5/5 got it sorted..or have I?

[+Geobuzzbee]

What is 5?

Edited November 28, 2010 by Geobuzzbee

[+FantasyRaider]

What is 5?

Hard?

[+The Klever Boys]

You might want to edit and post your original question (which I did see earlier) so that people can understand what you are really referring to.

 

IIRC, you maybe were querying how the difficulty settings should be applied to clues within stages of a multi?

[+Geobuzzbee]

What is 5?

Hard?

Just what i was thinking,,,but how long should the clues take to work out when Terrain at 5?

yes Klever Boys thank you

[+Geobuzzbee]

AK do i add clues to make it a 5/5 or do i just keep Terrain at 5? cus this is hard work but would be nice to get seekers in the spot to think,,maybe not?????

[+keehotee]

What is 5?

Hard?

Just what i was thinking,,,but how long should the clues take to work out when Terrain at 5?

yes Klever Boys thank you

 

Surely the clues will affect the difficulty - NOT the terrain?

[+*mouse*]

Difficulty rating: *****

Extreme. A serious mental or physical challenge. Requires specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment to find cache.

 

Terrain rating: *****

Requires specialized equipment and knowledge or experience, (boat, 4WD, rock climbing, SCUBA, etc) or is otherwise extremely difficult.

[+Amberel]

I'd like to see a clear distinction between the physical difficulty of getting there, and the difficulty in finding the cache once you are at GZ. Also the difficulty of any puzzle has to be factored in.

 

The terrain rating is a purely physical attribute. A extremely long walk, a long climb, and physical obstacles such as water to be crossed or cliffs to be climbed all raise the terrain rating.

 

The difficulty rating should cover any tricky puzzle that needs to be solved, either before setting out or once on the trip. It also covers how hard it is to find. It might be increased for an ingeniously camouflaged cache or if there were multiple stages to find.

 

The tricky bit in rating is to decide if an awkward hide such as 12 feet up a tree should contribute to the difficulty rating, and I think it shouldn't - that should affect the terrain instead. I like to think that terrain is a physical attribute, difficulty is a mental attribute. I feel quite a lot of caches are over-rated because physical difficulties are reflected in both ratings instead of just one.

 

Rgds, Andy

[+Delta68]

Terrain rating: *****

Requires specialized equipment and knowledge or experience, (boat, 4WD, rock climbing, SCUBA, etc) or is otherwise extremely difficult.

 

Unless your cache requires one of the items *mouse* mentions, don't bother setting it as a T5

 

All it will do is attract comments saying; "too many stars" "much easier than expected"

 

My preference would be to set T rating lower and attract comments like "tougher than expected - a great challenge"

 

 

Mark

[+The Other Stu]

 

The tricky bit in rating is to decide if an awkward hide such as 12 feet up a tree should contribute to the difficulty rating, and I think it shouldn't - that should affect the terrain instead. I like to think that terrain is a physical attribute, difficulty is a mental attribute. I feel quite a lot of caches are over-rated because physical difficulties are reflected in both ratings instead of just one.

 

Rgds, Andy

 

And, to be fair, the other way round too.

 

I have seen some really difficult mental puzzles and challenges as 5/5 - which doesn't actually reflect the final which is often a quick hike through some woods.

[+Pharisee]

 

The tricky bit in rating is to decide if an awkward hide such as 12 feet up a tree should contribute to the difficulty rating, and I think it shouldn't - that should affect the terrain instead. I like to think that terrain is a physical attribute, difficulty is a mental attribute. I feel quite a lot of caches are over-rated because physical difficulties are reflected in both ratings instead of just one.

 

Rgds, Andy

 

And, to be fair, the other way round too.

 

I have seen some really difficult mental puzzles and challenges as 5/5 - which doesn't actually reflect the final which is often a quick hike through some woods.

There a quite a lot like that. I think it's mostly a 'kudos' thing.... "Look at me, I've set a 5/5 cache. Aren't I brilliant?"

Some folks seem to think that a 5/5 rating is inseparable. 5 stars for one of the attributes automatically means 5 for the other and of course, that is not so. You could just as easily have a 5/1 (a very difficult puzzle leading to a box hidden beside a tarmac footpath that can be reached from a wheelchair) as you could a 1/5 (a very easily found box on top of Ben Nevis).

[+Amberel]

And, to be fair, the other way round too.

 

I have seen some really difficult mental puzzles and challenges as 5/5 - which doesn't actually reflect the final which is often a quick hike through some woods.

