Special Equipment

[+purple_pineapple]

On this thread here Alan referred to an e-mail discussion. Everything is very amicable, and he has obviously been careful not to identify me on the other thread! However, I was hoping to see some responses to the comments about special equipment and what that cache rating should be...

 

One of the caches is RTB - Colley Hill (apologies for linking my cache, I hope its alloweable under the circumstances! )

 

The special equipment is listed on the page, and none of it is particularly outlandish. Now Alan's opinion (apologies if I misquote slightly wrong) is that any cache that requires, shall we say, additional equipment should have a high difficulty or terrain rating. As we can presume that the only thing a cacher is expected to have with them is a GPS, (I agree with this) then anything additional is special equipment, be it a torch, a socket set, or a cuddly toy!

 

My opinion is that the special equipment doesn't affect the difficulty or terrain per se, especially as we have given a list of things that may be required. All these caches can be easily retrieved (many from a wheelchair) with the aid of the suggested equipment.

 

My own opinion is that there is a difference between special equipment which we can reasonably expect a cacher to have (torch/screwdriver/magnet) and know how to use, and the sort of specialist equipment such as ropes, boats or scuba gear, which many cachers won't have, or know how to use. Caches that require these should be rated much higher. Unfortunately, we have no way (I think) in distinguishing between these two extreme of "additional" equipment.

 

Regarding his other point, the Additional Logging Requirement (ALR) is merely that the cache is retrieved in such a way that the cache container isn't destroyed. There is a history to this that I don't want to go into, but that is the only additional requirement. I feel most caches intrinsically have this ALR, but it is only on these caches that we have had to mention it... (for example, a cache container closed with screws - am i within my right to delete a log from someone who crowbars the box open?)

 

Opinions please! I know Alan's thoughts through e-mail, so I hope he doesn't mind me posting this! I expect he'll be along to put his side of the debate soon!

 

Dave

[+The Lavender Hill Mob]

(for example, a cache container closed with screws - am i within my right to delete a log from someone who crowbars the box open?)

So i assume you have a cache container that was destroyed because someone crowbared it open!

 

I would also assume that a person would know that generally to access a cache box you wouldn't or shouldn't have to crowbar it apart and so destroy it. The same thing has happened with one of Alfarrows caches.

 

I'd be bloody annoyed but I wouldn't delete the log. I'd email or PM the person and tell them what I thought of them.

[Lactodorum]

One of the caches is RTB - Colley Hill (apologies for linking my cache, I hope its alloweable under the circumstances! )

No problem.

 

As for the rest of your post, I think it summarises my feelings closely. A classic example of flexibility allowing for the exercising of common sense on the part of the reviewer publishing the cache in question.

Edited February 22, 2008 by Lactodorum

[+purple_pineapple]

(for example, a cache container closed with screws - am i within my right to delete a log from someone who crowbars the box open?)

So i assume you have a cache container that was destroyed because someone crowbared it open!

 

I would also assume that a person would know that generally to access a cache box you wouldn't or shouldn't have to crowbar it apart and so destroy it. The same thing has happened with one of Alfarrows caches.

 

I'd be bloody annoyed but I wouldn't delete the log. I'd email or PM the person and tell them what I thought of them.

 

sorry - didn't mean to imply that! NONE of my caches have been crowbarred open. I was merely making a point! The retrieval method was one that, after being used about 4 times, compromised the integrity of the cache. The first finders weren't entirely to blame, and we now know why that retrieval method was used. Thats by the by though - after replacing the cache, we specifically stated that this particular retrieval method should not be used, and it was then found again using exactly the same method. That was the REALLY annoying bit.

 

As it happens, everything worked out well because the cache was resited again (third time in less than 2 weeks) and is now much much better!

[+purple_pineapple]

One of the caches is RTB - Colley Hill (apologies for linking my cache, I hope its alloweable under the circumstances! )

No problem.

 

As for the rest of your post, I think it summarises my feelings closely. A classic example of flexibility allowing for the exercising of common sense on the part of the reviewer publishing the cache in question.

