Lonetracker

There is one on 29th April - GC3FRFR at The Railway Pub in Cheltenham near the new Waitrose Supermarket not far from the station.

Of course, Idi Admin must therefore have been self-styled King of Rockall. Though technically, being King of Scotland also included Rockall but I like the title King of Rockall.

Tomorrow, Monday with many people back to work, it will not be possible to buy fuel because there will be even bigger queues at the fuel stations with people bringing back the fuel that they queued for last week and which they don't need now.

No, the posh word is "slug-hunting". Well, this cacher certainly found some slugs - get it!! Ok, I'll get my coat.

Talking batteries, although my dedicated GPS (Montana) can be charged from the mains or from the car charger, it has a swap out rechargable battery and this will allow AA batteries to be put in instead. Very useful for a really long day but the main battery will do many hours, probably over 12 which my phone would not do if using GPS and lots of internet accessing and screen loading.

I was about to say that I find it rather odd that the RAC did not use coords because the AA have done so for years but then I read the last bit of your post and saw that it was just this particular RAC man.

Garmin Montana is both a GPS and satnav so will accept coords.

Right, tonight I was looking to plan some caches for tomorrow. The maps I see are just about workable but the OS map would be nice as it would match that on my GPS. Aside from what the map looks like, there seem to be two things which would be just about essential. One is a scale so that depending on the zoom chosen, I could estimate the distance to walk from one cache to another from the scale which used to be in the lower left corner but which is no longer shown. Secondly, if you toggle the side panel out of the way to use the whole screen, the plus/minus zoom disappears so you are stuck with the zoom you have and to get around that you have to toggle the side panel back in, zoom and then toggle the panel back out again. This must be a bug. Finally, the satellite option just gives a white screen with the caches superimposed on it - useless. Not impressed.

I found a pen yesterday at a cache GZ. Pity I couldn't find the cache.

Having selected a place to find some caches and opting to 'map this location', I find that sometimes when zooming in the caches disappear from the map and occasionally only some caches are shown/disappear. It is easily sorted by zooming some more or back out again. Only happened since the update and the new layout to the maps. Pity the slider has gone from the zoom and all that is left is the +/- buttons.

A big yes to this. The format will probably be "GMS001 - Cache Name" - GMS for Geolympix Marathon Series. Something like that anyway. We hope to have a route mapped out before too long. Finding the right, interesting, varied area within easy reach of Oxford is a challenge, as you can imagine. Terrain notes from setting recces should also be added to the cache pages and a .doc file from the Geolympix website, designed to be printed and taken with you to speed things up. Thanks Paul. All that would be helpful.

My comments on this thread were geared to a lone cacher. Actually it was really me thinking and typing out loud. I am sure that there will be other ideas nearer the time to keep time at and in between caches to a minimum. If the general area of the cache loops are made known, I might even do a recce to see what the terrain is like. Even a look at Google Earth would be useful. One point which could be useful is that if the cache series are being numbered, could the number be placed first, i.e. No 1 Geolympix marathon, No 2 etc. If the number is put at the end, it is more awkward to find the next cache on the GPS as mine at least truncates the cache title. Trying to find the next cache in the GPS would then be more time consuming.

C0lin has thought some more. Speed might be decreased if the terrain is muddy and/or hilly or rolling countryside which would be against me keeping 2.5 mph, so an early start seems likely. C0lin makes mental note to prepare sufficient food and drink for the long day and some spare batteries for the GPS as although it will go many hours, 16 hours or so may be pushing it a bit. There is also the psychological fact of the five loops whereby it would be very easy to pack it in with one loop left - willpower is needed. In spite of all the negative thoughts generated by me, I still think it is doable. Oh, and I need to do a bit of training but there is plenty of time to get that in. Back to the thinking.

