My new pet peeve, bad Lat. / Lon. on GC's

January 17, 2010

:anibad:

I have noticed here in Milton, FL that MANY, MANY, MANY, of the caches seem to be placed with the cache owner(s) just getting one Lat. / Lon. reading, and many times if it is near where you park, they take the reading right there, even if the cache is 15 to 20 ft away! This is so annoying! Also, many people are placing these "mini" micro caches that are 1.5 inches x 1/2 inch in size and not saying if they are hanging in a tree, in / on the ground and 2 of those here are ones that have no hints and the Lat. / Lon. falls in the middle of the road ( and that is using 4 Garmin Rinos to quadruple check, 1 Rino 110, 2 rino 120's, and 1 rino 130 - that is almost $1,000 worth of GPS), and ALL of them show this one cache here in the middle of the road?? What is up with people not taking 30 to 40 minutes to properly get the coordinates for a cache??? That is the whole point, to put your cache where you say it is, sure you can hide it as well as you wish with all the camo tape you want, just put the right coordinates down!!! If people check the " I have read the ..." then they would have read to take the average of 3 (three) readings BEFORE placing the cache as active online!

Come on people, I expect this from newbies, but I have noticed those that have been on here as long or longer than myself (2004) getting lazy and very sloppy with Lat. / Lon. lately.

Please, anyone else noticing this happening more frequently in the past year or so? By all means, I welcome ALL constructive responses / critisism - (keyword constructive - so "stop whining" commentors can, well figure it out) :rolleyes:

6.7k · January 17, 2010

Um...At the risk of having you think I'm one of "those" responders I gotta ask. You do realize that 15-20 feet is well within the margin of error of consumer grade GPS receivers, right?

January 17, 2010

How do you know they only took one reading?

January 17, 2010

15-20 feet isn't bad at all.

15-20 yards is a different matter

Even if you took the time to average out your co-ords, they could still have 5 or 10 feet off (That's an error of 00.001 minutes in one or both the latitude and longitude). Take their slight error, and couple that with your GPS's error, and you end up with 10-20 feet of error (or more) quite easily.

5.3k · January 17, 2010

15 - 20 feet is definitely within the acceptable accuracy range of recreational grade GPS units.

January 17, 2010

Um...At the risk of having you think I'm one of "those" responders I gotta ask. You do realize that 15-20 feet is well within the margin of error of consumer grade GPS receivers, right?

I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?

January 17, 2010

How do you know they only took one reading?

because if you do the average of 3 reading the proper way, which geocaching.com even explains, it will be much closer, and my problem is when there is NOTHING but open road for 30 to 50 ft from the listed coordinates, where there is NOWHERE to place a cache, and the ones I have the problems with, are the same 3 or 4 cachers, and they are cherry new to the sport / game, and refuse to do the average of at least 3 reading, I have made conversation with them, that is how I know! I would not say that if I didn't know!

January 17, 2010

15-20 feet isn't bad at all.

15-20 yards is a different matter

Even if you took the time to average out your co-ords, they could still have 5 or 10 feet off (That's an error of 00.001 minutes in one or both the latitude and longitude). Take their slight error, and couple that with your GPS's error, and you end up with 10-20 feet of error (or more) quite easily.

I know, I was a surveyor for many years, but I was actually "holding back" and being nice actually, most of these caches I had trouble with ARE more than 40 ft off, 1 is 65 (used surveying GPS to prove it to my brother that is the cache owner).

January 17, 2010

15 - 20 feet is definitely within the acceptable accuracy range of recreational grade GPS units.

not sure what equipment you use, but if you are not 6 to 8 ft most of the time, it must not be a very good GPS. Not one of mine go above 8ft accuracy unless it is very cloudy or in thick wooded areas?

January 17, 2010

I do understand what all the responses are saying, but I was REALLY being conservative, only one cache was 30 ft off, the rest are greater than 40ft and up to 70ft - and 8 of 10 of them are by brand new cachers that I very nicely suggested using the "average of 3" readings, and they were not rude, but said they did not have enough time to take 3 readings before putting a cache down, yet they have plenty of time to go and seek?

I spend NO LESS than 1 hour placing a cache, just read the logs of the 2 active ones I have now, people are VERY pleased withit, and go right to it with less than 3 ft deviation, and my caches are not visible at all, they are completely covered!

It is like anything that you take time to do, it will be right, you do it fast and make mistakes, everyone can see this.

And I brought this to the forum, not just for myself, but for about 9 other local and 2 out of town cachers that met with me at a restaraunt one night we discussed this, and were ALL in agreement.

When I started in 2004 nearly EVERY cache was 10ft or less (mostly less), from listed Lat./Lon. , now maybe 2 of 10 are, and they are the hides of "old-timers" to caching.