 

I might be wrong, but am i right in thinking there is no explicit way of differentiating those caches that require additional equipment from those caches that require specialist equipment (my terms buy the meanings are clear I hope?)

 

Should there be? Discuss!

[+The Lavender Hill Mob]

after replacing the cache, we specifically stated that this particular retrieval method should not be used, and it was then found again using exactly the same method. That was the REALLY annoying bit.

Unfortunatley human nature is to find short cuts. I implement Maintenance Management software mainly for nuclear power plants and no matter how well you train the users on how to use the system and how well the procedures on what they have to do are written they always find another way to do the thing they want to do which usually means they break something and in the Nuclear would that isn't good!

 

We all do it...........there's nothing like thinking you know a short cut and finding yourself further away from where your supposed to be.

[+Alibags]

after replacing the cache, we specifically stated that this particular retrieval method should not be used, and it was then found again using exactly the same method. That was the REALLY annoying bit.

 

If somebody thinks up a cunning workaround to your cache, then I am afraid you just have to live with that. If the cunning workaround means damaging your cache (as in the crowbar hypothetical situation) then by all means zap their logs, it should not need to be explicitly spelled out not to trash the cache container and as the cache owner you have 100% right to police your caches as you see fit. If the cunning workaround means trashing the surrounding locality or the cachers putting themselves or others in danger* then I should seriously consider moving the cache

 

*this excludes T4/T5 caches where any risk is inherent to doing the cache, and not as part of a badly thought through workaround which the cache owner never envisaged when setting it.

[+purple_pineapple]

after replacing the cache, we specifically stated that this particular retrieval method should not be used, and it was then found again using exactly the same method. That was the REALLY annoying bit.

Unfortunatley human nature is to find short cuts. I implement Maintenance Management software mainly for nuclear power plants and no matter how well you train the users on how to use the system and how well the procedures on what they have to do are written they always find another way to do the thing they want to do which usually means they break something and in the Nuclear would that isn't good!

 

We all do it...........there's nothing like thinking you know a short cut and finding yourself further away from where your supposed to be.

 

I agree! But if you put a great big sign next to a red button saying "Do not press! This will blow up the reactor" would you expect someone to press it?! (Actually, probably yes! Not a good analogy!) Anyway, we eventually thought as much, and the resited cache is much better.

 

But this is irrelevent! Its the special equipment bit I'm interested in people's thoughts on!!! Quit distracting me!

[Alan White]

I didn't want to identify Dave on the other thread, partly because it wasn't relevant to that thread and partly because I didn't wish to bring our private, though polite, difference of opinion to a public forum. As Dave has asked for views then I'm happy to expand on mine here.

 

On special equipment, it's also been my understanding that a cache which requires special equipment must be rated as either or both of Difficulty 5/Terrain 5. The question really is: what consitutes special equipment?

 

This is difficult to answer because everyone will have their own interpretation of what is needed to retrieve a cache. I've seen people retrieve caches without special equipment that I wouldn't go near without climbing gear and appropriate training. Others have swum/waded to a cache where I would use nothing less than an inflatable dinghy.

 

Some things are obvious: climbing gear (where unequivocally required), SCUBA, a boat of some sort. All these are clearly, I hope, D5 or T5. What about a WiFi device? I know of a cache where the owner was surprised that the reviewer required it to be D5, whereas I expected it to be D5 because, though many cachers have WiFi-enabled PDAs and laptops, many others don't. What about a torch? Is that special equipment? It might be for a daytime cache, but should all night caches be D5? Surely a torch is an obvious, and therefore not special, requirement for a night cache? One of our archived caches is D5. We set it like this after publication because it was obvious that it was more difficult than we'd envisaged. A reviewer was then concerned that this implied special equipment. Then he found the UV torch we'd left in one of the stages, and was happy with D5 .

 

Back on the caches under discussion, many cachers will always carry with them some of the items on Dave's list. Mirror, torch, water, no problem. But a socket set? Surely that's special equipment?

