British Grid Or Long/lat

[+kevin308]

British Grid all the way for me!! They have the co-ords in every London road map and as far as I know for every road map in the UK (but not a full GB map) Your normal A-Z will do and the ordanance servay explorer maps have them listed verry well too not to mention that the co-ords are easyer to enter into a gps.

 

Anyone agree or disagree?

[+Moote]

Easier to enter into a GPS, what ever coordinates I use they just get fired down the cable from my PC

 

Just another though the format DD MM.mmm is like the geocaching language, so if you are out with other cachers you will not be fully understood.

 

Oh! and another how may could you give me a rough idea where SD 70035 81375 is?

 

I bet not, but most cachers could give you a good guess at

 

N 54°13.631', W 002°27.667'

 

and I bet they would be within 50 miles of the location.

 

I'm staying with the well known and loved DD MM.mmm format

 

Edited: for late night spelling errors

Edited January 12, 2006 by Moote

[+GAZ]

Much prefer DegDecimal...like wot one uses in autoroute!! Agree with Moote on knowing the rough area with co-ords than with grid.

[+Haggis Hunter]

British Grid has without doubts got it's advantages, allows new players in this country to start without a GPS, and all the other reasons that are stated at the beginning.

 

4. things you have to remember though.

 

1. British grid is displayed on the cache page below the co-ords, so for newbies it is there for them.

2. Surfing cache pages using G:UK gives an automatic conversion of all co-ords, yet again as long as newbies are told were to go they have the info.

3. You as the cache placer can list all your co-ords on the page in both formats.

4. A lot of tourist located caches such as London, Edinburgh and Oxford are visited by a high percentage of foriegners, so if all our caches were listed in British grid, they would have a nightmare converting their co-ords, just as we would if we used their grid system.

 

As all ready stated it is the international language of co-ordinates, hence why all sea charts are done in the same format.

 

Just another though the format DD MM.mmm is like the geocaching language, so if you are out with other cachers you will not be fully understood.

 

Exactly the same way as when out with others that use feet as distance, I don't understand as I use metres. I usually find that it is a vice versa situation as well.

[Lactodorum]

Use whichever you feel most comfortable with when out walking with your GPS/map. However when geocaching you are sure to run into trouble if you stick to OSGB

 

All references on cache pages are in Lat/Lon DD MM.MMM format so unless you use this you will be, on average, approx 100m out. It's noticeable that when reviewing people's first caches quite a few don't tie up with the descriptions as they are 100m out. This is almost always due to using OSGB/British Grid rather than Lat/Lon.

 

So if you want to use a GPS for Geocaching I would suggest getting used to using Lat/Lon.

[JackiePenn]

A localised system as OSGB is great for navigation in solely in the UK, such a lovely and simple system to use.

 

But a best fit global coordinate system makes much more sense for the worldwide sport of geocaching as does keeping to a standard of DD MM.MMM format.

 

I find it difficult to remember how to manual convert between different lat-long formats such as DD MM.MMM to DD MM SS.SSS without refreshing my myself on the subject decimal time. This doesn't crop up much in geocaching anyway.

[+kevin308]

Hmmmm.

 

I do agree that using OS BNG may sometimes be less accurate if the cache owner has mesured the location in Long/Lat however In my little expearance it is just as inaccurate as as the GPS signal. I have never been 100 meters out or even 100 feet. If I am having problems finding a cache I will change my gps to DD.MM.MMM and re-enter the co-ords. doing this does verry little except waste time. nothing realy changes.

 

Here is a question. Lets say your out searching for a cache and you read your map and see the symble for a pub about a mile away. you plan to walk there. what do you do? I would read the British grid on the map and stick it into my GPS. would you change your GPS to british grid and enter the co-ords or would you take a bearing and distance of the pub and get to it that way? Next time you go cacheing why not try using british grid and I bet you wont be able to notice the diffrancee.

 

Well thats my opinion. I only have 27 finds so its not as If I know everything lol

[Lactodorum]

Hmmmm.

 

I do agree that using OS BNG may sometimes be less accurate if the cache owner has mesured the location in Long/Lat however In my little expearance it is just as inaccurate as as the GPS signal. I have never been 100 meters out or even 100 feet.

Sorry you misunderstand what I was trying to say.

 

British Grid/OSGB is just as accurate as Lat/Lon however if you have your GPS set to OSGB datum when looking for a cache that is listed in WGS84 (which is the standard used on Geocaching.com along with the Lat/Lon format) you will find yourself about 100 metres out.

 

It's not a case of one being better than the other, it's just that they are different.

 

BTW - I like both Apples AND Oranges

[NickPick]

It's really horses for courses. The OSGB reference system is great for mapping in the UK, and lots of other countries use a similar grid co-ord system.

