RamblinBear

From a brief trial this lunchtime walking around the carpark at work, my experience is similar to jholly's - 2.61 is a definite improvement, but there's still some work to do. Walking slowly, there is still some stickiness going on, and this is reflected in the tracklogs being rather variable and erratic. Once I start walking reasonably briskly, the tracklogs become much more accurate and consistent, and repeatable to the nearest metre or so. The changes in lat/lon (or in my case OSGB) coordinates do seem to be more fluid though - it's almost as if there's a slight disconnect between the coordinates displayed and the tracklog (which I guess is possible using the "auto" setting for logging tracks).

And here... Washington Post

Heh. I'm so used to being someones beta tester I don't even flinch anymore. In my experience: Garmin purchaser = Beta tester Not knocking Garmin in any way - I own three, but just the way it seems to be.

Have any members emailed Garmin a link to this thread? There seems to be a body of evidence building up here to demonstrate that this issue is widely experienced and widely repeatable. That this has been identified and widely discussed on a public forum should be of interest to them. For what it's worth, I tried my new, UK market, Etrex 30 in the car park at work yesterday, and was able to encounter this issue quite easily - walking slowly, the tracklogs were sticky and all over the place. As soon as I started walking quickly, the tracklogs were literally metre-perfect: repeatable squares laid down right on top of each other. For my main use of the GPS, the issue isn't a big deal, but I can see for regular geocachers it's a significant problem and a failing of the unit.

Sprint have given LS another 6 weeks - until mid-March.

Garmin, Trimble, John Deere, the FAA, and a whole host of other interested parties are already involved. However, this is the first occasion that the FCC have openly put this thing out for public comment. It is as important that plenty of ordinary people let them know how useful (and fun) GPS is in their lives. Believe me when I say there are plenty of comments on there already from people who don't give a fig for GPS saying how they want fast broadband on their phones to be able to stream the latest music videos (or whatever) when they're out in the sticks. Doing nothing because one doesn't believe it'll make any difference? - that sounds like a self-fulfilling prophesy to me.

Funny that - you might want to look at this post... Help Garmin with sticky issue...

Indeed it does, and thanks for that, because it provides a clear resume of why and how this matters so much. However, it doesn't cover the latest developments concerning LightSquarred's petition and the opportunity for public comment. There's more plain English about it here: GPS World's article on FCC consultation This latest development is chance for us to make our voices to be heard. Closing date for comments is 27th February.

In another twist to the long-sunning saga of LightSquared trying to get FCC approval to launch its LTE mobile broadband network, LightSquared has petitioned the FCC to remove statutory protection to GPS receivers from interference caused by LightSquared's activities. In the words of the formal document: "LightSquared requests specific declarations designed to establish that commercial GPS devices are not entitled to interference protection from LightSquared’s operations, so long as LightSquared operates within the technical parameters prescribed by rule and Commission Order.2 Pursuant to Rule 1.2( b )..." You can read the full text HERE - you have to expand the page to see the whole thing. In plain English, this means that LightSquared would have the go ahead to screw up GPS reception, and there wouldn't be a thing we could do about it. I don't think that's right. Do you? Fortunately, the FCC are asking for public comments on LightSquared's petition. This is your chance to tell the FCC (politely) what you think of LightSquared's proposals. Finding the page to make your submission isn't exactly easy, so I've posted a link to it here. Submit Filing The Proceeding Number (at the top of the form) is 11-109 and also 10-142. I don't know for sure, but I'd suggest making a separate submission of comments for each proceeding number, as they seem to relate to slightly different aspects of the issue. This is the public's chance to have our say. I suggest we make good use of it.

And despite all of the evidence so far, LightSquared are still trying to override the legitimate interests of all those who currently own a GPS... LightSquared's latest attempt There's the technical detail of it here... FCC technical details on Delaratory Ruling

I don't think Delorme are stocked in the UK, and Magellan aren't widely supported here either. These things are always a compromise between size, features, weight, and intended use. I like the idea of the Montana with its big screen and slick user interface, but I know I'd be annoyed by how bulky it is. I've just gone for a new Etrex 30, which gives me what I need in a non-touchscreen package. You really do need to take yourself to somewhere where you can handle a few - ain't no substitute for a bit of hands on where GPS's are concerned.

I don't think you will go wrong with either charger. I have the BC700, and it's easy enough to change the default charging current. From what I've read, low charging currents aren't necessarily a good idea - it's best if the charging current is high enough to trigger a significant delta-V and delta-T (voltage and temperature changes) in the cells to tell the charger's processor to switch from bulk charging to trickle charging. As I understand it, both chargers have cell "refresh" routines to revitalise tired cells.

I too have a 60CSx, with the latest firmware (4.2), and it still crashes occasionally. For the record, Garmin do also make aviation GPS - maybe they test the firmware a little more thoroughly - the devices are quite a bit more expensive...

Unfortunately for us, Garmin are a bit clever in this matter - the mapping files (even if you could see them) are locked to that specific SD card - in order that you can't copy them and give copies to your friends etc... Each SD card has a unique identifier code, and the mapping files are "encrypted" to match that code. If the files are simply copied to another card, the code encrypted in the files no longer match the new card, and they won't work. There is software out there for cracking Garmin map locking, but I've never used it so can't advise you further. If you Google for it, you'll find further information. If you bought the Peak District map as a download rather than on a card, you might be able to put the files onto your existing card (I've never tried this), but you might also potentially mess up the data on the existing card. Proceed with caution...