 

Even if one can define special equipment there's still the question - which I think is Dave's point - of whether such equipment automatically makes it D5 or T5. I would argue that it does, and Clayjar's system, though somewhat dated, seems to reflect that.

 

An additional difficulty (no pun intended ) with Dave's series is that he doesn't say which of the series requires which equipment. This makes the series more difficult (no problem there) but to label some of them as D5 would give away which are the most difficult.

 

The ALR question is, after Dave had explained the reason, of less concern. My point was that threatening to delete a log if you think that a cacher hadn't retrieved the cache in the approved manner means that there is an ALR and therefore the cache must be listed as a Mystery. On this series that would rather defeat the object . I remain concerned at the log deletion threat, and Dave knows that this is dissuading me from seeking the caches. I can't see how, having found the cache damaged, it could possibly be proved that the last online finder had caused it. To have one's log deleted as a sort of punishment for the cache being found damaged seems to me to be somewhat extreme.

 

BTW, Peter, no-one was suggesting that the caches shouldn't have been published - there's no reason for them not to have been. The questions PP and I discussed were about D/T & ALR.

[+purple_pineapple]

No need to comment on Alan's post! That's our two opinions, and nothing he's said is wrong, merely a matter of interpretation and opinion. (I'm not sure where I stand on WiFi requirements - I don't think we can expect all cachers to have portable wifi, so it would get a higher rating, maybe even a 5*... )

 

I'm still very much hoping that Alan will have a go at the caches tomorrow. Once he has, we'll probably carry on discussing them, and I'll explain a bit more about why we mentioned deleting logs. Can't do that without giving the game away though! Its is more than possible that, after we've had a few finds on the caches, we may remove the reference on the cache page.

 

Dave

 

edited to add that i would never make any assumptions about how a cache got damaged. I may ask by e-mail how a cache was retrieved, but unless the finder said "I crowbared open the box" (to use my earlier example) then I'm not going to delete logs.

Edited February 22, 2008 by purple_pineapple

[Alan White]

(I'm not sure where I stand on WiFi requirements - I don't think we can expect all cachers to have portable wifi, so it would get a higher rating, maybe even a 5*... )

There you go, you see. We have two WiFi-enabled PDAs and a WiFi-enabled laptop. And one of the PDAs always comes caching so we don't (really) mind if such a cache isn't a D5.

 

OTOH, we don't even possess a socket set, let alone carry one caching with us .

[+purple_pineapple]

(I'm not sure where I stand on WiFi requirements - I don't think we can expect all cachers to have portable wifi, so it would get a higher rating, maybe even a 5*... )

There you go, you see. We have two WiFi-enabled PDAs and a WiFi-enabled laptop. And one of the PDAs always comes caching so we don't (really) mind if such a cache isn't a D5.

 

OTOH, we don't even possess a socket set, let alone carry one caching with us .

 

no socket set?!! I hadn't expected that! Spanners are of course essentially the same thing... an adjustable one covers a range of sizes...

[+Bear and Ragged]

 

Special equipment?

or

Specialst equipment?

 

I dont really see the cache as a D5, although you do need to take certain items with you.

They are fairly easy to obtain and use.

 

I would consider climbing and Scuba gear and boats as D5.

 

Not sure about WiFi gear as D5...

 

Remember the last item on the list of items needed

"a sense of humour!"

 

G

[+purple_pineapple]

 

Special equipment?

or

Specialst equipment?

 

 

My thoughts exactly, and I think Alan agrees to an extent - trouble is there isn't a way to distinguish... not that I know of anyway!

 

Remember the last item on the list of items needed

"a sense of humour!"

 

G

 

quite! And if you do have to DNF it, there's always the cuddly toy to comfort you!

[Lactodorum]

An interesting and worthwhile discussion. I don't disagree with most of what has been said This is one of those topics that has no definitive answer.

 

Isn't it lucky we're only discussing a silly game rather than anything important!

