Mr Kaswa
+Premium Members-
Posts
196 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Mr Kaswa
-
Well Doh, can you think of ANY thermometer that doesn't have the same limitations?!?!? Clearly with regards to thermometers, your glass is half empty. Obviously ANY thermometer will have the same limitations, does that somehow change the usefulness of this $25ish Garmin gizmo? Being able to check and continuously record the temp from "up to 32 feet(10 meters) away" will of course have some uses, but in regard to a device that Garmin is marketing to hikers, "Attach it to your pack, jacket or shoe to accurately keep tabs on the temperature as you head out on your next great expedition."** that will cause your device to eat it's batteries even faster, which in the case of my Oregon is too fast already, I do not see it as very usefull. ** Those locations do not seem to fit too well with the other statement about keeping it "away from things that can impact the temperatures of the device, such as your body, hydration bladders, or direct sunlight." EDITED to change EVERY to ANY.
-
I'm sure there are uses that I will never consider, but for a device with a fairly short range meant to be used on the trail or during exercise maybe...... For the best results, be sure to mount tempe away from things that can impact the temperatures of the device, such as your body, hydration bladders, or direct sunlight. .....would seem to limit this things usefulness.
-
I thought I had opted out of the newsletter about a month ago, did I get opted back into the "fun and helpful emails from Geocaching.com." automatically?
-
If you use GSAK there is a macro that will break each cache hint down into as many 88 character custom POI's as is needed. It can also do the same thing for the cache descriptions if you so choose. http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=262664&view=findpost&p=4513146
-
As someone mentioned earlier, it is rather unlikely that the city street property is on the railway's ROW....and it is not. Admittedly the two properties touch, that however is not proof of being on the railways property. Now if the placer of the second groups of caches either got or was told to get permission then yes that makes things completely different. Edited to fix the quote thing.
-
There is no guideline forbidding caches from being placed within 150 feet of a railroad. The guideline forbids placing caches on railroad property, which normally extends 150 feet on either side of the tracks in the United States. It's unlikely that a public roadway is located on the railroad's right-of-way. (Not all U.S. railroad rights-of-way extend 150 feet). Actual guideline or not, I was told 150' and that no amount of vertical separation matters to that. No mention of my side walk location being on railway property, just 150' and no amount of vertical separation matters to that. ETA..... >Canadian Rockies beat me to the punch. I wanted to add some more info. The 150 ft guideline is not there for safety. In the early days of Geocaching a rail company came down hard on a cacher who hid a cache on the rail right of way. The cacher apparently had some huge fines to pay. Groundspeak did not want this to be an issue and thus the 150 ft guideline was created. IF you can prove that the area is public or that you have permission you can place a cache within 150 ft. If you did supply that proof and the reviewer did not agree you can always try appeals.< The safety is not my point, only that I was only told 150' no vertical separation mattered. I guess the rest is my fault for not being more familiar with the guidelines and proving that the side walk on the city street was not on railroad property.
-
I had similar trouble with the 150 feet from railway tracks rule. I was told the fact that there was quite a bit of vertical separation and other obstacles that made it quite clear that you could not approach across the tracks did not matter because the location was still within 150'. Two or three weeks later three caches show up on a parking structure directly above a busy roadway and less than 150' feet from the railway tracks. More recently a fourth cache has appeared on the same structure that is less than 30 feet horizontally from the tracks and still over a busy roadway. I have no problem at all with caches on this structure and feel that cachers need to read descriptions and be responsible for their own actions, but if hunters at my location were going to park in a busy street with nowhere to pull over, climb a small slope, cross the tracks, climb another slope, and then scale a 15 foot concrete wall to get to the cache, why aren't those same cachers going to end up down below the parkade in the roadway, where you can drive to and park, or on the tracks?
-
It's just one mountain with a quarry away from the Fraser river.
-
Whoops, never mind.
-
Because so far Google is the only company that has taken the time to collect a set of good images to publish on the internet. And now they want to be paid for all that work. Yes, well in that context the question becomes, "why are there no useful satellite views for any part of the planet". But the basic question remains...why does the US get at least something, while the rest of us get beige blankness?
-
Having to open up the OSM to an area , click a cache, click on that cache again, scroll down to where ever googlemaps is on that particular cache page, click again, and then click several more times in order to zoom in to look at that one cache up close with a satellite image is fine for a cache or two, but is not a substitute for having the satellite images right there on the map search page. ETA: This also does not explain why folks in the US do not have to put up with having to do all that while the rest of the world does. Yes it is probably a licensing issue for somebody, but it would be nice to hear why.
-
Yes, but are why there are no useful satellite views for most of the planet?
-
Yes, but are why there are no useful satellite views for most of the planet?
-
Downloadable from www.google.com I am running chrome so what do I download from google? You don't have to download anything from Google. Go to http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/125926 and then click, "Install" in the upper right part of the screen.
-
This thread had some stuff in it, including pics of the insides of one. Edited to insert the link properly.
-
Could you have some other script running that is interfering?
-
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/125926 This one seems to work with Chrome.
-
That's great for PC folks but does anyone know of anything for Mac users? And Chrome users?
-
Looks to be that way here, as well. Just finished up a map transfer (God, that's SLOW) from Mapsource to my 60CSx. No issues noted. If you are not already doing so, and if your computer has a card reader, use a microsd>sd card adapter and transfer the maps that way. This is generally much faster than using the USB cable.
-
I have no problem with switching maps from google to other sources. I understand why they did it. I know all the work arounds to get a satellite view. I understand that I am not now getting less for my premium membership. I can cache without a satellite view. but I still would like to have a satellite view available for my area.
-
I use them side by side all the time without any difficulties.
-
This one probably won't be too hard, but it leapt to mind.....
-
Legend III GC697D This one took me a while, there were three areas with water and land running in this direction that leapt to mind and I tried the other two first
-
I am unsure of any criteria for this, but the picture seems to be about the same scale as most and is north up.
-
GC30N8C Times UP!! Enjoy! Exploring Elkford #2 Sorry, I don't have time right now to do one (I didn't expect to figure it out ) if someone else has one that they would like to post go right ahead.