I've not seen that so often, but maybe that's because I don't do many 5 star puzzles and so don't get to see the finals .

 

Rgds, Andy

[+MBFace]

There a quite a lot like that. I think it's mostly a 'kudos' thing.... "Look at me, I've set a 5/5 cache. Aren't I brilliant?"

There also seems to be a stigma about setting something at 4.5. Out of curiosity a couple of weeks back I decided to see how near we were to a second completion of the D/T grid from scratch and was not at all surprised to find that 11 out of the 17 remaining combinations were D and/or T 4.5.

[+keehotee]

 

Some folks seem to think that a 5/5 rating is inseparable. 5 stars for one of the attributes automatically means 5 for the other and of course, that is not so. You could just as easily have a 5/1 (a very difficult puzzle leading to a box hidden beside a tarmac footpath that can be reached from a wheelchair) as you could a 1/5 (a very easily found box on top of Ben Nevis).

 

Apparently you don't require any specialist equipment to reach the top of Ben Nevis.... where does your 5th star come from?

[+Pharisee]

 

Some folks seem to think that a 5/5 rating is inseparable. 5 stars for one of the attributes automatically means 5 for the other and of course, that is not so. You could just as easily have a 5/1 (a very difficult puzzle leading to a box hidden beside a tarmac footpath that can be reached from a wheelchair) as you could a 1/5 (a very easily found box on top of Ben Nevis).

 

Apparently you don't require any specialist equipment to reach the top of Ben Nevis.... where does your 5th star come from?

You do if you're like me and have a dodgy knee.... Leki poles would now be essential and as I don't normally use them, they become 'specialist equipment'

[+Delta68]

 

Apparently you don't require any specialist equipment to reach the top of Ben Nevis.... where does your 5th star come from?

 

Personally I wouldn't say it's T5. It's a bloomin' long walk but our 10 and 11 year old Labradors managed it OK...

Probably more like a T3.5 or 4 because you don't even need to use your hands at any point to pull yourself up

 

 

 

Mark

[+*mouse*]

Personally I wouldn't say it's T5. It's a bloomin' long walk but our 10 and 11 year old Labradors managed it OK...

Probably more like a T3.5 or 4 because you don't even need to use your hands at any point to pull yourself up

 

 

Agree - a regular walk up the mountain is a 3.5/4 - it is just a long walk up a hill.

 

 

It's interesting, but personally don't think I've ever completed a genuine 5/5 cache. Yes according to my stats I have - yes they were fun, but none of them was a true physical and mental challenge. Hardest cache I have ever done was actually rated as a 3.5 / 4.

As others say, for some there's a kudos to owning a 5/5, but for me personally I find the lower combinations more challenging and as a result more rewarding as they are rated accurately and not to there to bring in the 5/5 hunters.

[+currykev]

5 = IGNORE

[+Pharisee]

 

Apparently you don't require any specialist equipment to reach the top of Ben Nevis.... where does your 5th star come from?

 

Personally I wouldn't say it's T5. It's a bloomin' long walk but our 10 and 11 year old Labradors managed it OK...

Probably more like a T3.5 or 4 because you don't even need to use your hands at any point to pull yourself up

 

 

 

Mark

 

OK... Ben Nevis was probably not the best example for a 5 star terrain but I'm sure you get the idea I was attempting to get across. If you still want to 'nit-pick' then substitute Mount Everest for Ben Nevis!!

[+The Blorenges]

I suppose this is the 5/5 cache that's the benchmark for all other ratings but I do wonder if the D rating is a little too high?

 

Earth's Roof - Mount Everest.

 

MrsB

[+Happy Humphrey]

Personally I wouldn't say it's T5. It's a bloomin' long walk but our 10 and 11 year old Labradors managed it OK...

Probably more like a T3.5 or 4 because you don't even need to use your hands at any point to pull yourself up

 

 

Agree - a regular walk up the mountain is a 3.5/4 - it is just a long walk up a hill.

 

 

It's interesting, but personally don't think I've ever completed a genuine 5/5 cache. Yes according to my stats I have - yes they were fun, but none of them was a true physical and mental challenge. Hardest cache I have ever done was actually rated as a 3.5 / 4.

As others say, for some there's a kudos to owning a 5/5, but for me personally I find the lower combinations more challenging and as a result more rewarding as they are rated accurately and not to there to bring in the 5/5 hunters.