[+Bear and Ragged]

Isn't it lucky we're only discussing a silly game rather than anything important!

[+keehotee]

My understanding was always that if a cache required something you wouldn't ordinarily expect a cacher to have on them (like a pen, a GPS, and a torch) then it needed "specialist equipment" - even if that SE was something as mundane as a star drive screwdriver to get the lid off to sign the log. Thus it would be quite easy to have a cache rated as a 1/5 - if it was easy to find, but you needed the screwdriver.....

 

Conversely there are a few caches down here that are rated as 5's that you don't need any specialist equipment for - they're just b788dy difficult to get to....but personally I wouldn't have rated them as 5's (otherwise what rating would you give to a cache you have to freedive under water to?

Edited February 22, 2008 by keehotee

[+Birdman-of-liskatraz]

Well if a torch is special equipment and makes a cache a D5... Then what do you grade a cache that requires say a boat and scuba gear which could be "harder" by a factor of 10?

[+keehotee]

Well if a torch is special equipment and makes a cache a D5... Then what do you grade a cache that requires say a boat and scuba gear which could be "harder" by a factor of 10?

A torch isn't special equipment - it's part of the kit that you could be reasonably expected to carry with you....

 

"Then what do you grade a cache that requires say a boat and scuba gear which could be "harder" by a factor of 10?" my point exactly........

[+purple_pineapple]

Well if a torch is special equipment and makes a cache a D5... Then what do you grade a cache that requires say a boat and scuba gear which could be "harder" by a factor of 10?

A torch isn't special equipment - it's part of the kit that you could be reasonably expected to carry with you....

 

"Then what do you grade a cache that requires say a boat and scuba gear which could be "harder" by a factor of 10?" my point exactly........

 

I don't carry a torch! A GPS is all we can expect a cacher to have with them. As it happens, standard equipment for me includes pliers and two types of screwdriver. OTOH, Alan carries a mirror with him (begs the question why..?

 

So if anything beyond a GPS is specialist equipment, then ANY cache which uses a torch, screwdriver, wire coathanger, or full climbing gear, should be rated 5* ? Which makes the rating system meaningless....

[+scottpa100]

Special equipment vs specialist equipment as said elsewhere in the thread I think is the key point. For a 5 star rating for terrain up in the hills, I think warrants climbing gear. If its just a trek up a big mountain, it tops a 4. For a water cache, warranting a 5, I think it should need scuba gear. If its cache on a small island, 10 metres away from the shoreline, a terrain 4. You can still swim to it without scuba gear. If a cache is up a tree with no lower branches and needs a ladder that's a five.

 

If anything else just requires a second visit, some additional 'stuff' that you may have lying around the house / garage /shed (hooks, spades, pulleys, sense of adventure) is NOT a 5. At tops a 4.

 

IMHO.

[+martlakes]

"My thoughts exactly, and I think Alan agrees to an extent - trouble is there isn't a way to distinguish... not that I know of anyway! "

 

Well, I can think of a real easy way -

 

 

Read the cache page!

 

 

As a setter of caches I would generally like people to find it, otherwise why bother putting it out. So, I work out what information people would need to be able to find it and have an enjoyable caching experience. Adding a bit more info might make it a little easier, being slightly more obscure will probably give people a harder time. Coupled with where the cache is actually hidden, I try and aim for one that has a bit of a challenge, for those that like it, but becomes more straight forward if you use the clue, and read all the info on the page.

 

Putting this theory into the discussion here, if I put out a cache that needed a screwdriver, I would either:

1) put a clear cryptic clue about it on the page, or be explicit, or put it in the hint, etc.

2) if I don't do this, then why be surprised if people turn up without one and get annoyed that they can't find it/open it. If they can't open it, don't be surprised if people resort to the crowbar/large rock method.

 

This is especially true if it is a five mile walk up a mountain to get to the site.

 

If part of the 'fun' of this cache is to make repeated visits to a site bringing various items, then make it clear that this is what this cache is about. No doubt many people will enjoy the hunt.

