stevesisti

well actually you need three files if I remember right. Your full size image file, the actual map, your PV file which is a smaller reduced image used by mapsource (created by the cgpsmapper pv command, and the TDB file, created by the same cgpsmapper pv command at the same time the preview is created. It also creates registry mods if you are going to use them I hate the command line stuff because I'm not familiar with it, but more than likely your problem is the following. The pv text file you are converting has to be in the same folder as the cgpsmapper.exe file...if it's not, cgpsmapper can't find it and you will get the above error. When you run cgpsmapper, you must run it from the command line...get the DOS prompt, navigate to the folder where both gpsmapper and your pv.txt file are, then type "cgpsmappper(space) pv (space) (your file name ending in .txt format). This is the pain in the arse part of the whole project....good news is having done it once...it's very easy the second time around.

There are several ways and sources of material to get your data into gpsmapper and then into your gps..I can only tell you the path I went down, which might not necessarily be the best way. Opened a USGS 1:24K topo quad with Ozi explorer (free trial program program), saving that file in the ozi program gives you an Ozi .map file. Open the .map file in map edit and the map becomes the "background or "template " on which you can "draw your map. Save the file in Mapedit as an .Mp "polish" file, then convert to an image (.img) file in Mapedit. The fun starts once you have this .img file....if you just want to load that single .img file, without it being available to load thru mapsource, use this program "mapupload", again it's free....http://www.mapwel.biz/products.htm. Be advised though, like all uploads to your unit, all previously loaded maps are erased and the only map you will have is the one you just uploaded If you want to load the map through Mapsource, things get interesting, especially if your not familiar with working from "command Line". You must use gpsmapper again and create a several files that Mapsource requires for the map to load....www.geopainting.com has a tutorial that explains how....good luck

If you're doing this as a way to be "cost productive", you're way off the mark. Yes, you can make maps, and much more detailed and personal maps than say Garmin has to offer...but it requires a lot of work. My only reason for doing so was to map an island that Garmin offered no coverage on, and to map 2 or 3 of my favorite areas in the adirondacks to a higher level than the garmin topo. The level of Garmins topo has a "practical" side to it in that if all their maps were as detailed as the ones I created, 54 megs of unit memory would only hold a small fraction of New York state. Obviously the file sizes create a limit to the amount of detail you can create or would have a practical purpose for. That being said...Mapedit and gps mapper would get you going. They are 2 seperate programs that work with each other, and the trial versions allow you to make a "small" map to get a feel for what is required. There is also an all inclusive program out there but the name slips my memory right now. I found it very interesting, somewhat fun, but geeez... it really is a lot of work and requires at least a basic knowledge of different map products, datum and projections. These were by the way, non-routable maps. On the plus side, Mapsource freely accepts the maps integrated into the Mapsource program as a selectable "loadable" map, along with the Garmin mapsets...and the 60CS works fine with the "homemade brew"...not even a single lockup.

My only comment would be to make sure you have a provision for an external antenna, especially if your going to incorporate the data into a map. All units see improved accuracy with an external antenna, specifically under trail conditions where he will most likely be. My 60cs shows variations from track to track of well over 60 ft under tree cover, an external antenna improves this dramatically.

Hmmmm. You might want to check on that. I thought the base map had nothing to do with the available memory....In fact my 60 CS has 54 Meg available and I have loaded 53.3 into the unit with no problem....so..... Ok, I see what you are saying....you are correct.

Hmmmm. You might want to check on that. I thought the base map had nothing to do with the available memory....In fact my 60 CS has 54 Meg available and I have loaded 53.3 into the unit with no problem....so.....

Easy to do while hiking, but what about traveling down the road at 60MPH? I don't know about you, but I kind of like to watch the road while I'm driving - NOT my GPSr! If you read the original post correctly, you would see that we were referring to "hiking" and not "driving" while following a track. Regardless, when driving a return trip, it is still easier to do a new "go to" to your return destination, rather than panning around the map page that is required when you do a Tracback....it's a no brainer...for most of us anyway :0).

You have a right to have the product perform as advertised.....having said that, I don't see why anyone would use "trackback", having to perform the "find beginning" baloney at the start....just turn around and follow the track you just made. You also seem to be a little concerned about getting lost...maybe a good idea to mark a waypoint at your starting point (car/trailhead etc.)

