turning it off and see what the route doeson the TOPOs.

  13. I think EA P is correct, and I agree that it will probably take very view "via" points to make it go where you want it to.

     

    I just created several "out of the box thinking" routes, and in most cases like EA said, it only took 2-3 vias to make it happen.

     

    Just play with it, thinking along those lines .

  14. I don't know if this will work or not, but here goes..... try working with just the GPX files instead of "transferring"a route from Mapsource

     

    If the "desired" route is the one created by the 550, save it,.....it is saved in the unit as a GPX file. Take that GPX file and open it in Mapsource . I believe it will be the same as in the unit.

     

    If the "desired" route is the one created in Mapsource, then save it as a GPX file. Take that GPX file and copy it to your unit , either internal memory or on the card. It should go into .......\Garmin/GPX. The unit will "see" it and display from either location.

     

    Let me know if that works.....it's got my curiosity up now.

  15. Touch screen brightness and visibility in sunlight with only "onboard" battery power is not Apples & Oranges.

     

    Where Apples and Oranges comes in is when you talk about the screen being acceptable with backlight on (which I agree with) and the "subject" is..... the non visibility of the screen in camera mode in bright sunlight conditions.........where the backlight doesn't even work.....

     

    try turning your backlight on in Camera mode..........

  16.  

    "necessarily" reduced brightness ????? Not So.

    Why are the touch screen Nuvi's not "sorry" like the Oregons?

     

    "fine" in all bright conditions ?????? Not So.

    Taking pictures in bright sunlight conditions, where the user must keep the screen pointed at the subject thereby preventing twisting and turning to get it in a viewable position, quite often the screen becomes totally useless. You then understand why "they" call the cheapo cameras "point and shoot" ........really it should be "point and hope".

     

    The Nuvis are much brighter than the Oregons when under **battery** power?

     

    I would hope that people don't rely on the GPS camera for high quality shots. It's fine for what it is, a point and click geotagging device.

     

    My Nuvi 660 actually becomes brighter when I disconnect it from USB ! Perfectly visible

     

    My point is, quite often, the user cannot even see what the camera is being pointed at! Some directions you absolutely cannot see ANYTHING on the screen.

     

    If it works for you, fine.

    For me, I think Garmin has already proven in their Nuvi that there is better technology out there and I'll wait until they incorporate it in a new model.

    Maybe also by then they will change chipsets and antenna type to get rid of the WAAS problems and tracklogging problems.

  17.  

    Backlight + screen is fine in all conditions. Accuracy is also fine for geocaching, I've never experienced your "circles". I find the speed of the touchscreen far outweighs the necessarily reduced brightness of the screen.

     

    "necessarily" reduced brightness ????? Not So.

    Why are the touch screen Nuvi's not "sorry" like the Oregons?

     

    "fine" in all bright conditions ?????? Not So.

    Taking pictures in bright sunlight conditions, where the user must keep the screen pointed at the subject thereby preventing twisting and turning to get it in a viewable position, quite often the screen becomes totally useless. You then understand why "they" call the cheapo cameras "point and shoot" ........really it should be "point and hope".

  18. On your unit.....go to map page and hit menu

    toggle over to blue flag icon at top

    see what the settings are below, should see choices for Map Points,User Waypoints, Street Label, Land Cover

    Choices are Off, Auto, multiple "xx" distance choices for each.

    Your choices for each determine at what level they start becoming visible on map.

     

    Are any set to "off" ?, or are they on "Auto", or set to some distance" ?

  19. If you want to see my file with 7 tracks, go on Topografix forum and under ExpertGPS subject heading, look several threads down and find "Analyzing Tracks" thread. GPX file attached there.

     

    What differences I see between the two are higher sensitivity to multipath errors by the Oregon, and poor handling of WAAS signals. MP may be due to ceramic antenna and the WAAS problem is probably chipset peculiarities since the PN-40 has the same shortcomings and I believe the same (brand at least) chipset.

  20. I just picked up an Oregon 300 from REI and I'm in the process of checking it out. Walking or driving the same route several times, gave me accuracy differences of up to 30 ft. Is this a lot? 60CSx owners, what do you notice in regards to track differences? I heard, the 60CSx is hard to beat in accuracy. I will eventually decide between the Oregon 300 and the 60CSx. Your input is greatly appreciated.

     

    You heard absolutely correctly about the 60CSx. I have a 76CSx (internally same as 60CSx) and recently got an Oregon 550t. I have done some very careful comparison between them by hiking a single track trail, in canyon country, three separate times. Five mile loop trail, guaranteed same path within +/- 18inches , three separate days, 2 GPSs one day, 3 GPSs 2nd day, 2 GPSs 3rd day.

     

    Results: Under Ideal/Good conditions both units track each other very well and repeat with themselves very well day to day. However, when conditions start to deteriorate and start to become more difficult (under canopy or in canyons), the Oregon 550t appears to show some weakness. (see WAAS below)

     

    In several difficult areas around the loop, the 550t appears to be more susceptible to multipath error (canyon walls) and it's results varied close to 100 ft (day to day with itself and also to other units). To be fair, the 76CSx looked kinda lousy in one of the same areas on one of the days.

     

    If you are looking at the tracks plotted on 1:24000 maps , 7 tracks look like one except for slight deviations in the absolute worst areas. For quality comparison, I zoom in on magnification to the point where even the topo contour lines are very pixelated and I can see individual tracks and individual trackpoints. Overly critical ?, maybe, but you can really start to see unit capabilities/weaknesses.

     

    The Oregon is weak/lousy in the area of acquiring /maintaining WAAS reception. Slow to acquire lock and easy to lose. (Kinda like the PN-40) Is that critical?, that's for you to decide.

     

    Also have compared coordinates between units and (numerous) Benchmarks with "Adjusted Coordinates". Results-both usually within 1-2 meters (I use UTM) of published, extremely accurate, coordinates.

    (Note: in open country). That's easily as good as you can expect.

×
×
  • Create New...