It's likely to be rather subjective, but Ben Nevis probably qualifies as 5* terrain;

Requires specialized equipment and knowledge or experience, (boat, 4WD, rock climbing, SCUBA, etc) or is otherwise extremely difficult.

...under the "extremely difficult" rule. It might not require climbing skills (unless you ascend via Tower Ridge or Point Five gully or similar), and I don't think that walking poles can be classed as "specialized", but a long 4000' ascent is well beyond the range of what's expected to access a geocache.

 

I have a 4.5* Terrain cache; and I think it's accurately rated, as several people have refused at the final hurdle...

[+*mouse*]

Guess that's where we'll disagree then HH! It's no walk in the park admittedly, but as you can reach the top on two feet without any scrambling or climbing I will never consider it a 5* terrain It's only a 10 mile round trip at the end of the day and the ascent is pretty steady. I've done tougher walks in the Brecon Beacons. Anyone of average fitness can make it up there and they regularly do - I consider myself a case in point.

 

Part of my reasoning is also that if you class The Ben as a 5* where do you go from there? What if you had to use climbing gear to get to a cache - it would be a bit odd in my view to rate it the same as something you can walk to.

 

But I do agree with you about this being subjective - as this game repeatedly shows us

[+keehotee]

Guess that's where we'll disagree then HH! It's no walk in the park admittedly, but as you can reach the top on two feet without any scrambling or climbing I will never consider it a 5* terrain

 

Yeah - everyone knows you need a torch and wellies for a proper 5* terrain cache

[+martlakes]

Of course Ben Nevis CAN be a 5* depending on the weather and route chosen. Even the tourist track will require proper hill walking gear and some sense of how to use it - if you want to do things correctly. Yes you can do it in flip flops if you want, but ...

 

So the system suggests that a 10 mile, 4000' ascent up a rocky mountain isn't 5* but hiring a rowing boat on Windermere for half an hour is? Or taking a torch for a small 20' cave is 5* cos you need equipment? It's all a bit strange really.

 

Free climb a hard rock route - only 3* cos no gear needed!

 

I know, why not read the cache page and see what sort of challenge is involved - now there's an idea!

[+redsox_mark]

I'd like to see a clear distinction between the physical difficulty of getting there, and the difficulty in finding the cache once you are at GZ. Also the difficulty of any puzzle has to be factored in.

 

The terrain rating is a purely physical attribute. A extremely long walk, a long climb, and physical obstacles such as water to be crossed or cliffs to be climbed all raise the terrain rating.

 

The difficulty rating should cover any tricky puzzle that needs to be solved, either before setting out or once on the trip. It also covers how hard it is to find. It might be increased for an ingeniously camouflaged cache or if there were multiple stages to find.

 

The tricky bit in rating is to decide if an awkward hide such as 12 feet up a tree should contribute to the difficulty rating, and I think it shouldn't - that should affect the terrain instead. I like to think that terrain is a physical attribute, difficulty is a mental attribute. I feel quite a lot of caches are over-rated because physical difficulties are reflected in both ratings instead of just one.

 

Rgds, Andy

 

Difficulty rating: *****

Extreme. A serious mental or physical challenge. Requires specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment to find cache.

 

Terrain rating: *****

Requires specialized equipment and knowledge or experience, (boat, 4WD, rock climbing, SCUBA, etc) or is otherwise extremely difficult.

 

I agree, the tricky bit is that "difficulty" is not clearly defined in my view. Terrain is pretty clear. Difficulty talks about "finding the cache", but it doesn't explicitly say that it only applies to finding the cache once you reach GZ (plus any puzzle aspect).

 

As defined, one could argue that finding any cache on Mt. Everest is "A serious mental or physical challenge. Requires specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment to find cache"". Even if it is in a giant box painted bright orange. So all Everest caches would be 5/5.

 

Alternately one can argue that while finding cache on Everest is "A serious mental or physical challenge. Requires specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment to find cache", but if the difficulty is all related to getting there (the terrain), then you can have a 1/5 cache there.

[+Happy Humphrey]

So the system suggests that a 10 mile, 4000' ascent up a rocky mountain isn't 5* but hiring a rowing boat on Windermere for half an hour is? Or taking a torch for a small 20' cave is 5* cos you need equipment? It's all a bit strange really.

No, it's always been taken to be "specialised" equipment, i.e. you need significant skills and training to use it.

