Jump to content

The first of the "Chirp" caches arrive.

Coldgears

By Coldgears,
in General geocaching topics

Followers 2

Recommended Posts

Geo_Raptor

+Geo_Raptor

Posted
Posted

I just completed a "chirp" cache that was published on Nov 5 also in Vernon, BC...it was actually fairly entertaining as I had to walk through 4 different trails to get the GPS to engage the "chirping". The device and method Garmins GPS unit (Dakoda 20) handled it was quite slick also. It automatically revises the coordinates and provides some messaging capabilities also.

Link to comment
Chrysalides

+Chrysalides

Posted
Posted
Remember the whole forum arguement a couple of weeks ago as to whether or not chirp violates the guidelines. The people that were agaisn't it said that only some people could find it. Others said that there are no limitations. It seems however they are allowed, and the first of many has been hidden

The official guidelines were listed by MissJenn more than 3 weeks ago.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...p;#entry4504653

 

The first chirp only cache in my area was published on Oct 24.

Link to comment
AZcachemeister

AZcachemeister

Posted
Posted

We have three now in Arizona.

They are all on my ignore list.

Much like the Wherigo caches, I'm not buying new ($200-300) equipment to find these.

Fortunately an app was produced to enable ANDROID users to complete Wherigo caches, and if an app can be made to find 'chirp' caches I'll do those as well.

Meanwhile, it might be fun to look for a chirp module and see just how far you can throw it. :laughing:

Link to comment
lamoracke

+lamoracke

Posted
Posted (edited)

we had one in Washington State that was published on October 18th (though it says 15th).

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC2GRHF

 

Earlier than the ones mentioned here I believe.

 

Another reason my GPS 60CSX is becoming obsolete (first Wherigos, now this)

 

Personally I do not believe any of these justify 5 stars though...if you have the equipment, its easy, unless they put an extra trick or made it a very hard hide.

Edited by lamoracke
Link to comment
dfx

+dfx

Posted
Posted (edited)
You're quite right. I don't know what the frequencies are. I will guess that neither bluetooth or WiFi frequencies are being used.

actually it is the same frequency band, 2.45 GHz, the same as bluetooth and wifi (and microwave ovens for that matter). but you can't use a bluetooth chip to talk to a wifi AP, and you can't use a wifi chip to talk to a bluetooth device. the same applies to ANT.

Edited by dfx
Link to comment
PLMerry

+PLMerry

Posted
Posted

actually it is the same frequency band, 2.45 GHz, the same as bluetooth and wifi (and microwave ovens for that matter). but you can't use a bluetooth chip to talk to a wifi AP, and you can't use a wifi chip to talk to a bluetooth device. the same applies to ANT.

 

For the most part the chips are not much more than hard coded programs that analyze the radio frequency looking for either WiFi or bluetooth patterns within the signal. In theory a chip is not needed for either of these two functions. Of course a hard coded chip works faster than a soft coded (software) programs. Not having access to ANT, I cannot be one hundred percent sure, but considering the amount of information being handled as apposed to WiFi and bluetooth the programming application should be much less complicated. In theory for the most part it would be a matter of recognizing the ANT signal, analyzing the signal, which should not be much more than a geocode, and processing or passing on that geocode in whatever form is required. I don't see any security, or pairing issues, just raw data transmitted in a known format (to someone) on a known frequency. Since I have not done any programing in 10 years this is a little above my head. I do believe that someone more up to date than I should be able to figure this out without to much difficulty.

Link to comment
Pup Patrol

Pup Patrol

Posted
Posted

http://coord.info/GC2HTVE

 

Remember the whole forum arguement a couple of weeks ago as to whether or not chirp violates the guidelines. The people that were agaisn't it said that only some people could find it. Others said that there are no limitations. It seems however they are allowed, and the first of many has been hidden

 

Now all I need is a chirp compatible device.

 

Two chirpy caches, placed October 15th, both have the Chirp attribute, both "Unknown" cache type:

 

GC2G0ZJ BRRR! OINK! PURR! CHIRP!

 

GC2G0ZF You Wouldn't Understand

 

I was FTF on a chirp cache yesterday after work. I dont have the proper tools for the chirp but I was surprised to see one posted in my area already :laughing:

 

"Traditional" cache category, no Chirp attribute

GC2J15J Barking Up the Wrong Tree

Link to comment
dfx

+dfx

Posted
Posted
For the most part the chips are not much more than hard coded programs that analyze the radio frequency looking for either WiFi or bluetooth patterns within the signal. In theory a chip is not needed for either of these two functions. Of course a hard coded chip works faster than a soft coded (software) programs. Not having access to ANT, I cannot be one hundred percent sure, but considering the amount of information being handled as apposed to WiFi and bluetooth the programming application should be much less complicated. In theory for the most part it would be a matter of recognizing the ANT signal, analyzing the signal, which should not be much more than a geocode, and processing or passing on that geocode in whatever form is required. I don't see any security, or pairing issues, just raw data transmitted in a known format (to someone) on a known frequency. Since I have not done any programing in 10 years this is a little above my head. I do believe that someone more up to date than I should be able to figure this out without to much difficulty.

in theory you're right, but doing raw signal processing in software takes a lot of processing power. it's feasible to do simple stuff like recognizing DTMF tones in software, but we're talking gigahertz signals here. doing that in software in realtime is beyond the processing power of even desktop computers, let alone mobile phones.

