smillersmiller
-
Posts
99 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by smillersmiller
-
-
With my Mag 315, I can almost always get within 15 feet of one of my own auto average coordinates taken weeks ago - often times closer.
-
Different GPS receivers require holding them in different ways for optimal reception. This is a great example where Reading The Manual will save you a lot of grief. The receiver I own, the Magellan 315, is designed for best reception when held perfectly vertical (antenna pointing straight up). I've used a Garmin eTrex Yellow and eTrex Venture quite a bit - they were both designed for best reception when held perfectly flat (screen parallel to ground). In either case, I've found tilting the screen as little as 10 degrees from true vertical or true flat can make a big difference depending on the situation.
Normally I hike along with the screen at whatever angle is most comfortable, but if I lose reception or am taking coordinates for a cache I've hidding or zeroing out the GPS on a cache hunt, I'll then orient the GPS for best reception.
With my Mag 315, under certain circumstances, I've found I can improve reception by tilting the GPS off of perfectly up and down. I'm guessing this is true for most or all GPS receivers.
Hope this helps.
smillersmiller
-
I'd always recommend at least doing a basic scan of the stuff on eBay.
Hmmm, is the Garmin II+ a 12 satellite unit? If so, they seem to be trading at reasonable prices.
-
I strongly recommend anyone that got screwed on this deal to post a negative rating on Reseller Ratings. You can read my comments under "smillersmiller".
-
I would've found more benchmarks faster if I had known when I started to not rely upon the GPS.
However, once I find the benchmark, I always use my Mag 315 to get an auto-average point so I can include accurate WGS-84 coordinates in my log.
-- Scott
-
I've used DeLorme Street Atlas USA 2003, mainly on a vacation trip to Chicago last October (2 months ago) with my Pentium 3 850 Mhz laptop, Magellan 315, and serial cable, and thought I'd pass on my experiences. (Standard Disclaimer: your experience may vary.)
I've tried to be fair and balanced, but re-reading this, it sounds pretty negative. Just so you know, I'd like to point out that bottom-line, the GPS functionality in DeLorme Street Atlas 2003 is much better than the GPS functionality in Microsoft MapPoint 2002. I had both installed, and while MapPoint 2002 is easier to use, it doesn't integrate as well with the GPS as Street Atlas 2003.
Some things that worked well: Enter an address or in many cases a business name or point of interest, and bam Street Atlas finds the item and plots a route. This works amazingly well and will be appreciated by anyone who has spent a long time searching a huge city map for "Abc Street". (D4-H4, it says D4-H4 but there's no Abc here!!!! Where is that @#$% street!) The "radar" feature is neat as well. You can cruise along the Interstate and decide you want some fast food, so have the radar search for and pop up all the fast food restaurants within x miles of your route as you drive along.
Unfortunately a few points of interest seemed to be missing, and others required rephrasing the name. I don't remember exactly what off the top of my head, but the Art Institute and Field Museum come to mind. On the plus side, the database seemed to be have just about every hotel.
There was two of us so the non-driver was the navigator. It does come with voice directions. The voice directions seem to work very well while driving the open highways, but inside Chicago it seemed the directions usually came too late to be of use.
The user interface is rather confusing, and this is coming from someone that can sit down at most software and figure out the main features in a few minutes without a manual. Of course I left the manual at home like a fool. I did manage to figure out the program while on the road, but then I took over the driving in the city and my navigator had a hell of a time with it. I ended up losing my patience more than once. Of course the fact that my navigator didn't think proper spelling was important (idiot!!!) was a big part of that problem.
I would strongly recommend learning the software by navigating a trip that you already know the route of (say a drive to visit family for Christmas). If you make a genuine effort of relying on the software to get you there, you'll learn the quirks fast and your knowledge of the route will bail you out if you become totally frustrated and give up.
With the Delorme Street Atlas USA 2003 and the maps installed, it takes up about a gigabyte. You can save hard drive space by using the map data off of the CD, but most laptops will consume the battery faster using the CD and the program probably runs faster from the hard drive.
These last two points apply regardless of what software you use:
For power, we used a 300 watt power inverter that was barely sufficient and cut out while waiting for red lights to change - this despite the laptop power supply being rated at only 75 watts. It would be nice if Consumer Reports or similar would review power inverters to find one that actually works well.