Sure, if your cache is off 5 ft AWESOME!, 10ft great, 15ft ok, 20 ft so so, more than 20ft, please, re-read the coordinates and do it right, remember, does the cache YOU "set" / hide, not reflect YOU? If so, then a sloppy cache means_______. ???

I could go into those that are listed as micro caches and are half-gallon jugs in reality, or vice-versa , listed as a medium to large cache and find a 35mm canister, yes, there are at least 2 like that I just found not long ago.

Or caches that are home made "jars" or "jugs" with no waterproofing and continuously soaked logs and the owners NEVER go and repair / replace?

BUT, I will stop there, as I am sure that at least 20 of you want to reach in and strangle me right here and now, but why, did I hit a nail on the head? I am just being honest, and trying to help cache owners tale a little pride in their work! Would you rather drive a 2010 Corvette down your main street of town with everyone looking, or a rusted yugo that back-fires every 10 ft? I know what I'd choose!

Edited January 17, 2010 by Team KORFUS

8.3k · January 17, 2010

15 - 20 feet is definitely within the acceptable accuracy range of recreational grade GPS units.

not sure what equipment you use, but if you are not 6 to 8 ft most of the time, it must not be a very good GPS. Not one of mine go above 8ft accuracy unless it is very cloudy or in thick wooded areas?

Try coming up to the Pacific NorthWet and check it out under heavy tree cover with trees every where. A good day is 22 foot. Yeah, when I cache in places that don't have heavy tree cover I can get 8 foot acccuracy.

4.8k · January 17, 2010

If caches placed 15 feet off of your surveying equipment coordinates are bugging you that much, can I suggest you take up golfing or something. The precision needed for golf is much more to your requirements.

38.2k · January 17, 2010

Um...At the risk of having you think I'm one of "those" responders I gotta ask. You do realize that 15-20 feet is well within the margin of error of consumer grade GPS receivers, right?

I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?

How do you know that? Unless you are measuring it against a known accurate position it is impossible for you to know. Even if you do measure it against a known position it only proves that it is X accurate in that location at that moment. A different location or different day may bring different accuracy.

Edited January 17, 2010 by briansnat

January 17, 2010

If caches placed 15 feet off of your surveying equipment coordinates are bugging you that much, can I suggest you take up golfing or something. The precision needed for golf is much more to your requirements.

You are missing the whole concept here, I DID mention the ones 15ft off, but I still say "so what" to those, it is the ever-growing number of 35ft to even 60ft off the listed Lat./Lon. that I am actually trying to get the point across about.

And, I said this was a NEW PET PEEVE, not something that is absolutley under my skin, but is may be if we continue to get all these newcomers that just place a cache, turn on the GPS, sometimes not even "over" the cache. As I stated I had actual pleasant discussions with some of the new cachers, and they said "I don't have time to make an avaerage of 3 reading" (which actually, if you study the geocaching history and how to place a cache, that is how it is to be done - so when those people check "I have read...", they are just doing so to get the new cache "published". I actually watched one of the guys (on invitation" place a cache, and he took the Lat./Lon. less than 3 ft from his car, which was parked about 25ft from the cache!). So, to sum it up, there is a huge "dumbing-down" coming into geocaching, and not by everyone, but many new comers are just in a hurry to "get the cache out" not taking any pride or worried about the quality of their cache. AND THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS I STARTED THIS THREAD, those few I speak of, had the nerve to complain that some caches were hidden too weel / hard, even though the Lat./Lon. fell right on the ammo box top of the cache and it only had 2 to 3 inches of spanish moss on it! What hippocrites! THAT is the very reason the 12 of us had a long discussion in a Waffle House from 9 pm until almost 12:30 am one night, and I promised them I would make a thread to see if others agree, guess I a wrong or either the responders are the guilty ones of poor cache etiquette, otherwise, why dispute the truth?

1.4k · January 17, 2010

I have noticed here in Milton, FL that MANY, MANY, MANY, of the caches seem to be placed with the cache owner(s) just getting one Lat. / Lon. reading, and many times if it is near where you park, they take the reading right there, even if the cache is 15 to 20 ft away! This is so annoying! Also, many people are placing these "mini" micro caches that are 1.5 inches x 1/2 inch in size and not saying if they are hanging in a tree, in / on the ground and 2 of those here are ones that have no hints and the Lat. / Lon. falls in the middle of the road ( and that is using 4 Garmin Rinos to quadruple check, 1 Rino 110, 2 rino 120's, and 1 rino 130 - that is almost $1,000 worth of GPS), and ALL of them show this one cache here in the middle of the road?? What is up with people not taking 30 to 40 minutes to properly get the coordinates for a cache??? That is the whole point, to put your cache where you say it is, sure you can hide it as well as you wish with all the camo tape you want, just put the right coordinates down!!! If people check the " I have read the ..." then they would have read to take the average of 3 (three) readings BEFORE placing the cache as active online!