I'll be willing to bet that those chipsets are already in development/production - the Russian Federation market will be too big for comanies like ST Microelectronics to ignore, and it will be cheaper for them to produce one range of "do it all" GPS+GLOANSS+WAAS chips than separate ones for each GNSS system.

Not looking good for LightSquared... Reuters report that LightSquared may run out of money

No more leaked results - it's official... GPS World comments on official results

I think this reveals just how weak Lightsquared's hand is becoming (quoted from the second article I linked to)... "Beset by leaked reports that its planned network once again flunked Global Positioning System interference tests and with billions of dollars at stake, startup cellular carrier LightSquared took a bold step late Monday to win approval for operation of its network in its low frequency band by offering a multiagency federal working group veto power over operations in the upper portion of its spectrum." "But the proposal comes with a catch: the Federal Communications Commission must remove conditions that restrict LightSquared from commercial operation in the lower 10 MHz of spectrum tentatively approved in January." But the FCC has already re-iterated that it won't allow any buildout of Lightsquared's network in either the Upper or Lower 10MHz bands until they are satified that there won't be interference with GPS. The FCC already holds the power of veto, so Lightsquared really aren't offering anything new. There will have to be a lot more testing of receivers and signals in the Lower 10 before there's any prospect of FCC approval for Lower 10 only operations. It seems to me as if Lightsquared are getting a little desperate and trying almost anything to keep their boat afloat.

Apparently, Lightsquared are now saying that the leaks are a "distortion of truth"... distortion of truth They're saying the leak was intended to turn public opinion against Lightsquared - not that they've ever tried to turn public opinion agains the GPS manufacturers... Well, I guess they're better equipped than most to be able to judge that one... But they're obviously also seriously looking to change their plans and try and rescue this thing, again... more horse-trading

Thanks for that link - fascinating, and in depth. Getting more and more tempted by the Etrex 30... Resist... Resist...

It gets worse for Lightsquared... Draft results from testing

I don't believe I am oversimplifying - what I said was that the main benefit of receiving GPS and GLONASS signals is the improved reliability and ease of getting a position fix. I never said that GLONASS on its own would be any better than using GPS on its own. It is a fact that receiving GPS and GLONASS signals will virtually double the number of satellites a receiver can see at any one time, and therefore this will enahnce the reliability, speed and accuracy of computing a position fix - even under marginal or difficult receiving condtions. This may be achieved through having more visible satellites and also better GQ (Geometric Quality) of the satellites that are visible to the receiver. As for accuracy, there may be some improvement, but to be honest, in brief comparison between a friend's Etrex 30 and my GPSMap 60CSx, I really didn't observe a significant difference, and I suspect that under good reception conditions, one wouldn't see much of a difference with consumer-grade units - their chipsets generally don't deliver precision much better than 2-3 metres (whatever the estimated error readout may tell you). You have to pay a lot more for a GPS receiver to get real, measured, staistically repeatable accuracy at the sub-0.5 metre range (using GPS+GLONASS+EGNOS). Trust me on this, I researched it very carefully before spending £3000 of my employer's hard-earned cash on such a unit. However, I have little doubt that under less than ideal reception conditions, a GPS+GLONASS capable consumer GPS will (all other things being kept equal) give better accuracy than a GPS only device (of otherwise similar spec.) for the reasons that you and I have both mentioned - that it will be able to see more satellites, and more widely spaced acrossed the sky (better GQ).

Speaking personally, I really like the TopoGB v2 maps. I have them installed on my GPSMap 60CSx. The point to bear in mind is that these are topographical maps - they show physical land features and not legal rights of way, so where they show a track or a path, there will be a physical track or a path on the ground, but it won't tell you where public rights of way are (although often the rights of way go along the same physical tracks or paths). I use mine a lot, but usually in conjunction with a 1:25,000 OS map (which if you're in the hills you should have anyway, with a compass - in case your GPS gives up the ghost). The detail they give of features like streams and contours is pretty incredible (and zoomed in they'll often show more detail than a 1:25,000) map. Most of the time in the hills, I'll be navigating using contours and streams (the landform) as my main reference points, and I don't generally need much more. The install/registration of the maps was (as I recall) a little bit involved with activation codes to be entered, but not too difficult and only needs to be done once. I have mine installed on a 2GB microSD card and it works fine. The only thing is that the maps are locked to the device you install them on, so if at a later date you change/update your GPS, you won't be able to transfer the mapping and you'll have to buy again (though chances are, if you get a different GPS, you might want to get the GB Explorer type mapping). To be honest, whilst the newer mapping looks nice, if I were to get a new GPS tomorrow, I'd probably buy TopoGB again to put on it as a base-map, and maybe some of the 1:25,000 GB Explorer maps just to cover specific areas. Hope this helps.

Great - thanks Martin.

Thank you sussamb - I finally got it to work. But what a performance! Going through the install of maps into Basecamp and then having to select them all in Basecamp to load up into the Etrex 30. However, I was able to store the maps onto the microSD card in the Etrex by using this method. So all's good - eventually. Many thanks.