In Chicago, we naturally worried about break-ins, so we discreetly hid everything before getting out of the car. I found packing the laptop, power inverter, and GPS away when stopping, then unpacking and plugging everything back together and firing everything up when setting off for the next destination to be a huge hassle. It was enough to make me at least consider the $2,000 navigation package on my next new car (although I still think 2 grand is a bit crazy unless you travel a lot on business or something like that). A less expensive alternative is something like the Garmin StreetPilot.
Scott
-
I just noticed this thread. Hope nobody will mind my late reply.
Of the 19 "traditional" Iowa geocaches I have found so far, "Three ??? Bridges Cache" by summitt_dweller (GC4674) gets my vote for the best Geocache in Iowa.
Another favorite of mine is "Eager Beaver Cache" by Bob Jackson & Ryan Colley (GC31D0). This location is so cool - I think of this cache everytime I read the part of the Geocache hiding guidelines regarding location, location, location. The only down side, if there could be one, is that the hike to get there isn't all that interesting IMHO. Even so, I still recommend it.
One of these days I'll have to chase down some of Squeamish's caches (other than the Confluence cache).
-- Scott
-
quote:
Originally posted by Chux:My browser is purged of all cookies and the like when I close IE automatically thanks to the purchase of a cookie purger/cleaner.
Cookies are completely seperate from the browser cache. A program dedicated to handling cookies may not clear the cache. In any case, if you have problems like this, you might try manually clearing the browser's cache.
I use Netscape, which allows forcing a refresh by holding the shift key down while pressing the refresh button. To my knowledge, IE still doesn't do this, but I haven't tried it with IE 6 yet.
-
I'm again in agreement with T-storm.
Consent to use the photos on geocaching.com is implied when the cache visitor takes their own picture, however, it would be best to ask permission when using the picture elsewhere.My own experience as an amateur photographer, taking photos for Radio Controlled soaring publications (mainly non-profit club newsletters) has been that virtually everyone is happy to have their photo taken and published, and I have respect for anyone that chooses not to. I bet if you emailed a couple of local geocachers you could set up a cache hunt. It could even be a cache they've already found, or even just take a box along to "fake" a cache. Snap snap, you've got your pictures and your permission, and likely made some new geocaching friends in the process.
Another unsolicited tip (just ignore if you want): when I'm taking photos to use photos for some purpose, I always shoot about double the number of photos I think I really need. In a set of 24, I usually find one or two really stellar shots where everything is just perfect, a few great to excellent pics, and the rest are sort of middle of the road -- good enough to illustrate a point, but nothing I'm really proud of. It's not so much a matter of simple mistakes (I'm past that point) it's a matter subject and lighting and composition as well. This is particularly true when using live subjects. It may sound like "work", but it's really fun to do it well.
I once was flying a model plane on a cliff over the ocean and the sunset was beautiful. The waves were gold tipped. I'd made friends earlier with a guy I had met that day - turns out he owned the same brand of camera I did. My camera had a fresh roll of film. I handed the camera over and encouraged him to use the entire roll. Out of about 18 pictures of essentially the same thing, 2 of the frames stand out as much better than the rest.
-- Scott
-
quote:
Originally posted by bk11:It's about community and fun. The "jerks" are all you whiners... lighten up, sheesh! If you don't like it, there's that fancy little back button that came with your browser, use it!
Interesting tactic. People bring up an idea and discuss it's merits. Those involved with the idea find out, are upset that most people don't like the idea, and their defense is to accuse everyone of whining. Sounds similar to the tactics of a certain Iraqi leader (who was recently re-elected in a landslide, no doubt after silencing all the pesky whiners). If this is really such a great idea, you shouldn't have to resort to name calling to defend it.
The text for this "Travel" Bug clearly states how it was engineered to bypass the normal mechanism for being on the top 10 list. If this were an unintended side-effect, it'd be defendable, but this intention is clearly stated.
(sarcasm on)
Also I tried your back button method, but it didn't remove the chicanery from the list. Perhaps you could explain how this is supposed to work?
I would like to call attention to an idea that was suggested by someone else - ignore the "notes" when coming up with a count for the top 10 page
[This message was edited by smillersmiller on November 02, 2002 at 01:28 PM.]