I was thinking of doing this marathon and have been doing some sums and perhaps I might have to start before 6am. I was thinking about the time to do one cache, i.e. locate the container, get the log out, sign it, put the log back (some resealable bags are time consuming to close properly), put the cache back, enter the fact that I have found into the GPS (not talking about writing a comment on the find here), selecting the next cache on the GPS. This could take 2 mins so for 150 caches, 300 mins or 5 hours. Now the walking bit (I will not be using a bike, not even sure it would be suitable terrain and I will not be running). I can maintain 3 mph on the GPS between caches if I know the route but with checking direction changes and the distance involved etc it would be down to about 2.5 mph so the 26 and a bit miles would take about 10.5 hours. Thus if I kept going I would finish in about 15.5 hours meaning a finish time for me of about 9.30pm and that is not allowing for some lunch etc. Say 20mins for lunch and two 10 mins stop for a brew in morning and afternoon, I can see my total time being over 16 hours which is getting slightly close to closing time - not good. So, for me the bottom line is to either try to walk quicker or start earlier. Will think on this one.

Of course, this leap year business is not as straightforward as it may sound. A leap year does not necessarily come every four years. There are occasions when cachers and everybody else would have to wait for 8 years to cache or whatever on 29th February. I will explain but take notes, there will be a test at the end. A leap year is a leap year when the year is divisible by 4 with no remainder unless the year is divisible by 100, then to be a leap year it has to be divisible by 400. So, for example 1996 was a leap year, 2000 was a leap year and 2004 was a leap year. Now 1896 was a leap year but 1900 was not. So 2100 will not be leap year thus new cachers on 1st March 2096 will have to wait eight years. Best thing to do is to go to the event in Cheltenham so as not to have to worry about missing leap years although all of us will be 'quite old' when the next one is missed from the calendar :) Ok, I'll get my coat (anaorak) and go!!!!!

Congratulations on your holiday. Just had a quick look and there seems to be 6 caches in said country for you to go at. Oh, and the best thing I found in a cache - *C0lin things hard* - well nothing like you have just found!!

Unless there is something special about the event such as a CITO, all you have to do is turn up, sign the log, have a chat and maybe a drink (as this one will be in a pub) and then go home. Log the event as 'attended' at some point and a 'find' is added to your stats. As the TV advert says - simples!

I'll come if one is set up.

Thanks everyone for their replies. I must get myself into GSAK as I have noted lots of benefits from other threads. It is really only a bit of a nuisance and not the end of the world. There is a couple of cache series in South Wales where the CO has actually changed the name so that the number of the cache comes first so that the problem I described does not occur. I, too, like to take a map which helps alot but selecting on the GPS is the minor problem. The idea is to do as much 'homework' on the location as possible to try to minimise the chance of a DNF. Fianccetto - yes, our paths have crosssed as I am in West Gloucestershire. Thanks again everyone.

I have a couple of series near me where the cache series name is quite long and the number of each cache in the series is at the end of the name, i.e. at the right hand end of the title. When I download the caches to the GPS, the title is truncated and even if I use the GPS in landscape mode, the number is not shown. The only way to find the next one in the series in the GPS is to open each cache page. Is there an easier way of doing this. The distance from any point is given with the cache names but if the series is in a circular walk it is not always possible to see which one is the next in the series. If the series were in a straight line, I could guess the next one in the GPS by the distance from where I am. Maybe I have missed something obvious but would appreciate help in how to see the full cache title. Thanks.

I have been asked if I am lost to which I reply, "No, I know exactly where I am to an accuracy of about 10 feet" and then show them the screen of the GPS. Sometimes I scroll the map on the screen with my finger. In all cases so far they have been so amazed by the kit that any further thoughts of what I might be doing has gone.

You are all wrong. It is styel or styelle.

How's about a tupper of cachers.

1st Jan 2100 will be ok, but I'm not planning to go caching that day I did of course mean 1st Jan 2101, but I don't think anyone will notice You are right - 2101 but that is still a long wait. I will be 150 years old - wonder if I can get a bracket to attach my GPS to the zimmer that I would be using then!!!! 3001 - what was I thinking. My logic was wrong, I will get my coat!!!

There will only be one more year to do a cache like this after this year, i.e. 12/12/12 and then it will be a long wait for 01/01/01 i.e. 1st Jan 3001 if my logic is correct.