 

There are 2 problems:

 

first, Geocaching is a worldwide thing, so the database needs to be worldwide, so WGS84 is the best to use - it's understood by (almost) everyone

 

second, Because geocaching.com uses WGS84, anyone setting caches should. If you set a cache and take the OSGB co-ords, then convert them to WGS84, there is room for errors. These may be of the order of 100m if you use the wrong datum, or a matter of metres depending on what conversion method you use (I find GridInquest is best as it's what the OS recommend) If you've read OSGB from your GPSr, it has already converted from WGS84 to OSGB, if you then convert this using a different formula, you'll have a different answer than if you'd read the set the GPSr to WGS84 and read it.

[+The Mars Bars]

Geocaching I use Lat/Lon, WGS84 and if using mapping software and a pda there is no problem using the same settings when out hill walking.

At least until your batt's run out!

 

However for when walking and using paper OS maps I would always revert to OS BNG. Only for the fact that it is easier to read your position, to 6 figures anyway.

 

Used UTM in France a couple of years ago with French IGN maps and a yellow Etrex...something different again to get my head 'round

 

Cheers

Dave

[+t.a.folk]

Here is a question. Lets say your out searching for a cache and you read your map and see the symble for a pub about a mile away. you plan to walk there. what do you do? I would read the British grid on the map and stick it into my GPS. would you change your GPS to british grid and enter the co-ords or would you take a bearing and distance of the pub and get to it that way?

 

Cut my teeth walking in remote areas pre G.P.S. days so I would just use map and compass, if need be ,to reach the pub .

[+The Mars Bars]

 

Here is a question. Lets say your out searching for a cache and you read your map and see the symble for a pub about a mile away. you plan to walk there. what do you do?

I have never had a problem finding pubs!

 

The problem is finding my way after the pub...

 

Hic..

Cheers

Dave

[+Moote]

I only think it is a matter of time until the major datum on OS maps will be WGS84, as the maps I have all include that datum

[+Bear and Ragged]

Cache with Long/Lat, but it's the fact OSGB co-ords are marked on the map at regular intervals, so you don't have to open a map fully to find an edge with long/lat marked on it. Not safe when the passenger opens the map in the car when you're driving, and possibility of map being blown away on the top of a windy mountain (or hill!).

[Garmin8888]

Ordnance Survey maps will continue to correspond to the OSGB36 datum and they have no plans to change it........ask them I did!

[+kevin308]

Ordnance Survey maps will continue to correspond to the OSGB36 datum and they have no plans to change it........ask them I did!

good. Walkers would not like it changed.

[+Moote]

Ordnance Survey maps will continue to correspond to the OSGB36 datum and they have no plans to change it........ask them I did!

They might not actually get rid of OSGB36 for some time, but because there mapping is based on the degrees/minutes format (because they collect it that way) they are slowly introducing this on OS maps, if you look at any OS map you will notice that this is the case. It would be foolish of OS to work in anyother way as the world is moving to the call of WGS84

[+Moote]

good. Walkers would not like it changed.

I beg to differ, I am and have been actively involved in outdoor activities for 30 years of my life, and since 2000 I have moved away from the quirky OS NRG system to using WGS84. Many of my friends in the Caving and Mountaineering world have also switched as it make real sense when we are in other parts of the world to just understand a single system which is spoken worldwide by mapping agencies.

Edited January 13, 2006 by Moote

[barryhunter]

I would not like to see the Grid References disappear from the map as its so much easier to use (being rectlinear), as mentally and mathematically can quickly work out distances. However I have no objection to including a lat/long on the map for when need it, and it makes sence to have this as wgs84, maps have long had lat/long but have traditionally being osgb36.

[+Learned Gerbil]

Ordnance Survey maps will continue to correspond to the OSGB36 datum and they have no plans to change it........ask them I did!

According to the OS website they intend to stick to OSGB36 on their published maps even though they know it is less accurate than more modern measures, including GPS derived ones, and have developed sophisticated models like OSTN02 to compensate for the error and allow OSGB36 data to be displayed alongside data using other systems.

[+The Bongtwashes]

I would not like to see the Grid References disappear from the map as its so much easier to use (being rectlinear), as mentally and mathematically can quickly work out distances. However I have no objection to including a lat/long on the map for when need it, and it makes sence to have this as wgs84, maps have long had lat/long but have traditionally being osgb36.

As far back as I can remember being interested in maps and walking (back to the mid to late 60s), OS maps have always had Lat/Long marked in the margins, so it's not a system they're "moving towards", especially as wgs84 wasn't developped until over a decade and a half later!

As far as I'm concerned, for using maps I prefer the good old OSGB grid refs, whereas for caching I have no problem entering and using data in DD MM.mmm format. It is a lot easier to say how far apart 2 points are using a rectilinear system rather than a polar system, and as I always say how far I've walked in either miles or kilometres rather than angular minutes I will probably always prefer OSGB.