-
Yes, you will need permission, at least in the United States. Some people just take and post snapshots, but others such as myself take photography pretty seriously and put a lot of time, effort and money into it. I'd be pretty mad if someone used one of my photos without permission and might even consider some legal action just to prove the point. On the other hand, if someone wanted to use one of my photos to illustrate a newspaper article on Geocaching and asked politely, I'd almost certainly give permission to use it for free with the simple requirement that I get a copy of the article when it's published. And as T-storm said, I might have a much better copy than what is on geocaching.com (I often times scan 35mm 4"x6" prints at 600 dpi - try finding a digicam with that kind of resolution. ;-)
-
I suggest creating a new forum for just Pocket
Queries and related topics. The related topics
would include the MobiPocket Reader and alternatives to MobiPocket Reader.
The reason I'm suggesting this is because I've been having some problems with MobiPocket Reader for Windows (not WinCE or Pocket PC, but for Win32 on my Pentium 3 laptop). Pocket Queries and related topics didn't really seem to fall in any particular forum, so I did a search to see what forum others had used. I found people had posted stuff in about 5 different forums.
So I guess for now I will post in the General forum, but I was thinking this might be a good idea for a new forum.
-- Scott
-
Just noticed this thread... figured I'd check in.
I joined May 2001, and then "lurked" for over a year before buying a GPSr and going on a cache hunt. I particularly like going on caches with friends. I've gone on cache hunts with quite a few different people.
spinwebby has done a couple of "newbie treks" and a picnic. I've joined one of the treks and gone to the picnic and they were both fun. I think it might even be fun to get a group of experienced cachers to group hunt a difficult one.
I've also been benchmarking quite a bit. For the marks I've gone after, I've found that the ones in Des Moines seem to mostly be innaccessible and/or missing. I've had better luck percentage-wise in rural locations. If anyone would be interested in a benchmark hunt in the Des Moines area, I'd be happy to organize one (as an experienced guide
- just call me sherpa). -
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Burke:Groundspeak should alter the manufacturing of the travel bugs to include two codes. One on the front of the tag and a different one on the back. That way when someone takes a picture of the tag number by mistake it cannot be "picked up" without the number on the other side.
Robert,
I have to commend you on thinking of a good idea.
I hope you won't take this the wrong way.
Jamie Z has a good point about this, but I'd
like to point out another....
With numbers on both sides, long-lived bugs
would eventually have pics posted by different
people of both the front and back. I say
that because of this...
A while back I grabbed a travel bug and when I
got home I dumped it and my backpack and GPS
on the floor. One of my cats went to check
it out and I had to snap a pic really fast.
Before I took the pic, I flipped the tag so
the number side was down. With numbers on
both sides, I'd have to choose one side
or the other. And so on. Eventually if
enough people took pics you'd get both numbers.
-- Scott
-
That's a really good idea! It could be
politely worded as a "courteous reminder that
you have a travel bug in your possession."
"If you have already deposited the travel bug
in a Geocache, great, but there's one more step
necessary to send the bug on its way. Stop
by the Geocaching website and log your visit
to the Geocache as soon as you can."
Or something like that anyway.
-- Scott
quote:
Originally posted by Marky:Why not have the geocaching.com system mail out the form letter automatically. That way, there is nobody to get mad at. It's just a 'ping' from the system reminding you that you have a bug in your possesion that hasn't been logged in X days/weeks/months. What do ya think?
-
Thanks. I was hoping I could just email them
or upload them via a webpage (similar to what
Geocaching and Yahoo photo album uses). A CDR
and shipping isn't that expensive, but I was
hoping to see my stuff in the NOAA
database right_now_.
-
Thanks. I was hoping I could just email them
or upload them via a webpage (similar to what
Geocaching and Yahoo photo album uses). A CDR
and shipping isn't that expensive, but I was
hoping to see my stuff in the NOAA
database right_now_.
-
I've read the instructions and guidelines
that the NOAA has for photographing marks.
http://www.ngs.noaa.gov:80/PROJECTS/INSTRUCTIONS/Digital_Photo_Requirements.pdf
I've taken a set of three good photos of a mark that conform to these requirements.
I've added the required captions.
Now how do I submit the photos of the recovered mark? I see that I am to email photos of destroyed marks to Deb Brown, but I haven't seen any mention of where to submit photos of recovered marks.