Come on people, I expect this from newbies, but I have noticed those that have been on here as long or longer than myself (2004) getting lazy and very sloppy with Lat. / Lon. lately.

Please, anyone else noticing this happening more frequently in the past year or so? By all means, I welcome ALL constructive responses / critisism - (keyword constructive - so "stop whining" commentors can, well figure it out)

Man sounds like someone needs a nap and some cookies, and milk.

SS

January 17, 2010

15 - 20 feet is definitely within the acceptable accuracy range of recreational grade GPS units.

not sure what equipment you use, but if you are not 6 to 8 ft most of the time, it must not be a very good GPS. Not one of mine go above 8ft accuracy unless it is very cloudy or in thick wooded areas?

Try coming up to the Pacific NorthWet and check it out under heavy tree cover with trees every where. A good day is 22 foot. Yeah, when I cache in places that don't have heavy tree cover I can get 8 foot acccuracy.

Again, don't RUSH through, READ, I am speaking of a specific geographical region where we are at sea level to 60 ft ONLY with VERY LIGHT forests, actually bushes if you want to be technical.

I DO NOT DOUBT AT ALL some geographical regions with dense canopy overhead and/or rock formations in areas to block satellites over the horizon that you have poor reception and yes, that will definately throw off the signal to the point where it would be almost impossible to be "spot on", but here, in MY AREA, there is no excuse on flat ground where you can get 9 to 11 satellites ALL the time at VERY HIGH signal strengths.

So please, understand, I am speaking of this region in particular that is the reason I started off by saying WHERE this is going on!

January 17, 2010

Man sounds like someone needs a nap and some cookies, and milk.

SS

Not at all, come seek in this area, then you will understand. This was meant for people in the region, but I guess everyone in the world ( or 3,000 miles away) has to add their 2 cents?

January 17, 2010

Um...At the risk of having you think I'm one of "those" responders I gotta ask. You do realize that 15-20 feet is well within the margin of error of consumer grade GPS receivers, right?

I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?

How do you know that? Unless you are measuring it against a known accurate position it is impossible for you to know. Even if you do measure it against a known position it only proves that it is X accurate in that location at that moment. A different location or different day may bring different accuracy.

Repeating myself again since you don't bother to read all the post, you see one that strikes a nerve and speak before you know. I HAVE SURVEYING EQUIPMENT, I SURVEYED MOST OF THIS AND THE NEIGHBORING COUNTIES! I was a surveyor for MANY YEARS, I HAVE POINTS THAT ARE USGS CERTIFIED TO GO BY IF THAT IS ENOUGH TO SATISFY YOU WITH YOUR INQUISITION SINE YOU DID NOT BOTHER TO READ FURTHER!

6.5k · January 17, 2010

I've been caching for over seven years and this is the first time I have ever heard of this 'rule of 3'. As many others have already posted, 15-20' is plenty close enough for geocaching accuracy. I agree that the nanos can be annoying if they are used in the wrong situations, but there are plenty of times when they are appropriate.

I'm also seeing more noob coordinate errors, but I think that is due to the use of Iphones and nuvis for initial coordinate readings, and not simply anything mentioned in the OP's rant.

4.8k · January 17, 2010

Man sounds like someone needs a nap and some cookies, and milk.

SS

Not at all, come seek in this area, then you will understand. This was meant for people in the region, but I guess everyone in the world ( or 3,000 miles away) has to add their 2 cents?

If you want to make a regional gripe then maybe the regional forum is more appropriate.

1.1k · January 17, 2010

I know it's hard to understand, but GPS devices are only rated at around 15 feet accuracy. I know practical accuracy can sometimes be more like 10 feet, but you need to consider the fact that even with two devices functioning at the best accuracy available 20 feet (each person off by 10 feet) is entirely reasonable.

Accuracy, even in wide open skys, is limited by signal refraction.

Without correction, signal refraction leaves a GPS with an accuracy of 30-60 feet.

The coast guard (and other services) offer correction, but they can do only so much. 10-20 (or more) foot error rate is standard for consumer level GPSrs.

This is a great article:

http://ohioline.osu.edu/aex-fact/0560.html

(it's where I lifted the images)

Edited January 17, 2010 by Arrow42

6.5k · January 17, 2010

Um...At the risk of having you think I'm one of "those" responders I gotta ask. You do realize that 15-20 feet is well within the margin of error of consumer grade GPS receivers, right?

I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?

How do you know that? Unless you are measuring it against a known accurate position it is impossible for you to know. Even if you do measure it against a known position it only proves that it is X accurate in that location at that moment. A different location or different day may bring different accuracy.

Repeating myself again since you don't bother to read all the post, you see one that strikes a nerve and speak before you know. I HAVE SURVEYING EQUIPMENT, I SURVEYED MOST OF THIS AND THE NEIGHBORING COUNTIES! I was a surveyor for MANY YEARS, I HAVE POINTS THAT ARE USGS CERTIFIED TO GO BY IF THAT IS ENOUGH TO SATISFY YOU WITH YOUR INQUISITION SINE YOU DID NOT BOTHER TO READ FURTHER!

