Jump to content

Grasscatcher

Members
  • Posts

    1114
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Grasscatcher

  1. If you cleared the memory ...the track is not there.

    If you are sure that the track is not on the memory card in a GPX file named with the date it should have been recorded..... then, Yep, you're out of luck.

     

    Download all the GPX files from the card to your computer and double check each one for the data in question.

     

    Of course, you know now......always double check before deleting anything. I always download important data to three different programs that I use before deleting from unit.

  2. Yes, you need to adjust the setting to turn the compass off when moving. It only works properly when stopped and holding it JUST right.....

     

    Red 90,

    Absolutely perfectly accurate advice !!!!

     

    After numerous years of my trying to convince others of that (unsuccesfully), I now just accept that my compass ( and maybe yours) must be the only ones that work perfectly.

     

    I was just never able to hold the GPS vertically ( for the greatest accuracy) and hold the GPS horizontally at the same time (level for the compass to work) .......Duh, must be some sort of physical limitation of me personally...

  3. Yep, it takes some playing with it (TP) to understand it.

     

    Start with the coordinates for your home and play with it. For trip planning, use the coordinates for the trip area (in this case Zion NP). To better simulate the difficult conditions at the park, be sure and set the "mask elevation" values to something like 30-35 deg to approximate higher than normal horizons.

     

    Be sure and get and use the latest Almanac info available.

     

    When you get familiar with it, you can go outside at any particular time and anywhere (that you choose "station" information for) and the satellites that "your" GPS sees will be exactly the satellites predicted.

    You can watch (as predicted) as it drops one satellite and picks up another at the predicted times.

    It is very accurate and useful, but as mentioned, takes some playing . Experiment with all the ways you can display the info. Some may make more sense to you than others.

  4. The truth is all GPS units will have trouble down in canyons. You're signal quailty is going to be based on reflected signal from surrounding reflective surfaces and the narrowed horizon will play into how many satellites are visible to your GPS. Timing in the day will most certainly play a critical part in good navigation through these conditions as this will be the difference to having another visible satellite or one less.

     

    Pretty much what I figured. I wonder what Searching_ut meant about the newer units being "different in canyons".

     

    If you ever plan on going back there, here's some suggestions that might improve your track results.

     

    As suggested above, use a planning program (Trimble Planning) to try and choose a time when satellite configuration will be the most favorable.

     

    Since you already are using one of the most accurate track logging GPSs (60CSx or 76CSx), for the "Track Logging method" be sure and choose "Auto", and for the "interval" choose "More Often" or "Most Often".

    Also use a "high mounted" external antenna, preferably velcro'd on top of your cap. Anything lower gets partially blocked by your head and neck at some angles. The choke ring antennas get real expensive , but a Garmin 25 or 27 will work, as will a Gilsson.,,,maybe not as well as a choke ring antenna, but acceptable.

     

    Also as mentioned above, KEEP MOVING. The high sensitivity chips are more susceptible to logging random points when stopped......and the external antenna will help to reduce multipath errors while still allowing the benefits of improved reception by the high sensitivity chipset.

     

    This is not a guarantee , because there are places that NOTHING will work, but it would not surprise me for you to be able to get a very acceptable tracklog on that trail using the same 60CSx GPS configured as described above.(I've been there before GPS)

  5. Now Lee......here's one "anyone" that disagrees.

     

    I've been GPS'ing since before "Geocaching" even was a twinkle in someones eye. I will acknowledge that "the game" has caused an increase in interest, which is great for inovation, but I couldn't care less about the passtime. What is annoying is that all the manufacturers lately seem to be concentrating on all the bells and whistles stuff instead of maintaining GPS accuracy. Most of the "fluff" features are nice but unnecessary for geocaching and most don't even pertain to GPS accuracy.

     

    Accurately determining coordinates of a structure (irrigation headgate) from sometimes ancient legal descriptions after they were plotted on paper maps, can be a real challenge.( before computer mapping software) After the (starting) coordinates are determined then the fun begins. Next is following the GPS's direction to that location or somewhere "nearby".+ / _ ????? to find the target and replace the coordinates with "actuals" ( Approx the same as Geocaching but starting with only best guess coordinates)

     

    Finding Benchmarks with "scaled" coordinates is also a fun activity that's more challenging than Geocaching.

     

    I really have to chuckle when someone posts a complaint or question about "their" GPS ONLY getting them to within XXX feet.