-- Scott
-
I've read the instructions and guidelines
that the NOAA has for photographing marks.
http://www.ngs.noaa.gov:80/PROJECTS/INSTRUCTIONS/Digital_Photo_Requirements.pdf
I've taken a set of three good photos of a mark that conform to these requirements.
I've added the required captions.
Now how do I submit the photos of the recovered mark? I see that I am to email photos of destroyed marks to Deb Brown, but I haven't seen any mention of where to submit photos of recovered marks.
-- Scott
-
I totally agree with travsl's reasons for logging a did not find. "Did not find" does not mean "I'm a loser", it means I went out after the Geocache but did not find it. On several cache hunts, I've walked right up to the cache and found it in seconds - still a good cache, but hardly an ego booster. The ones where we didn't find the cache were the epic journeys that we still talk about.
This is actually one of the first Geocaches I've searched for. We didn't reach "ground zero" and we still plan on going back for a 2nd attempt (someday), but I still felt I had several good reasons to log a "Not Found".
http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=16910
1. Sharing the fun and funny story of our caching adventure.
2. Warning to other cache seekers: Bugs and weeds in abundance so take appropriate action.
3. Comment to cache seekers and cache hider: We thought the cache is harder to get to than the 2 star terrain indicates.
4. Advice to other cachers to consider a non-direct route closer to the lake.
As far as pride is concerned, frankly I'm more proud of this "did not find" than most of the geocaches I have found. And frankly the "did not find" just fires me up to go out after this one when I get the chance.
-
I totally agree with travsl's reasons for logging a did not find. "Did not find" does not mean "I'm a loser", it means I went out after the Geocache but did not find it. On several cache hunts, I've walked right up to the cache and found it in seconds - still a good cache, but hardly an ego booster. The ones where we didn't find the cache were the epic journeys that we still talk about.
This is actually one of the first Geocaches I've searched for. We didn't reach "ground zero" and we still plan on going back for a 2nd attempt (someday), but I still felt I had several good reasons to log a "Not Found".
http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=16910
1. Sharing the fun and funny story of our caching adventure.
2. Warning to other cache seekers: Bugs and weeds in abundance so take appropriate action.
3. Comment to cache seekers and cache hider: We thought the cache is harder to get to than the 2 star terrain indicates.
4. Advice to other cachers to consider a non-direct route closer to the lake.
As far as pride is concerned, frankly I'm more proud of this "did not find" than most of the geocaches I have found. And frankly the "did not find" just fires me up to go out after this one when I get the chance.
-
The first benchmark I found, I only took close-up photos of the benchmark with the idea that anything else would spoil the joy of finding the benchmark for anyone else.
Since then, I've noticed that geocaching.com encourages photos showing the area, etc., and I've seen some benchmark photos that totally give away the location of the benchmark.
I realized that when it comes down to it, any photo would be a spoiler to some degree or another . Even my close-ups tell any seekers the size, shape, and color of the mark, and the fact that the mark is in a grassy area.
Still I plan to put "SPOILER" in the description of any of my photos that show the mark and the surrounding area in the comments. (I'm expecting some back from the film processors Monday.)
Thought I'd pass these thoughts on and see if anyone else had any comments.
-
Yes yes! More benchmarks to seek out!!!!
(bounces like a kid in a candy store)
How long is too long to hold a TB?
in Trackables
Posted
Go to your "My Cache Page" (5th button down on the left edge of the Geocaching home page). On the My Cache Page, under "Travel Bugs that you found:", click on the name of the lost Travel Bug. On the page for the Travel Bug, click the link for the owner's name. On the owner's profile, click the "Email this user" link.
Or did you mean how do I explain the situation? If that's the trouble, I suggest you just be honest and upfront. Your story sounds believable and you sound sincere - I think most TB owners would prefer to hear this story than be left wondering.
I don't think this Geocache is an official feature of the site. There's at least one other TB Graveyard Geocache. Moving a TB to a Graveyard Geocache has a serious drawback: The TB adds up mileage and the map shows movement that the TB didn't really make. The alternative of having the TB owner "grab" the Bug is IMHO a better choice (and I've talked with a couple of other TB owners that agree). Either way, I think it should be up to the Travel Bug OWNER to make this decision.
As a side note, I can't believe people are actually logging GC4DED as a "find" instead of "posting a note".