I recently did a paddling trip of 15 mi, with my 60CS set to record a track point at a distance interval of .01 miles (52 ft.). When I download the active track, the spacing between the majority of points is 150 ft, with very few of them being in the 50 ft range. I've always had the unit set to that distance, and it's set to that distance now. Does anyone know why it would save points at an interval different then what I have the unit set to ?

Who knows what your particular problem is....I have had several "funky" things happen while using the 60cs...from lock-ups to routings that went one way... and then all of a sudden reversed direction and went the other.....finally a reset fiexed all....at least for the last few months now the operation is flawless. Simple approach....do a master reset.....start from square one and if the problem re-occurs, send it back to Garmin for a replacement....and don't be shy about talking to Garmin...they have excellent customer service...you paid good bucks for the unit...and should get good service in return.....and remember...it's not your job to figure out what the problem is....make a reasonable effort to get it functioning...after that....let Garmin take a crack at it or else replace the unit.

http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/distance.html Try it

I don't see what all the fuss is about.....The definition of the unit is "handheld" and as such you're still looking at a screen and resolution size that would not take advantage of all the info on a std. USGS 1:24K topo map. The next question is...since there is no way to get any vector, or routing data from a raster map, this is probably going to be some sort of "hybrid" map either converted in the unit or beforehand with proprietary software, but either way, someone will have to supply the vector/navigation data and you can bet it's going to cost you. Another intersting note...each USGS topo quad averages about 5megs of image data (someone correct me if I'm wrong) so the storage consideration would be enormous. I would also assume the processing demands would be equally large. I would wait till more details come out, but you can be sure your not just going to be throwing the freely available usgs quads into one of these things and it's " off you go".

Don't know why you would need an external antenna in a Kayak...I use the 60 cs in a "dry-loc" plastic bag ($8.50) sitting on the deck of my Kayak and the reception through the bag is the same as without. It's been in the water several times and never let in a single drop...I have used these bags for several years with cell phones and they still perform fine. I can operate all the buttons with ease. Being out on the open water I always get superb reception....usually 7-10ft...and never lose a sat lock. Probably the best reception you will ever get is on an open body of water.

I have a 60cs and love it.......I get very good reception under tree cover and only occassionally lose lock when heavy tree cover is combined with a mountain/canyon. So I'm not complaining and will be happy with the 60cs for years to come. But I still have my curiosity about just how good the reception is on the new chip and if Garmin will use them "across the board" in their products Steve

Garmin seems to be pushing the new Sirf III chip as in their new Bike gps units (edge) I have never seen them advertise the reception on any of their handheld units as they decribe the edge... # High-sensitivity GPS receiver—knows your position even in tree cover and canyons, making it extremely reliable for navigation Are we looking at the next release of handhelds all incorporating the Sirf technology, making my 60cs somewhat of a "paper weight". If we are, I have to hand it to Garmin marketing, because if they perform as I'm starting to hear, I can see a new "wave" of purchases to get units with the higher sensitivity chip. I heard there were problems with the original Sirf chip, But recent reviews and Garmins commitment to purchasing and incorporating the sirf chip in their new products makes me wonder just how good the chip is. Steve

Some decent reviews out the including one person at a trade show who said the only demo unit that had a fix indoors was a serf 111 chipset. Well I think you can read between the lines...If Garmin has ordered the chips from Sirf Tech to incorporate into their product...that says a lot. Here we go again...trade in dem 60cs's for the latest, and greatest reception in handheld GPS :0)

Sounds like a sales gimmick to me.....if there were more sats available in orbit, well then maybe, but as it is, under tree cover, I usually average 5 or 6 sats...adding the ability to scan for two more sats that aren't going to be there is a waste of processor time. For the most part, under tree cover, I'm pretty much only picking out the sats that are at the 45 or above, which are the 4 or 5 sats I'm getting now. So right now I have an extra 5 slots that receive nothing....having an extra seven slots to look for nothing is the same situation as having 5 look for nothing. Out in the open, I get lock on 6-10 sats with very good accuracy readings... having the ability to lock on 2 more isn't going to effect already good reception and accuracy.

He probably used the 76CS to 60CS software conversion kit, allowing the buttons to be used on top of the unit.

Regardless of what any manufacturer says regarding the water resistant rating, you really should have had the explorist in a waterproof bag. I keep my 60cs in a "Dry-Pak" bag when I have it on my Kayak. Reception is great and the buttons are easily pressed through the clear membrane. It's been dunked on numerous occasions and has never let in a drop...cheap insurance for $9.00. I also have a water proof VHF marine radio from icom thats "supposed" to be waterproof, I also have that in a "dry-pak" bag. Same story, dunked along with the 60CS, not a drop inside. It's really a shame these Mfgr's are allowed to call anything waterproof..at best they should be able to say "water-resistant". I would definitely send it to the factory as soon as possible....and if I were you I would press them hard on a free repair owing to a "minor" exposure to water. I have had several electronic units return to service after a water dunk, only to have it fail again shortly thereafter.