So a rowing boat on Windermere doesn't make it 5*, nor does a torch, or walking poles, or a space-hopper. Because you don't need training to use that gear (beyond a five minute introduction to rowing or torch-wielding). The principle is, that (given the required gear) you could just go and get a cache like that without the need for specialised experience or training.

 

But if you need to abseil, or if the cache is 50 feet underwater, or down a deep cave system - then it's always 5* terrain. You can't just go and get it, even if you borrow the gear. At least - not safely!

[+MBFace]

But if you need to abseil, or if the cache is 50 feet underwater, or down a deep cave system - then it's always 5* terrain. You can't just go and get it, even if you borrow the gear. At least - not safely!

So I've abseiled (highly unlikely in my case ) to find a cache which contains information to enable me to find another cache. Some people would also rate the second cache as 5* terrain whether it's another abseil or a driveby, others would rate it in its own right. The second option seems correct to me - is there a definitive rule guideline anywhere?

[+Madyokel]

I suppose this is the 5/5 cache that's the benchmark for all other ratings but I do wonder if the D rating is a little too high?

 

Earth's Roof - Mount Everest.

 

MrsB

And the finder did't even claim a FTF

[+The Blorenges]

I suppose this is the 5/5 cache that's the benchmark for all other ratings but I do wonder if the D rating is a little too high?

 

Earth's Roof - Mount Everest.

 

MrsB

And the finder did't even claim a FTF

 

Neither did this cacher who was a long way from home for this FTF...

 

The distances (and heights) some will go to for a FTF.

 

MrsB

[+Delta68]

 

So I've abseiled (highly unlikely in my case ) to find a cache which contains information to enable me to find another cache. Some people would also rate the second cache as 5* terrain whether it's another abseil or a driveby, others would rate it in its own right. The second option seems correct to me - is there a definitive rule guideline anywhere?

 

A good example would be Simply Paul's 3 Peak Challenge (Which we have done )

You have to climb Snowdon, Scarfel Pike and Ben Nevis in order to get the coords for the final location which is basically a C&D.

 

How should the terrain be calculated for that?

Sum of all three?

Mean of all three?

Max of all three?

Mode of all three?

Medium of all three?

Root mean squared of all three?

or 1.5 which it would probably be if it was a trad...

 

 

Mark

[+Amberel]

... or 1.5 which it would probably be if it was a trad...

It's not something I've thought of before, but I guess you should rate each cache on its own merits. You already got the big stars for the qualifying caches, why should you get them twice if the final one is a cache and dash?

 

Rgds, Andy

[+keehotee]

Of course Ben Nevis CAN be a 5* depending on the weather and route chosen.

 

But you could say that about almost any cache....

 

Needs Maintenance - "Don't like drive bys, so decided to come at this one across the river, and over the weir, by kayak - in a snowstorm. Please amend your Terrain rating to suit.!"

 

[+Happy Humphrey]

So I've abseiled (highly unlikely in my case ) to find a cache which contains information to enable me to find another cache. Some people would also rate the second cache as 5* terrain whether it's another abseil or a driveby, others would rate it in its own right. The second option seems correct to me - is there a definitive rule guideline anywhere?

I haven't seen a guideline, but if you think about it there's only one answer. It has to be graded as a standalone cache.

 

Let's say your second cache is on a fence by the side of a car park, but you have to use diving gear to find the first cache containing the coded coordinates for the second.

 

If the first cache is 5* terrain, including that in the terrain for the second cache completely masks the actual terrain for this cache. So you find cache 1, go home and decipher the coordinates for cache 2. Now, how do you know whether you need to allocate hours for a struggle up a mountain with full winter gear, or a few minutes with the kids in tow? Or somewhere inbetween?

OK, you read the description and there might be a hint in there; but if that's the case what's the point of the terrain rating anyway?

[+keehotee]

So I've abseiled (highly unlikely in my case ) to find a cache which contains information to enable me to find another cache. Some people would also rate the second cache as 5* terrain whether it's another abseil or a driveby, others would rate it in its own right. The second option seems correct to me - is there a definitive rule guideline anywhere?

I haven't seen a guideline, but if you think about it there's only one answer. It has to be graded as a standalone cache.

 

Let's say your second cache is on a fence by the side of a car park, but you have to use diving gear to find the first cache containing the coded coordinates for the second.