Perhaps you should make a post on your local forum offering to take your surveying equipment out to assist these poor poor hiders so that they can post better coords on their caches?

OH, and please turn off the CAPS LOCK. There's no need to yell at us.

1.1k · January 17, 2010

Not that I disagree with your initial statement... taking multiple readings and getting an average is a good idea. So far it has served me well.

10.1k · January 17, 2010

Not at all, come seek in this area, then you will understand. This was meant for people in the region, but I guess everyone in the world ( or 3,000 miles away) has to add their 2 cents?

Guess that's what happens when you post on a worldwide forum, rather than a regional one?

Your rino says eight feet. My Vista says it's twenty feet off. One would think that a surveyor would know better? Be glad you weren't here in the early days, when 30' was commonly acceptable!

That being said, I use averaging, and walk away fifty feet, and check it out. Adjust as necessary.

But, you are correct. Many people do not list good coords. Might have been a bad satellite day? Took much leaf cover? Incompetance? My QC department hates bad coords, and insists on the best possible.

2k · January 17, 2010

Um...At the risk of having you think I'm one of "those" responders I gotta ask. You do realize that 15-20 feet is well within the margin of error of consumer grade GPS receivers, right?

I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?

And my 60Cx is always within 6 to 8 feet. That is as much as 16 feet between us. Simple math.

Edit to clarify that I am using a different computer and logged in under my old account. This is actually Gof of Gof & Bacall.

Edited January 17, 2010 by gof1

January 17, 2010

Team KORFUS-"I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?"

You obviously don't understand the technology, equipment, or scientific methodology. Even Garmin's specs state the Rhino's accuracy to be "position: < 15 meters, 95% typical." There is no way that your unit is ALWAYS within 6 to 8 feet as you falsely claim. If you make a reasonable assumption that most GPS receivers will give you an averaged reading that is within 15-20 feet most of the time then the possible accuracy you will read of a placed cache will be the combined accuracy of the hider's GPS plus the accuracy of your GPS, which could be up to 40' off. I've generally found most carefully placed caches to be within the range of 10'-25' which I consider pretty good.

If you find the technology does not meet your expectation or you can't find a cache when you get within 15'-20' of GZ, perhaps a less stressful hobby with more qualified people is in order.

7.4k · January 18, 2010

Um...At the risk of having you think I'm one of "those" responders I gotta ask. You do realize that 15-20 feet is well within the margin of error of consumer grade GPS receivers, right?

I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?

Do you mean they're always 6 to 8 feet within a waypoint taken by the same GPS on a different day?

Remember that a margin of error can occur in any direction. If your GPS is 5 feet off, and mine is 5 feet off, there's a potential for 10 feet right there. Add in other conditions like weather, trees, too few satellites in range at a particular moment, buildings, etc. and it's not hard to find yourself 20 feet away from the cache when your GPS says 0.

I stop looking at my GPS when I get within 10 metres (my brain works better in metric) and I start looking for hiding spots around me. Most of the time, I don't even notice how close the actual coordinates are.

1.4k · January 18, 2010

Well I think the statement that "Team KORFUS" has on his Profile page pretty much tells the story

"Lifetime member of the International Ghost Hunters Society - (IGHS)"

Scubasonic

5.3k · January 18, 2010

Again, don't RUSH through, READ, I am speaking of a specific geographical region where we are at sea level to 60 ft ONLY with VERY LIGHT forests, actually bushes if you want to be technical.

You are getting the typical forum response to people who express any dissatisfaction with cache coordinate accuracy. You see, the majority of people here don't understand much about GPS accuracy, so when you give an example of bad coords, they can always find a situation in which the accuracy would be worse than your example. Doesn't matter whether their scenario applies to your example or not; they reason that if there is ever a reason for a GPS to get bad accuracy, it must always have bad accuracy.

And don't expect people to read your posts. That's way too much trouble for the majority here. If you can't say it in a sentence or two, nobody will read it. For example, I would expect almost nobody to have gotten this far into this response!

I understand exactly what you are saying. I think hiders should take pride in the accuracy of their coordinates, and I recommend averaging multiple readings to do so. Unfortunately, accuracy doesn't seem to be valued much any more; many hiders intentionally post bad coordinates to make their hides "harder."

I wish I had some idea of how to address the problem.

Edited January 18, 2010 by fizzymagic

January 18, 2010

The search in some cases is half the fun.... Lighten up a little.... Maybe we can just bring the logs to you to sign.... lol....

January 18, 2010

Again, don't RUSH through, READ, I am speaking of a specific geographical region where we are at sea level to 60 ft ONLY with VERY LIGHT forests, actually bushes if you want to be technical.