It is difficult to wade through the smls viewer for the first time...or for your first several times for that matter....try this link for a listing of areas which have the high resolution images available...note that of the available ones...some are available for "viewing" only and not download.....you will get a feel for how limited the availabilty really is. http://seamless.usgs.gov/website/seamless/...listofortho.asp

Have a look here, there is a brief explanation of how to see what areas are available. One of the problems you will encounter is that the new higher resolution (1/3 meter) are really only available in a very limited amount of areas and these area are all urban (city) areas, or popular areas of historic interest( Washington dc etc.). While the 3 meter DOQ have somewhat of a "national" program to cover the whole country, even they are not 100% coverage. There are several states that have embarked on a program to re-map their boundaries in the Higher resolution imagery...this is not a "national" program...you will just have to look at the USGS SMLS site to see if what you want is available. http://seamless.usgs.gov/announcements.asp#ortho

Probably not....unless you are willing to pay for them and you are fortunate enough that the area you want has been photographed "recently" by a private concern. Most organizations have a "mish-mosh" of government supplied (mostly outdated) and self generated (Mostly large urban areas) aerial photos. I have not found one place that "has it all". From a practical point of view I don't really see why you would want that kind of accuracy. The file sizes become huge, and from a mapping point of view, you are just adding info which has no practical use. Also, having a small meters/pixel ratio means absolutely nothing if the source detail wasn't there in the first place...I can take a 72 dpi map and scan it at 4000 dpi....I now have a lot higher meters/pixel...but no more information than I had at 72 DPI.

You can buy radios that are frs only, gmrs only, or a combo of FRS and GMRS. Whether you need a license or not isn't necessarily determined by the radio, but rather if you are going to use the GMRS (higher wattage) frequecies. You could buy a dual radio, FRS/GMRS and not use the GMRS side of the radio and you don't need a license. You can buy a GMRS radio wihtout getting the license, but using it would be in violation of the FFC rules and regulations. FRS is restricted to 1/2 watt, GMRS to 5 watts. From a practical point of view in real use situations, 10 times the wattage will not give you 10 times the transmission distance The most important factor in determining your transmission distance is your antenna,antenna height, and having free line of site to your receiving radio. I highly doubt you will be able to contact someone 6 mi away using a handheld...any buildings, hills,trees or mountains will knock the signal down for sure. Unless you live in Kansas, the standard distances quoted by radio MFGr's are way, way off from real-time use. The gmrs license is $80 for 5 years, you can apply here http://wireless.fcc.gov/uls/

I beleive the original version of gpsmapper (0085 ver. ?) could convert a garmin .img file into a MP (Polish Format) file. Using "MapEdit" you could edit the .MP file, add roads etc., and then convert back to a Garmin .img file. The newer version of gpsmapper will not do this conversion, I assume owing to copyright liabilities. I have used gpsmapper to make my own maps, the only reason for doing so is to create maps with much, much more detail than Garmins. The process is time consuming, and was originally developed for gps enthusiasts in foreign countries where Garmin didn't offer map coverage. The down-side of having more detailed maps is that the files are obviously larger than a typical Garmin file. The up-side is that it is very satisfying to be on your favorite lake following a shoreline and having the gps track follow the shoreline to a T. With Garmin topo, I would frequently find myself tracking "way up" on dry land. My first map was of Lows Lake in the Adirondacks....Garmin topo is horrible compared to what you can do tracing a standard 1:24K USGS Quad map. Garmin topo eliminated many of the smaller islands, had irregular and "odd" shapes for many of the larger islands, and just plain left out several Kayak/canoe passages altogether. I would suggest making your own maps for one or several of your favorite areas, but as an alternative to the Garmin maps, it's just simply too much work compared to the ease of buying the available Garmin product. I would also add that although I'm not thrilled with the detail of the Garmin topo, it would be impractical to have all my maps in higher detail. If I did, I would probably only be able to fit a few ny counties in the unit at a time. Almost forgot the original question.....no, it cannot be easily done, at least not the first time you do it. Once you have gone thru the process , the next map is much mcuh easier.