Link to comment
Coldgears

+Coldgears

Posted
  • Author
Posted
For the most part the chips are not much more than hard coded programs that analyze the radio frequency looking for either WiFi or bluetooth patterns within the signal. In theory a chip is not needed for either of these two functions. Of course a hard coded chip works faster than a soft coded (software) programs. Not having access to ANT, I cannot be one hundred percent sure, but considering the amount of information being handled as apposed to WiFi and bluetooth the programming application should be much less complicated. In theory for the most part it would be a matter of recognizing the ANT signal, analyzing the signal, which should not be much more than a geocode, and processing or passing on that geocode in whatever form is required. I don't see any security, or pairing issues, just raw data transmitted in a known format (to someone) on a known frequency. Since I have not done any programing in 10 years this is a little above my head. I do believe that someone more up to date than I should be able to figure this out without to much difficulty.

in theory you're right, but doing raw signal processing in software takes a lot of processing power. it's feasible to do simple stuff like recognizing DTMF tones in software, but we're talking gigahertz signals here. doing that in software in realtime is beyond the processing power of even desktop computers, let alone mobile phones.

Why would it have to be in realtime? Could there not be an app where it could et the info from the beacon and you'd have to wait 5 - 10 mins for it to process?

Link to comment
dfx

+dfx

Posted
Posted
Why would it have to be in realtime? Could there not be an app where it could et the info from the beacon and you'd have to wait 5 - 10 mins for it to process?

no, because it's not a one-way reception process. the two devices have to talk to each other. but this is really a non-issue as the phone doesn't have the required hardware to do that anyway.

Link to comment
dfx

+dfx

Posted
Posted
I have a Garmin E705 which has ANT technology so that it can work with a Garmin heart rate monitor and a cadence sensor. It is also made to exchange information with other GPS sets. Will it work with a Chirp cache?

theoretically yes, but the firmware probably doesn't support it.

Link to comment
Team_Searchgeo

+Team_Searchgeo

Posted
Posted (edited)

Oh, great. Now I have to redo my PQs to ignore the Chirp icon.

My take on this is that if you need a specialized piece of equipment to find it then it should probably go the way of Wherigo and be it's own game. If every cache uses a chirp then you would be specifically targeting one type of GPSr maker which then only those with that type of GPSr could play. Didn't think that was what geocaching was all about. For me I will not be purchasing a chirp enabled GPSr anytime soon. Not in the cards or pocketbook. I have no problem with chirp caches I just think they need to be a separate game maybe.

 

I also believe these will come up missing in large numbers and not only by muggles as we have seen has already happened. Cool idea all together though but I just think it will be to tempting for some not to take the chirp.

Edited by Team_Searchgeo
Link to comment
Loony Londo

+Loony Londo

Posted
Posted (edited)
I have a Garmin E705 which has ANT technology so that it can work with a Garmin heart rate monitor and a cadence sensor. It is also made to exchange information with other GPS sets. Will it work with a Chirp cache?

theoretically yes, but the firmware probably doesn't support it.

 

I hope if Garmin want to make the Chirp a success they will upgrade the E705 firmware to read the Chirp signal.

 

My guess it would not be too much code and a simple task !

Edited by Loony Londo
Link to comment
JL_HSTRE

+JL_HSTRE

Posted
Posted
Remember the whole forum argument a couple of weeks ago as to whether or not chirp violates the guidelines. The people that were against it said that only some people could find it.

 

By that logic Wherigo caches shouldn't be allowed.

 

As long as GPS is involved, it's fair game. Just rate it appropriately, especially with attributes.

Link to comment
Scooter Rider

+Scooter Rider

Posted
Posted

Great! I have a reason to upgrade from my 60CSx to something new to be compatible with Chirps.

 

I am going to hold off for a wile and see were this goes.

 

Garmin has a track record of today's latest and greatest is tomorrows abandon child.

 

Unless they can find another uses for it other than geo-cacheing the chirp will be the same way

If they can't sell enough of them they will drop the chrip like hot rock.

Link to comment
g_o_caching

g_o_caching

Posted
Posted

Good point Scooter Rider. I'm going to hold out and see what happens. I thought, from what I have read about chirps, is that the chirp is linked to the first GPSr it finds when turned on, then more or less password protected by having to know the last 5 digits of the unit ID that first linked to it. What good is stealing one if you can't program it to your own cache? Is it just that the low life trash that stole it don't know it is useless to them?

Link to comment
dakboy

+dakboy

Posted
Posted (edited)
Remember the whole forum argument a couple of weeks ago as to whether or not chirp violates the guidelines. The people that were against it said that only some people could find it.