You are getting the typical forum response to people who express any dissatisfaction with cache coordinate accuracy. You see, the majority of people here don't understand much about GPS accuracy, so when you give an example of bad coords, they can always find a situation in which the accuracy would be worse than your example. Doesn't matter whether their scenario applies to your example or not; they reason that if there is ever a reason for a GPS to get bad accuracy, it must always have bad accuracy.

And don't expect people to read your posts. That's way too much trouble for the majority here. If you can't say it in a sentence or two, nobody will read it. For example, I would expect almost nobody to have gotten this far into this response!

I understand exactly what you are saying. I think hiders should take pride in the accuracy of their coordinates, and I recommend averaging multiple readings to do so. Unfortunately, accuracy doesn't seem to be valued much any more; many hiders intentionally post bad coordinates to make their hides "harder."

I wish I had some idea of how to address the problem.

Well if it makes you feel better the few that I have hidden I have tracked down over several different days to make sure that cords are as close as possible.

38.2k · January 18, 2010

Um...At the risk of having you think I'm one of "those" responders I gotta ask. You do realize that 15-20 feet is well within the margin of error of consumer grade GPS receivers, right?

I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?

How do you know that? Unless you are measuring it against a known accurate position it is impossible for you to know. Even if you do measure it against a known position it only proves that it is X accurate in that location at that moment. A different location or different day may bring different accuracy.

Repeating myself again since you don't bother to read all the post, you see one that strikes a nerve and speak before you know. I HAVE SURVEYING EQUIPMENT, I SURVEYED MOST OF THIS AND THE NEIGHBORING COUNTIES! I was a surveyor for MANY YEARS, I HAVE POINTS THAT ARE USGS CERTIFIED TO GO BY IF THAT IS ENOUGH TO SATISFY YOU WITH YOUR INQUISITION SINE YOU DID NOT BOTHER TO READ FURTHER!

I read your entire post and I stand by my statement. Unless you are bringing your survey grade GPS along with you all the time to calibrate your consumer grade unit, you can never be certain about the accuracy of your consumer grade unit. If you check the unit at your home with your surveying equipment or at a certified benchmark and it is accurate to within 6 feet, it does not mean that it is still accurate to 6 feet when you are at a cache 3 miles away. But being a surveyor you already know that.

And by the way there is no need to spend 40 minutes obtaining your coordinates. In most instances 2-3 minutes is more than enough.

Edited January 18, 2010 by briansnat

6.8k · January 18, 2010

15 - 20 feet is definitely within the acceptable accuracy range of recreational grade GPS units.

not sure what equipment you use, but if you are not 6 to 8 ft most of the time, it must not be a very good GPS. Not one of mine go above 8ft accuracy unless it is very cloudy or in thick wooded areas?

I guess you mix up something here. The EPE value displayed by GPS-devices does not mean that this is an upper bound on the error in the worst case. In the case of Garmin units, for example, the displayed EPE value (called accuracy by many cachers though this is wrong) is just an *estimate* of the *50% confidence circle*,

i.e. 50% of the positions would fall within that circle, but up to 50% might be outside (Note the stress on estimate and on the probabilistic aspect). Other GPS-receivers use other methods to determine the EPE-value - so you cannot even compare EPE values when determined by different methods. The quality of the estimate for the EPE value also depends on the reception at your current location. It might be higher at points where you can easily check the accuracy of your measurements than at locations with bad reception.

Cezanne

Edited January 18, 2010 by cezanne

14k · January 18, 2010

First of all, I'd like to agree with the general advice of attempting to obtain the most accurate coordinates possible when placing a cache.

Let as also assume (whether or not this is actually the case) that finding many more recently placed cachers where the finders GPS is showing a location is showing a significant disparity from the published coordinates. The real question, then, is why is this happening? Are new geocachers just getting lazy and not averaging coordinates (I suspect that many newbie hiders probably don't know *how* to average coordinates. The thing is, we don't really know anything about the method, or possibly more importantly, the equipment thse cache hiders used to obtain the coordinates.

One thing I do know is that are a lot more geocachers today using cell phones and auto navigation GPS devices as their only GPS. My personal experience with my iPhone is that I haven't been able to get anywhere close to the accuracy that my Garmin 76Cx is showing. One has to wonder how many new caches are being placed using a cell phone or an auto-navigation GPS (which might even be set to "follow road") when obtaining coordinates.

38.2k · January 18, 2010

One thing I do know is that are a lot more geocachers today using cell phones and auto navigation GPS devices as their only GPS. My personal experience with my iPhone is that I haven't been able to get anywhere close to the accuracy that my Garmin 76Cx is showing.

Unlike the OP, if anything I've seen an improvement in the accuracy of coordinates over the years. When I started out finding caches 50 feet off was quite common and the GPS showing under 10 feet at the cache site was a rarity. Now anything above 20 feet off is fairly rare.

I think it has to do with better technology.