 

If the item is unlikely to be carried by normal cachers, then yes, put the stars up to warn people. Then hopefully the folk who can't be bothered to look at the cache page anyway might stop and think. If a torch is an absolute requirement - the cache can in no way be found without it - I would warn people about needing one (I don't always carry a torch, especially in the summer). If I don't warn them, I shouldn't be surprised if I get annoyed logs saying they didn't know they had to bring a torch.

 

The stars are only vital if you don't bother to read the cache page, and/or if the cache setter likes to watch people not find their cache cos they haven't got a 25mm spanner with them. "Ha ha, aren't you silly! Fancy not bringing the right spanner with you!"

 

Generally, boats, ropes etc would be 5*, but I can also imagine wifi being so, or anything that isn't normally carried. But the answer lies in the cache page - writing it well and reading it. If you don't read the cache page, don't be surprised if you fail to find the cache. The precise number of stars is a little bit irrelevant as they vary so much around the country.

 

(sorry for the long waffle!)

[fraggle69]

If it meant a smiley, I'd crowbar it open....... If the owner got upset, I'd probably replace the container for them, or offer some money towards a new one.

[+martlakes]

Just gone and had a look at PP's cache and he's done very much what I would do. It's obvious from the cache page that the 'fun' on this one is deciding how much kit to take, (do I really need the steps!) then figuring out what is actually needed when there.

 

I have no problem with the stars not being 5. At 3.5 I know that if I take some of this gear, it's going to be a slightly harder than usual find but probably do'able for my limited skills!

 

Why worry about it not having 5 stars - only if you don't read the cache page and just plug in the co-ords and turn up expecting to see a box in a hedge?

[+martlakes]

Double post

Edited February 22, 2008 by martlakes

[Alan White]

Alan carries a mirror with him (begs the question why..?

To clarify: it is not Alan who carries a mirror with him...

 

Nor the nail clippers which have also come in useful on more than one cache .

[+keehotee]

The rating system actually says

"Specialized equipment includes: Boats, 4WD vehicles, rock climbing gear, SCUBA, etc."

[+John Stead]

Just to stir the muddy water what is not needed by one cacher might be essential to another - e.g. as I am only about 5'3" there have been times when I have used a folding ladder to reach something which a 6 footer could get without even standing on tiptoes! Maybe not specialist but certainly necessary.

Edited February 22, 2008 by John Stead

[Alan White]

So if anything beyond a GPS is specialist equipment, then ANY cache which uses a torch, screwdriver, wire coathanger, or full climbing gear, should be rated 5* ? Which makes the rating system meaningless....

I don't see that it makes it meaningless. In fact, it makes the rating system useful by enabling one to identify caches that are out of the ordinary. The mantra "read the cache page" is all very well, but the PQ system (and other search facilities) cannot weed out easy or difficult caches by reading the cache page.

 

The purpose of the rating system, if properly used, is surely to give one an idea of the difficulty of the cache? If logging the cache requires taking or doing something which wouldn't normally be expected then the D/T rating should reflect that.

 

What's lacking here is a definitive statement from TPTB about what they expect. There's no point at all in any classification system unless everyone uses it in much the same way. Perhaps this thread might be better in one of the other forums?

 

As I said in email, I really do appreciate what you've tried to do with the RTB series. But it doesn't redress the balance by replacing the puzzles with caches which are difficult in other ways, and then not setting the D/T to reflect that difficulty. Of course, not having done the caches, I'm basing this merely on our discussions .

[+Bear and Ragged]

A GPS is all we can expect a cacher to have with them.

 

...So those micro's and Nano's that say "Bring a pencil/pen" should be rated as 5?

 

G

[+mumbo jumbo]

So should a cache of mine which requires special equipment (most people would have to go and buy it specially) AND where the nature of that equipment is a puzzle be a D5? It's currently a 4.5 (having started life as D3) and there have been 11 finds since 14/7/07.