     

    Not complaining, just "opinion" and a plug for increased GPS accuracy development over Geocaching " fluff" features.

  6. I am constantly amazed that people accept the fact that your location is inaccurate and jumps around, but then expect the collection of inaccurate points to somehow change into an accurate track or odometer reading. The software revisions do curve smoothing or snap to road to make a guess. A GPS with never be as accurate as your car, in my opinion and only my opinion.

     

    I agree....and with even a little unscientific investigation /experimentation "they" could figure out that most of the difference between the odometer, the track log, and "actual" distance and speed comes from points recorded while stationary. (or moving so slow that they might as well be stationary). As mentioned, some of the new GPS models don't like any speed below approx. 2 mph.

  7. Like this?
    Yeah, something like the Skyplot buried down a ways down on that page. Frankly I'm not even very interested in the deep analysis of the geometry, even if that was part of the program. I just need a quick look about the same as the status page on most handheld GPS units for comparison -- that is, matching up what the DeLorme & Garmin & other devices THINK constellation should look like vs what it actually is at the moment.

     

    With that Trimble planning site , if you set up your station location correctly, and are using the correct almanac data, you can accurately predict Exactly which sats "your" GPS will see at any location, even days in advance. I've never known it to be anything but "Dead On".

     

    Experiment with it at your home, then predict what your unit will see a couple of days in advance and check it out at exactly the selected time on that day.

     

    Play with the program, because there are lots of ways to display the data . Some might not make sense to you, but others will.

     

    Understand the DOP screens and you'll start understanding why there are good times and there are not so good times to record GPS data on the same day. Sometimes the difference of 15-30 min on any given day can make a BIG difference.

  8. Guaranteed last post.....

    "And sharing info with BLM and Forest services is??".....It is a requirement when transfering GPS data dealing with un documented existing roads/trails in areas covered when those agencies start revising their "Land Use " information. Either document it/them, and furnish the information to the FS or BLM .........or lose the use of them.

     

    GPS - Map 76CSx (I don't need or want AP on my handheld)

    I only use MapSource to transfer the "Plain Jane" Garmin Topo maps. Plenty good for me since I'm only interested in the directions the GPS is providing, not whether the trail is visible on the 2" screen.

    Cost of software- $99 -free updates (pleasant surprise ?)

    Name -Expert GPS by Topografix (name already provided to others)

    Easy to use ( more features than any one user can use but the more you use it, the more you discover)

    Won't communicate directly with PN40 (thanks to Delorme) ....so get your file into gpx format and then use.

     

    TL, we agree on one thing, that none of the frills are "Required", just conveniences.

     

    As you know, GPSs with no maps at all have found thousands of caches.

     

    The manufacturer's concentration on providing the "frills" has resulted in the decline in GPS accuracy and total reliability in all the new models. (Yes, including Garmin and Delorme both)

     

    Oh yeah, the time delay was not sidstepping the issues..... it's Sunday morning,...I went to church.

  9. "I want to reiterate, all of that in the quotes is loadable onto the PN series as well as support full paperless caching."

    .........all of which makes it into a really cute mini-TV. Non GPS features good for "bragging rights" but totally unrelated to GPS accuracy and operation, and totally unnecessary for Geocaching.

  10. Rockin R, & TL,....I guess you got so upset that you failed to notice that we were talking about software , not "units".

     

    No, Garmin software doesn't do those things either.....Thank you for underscoring and agreeing with my point that 3rd party software is necessary.

     

    If you exchange any data with the US Forest Serv or BLM , they just about must have it in shapefile format.

     

    I exchange data with numerous folks, lots of different formats, different GPS users. Not numerous daily, but several each week. After all, I've got to have time for Trail mapping, Hiking, ATV,Snowmobile.

     

    RRLover...PM Sent

     

    I get by just fine each day with my "sorry" ole Garmin (my description) and my " insinuated as totally unnecessary" 3rd party software (that it DOES NOT take a GPS Professional to learn and use.

     

    Just needed to let other GPS users out there know that there are other, much more versatile softwares available than the "one package" mentioned.

  11. As Briansnat said, it's not really with either of the GPS units (Oregon/PN_40) where the problems lie. It's really the software and proprietary paranoia of manufacturer "D". "Clunky" is a very appropriate word for the software! There is much more that you cannot do, than what you can. (import/export/format conversions,etc)

     

    As a PN-40/TOPO 8 user, just try and use multiple 3rd party softwares to import /export convert and exchange data with other GPS users in any one of multiple formats. Delorme doesn't want/allow that. THEY want to tell YOU what you want/need in the way of formats.(and capabilities)....except of course if you want to lay out big$ for more of their (again limited) software.