In areas where many cachers use cell phones and automotive devices I'm sure it does affect the accuracy of coordinates. I suspect that this would largely apply to urban and suburban caching, because back country cachers are more likely to use dedicated hand held units.

7.3k · January 18, 2010

One thing I do know is that are a lot more geocachers today using cell phones and auto navigation GPS devices as their only GPS. My personal experience with my iPhone is that I haven't been able to get anywhere close to the accuracy that my Garmin 76Cx is showing.

Unlike the OP, if anything I've seen an improvement in the accuracy of coordinates over the years. When I started out finding caches 50 feet off was quite common and the GPS showing under 10 feet at the cache site was a rarity. Now anything above 20 feet off is fairly rare.

I think it has to do with better technology.

I agree!

20.7k · January 18, 2010

-Snipped- because I answered my own question.

Edited January 18, 2010 by sbell111

1.4k · January 18, 2010

I have an iPhone I do not use it for finding caches, I use a handheld, because the accuracy is not good in my area with lots of cloud cover and trees. But when I went to Arizona recently I was forced to us it and it worked great in finding caches due to no cloud cover, and not a lot of trees.

Scubasonic

January 18, 2010

Out here in the west I have also noticed alot of the cacher's not repairing or checking on there cache. I just start sending notes on the cache page to let them know what is wrong with it. I think a lot of the bad coordinates have to do with the iphone. I don't think they are all that great with there gps'r abilities. I also believe that there are a lot of cachers that like the game and flood the area with caches then get board fixing all the time so they jusy let them go and do nothing with them. Just my .02

7.4k · January 18, 2010

I rarely come across caches with coordinates bad enough to notice or grumble about. When I am introducing someone to caching, I always try to teach them to use the GPS to get them close, and then STOP looking at the GPS when they are within a few metres.

Geocaching is a game made up of people with various experience levels, types of equipment, and dedication. You can stomp your feet and shout all you want in the forum, but there's always going to be new cachers with iPhones or old timers who won't give up their Gecko posting coordinates that aren't perfect.

You can't control other people's behaviour, but you can control the way you react to it. If fifteen feet of inaccuracy makes you blow your top, perhaps you have some work to do on yourself.

2.5k · January 18, 2010

I can sympathize with the OP. I've recently noticed a rash of caches in my area that appear to have had coords taken in the middle of the road. Of course, they are all placed, of all places, along a road, "Stud Mill Road" style, so I don't really expect any better.

While I sympathize, there are several points I take issue with:

...and that is using 4 Garmin Rinos to quadruple check, 1 Rino 110, 2 rino 120's, and 1 rino 130 - that is almost $1,000 worth of GPS...

I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?

Really? You're staking your argument on a Rino? Maybe this is, again, a regional thing, but 'round these parts, people blame bad coordinates on Garmin Rinos. . .

If people check the " I have read the ..." then they would have read to take the average of 3 (three) readings BEFORE placing the cache as active online!

Where, exactly, in the Guidelines or Terms of Use does it say you need to average your waypoints? I found it in "How to Hide a Geocache" but this is not what anyone has agreed to read when they check those little boxes. They should read this section, I agree, but realize they never have to agree to have read it.

And don't expect people to read your posts. That's way too much trouble for the majority here. If you can't say it in a sentence or two, nobody will read it. For example, I would expect almost nobody to have gotten this far into this response!

3.6k · January 18, 2010

Here in New England, 15-20 are very good coords. We put the GPS away when we're 20-25 feet away and just start looking for the cache. In FL, we found on most caches that if we started looking that far away, we weren't at the cache. Generally, we found most caches within 10 feet of where our GPS wanted us to be, some were 7 to 8 feet. There were some more further away, but they weren't common. We loved it.

That said, different brands of GPS do different things. We have a Garmin, and when someone hides with a Garmin, our coords match pretty well, but if another brand was used, we are consistently 30-50 feet off from the posted coords. Friend who have the other brand of GPS end up being very close to the posted coords. Perhaps those placing the caches are using a different brand of GPS than you?

Edited January 18, 2010 by Skippermark

January 18, 2010

I can sympathize with the OP. I've recently noticed a rash of caches in my area that appear to have had coords taken in the middle of the road. Of course, they are all placed, of all places, along a road, "Stud Mill Road" style, so I don't really expect any better.

While I sympathize, there are several points I take issue with:

...and that is using 4 Garmin Rinos to quadruple check, 1 Rino 110, 2 rino 120's, and 1 rino 130 - that is almost $1,000 worth of GPS...

I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?
Really? You're staking your argument on a Rino? Maybe this is, again, a regional thing, but 'round these parts, people blame bad coordinates on Garmin Rinos. . .
If people check the " I have read the ..." then they would have read to take the average of 3 (three) readings BEFORE placing the cache as active online!
Where, exactly, in the Guidelines or Terms of Use does it say you need to average your waypoints? I found it in "How to Hide a Geocache" but this is not what anyone has agreed to read when they check those little boxes. They should read this section, I agree, but realize they never have to agree to have read it.
And don't expect people to read your posts. That's way too much trouble for the majority here. If you can't say it in a sentence or two, nobody will read it. For example, I would expect almost nobody to have gotten this far into this response!