 

If the first cache is 5* terrain, including that in the terrain for the second cache completely masks the actual terrain for this cache. So you find cache 1, go home and decipher the coordinates for cache 2. Now, how do you know whether you need to allocate hours for a struggle up a mountain with full winter gear, or a few minutes with the kids in tow? Or somewhere inbetween?

OK, you read the description and there might be a hint in there; but if that's the case what's the point of the terrain rating anyway?

 

The terrain rating should accurately reflect the terrain you're likely to encounter going after that particular cache.

If you have to jump through hurdles/climb mountains/plumb the depths to get the co-ords for that cache then that should properly be reflected in the difficulty rating - NOT the terrain rating....

 

Just my opinion.....

[+Geobuzzbee]

im still no wiser i want to do a cache that needs a 20ft abseil,so 50ft of rope is needed a harness and a locking descender at least so you have 2 hands free to open cache(25ft under you from here) so is it a 5 terrain?

 

i also am waiting for permission to do a cache on top of a 60mtr climb wich will needs hands most of the way to get up to the top,diff 3? terrain????

any ideas?

cheers.....

Edited December 1, 2010 by Geobuzzbee

[+martlakes]

im still no wiser i want to do a cache that needs a 20ft abseil,so 50ft of rope is needed a harness and a locking descender at least so you have 2 hands free to open cache(25ft under you from here) so is it a 5 terrain?

 

i also am waiting for permission to do a cache on top of a 60mtr climb wich will needs hands most of the way to get up to the top,diff 3? terrain????

any ideas?

cheers.....

 

5* terrain for both - simple.

[+Geobuzzbee]

im still no wiser i want to do a cache that needs a 20ft abseil,so 50ft of rope is needed a harness and a locking descender at least so you have 2 hands free to open cache(25ft under you from here) so is it a 5 terrain?

 

i also am waiting for permission to do a cache on top of a 60mtr climb wich will needs hands most of the way to get up to the top,diff 3? terrain????

any ideas?

cheers.....

 

5* terrain for both - simple.

 

Thank you first 1 is just a cache, so over all diff?

second a multi with easy clues so over all diff? dont want to put people off,,the abseil will be easily seen when on cliff,may get others in to the game with an adventurers nature

[+MBFace]

The terrain rating should accurately reflect the terrain you're likely to encounter going after that particular cache.

If you have to jump through hurdles/climb mountains/plumb the depths to get the co-ords for that cache then that should properly be reflected in the difficulty rating - NOT the terrain rating....

 

Just my opinion.....

 

Ms Pedantic here .....

 

How would you set the difficulty when the requirements for getting the coordinates are variable?

 

1. Caches which involve finding TBs: While I'm happy for All About the UK to be D5 as it involves jumping through hurdles of one sort or another I'm not so sure about those for a more limited geographical area when it's possible for the TBs to be picked up from a series of D1 caches (just don't look for the bugs when we place them ) .

 

2. Filling lines on the bingo card. We've done one which is rated D5 but by the very nature of the cache it can be claimed after finding a line comprising only D1 caches.

[+martlakes]

Thank you first 1 is just a cache, so over all diff?

second a multi with easy clues so over all diff?

"Just a cache"? Not sure what this means. If it is in a fairly obvious spot, that anyone who has found a few caches is likely to look and go "Ah!" then 1* or if you are going to give very specific directions in a hint.

2* there are several possible sites, and/or it's not particularly obvious and I'll have to look around a bit. A non-specific hint, but helpful.

3* as 2 but more so. Going to expect a bit of a hunt here. Not the usual pile of sticks/stones type hide. Could be a camoed container, or a sneaky spot. Hint: needs some thinking about and/or a bit cryptic. Me - DNF might well happen here!

4* getting tricky now. Would expect to spend a fair bit of time looking. Not going to be an easy hunt although might get lucky! Creative/unusual hide or very well hidden. Hint: cryptic, obscure or only realise what it means after finding the cache! Me - quite/very likely to cause a DNF!

5* hmmm - not sure cos I've not done (m)any true 5* D ones! Would expect it to be very tricky for me as I'm a bear of little brain. Evil nasty hide which I'll get frustrated with and mutter comments about the cache owner! But will get a huge amount of satisfaction if I find it! Would expect more than one visit may be needed to find it. Hint: probably plain language but appears to be no help whatsoever! Five star D caches are, of course, easily found by a newby on their first caching trip!

If it's a puzzle with D5* then I probably wouldn't bother trying it as it will be too hard!! Likely wouldn't even know where to start!