     

    Many 3rd party developers won't even try to work with them due to past experience.

     

    If you own a Delorme and are satisfied...Great!

    I'm very happy for you and what you have "settled for".

    Give it a breatk GC. It can also be said if you're content with going to all the third party software to do what DeLorme can do with one package, then I'm very happy for you and what you have settled for.

     

    TL,

    I really can't let the " what Delorme can do with one package" (absolutely incorrect Farce statement), go unchallenged.

     

    Try some of these with only your "one package"....good luck!

     

    1.Have someone send you a NG TOPO file (tpo) with Tracks and waypoints. Using only your "one package", open it and do whatever editing may need to be done. Then save the data in "gpx" format to send to several folks, Oh and yeah, there's the other guy that only has ArcView so you'll need to export all the data in Shapefile format for him. Also for use in GE you'll need kml,and kmz, and for CAD you'll want the data in dxf. ( and too many more to list)

    2.The ArcView guy also has some data to send to you (in shp format) so you'll also need to be able to do some of the above actions in reverse also.

    3.Someone sends you a track ( what format ?)of a hike you want to make. (either hand drawn or GPSd). You really need to have an elevation profile for info before your hike. Oops, the elevation data is missing in the file....go ahead and have your "one package" accurately create the elevation profile.....from the original data, not traced over.

    4. etc,etc,etc

     

    Gimme A Break! I can do all of the above within ONE software !!....and can also zoom in close enough to see what your PN40 tracks REALLY look like when overlayed on Aerial Photos where you can see visible trails.

     

    Delorme with it's "one package" software is so far behind in capabilities , that they are out of touch with reality and think that they are in the lead!........but they will gladly sell you more for $$$ so that you can do a "tad" more, and more $$ for more......

  12. Twolpert- Check out post # 9 above....so it's not me painting with a broad brush.

    I had a PN-40(very early) for a short while, and noticed the problem immediately.

    An easy way to see the problem is to log/record an intricate track in dense cover, or at least difficult reception conditions, then download the track and view it displayed over aerial photos. Zoom in to where the trail is clear and visible on the photo, and see how well the track/trail match.

     

    You will start to see things that you really won't be proud of. Note: GE photos often are not georeferenced accurately enough to use for this purpose.

     

    NEVER.....have I seen a "drift" problem with my 76CSx. When mapping trails / logging accurate tracks, I regularly also use an external antenna.

     

    I have been in conditions where there was absolutely no reception(Slot canyons,etc), where even the 76CSx won't work.

  13. Whoa!......to blame the drift on (ALL) the "Higher sensitivity chips" is a very uninformed statement!

     

    The 76CSx has a high sensitivity chip, and you'll notice that it's not the one being described as having the problem. (the 60 series doesn't have the problem either)

     

    The problem lies with the Mediatek & Cartesio "brand" chipsets. It started with the ETrex H series and continues thru the PN-40 and Colorado & Oregon series. (I'll also bet that the newer 60's with the M-Tek chips start having "problems")

     

    That's also the express reason I refuse to buy a new model GPS until those problems are corrected. They are simply not as accurate and dependable as my 76CSx. (with the SIRFlll chipset)

     

    Until the manufacturers can correct the problems or change to more accurate chipsets, you'll continue to hear complaints about "drift" and WAAS reception , etc.

  14. As Briansnat said, it's not really with either of the GPS units (Oregon/PN_40) where the problems lie. It's really the software and proprietary paranoia of manufacturer "D". "Clunky" is a very appropriate word for the software! There is much more that you cannot do, than what you can. (import/export/format conversions,etc)

     

    As a PN-40/TOPO 8 user, just try and use multiple 3rd party softwares to import /export convert and exchange data with other GPS users in any one of multiple formats. Delorme doesn't want/allow that. THEY want to tell YOU what you want/need in the way of formats.(and capabilities)....except of course if you want to lay out big$ for more of their (again limited) software.

     

    Many 3rd party developers won't even try to work with them due to past experience.

     

    If you own a Delorme and are satisfied...Great!

    I'm very happy for you and what you have "settled for".

  15. When a unit is bought with the express intent (as stated) on returning it....

    When EVERY SINGLE one of YOUR posts above "knocks" something about the unit.....