Ok,

Point taken, but I did not base them on just the Rinos, I was a surveyor for many years, I have equipment still certified to spec to place legal boundaries using the GPS, and have used that to check the calibration on my GPS units, including my Magellan, and embarassingly enough, my magellan was off over 35ft. So, NO, I am not JUST using the Garmin Rinos ALONE, they were checked with equipment the USGS uses for Cartography AND TOPO, so I trust the Rinos. I have test about 1 dozen of my friends, and there was a couple EARLY Magellan models that were off, 1 was MY OWN and it was off the most I will admit that, that is why I DID NOT SELL IT, I just retired it and stuck to the Rinos and other Garmin models like the eTrex and GPSMAP 60 CSx series are great and MANY of the new generation (last 4 ot 5 years of Magellans) that belong to friends that checked them agains the USGS Certified Coordinated, ARE ALL TOP OF THE LINE AND FINE, (No rhyming intented).

I was just getting at what "Too Tall John" was saying about the rash of caches that SEEM to be just "thrown" out and a quick Lat. / Lon. check do from a few feet away or haphazardly, and then published.

And @ Too Tall John, I agree and did not intend to imply it was "THE RULE", but yes, GC.com does RECOMMEND you get an average of at least 3 readings then double check the cache is "on" target, THEN publish (That was paraphrases, not verbatim).

Ok,

I promise will NOT snap back with any more post other than to educate or answer questions, I said my piece, and I encourage ALL to do the same and I respect your opinions and will read them as you have read my opininion / tutorial on correctly placing a cache (whether you agree, that is your right).

So in ending, I say, I hope maybe someone will learn how to use the averaging method, and if just one did, it is worth all the "hate PM's" I get / have gotten, but I hope you ALL would just look at it from not my point of view, but from the view if you were cache seeking and come up on 8 of 10 caches more than 35ft off, how do YOU react? Would you wish the cache was placed with the best care and the owner actually take just a few minutes and take 3 readings and average them, if they do not know how, just read on "How Geocaching Started" it explains EVERYTHING including how to properly set a cache and average the Coordinates.

So, hate my post, or learn from it, it is your right do respond as you wish / feel! I will NOT tell you how you should feel or even place the cache, I AM JUST SUGGESTING, that's all.

I thanks ALL of you for reading this thread, it was meant to be educational with my own twist of sarcasm placed in it (I guess I should have just made it a tutorial and checked my sarcasm before hitting the keyboard?), but I HAD ALL GOOD INTENTIONS, but yes, I know the say the road to...is paved in good intentions, SO IF I OFFENDED ANYONE, I AM GENUINELY SORRY! I really mean that too!

So please do not go away fro this post mad at me, try to take a little knowledge with you if you are new to Geocaching, all the "oldtimers" like myself, go ahead and be mad if you want, I know you guys/gals have paid your dues in caching!

Unless someone asks me a direct question on this matter, I will just let this thread eventually die and "fall to the bottom".

Thanks Everyone,

Walter - Leader of Team KORFUS (a family and friend team of 9, and no we don't always go out together, I always go, but no more than 3 or 4 of us go at one time - and several members have their own CG accounts also, this is just the "Team" / my account).

7.4k · January 18, 2010

but from the view if you were cache seeking and come up on 8 of 10 caches more than 35ft off, how do YOU react?

Your original post was complaining about 15 to 20 feet.

January 18, 2010

Out here in the west I have also noticed alot of the cacher's not repairing or checking on there cache. I just start sending notes on the cache page to let them know what is wrong with it. I think a lot of the bad coordinates have to do with the iphone. I don't think they are all that great with there gps'r abilities. I also believe that there are a lot of cachers that like the game and flood the area with caches then get board fixing all the time so they jusy let them go and do nothing with them. Just my .02

Thanks SCCS,

That is why several cachers and myself came up with the idea and I wrote this thread. I was just trying to get cachers to just take a little care and pride in their cache. Just like th e 3 pigs, would someone build their house of straw? That was my point.

Thanks for the positive/constructive comment, it was very well appreciated!

Walter Leader of Team KORFUS

January 18, 2010

Um...At the risk of having you think I'm one of "those" responders I gotta ask. You do realize that 15-20 feet is well within the margin of error of consumer grade GPS receivers, right?

I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?

How do you know that? Unless you are measuring it against a known accurate position it is impossible for you to know. Even if you do measure it against a known position it only proves that it is X accurate in that location at that moment. A different location or different day may bring different accuracy.