[+purple_pineapple]

A GPS is all we can expect a cacher to have with them.

 

...So those micro's and Nano's that say "Bring a pencil/pen" should be rated as 5?

 

G

 

Bah, you know what I meant! Although that could be seen as a fair point! Shall we say cachers are expected to carry a GPSr AND a pen/pencil?!

[Archangel_UK]

"My thoughts exactly, and I think Alan agrees to an extent - trouble is there isn't a way to distinguish... not that I know of anyway! "

 

Well, I can think of a real easy way -

 

 

Read the cache page!

 

Says it all

 

BTW who goes caching with crowbar in their kit ?

and surely THAT is specialised equipment !

[+drsolly]

OTOH, Alan carries a mirror with him (begs the question why..?

 

I carry a mirror. Apart from the obvious use of being able to admire my beauty at any time, I also use it as a periscope for looking into places where my head won't go, for looking behing railings, and for looking high up in trees.

[fraggle69]

OTOH, Alan carries a mirror with him (begs the question why..?

 

I carry a mirror. Apart from the obvious use of being able to admire my beauty at any time, I also use it as a periscope for looking into places where my head won't go, for looking behing railings, and for looking high up in trees.

 

I use a mirror to reflect the sunshine into the eyes of any passing muggles. I also do it to cachers I want to annoy. If it's dark, a mirror is a good way of finding out if you have any vampires in your group!!

[+dino-irl]

I think people are looking at this in the wrong way.

 

T5* means to me that the area the cache is in is very difficult to get to and that it may need specialised equipment whether that be scuba, climbing gear or a boat.

 

PP's equipment list is about finding/retrieving/opening the cache and IMO that requirement is more suitably reflected in the D rating.

[+Happy Humphrey]

I think people are looking at this in the wrong way.

 

T5* means to me that the area the cache is in is very difficult to get to and that it may need specialised equipment whether that be scuba, climbing gear or a boat.

 

PP's equipment list is about finding/retrieving/opening the cache and IMO that requirement is more suitably reflected in the D rating.

Good summary: that's how I see it as well.

[Alan White]

I carry a mirror.

You don't count . There doesn't seem to be anything that you don't carry caching with you (kitchen sink possibly excepted) therefore for you there is no special equipment .

[Alan White]

I think people are looking at this in the wrong way.

Not me. I don't mind whether the special equipment requirement is reflected in D or T, just so long as it's reflected in at least one of them.

 

But I think we digress. Where PP and I disagree, in the nicest possible way, is twofold:

- what constitutes special equipment

- whether special equipment automatically means D5 and/or T5

 

I entirely accept that there can never be a definitive answer on the first question because, as this thread shows, everyone carries around a different set of equipment. I would suggest that a test of reasonableness applies. I would not consider pen, torch, mirror, tweezers, even WiFi as special equipment because I carry those things caching almost always. And I know that many other cachers carry similar items. But I can't accept that most cachers carry a socket set .

 

I believe that the answer to the second question is yes, it does. I didn't make that up. It's listed in clayjar's system and reviewers have often insisted both that special equipment = D5 or T5 and that D5 or T5 = special equipment. Would a reviewer like to comment?

 

We did one of the caches in question today. Obviously I can't say which special equipment it required, if any .

[+Happy Humphrey]

- whether special equipment automatically means D5 and/or T5

D5 or T5 = special equipment.

No: if you leave the "Is specialized equipment required?" set to "No" you can still rate the cache as 5* terrain using the Clayjar system.

If you set it to "Y" then it WILL return 5*, however.

 

But what is meant by "specialis(z)ed equipment"?

I take it to mean the type of gear where you need special training to use it.

 

So if you need a 20' long pole to retrieve the cache, but all you do is walk a few yards along an easy path, stick a hook on the end of the pole and hook the box with it, then it's not "specialised equipment" and you'll have to judge how much difficulty to add on - it won't automatically be 5*. I'd guess around 3.5-4* difficulty.

 

If the cache is found simply by going to a lake, then diving to an easily-located spot 10 feet below the surface and retrieving a prominent ammo box: it'll certainly deserve 5* terrain but only perhaps 1-2* difficulty.

 

But 5* terrain could also mean that it's a 10-mile walk up a trackless mountain...not common around Berkshire, I'll admit!

[nobby.nobbs]

Wouldn't it be better to have a warning flag that specialist equipment was needed at the top but leave the d/t to accurately reflect the actual difficulty and terrain?

 

That way a difficult climb wouldn't be the same as a flat path where you need something unusual to get the actual cache.

[Alan White]

No: if you leave the "Is specialized equipment required?" set to "No" you can still rate the cache as 5* terrain using the Clayjar system.

Oh, sure. Clayjar is merely a suggestion. It's probably a little simplistic for the types of caches placed these days. My foundation for that statement is that reviewers have in the past said that 5* implies special equipment. See further up the thread for an example.

[Alan White]

Wouldn't it be better to have a warning flag that specialist equipment was needed at the top but leave the d/t to accurately reflect the actual difficulty and terrain?

 

That way a difficult climb wouldn't be the same as a flat path where you need something unusual to get the actual cache.

That's a good point. The D/T system predates the attribute system, and there are some attributes that identify the particular special equipment required. Perhaps what's required is one or more new attributes?

[+dino-irl]

I think people are looking at this in the wrong way.

Not me. I don't mind whether the special equipment requirement is reflected in D or T, just so long as it's reflected in at least one of them.

 

But I think we digress. Where PP and I disagree, in the nicest possible way, is twofold:

- what constitutes special equipment

- whether special equipment automatically means D5 and/or T5

 

I entirely accept that there can never be a definitive answer on the first question because, as this thread shows, everyone carries around a different set of equipment. I would suggest that a test of reasonableness applies. I would not consider pen, torch, mirror, tweezers, even WiFi as special equipment because I carry those things caching almost always. And I know that many other cachers carry similar items. But I can't accept that most cachers carry a socket set .

 

I believe that the answer to the second question is yes, it does. I didn't make that up. It's listed in clayjar's system and reviewers have often insisted both that special equipment = D5 or T5 and that D5 or T5 = special equipment. Would a reviewer like to comment?

 

We did one of the caches in question today. Obviously I can't say which special equipment it required, if any .

Ahem!

[+purple_pineapple]

Wouldn't it be better to have a warning flag that specialist equipment was needed at the top but leave the d/t to accurately reflect the actual difficulty and terrain?

 

That way a difficult climb wouldn't be the same as a flat path where you need something unusual to get the actual cache.

 

A flag of some sort would be my preference. Basically something to say "Take note - this cache is not retrievable with standard caching equipment". My words, but you know what I mean. Whether or not the equipment is listed can then be reflected in the difficulty rating, as can such things as whether the equipment requires specialist training (which may also be reflected in the rating.

 

So we could have a cache which requires a wire coat hanger - the specialist equipment attribute (or whatever) is set, and then the diff/terr is rated independently, maybe a 1D / 1T

 

A cache which requires the use of theodolite, (don't ask me how!!! ) but is retrievable in a wheelchair on a public footpath would be a 5D / 1T

 

Cache at bottom of lake in obvious ammo tin might be 1D 5T

 

You get the idea...!

[+Cache U Nutter]

- whether special equipment automatically means D5 and/or T5

D5 or T5 = special equipment.

No: if you leave the "Is specialized equipment required?" set to "No" you can still rate the cache as 5* terrain using the Clayjar system.

If you set it to "Y" then it WILL return 5*, however.

 

But what is meant by "specialis(z)ed equipment"?

I take it to mean the type of gear where you need special training to use it.

 

So if you need a 20' long pole to retrieve the cache, but all you do is walk a few yards along an easy path, stick a hook on the end of the pole and hook the box with it, then it's not "specialised equipment" and you'll have to judge how much difficulty to add on - it won't automatically be 5*. I'd guess around 3.5-4* difficulty.

 

If the cache is found simply by going to a lake, then diving to an easily-located spot 10 feet below the surface and retrieving a prominent ammo box: it'll certainly deserve 5* terrain but only perhaps 1-2* difficulty.

 

But 5* terrain could also mean that it's a 10-mile walk up a trackless mountain...not common around Berkshire, I'll admit!

 

Sorry, I have been away but trust this delayed contribution may be of interest !

I put together some special equipment on my own cache [poleaxed GC 17GW9 http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...7c-2d21181bb128

as a dress rehearsal for Mark and Lynnes cache 'stairway to heaven GC13542 http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...7c-2d21181bb128

Both caches are similar - mine not in such a scenic position, M&L's not requiring quite so much Viagra!

Theirs is graded 4/5 [special equipment] and I decided mine should be only 4.5/1.5 despite also requiring the same [but longer ] special equipment.

I asked other cachers to comment on the grade and no one disagreed that a 5 T grade would really be out of place in this situation.

What is clear from everyones comments is that the clayjar grading system no longer caters for the diversity of caches around today.

Many of my own caches are extreme and I have come up with my own 'Extreme' classification which I have highlighted on those cache cache notes where I consider there to be a serious chance of injuring / killing oneselves if certain precautions are not taken.

Perhaps someone should propose an alternative, It need not be accepted by GC.com but put into universal practice by GB cachers if we all agree [although flying pigs may be more likely !]

[+Happy Humphrey]

So if you need a 20' long pole to retrieve the cache, but all you do is walk a few yards along an easy path, stick a hook on the end of the pole and hook the box with it, then it's not "specialised equipment" and you'll have to judge how much difficulty to add on - it won't automatically be 5*. I'd guess around 3.5-4* difficulty.

...I asked other cachers to comment on the grade and no one disagreed that a 5 T grade would really be out of place in this situation....

I wouldn't expect a 5T grade for such a cache. That would suggest that you would (for instance) have to borrow a boat and sail to an island before you could begin searching for the cache. The Clayjar system works quite well for this type of case.

 

Remember that only the last question is about difficulty: all the others are terrain-related. So where it says "Is specialized equipment required?" at the start, that means "Do you need expensive, non-geocaching gear to get to the cache area?". In the case of Mark&Lynn's cache, I don't think that it is the case so the terrain rating should be much lower.

 

The last Clayjar question is, "How easy is it to find the cache?". In the examples you give (I haven't been to them, but I think I know what's involved), you'd probably answer "Finding this cache requires very specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment. This is a serious mental or physical challenge.". That would give a 5D rating. You might knock it down to 4D if you think it won't be that hard to get hold of the required equipment.

[+mongoose39uk]

So caches requiring the use of a boat should be a 5*.

 

So all the caches on the IOM should be 5* then

[+The Other Stu]

So caches requiring the use of a boat should be a 5*.

 

So all the caches on the IOM should be 5* then

Funny you should say that....

 

This cache in my very humble opinion should be far more than a 3.5/4

 

For a start, you need to go hire a boat. When you've got over that hurdle, you need to find the 4 stages. Some of which are accessable by said boat. Once you've got them all, you need Memory map or something similar to plot them on a map to work out the final. Oh and not to mention the 6 mile row! Although the person setting says it can be done using one of the eletric day boats, I'd be very wary - this particular area is getting worse and worse for weeds and the Broads is in serious need of dredging! I did attempt to get near it in my 22 foot plastic boat, but not a chance!!!

 

Compare this to TDWs Waterworld caches which were 3.5/5s. No offence to anyone, but getting in a dinghy in a 3ft deep canal is hardly the same as rowing for 6 or 7 miles having grabbed 4 difficult waypoints (that a lot of people get wrong btw).

[+Happy Humphrey]

So caches requiring the use of a boat should be a 5*.

 

So all the caches on the IOM should be 5* then

They're all local caches, for local people. There's nothing for you here.