 

I can, of course DNF a cache whatever its star rating! Many caches are not as above, even some of mine might not quite fit this outline. When setting mine I compare with my others and try and judge how hard folk will find it, its level of sneakiness and help (or not) with the hint to try and get most people finding it, although it might need a bit of work. I don't generally like folk to not find my caches as I know I don't usually enjoy a DNF unless it's purposefully sneaky. I can also 'have my cacher eye in' and find a 'hard' cache straight away or just be lucky.

 

It's all pretty subjective and as we all know, we can get a DNF on a 1.5* with a cache page full of other logs with "easy find", "walked straight to it" etc, just to rub it in!

Find quite a few caches and you'll get a better feel for the stars. Have fun.

[+Guanajuato]

Climbing trees - does that affect the difficult or terrain rating?

[+Delta68]

Climbing trees - does that affect the difficult or terrain rating?

 

 

This one was rated at 4/4 which is probably about right (it's a Multi)

 

View from GZ:

 

 

 

Mark

[markandlynn]

Just use http://www.geocaching.com/hide/rate.aspx

 

The knowledge base gives clearer guidance on what d&t mean

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?p....page&id=82

 

Has anyone here done ben nevis the winter version ? both classed as the same cache as the ammobox will be beneath a few feet of snow, the path is invisible, you need good navigation to avoid the cornices, crampons for the iced up scree slope etc and still have to walk a fair few miles.

 

edited a spurious word wot creeped in at the last minute via my clipboard:(

Edited December 2, 2010 by markandlynn

[+martlakes]

Climbing trees - does that affect the difficult or terrain rating?

 

No, doesn't affect either cos as you know climbing trees is easy peasy!! Just think up!!

[+DizzyPair]

We think the Difficulty and Terrain numbers make people aware of what they may encounter before they go and seek a cache.

If you see it is T4, then expect to use your arms to get to the cache, as well as your feet/legs….No equipment needed.

If you see T4.5, then expect the same but it will likely be a bit more dangerous and/or challenging…..No equipment needed.

In both these cases, you should be able to get to the cache without equipment, but there is nothing stopping you from using some.

e.g. T4.5 up a tree. Some people will be confident enough to climb up without any equipment, but others who are more fearful might prefer to use a harness with a sling, just in case they slip off a branch.

 

Someone mentioned something about “adventurers” earlier. These T4 & 5 caches should be an adventure. It is not a test to see who is bravest or the most stupid.

 

To get to a T5 cache you should use some sort of equipment. This might be a harness and rope or you might need a descender, and an ascender. You might need 2 or 3 ropes.

 

Caches in trees can be easy or hard, and some trees are not easy to climb.

 

If the trunk is bare of branches for the first 5, 10, or 15 metres, then you cannot just climb up. The easiest way is to get a rope over a suitable branch.

 

Think about how you can get the climbing rope over a branch 10 metres high. Usually a pilot line is used. This can be easy to install or there may be many smaller branches close together etc which hamper getting it up. This could increase the difficulty rating.

 

So a cache high in a tree could vary from T4 to T5.

The difficulty can be affected by how easy it is to get your hands on the cache. If it is very close to the trunk of the tree then it might be D1 or D2. But what if it’s on the end of a thinner branch a long way from the trunk, then you will have to climb along this to get the cache. That could be D3, to D5

 

If a cache is on a cliff and the only way to it is by using a rope then it should be a T5.

If you can abseil down to it and then go all the way to the bottom, then a D2 would be about right.

 

But take a similar cache, same height, but it is not possible to go all the way down, and you have to go back up, then the D rating should be higher, 3, 4, or 5.

 

We have 2 caches on old railway bridges.

One of them you can walk onto the top of the bridge and abseil down to the cache =D2 T5

The other, you can only get to by ascending to the cache, and then descending back to the ground. This is obviously more difficult. =D5 T5.

 

Many T5 caches in this country are also rated as D5. This is not very accurate.

 

We have found a few T5 caches in different countries and suggest that one way to determine the Difficulty and Terrain combinations is with experience. Go out and seek those T5 caches and you will soon see that they are not all D5 T5. Some are easy, some are hard, and some are almost impossible.

 

Take a look at http://geo.b44.de/ which is a map based site that shows just about every T4 to T5 cache in mainland Europe. You will also see that whereas most of the UK T5 caches show no photos, the caches in Europe are almost all accompanied by photos, so you see people enjoying their adventure. You will also see that the Difficulty Ratings are much lower than if the same cache was placed in this country.

[+nevryan]

Has anyone here done ben nevis the winter version ? both classed as the same cache as the ammobox will be beneath a few feet of snow, the path is invisible, you need good navigation to avoid the cornices, crampons for the iced up scree slope etc and still have to walk a fair few miles.

 

My sister and I did the Ben way back in April 2007, snow on the summit plateau, 50m visibility, loads of people turning back at the top of the zig zag where the surface turned to sheet ice. No chance of getting the summer cache but the winter one was not too bad. A great day followed Scarfel and Snowdon over the next two days.

[The Red Kite]

Personally I wouldn't say it's T5. It's a bloomin' long walk but our 10 and 11 year old Labradors managed it OK...

Probably more like a T3.5 or 4 because you don't even need to use your hands at any point to pull yourself up

 

 

Agree - a regular walk up the mountain is a 3.5/4 - it is just a long walk up a hill.

 

 

It's interesting, but personally don't think I've ever completed a genuine 5/5 cache. Yes according to my stats I have - yes they were fun, but none of them was a true physical and mental challenge. Hardest cache I have ever done was actually rated as a 3.5 / 4.

As others say, for some there's a kudos to owning a 5/5, but for me personally I find the lower combinations more challenging and as a result more rewarding as they are rated accurately and not to there to bring in the 5/5 hunters.

 

That WAS a very easy 5/5 Mouse, especially for me, when you did most of the legwork

[+Lonetracker]

This is a 5/5 -

welcome london

by Geo Xpress Hamburg | GC2NTPX | South East England, United Kingdom

 

At first sight it is not even a walk in the park. Must have one hell of a sting in the difficulty and terrain tails.

 

If that is too tough for you, this one is easier, being 'only' a 4.5/5 -

good bye london

by Geo Xpress Hamburg | GC2NTPZ | South East England, United Kingdom

 

Thought I might drive down for these two but there must be a cache, sorry, catch.

[+keehotee]

This is a 5/5 -

welcome london

by Geo Xpress Hamburg | GC2NTPX | South East England, United Kingdom

 

At first sight it is not even a walk in the park. Must have one hell of a sting in the difficulty and terrain tails.

 

If that is too tough for you, this one is easier, being 'only' a 4.5/5 -

good bye london

by Geo Xpress Hamburg | GC2NTPZ | South East England, United Kingdom

 

Thought I might drive down for these two but there must be a cache, sorry, catch.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=274092

[+perth pathfinders]

 

Some folks seem to think that a 5/5 rating is inseparable. 5 stars for one of the attributes automatically means 5 for the other and of course, that is not so. You could just as easily have a 5/1 (a very difficult puzzle leading to a box hidden beside a tarmac footpath that can be reached from a wheelchair) as you could a 1/5 (a very easily found box on top of Ben Nevis).

 

Apparently you don't require any specialist equipment to reach the top of Ben Nevis.... where does your 5th star come from?

You do if you're like me and have a dodgy knee.... Leki poles would now be essential and as I don't normally use them, they become 'specialist equipment'

 

I think the 5 star terrain can be taken several ways.

how hard it is physically

how dangerous it is weatherwise

its suitability for youngsters

what equipment is required

winter conditions have to be considered

It alerts the cacher to read the page carefully, consult maps/tides/take appropriate gear.

 

Ben Nevis is a good example - is is a hill, with a tourist footpath reaching all the way to the top - easy?

BUT - with the scottish weather it is very unpredictable, you still need full kit.

We have seen tourists in flip flops and child in backpack without even a drink of water or a coat, not even a map.

The temperature can drop drastically at the top, it can suddenly get enshrouded in mist for hours.

People under-estimate the time it takes and the setting sun thus end up there in the dark with no torch.

A GPS cannot show you any crags or paths in the mist - map reading skills essential

Only the very experienced would attempt it in the snow/ice.

Many a time mountain rescue get called out or tourists have to be airlifted off, we constantly hear it on the news up here

 

And this is one of the easy hills up here!!

Edited May 16, 2011 by perth pathfinders

[+Towcester Pirates]

AK do i add clues to make it a 5/5 or do i just keep Terrain at 5? cus this is hard work but would be nice to get seekers in the spot to think,,maybe not?????

 

bearing in mind the summit of snowdon cache is a 2/3.5 rating, a 5/5 really needs to be elite i would say.