Repeating myself again since you don't bother to read all the post, you see one that strikes a nerve and speak before you know. I HAVE SURVEYING EQUIPMENT, I SURVEYED MOST OF THIS AND THE NEIGHBORING COUNTIES! I was a surveyor for MANY YEARS, I HAVE POINTS THAT ARE USGS CERTIFIED TO GO BY IF THAT IS ENOUGH TO SATISFY YOU WITH YOUR INQUISITION SINE YOU DID NOT BOTHER TO READ FURTHER!

Perhaps you should make a post on your local forum offering to take your surveying equipment out to assist these poor poor hiders so that they can post better coords on their caches?

OH, and please turn off the CAPS LOCK. There's no need to yell at us.

Ok, sorry for yelling, but I asked for constructive critsism, not smart A** remarks! I guess we know when kind of cacher you are if you take offense!

January 18, 2010

Um...At the risk of having you think I'm one of "those" responders I gotta ask. You do realize that 15-20 feet is well within the margin of error of consumer grade GPS receivers, right?

I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?

How do you know that? Unless you are measuring it against a known accurate position it is impossible for you to know. Even if you do measure it against a known position it only proves that it is X accurate in that location at that moment. A different location or different day may bring different accuracy.

Repeating myself again since you don't bother to read all the post, you see one that strikes a nerve and speak before you know. I HAVE SURVEYING EQUIPMENT, I SURVEYED MOST OF THIS AND THE NEIGHBORING COUNTIES! I was a surveyor for MANY YEARS, I HAVE POINTS THAT ARE USGS CERTIFIED TO GO BY IF THAT IS ENOUGH TO SATISFY YOU WITH YOUR INQUISITION SINE YOU DID NOT BOTHER TO READ FURTHER!

I read your entire post and I stand by my statement. Unless you are bringing your survey grade GPS along with you all the time to calibrate your consumer grade unit, you can never be certain about the accuracy of your consumer grade unit. If you check the unit at your home with your surveying equipment or at a certified benchmark and it is accurate to within 6 feet, it does not mean that it is still accurate to 6 feet when you are at a cache 3 miles away. But being a surveyor you already know that.

And by the way there is no need to spend 40 minutes obtaining your coordinates. In most instances 2-3 minutes is more than enough.

You are right, but it has been use in the field before too, and it gives you an idea of accuracy. And with those I know that did do an average of 3 readings to place a cache, I always go right to it within 6 to 8 ft accuracy, that should count for somethings and should tell you something?

January 18, 2010

Um...At the risk of having you think I'm one of "those" responders I gotta ask. You do realize that 15-20 feet is well within the margin of error of consumer grade GPS receivers, right?

I don't know whose receivers are always at 15 to 20 ft, but my Garmin Rinos are ALWAYS within 6 to 8 ft?

And my 60Cx is always within 6 to 8 feet. That is as much as 16 feet between us. Simple math.

Edit to clarify that I am using a different computer and logged in under my old account. This is actually Gof of Gof & Bacall.

I did make a post in this thread that the Magellan MAP GPS 60 CSx series was one of the best also, one of the local geocachers here uses one and his as as good of a GPS as any, and I am not saying any one is better than another, I don't want anyone to get that idea, if it sounds implied, I am sorry, that was not supposed to be my message, just that some of the older models did not work as well.

January 18, 2010

Again, don't RUSH through, READ, I am speaking of a specific geographical region where we are at sea level to 60 ft ONLY with VERY LIGHT forests, actually bushes if you want to be technical.

You are getting the typical forum response to people who express any dissatisfaction with cache coordinate accuracy. You see, the majority of people here don't understand much about GPS accuracy, so when you give an example of bad coords, they can always find a situation in which the accuracy would be worse than your example. Doesn't matter whether their scenario applies to your example or not; they reason that if there is ever a reason for a GPS to get bad accuracy, it must always have bad accuracy.

And don't expect people to read your posts. That's way too much trouble for the majority here. If you can't say it in a sentence or two, nobody will read it. For example, I would expect almost nobody to have gotten this far into this response!

I understand exactly what you are saying. I think hiders should take pride in the accuracy of their coordinates, and I recommend averaging multiple readings to do so. Unfortunately, accuracy doesn't seem to be valued much any more; many hiders intentionally post bad coordinates to make their hides "harder."

I wish I had some idea of how to address the problem.

Thank yo fizzymagic,

I do understand that, I appreciate your post. BTW, I like your "name", very neat and original! "fizzymagic", awesome!

Thanks Again,

Walter - Team KORFUS

January 18, 2010

Yeesh...! I guess some folks want to be told exactly where each cache is located so they don't have to think or develop seeking skills. I have a very good GPS unit but I make it a point to post coords that are "approximate" so seekers have to expend a little effort to locate my caches. They have to think a little, look for indications that others have been there before them. Maybe someone needs to find another hobby for awhile, eh?

My new pet peeve, bad Lat. / Lon. on GC's

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment