blindleader

Were there recent logs in it? It could be the final of a multi or puzzle cache. If it isn't one of those, you can find archived caches by going to the listing page of a nearby cache and click on geocaching.com maps. The map page you get will have a check box at the bottom to show archived and disabled caches. Set the [identify] radio button and click on the map. A list of all the caches, archived or otherwise on the map will appear.

Answer to 1: No. Doesn't loose accuracy quickly, either. Answer to 2: No. You can't restore what hasn't been lost.

Is your computer plugged in? Sorry, I couldn't resist a little flippancy. Your question is so open ended that that you'll get no useful help till you provide some information to go on. How is your Garmin connected to the computer? (USB, Serial Com port) When you could send caches, what software did you use (EasyGPS, GSAK, Mapsource, etc)? What, if anything, might have changed (new software installation, new cable, computer crash, etc), between the last time it worked and the first time it didn't? When it doesn't work, what does it do instead? Error messages, dialog boxes, hang-up, etc. Another comment. Not being able to download waypoints hardly prevents geocaching or any other use of the 60. You can, and many do, enter coordinates by hand. It's in the manual.

You don't say what model of GPS receiver you have, but I can almost guarantee you can change the input format on your unit, so you can enter coordinates in the Hddd°mm.mmm' format. It's in the manual. Also, when downloading waypoints to your unit from a computer using EasyGPS or any other program, you don't need to do any converting, and it doesn't matter what format the unit is set for. Your unit uses only ddd.dddddd format, as does EasyGPS. Anything else you see is just for display and manual input.

I don't think you can. You can either "find nearest" (shows only the nearest 50 caches, I believe), or you can "find by name" to see the entire list sorted by waypoint name. Lest you think that's unreasonable, consider how long it would take the unit to calculate the distance to 1000 points every time you pressed [Find]

To clarify what the others are saying, and maybe end your confusion: The list on the left is of the pictures you uploaded to the cache page. The Gallery contains two classes of images - those uploaded to the cache page and those uploaded by people writing logs to that cache. Note that only six appear in your list while the gallery lists ten. The other four are in the logs. The cache with the screen shot on the right has 246 images uploaded in logs and none uploaded to the cache page by the owner.

Since teleportation assumes a circumvention of some really fundamental physical laws, Larry is playing tennis without a net and I see no reason to assume that momentum can't be managed just as easily.

Defeats most of the reason for keeping a database. Do as miragee says. I have filters set up to match my PQs. After updating the Db, I run the filter of the day, sort on the Last GPX column, and download by hand the cache gpxs that were not updated. It sounds like a lot of work but it only takes a few minutes every day to keep databases for two entire states up to date.

Contrary to traditional OWT's (Old Wives' Tales) it isn't the antenna so much as the receiver circuitry and its software. A receiver with a sirf chip will work much better on the ground than older units. In the Garmin line, an x in the model number means it's a sirf unit. Aside from the sirf chip, the only significant difference that price makes within a model line is the bells and whistles, not positional performance

Perhaps Markwell's response seemed a bit snappish to you. Asking for puzzle hints on public forums is considered bad form. It happens repeatedly, and irritates some of us curmudgeonly veterans. Most would consider any part of a puzzle cache page that you don't understand to be part of the puzzle, including UTM coordinates. It's impossible to objectively tell whether the snappish tone of the reply is intended or just read into it by you. Try not to assume such things. I wouldn't have answered in that manner. I might have said something like. "It's a puzzle cache. It's for you to figure out." Footnote: You could have gotten away with the question by just asking what 437475.390 EAST - 5353160.232 NORTH means, without reference to the puzzle cache. Some version of that question gets answered at least once a week on the forums.

It certainly looks like a planter. Guessing from satellite photos, it was probably one of two, flanking the road entering the track. Terraserver (same data as Google Earth uses) yields two pictures: from 1990, when the track was still in operation, and 2002.

It's a puzzle. Don't give it away.

I use GSAK for caches. EasyGPS for other stuff and before I went paperless. Why has no one mentioned MapSource? That's what came with the unit.

Before you get too excited about measuring the "accuracy" of your GPS receiver, consider what is really happening. The receiver doesn't really measure anything. It syncs up its clock with that of the satellite it's receiving and then calculates the distance to that satellite. When it has enough satellites, it calculates the receiver position. Two identical receivers at the same place, with likely give the position as somewhat different. the main variables that lead to this difference are: -The two receivers might be using one or more satellites different from each other for their calculations. -The almanac data for one or more of the satellites might be slightly older for one receiver than for the other. -Two receivers using identical satellites with the same almanac data, might not be using data from the precise same moment. The satellite, going several miles per second moves more than a hundred feet in .01 second, giving a different set of position and range for the calculation. The bottom line is that you can't really talk about the "accuracy" of the receiver, because it isn't a measuring device. How well it receives satellites (better and faster sync up), and what the software does in the way of fudging the results before showing them to you (Yes both Garmin and Magellan units do this) affect the accuracy of each particular fix. Every fix is different for the above reasons, so going to an accurately fixed benchmark will tell you how accurate the fixes you get at that place and time are, nothing more.