 

By that logic Wherigo caches shouldn't be allowed.

Wherigo was invented by Groundspeak. They can play it however they want, they're holding all the cards.

 

Chirp, OTOH, caught Groundspeak completely off guard. They had no indication that anything of the sort and the thread(s) from a few weeks ago demonstrate their rush to get some kind of guidelines around caches using it. Given the past relationship between Garmin & Groundspeak, and the number of Garmin devices used by cachers, GS would be foolish to ban the devices outright.

Edited by dakboy
Link to comment
Aquacache

+Aquacache

Posted
Posted (edited)
Personally I do not believe any of these justify 5 stars though...if you have the equipment, its easy, unless they put an extra trick or made it a very hard hide.

If you have a boat, a cache on an island is easy. So using your logic, it shouldn't be rated a T5.

 

Remember the whole forum argument a couple of weeks ago as to whether or not chirp violates the guidelines. The people that were against it said that only some people could find it.

 

By that logic Wherigo caches shouldn't be allowed.

 

As long as GPS is involved, it's fair game. Just rate it appropriately, especially with attributes.

The Wherigo cache is a completely separate type of cache with it's own icon. It doesn't require someone to remember to set the attribute for it in order for it to be ignored. It's unchecked in all of my PQ's.

 

The Chirp cache, however, uses the "standard" cache types which could -- up until now -- be found with *ANY* GPS-enabled device that can have waypoints added to it. These now require special equipment. Albeit, equipment that more and more cachers are acquiring.

Edited by Aquacache
Link to comment
Ma&PaD

+Ma&PaD

Posted
Posted (edited)

We just completed 2 chirp caches in our area, and frankly, I don't understand what the big deal is - alot like a Wherigo cache, and we find the wherigos to be much more creative....at least with a Wherigo, I can get the app on my phone, whereas there is no app, at this time, for a "chirp" cache, which limits alot of people from finding it...to be honest, think the "chirp" cache is highly overrated, and also expensive to purchase. We feel the "virtual caches" which has been discontinued, was much more creative and educational, plus "user" friendly.

Edited by Ma&PaD
Link to comment
niraD

+niraD

Posted
Posted
We just completed 2 chirp caches in our area, and frankly, I don't understand what the big deal is - alot like a Wherigo cache, and we find the wherigos to be much more creative....at least with a Wherigo, I can get the app on my phone, whereas there is no app, at this time, for a "chirp" cache, which limits alot of people from finding it...to be honest, think the "chirp" cache is highly overrated, and also expensive to purchase.
I haven't found a Wherigo cache yet, but I have found an InterCache, and I have found a chirp cache. I agree with you about chirp caches. An InterCache would be much more flexible (since anyone with a smartphone can do it) and reliable (since there's no transmitter that needs batteries) and economical (since there's no transmitter to buy).
Link to comment
Ma&PaD

+Ma&PaD

Posted
Posted
Personally I do not believe any of these justify 5 stars though...if you have the equipment, its easy, unless they put an extra trick or made it a very hard hide.

If you have a boat, a cache on an island is easy. So using your logic, it shouldn't be rated a T5.

 

Remember the whole forum argument a couple of weeks ago as to whether or not chirp violates the guidelines. The people that were against it said that only some people could find it.

 

By that logic Wherigo caches shouldn't be allowed.

 

As long as GPS is involved, it's fair game. Just rate it appropriately, especially with attributes.

The Wherigo cache is a completely separate type of cache with it's own icon. It doesn't require someone to remember to set the attribute for it in order for it to be ignored. It's unchecked in all of my PQ's.

 

The Chirp cache, however, uses the "standard" cache types which could -- up until now -- be found with *ANY* GPS-enabled device that can have waypoints added to it. These now require special equipment. Albeit, equipment that more and more cachers are acquiring.

Link to comment
Ma&PaD

+Ma&PaD

Posted
Posted

In response to a "Wherigo" versus a "chirp" cache - if you have a smart phone, there is an app for Wherigo caches - I don't know if Iphones have one or not as I'm not familiar with Iphone apps - but with "chirp" caches, as far as we know right now, there is no app and since alot of people have older gps systems, they are unable to find a "chirp" cache - and alot of people can't afford a chirp enabled gps - after checking on a few - they run about 300 to 400 dollars....but like us - we were able to turn to our friends who had a "chirp" enabled gps, but that might not be the case with everyone....as stated in my blog, I frankly think they are highly overrated....

Link to comment
Ma&PaD

+Ma&PaD

Posted
Posted

We have three now in Arizona.

They are all on my ignore list.

Much like the Wherigo caches, I'm not buying new ($200-300) equipment to find these.

Fortunately an app was produced to enable ANDROID users to complete Wherigo caches, and if an app can be made to find 'chirp' caches I'll do those as well.

Meanwhile, it might be fun to look for a chirp module and see just how far you can throw it. :laughing:

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
Followers 2
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...