    When the negative opinions started even before you even got familiar with the unit....

    When a poster has to tell everyone how unbiased their opinion is going to be.....

     

    Yep...I'd say there is bias......

  16. Everyone above only seems to be concerned with all the add-on fluff & frills.....NOT the GPS itself!

     

    What good are all the pretty little pictures (maps & aerial photos) if the data you record, and see overlayed on them, is incorrect? ......besides, just how much useful detail can you see on a 2"X2" screen?

     

    I would rather see a new GPS model that has these capabilities;

    record accurate tracks without drift under dense cover,

    consistent WAAS reception,

    external antenna capability,

    camera for one step geo-tagging,

     

    None of the more recent models by any manufacturer qualify.

  17. Per the OP's original request, I also think a side by side comparison between old chipset vs new chipset -----in the same model GPS----would be a real eye opener. Time will also serve the same purpose.

     

    I'll go on record (ahead of time) and predict that new (chipset) 60 CSx's will slowly start showing problems previously non existent on models with the SIRFlll chipset. Every other GPSr model that has a/the Mediatek "high sensitivity" chipset is prone to problems with "drift" while logging tracks, reception under heavy cover, WAAS reception, etc......... The Cartesio chipset in other models has proven to have some of the same problems.

     

    I still use a 76CSx (SIRFlll chipset) coupled with a high mounted external antenna to log extremely accurate and repeatable tracks. Up until the conditions get Extremely unfavorable to GPS reception, the tracks as recorded are as accurate (sometimes more accurate) than any available maps to print them on.

     

    I personally don't feel that there is a more accurate consumer grade GPSr /chipset on the market. That applies also to the earlier 60x series. (ie 60Cx,60CSx, 76Cx,76CSx), since internally, they are the same.

     

    Not even the most recent models by any of the manufacturers can compare to the accuracy and repeatability in adverse conditions. Forget "paperless" and all the other convenience frills, only think GPS feature functionality.

     

    I was really hoping that Garmin would change the chipset for the Oregon 550. I would love to be able to NOT have to carry and extra camera and use additional software to be able to geotag photos at specific points along a track/trail.

  18. In my OP, I just asked if anyone had seen or heard anything official about which chipset ( brand and model) would be in the 550t.

     

    PS,

    I sure hope you are correct ! ........because, if you are, then most of the remaining Oregon "problems" would just quietly go away.

  19. So what is the problem? Not recognizing the codes? not installing?

    Maingray,

    You are correct.

    Considering the fact that we're now seven posts into a "problem" and the PROBLEM has not even yet been defined.......maybe the OP is more interested in Ranting than in finding a solution.........

     

    Rustynails,

    Start at the beginning.....Describe in step by step detail what actions you have taken, and what results /error messages you have received. What does happen or doesn't happen.....

  20. Sounds like paper weight material.

     

    Unfortunately, that will probably be the prevailing attitude......, but the irony is that, except in the hands of some pseudo-GPS intellectual that "HAS TO" have the absolute "latest & greatest" with all the bells & whistles, it is capable of finding most caches almost as well as the "L&G" ones . Concrete jungle and heavy tree cover probably the exceptions.

  21. The best solution....... is to use something other than Mapsource( dang near anything) to edit your tracks.......

     

    I recommend Expert GPS by Topografix.

     

    Really, the ONLY thing that Mapsource is useful for (IMHO) is transferring maps to your Garmin GPS.

    Will Expert GPS allow me to view the underlying Garmin maps? If not it's a non-starter, see my OP.

     

    On the subject of Mapsource, I consider it a good software product based on the many applications I've run over the last 30-years. Certainly leagues better than Delorme's Topo? Yes Mapsource could be better, but then so could you and I. I'm not perfect so I no longer expect perfection.

     

    I like the filter tools and I started this thread to get ideas how best to use the available options.

     

    Maps are maps , and data(tracks) are data....two totally different subjects. When editing tracks in EGPS, you are working with the data only (but shown over USGS quads) then you can open the exact same (edited) file with Mapsource and view the data as displayed over whatever maps you choose that will work with Mapsource.

     

    I'm not perfect either, but I like to have my data as accurate as possible. That's why when you have maps as inaccurate as Mapsource's often are, it's nice to know that you can depend on the accurate data....as displayed over inaccurate maps.

     

    Different strokes for different folks......

×
×
  • Create New...