Doesn't seem to be compatible with Firefox 2. None of the install script entries appear on the pop up menus.

There's no cache like Transit 101 yet. But you are the perfect candidate to hide one, once your research is done. I thought about bookmarking a list of caches within a few minutes walk of the #5/54 route,all the way from Shoreline to White Center, to see how many caches could be done in one day (Weekend all day pass $2.50), probably dozens, entirely by bus. But my round tuit has been on backorder for more than a year. If you've explored the metro link above, and clicked on [Online Tools] you may have run into [Tracker], which is a very valuable tool, with real time (+/- 1 minute) updates on the metro buses. I don't know if a clue scheme like Transit 101 could work on Metro, with so many different buses and drivers. Seattle is slightly bigger than Galeburg IL. But it might be a good takeoff point for a Metro Transit Cache. If you have an idea, maybe I can help with the research.

1. There are no graphics in a gpx file. You can get the pictures off the cache page using Spoiler Sync. A link to each picture appears on the cache page in gpxsonar. 2. I've had this problem at least once, but I don't know how I resolved it. If re-setting the PPC doesn't work, try reinstalling gpxsonar. If neither of these things work, try the gpxsonar home page.

Not so new. Many of us found our first few caches without GPS, and quite a few people have many hundreds of finds, all without GPS. There are many different ways to play.

Here's the one I use at my computer. You can also easily convert using your GPS receiver. -Change your display format to the one you want to convert, enter the coordinates, change the format to the one you want, and read out the converted coordinates. Your example: N43.631549248° W110.565234°

Sorry, the non-sirf Garmin 60s are just as terrible in the trees as the etrex. You'll have to spring for an x type.

No it wasn't any good for measuring accuracy. Your own hand held GPS unit (modern) has the means to estimate the accuracy of its own readings. Newer Garmin units generally display a +/- number that is a 95% confidence circle of uncertainty. I don't know what newer Magellan units display but older Meridians displayed EPE which was essentially the same thing as the Garmin +/- but with an unpublished and unknown confidence percentage. Under certain circumstances, these estimates can be way off, but generally they're OK. Technical rant follows. Your old method isn't useful for the following reasons: First: When SA was in operation, you needed about two hours of averaging to cancel out the induced errors. Second: Scaling a symbol off a paper map is no way to get the correct coordinates of a bench mark. To do that you need to go to the NGS data pages, make sure the coordinates given for it are GPS data and not scaled from a map. Third: Once you have the real GPS coordinates of a benchmark and you take your GPS receiver to it, all you'll be measuring is the accuracy of the specific readings you are taking at that spot at that time. These measurements mean very little a half hour later a mile away, and they mean nothing at all two hours later in the woods down the road. This is all because the measuring system consists mainly of a about thirty components screaming through the sky at tens of thousands of miles per hour and therefore is constantly changing their geometry. Also hills, trees and buildings sometimes determine whether of not you're getting signals from the best satellites.

That's strange. a keyword search on delorme challenge returns all twenty five of the currently existing DeLorme Challenge caches. They are all linked in a public bookmark list, as well.

Read this log. I have gpx files of the page corners for both Oregon and Idaho, and the page boundary polygons for Oregon. For some reason, I've lost the page boundary polys for Idaho but they can be recreated from the corner gpx files. As I understand it, the page boundary overlay that M10B did for Washington were pretty involved and tedious. Anyway, here's what Oregon looks like with the corners imported. Idaho looks similar, except it's shaped funny.

I was thinking of knocking off two nearby (relatively) caches while down there: Rolling Thunder 1 (Capitol Peak) and The Green Beret Hide Site (What, are you scared??) For those of you from the area. Are there any problems for clearance challenged vehicles getting to the parking coordinates for Rolling Thunder? For all others. Does anyone want to knock off either or both of these in the morning before the shootout? They are the 43 and 29th oldest currently active caches in the state, so they are on my to do list for that area.

It's a good thing I re-read the whole thread. I wasn't sure which day (the 30th) and the time (Noon). - Don't worry about bringing ammo for my pistols (.40 and .45). Only stuff I made myself goes through them and I have plenty. - Eye protection is not optional in my book, especially if we shoot any bowling pins. I might have an extra pair of ear muffs too. - pdx: what are the coordinates of your front yard? Is sounds as if this crew has the cure for that orange infestation.