Jump to content

Cache placement in the third dimension?


Recommended Posts

Another thread discussing theoretical cache density has a post that refers to stacking people on top of each other to achieve population density. That comment in the context of that thread prompted a thought:

 

Since there are buildings that are more than 528 feet high, would it be possible, within Groundspeak's guidelines, to place multiple caches in such a building? For instance, the Empire State building is 1250 feet tall. So you could conceivably place a cache at ground level, a second cache roughly half-way up (625 +/- vertical feet from the first), and a third near the top. This approach would also (theoretically) allow three caches on/at the Eiffel Tower, and up to SIX at the Burj Khalifa.Aside from buildings, this could also apply to cliffs and steep slopes. Or even underwater caches, too, if they're rigged to maintain specific depths. Sadly, a brief Google search suggests it's essentially impossible for trees to grow to a height of 528 feet. But a tree on a hill...

 

Getting a bit more absurd, tethered balloons or other technologies yet to come could conceivably open airspace to "cache stacking." Imagine a vertical power trail. You'd just have to reel in several miles of balloons and then let them go when you're done! I'm sure the FAA would get a big grin about that.

 

 

 

Edited by beauxeault
Link to comment

Interesting theoretical question. I think it wouldn't be approved (besides the admission fee question) because on an overhead view they are right on top of each other. But then it might....I have heard of caches being closer than 528 feet when they were on opposite sides of a river or at the top and bottom of a steep cliff....some physical barrier that makes the actual travel between them a reasonable obstacle. It would probably take a bit of communication with the reviewer to explain the unique situation.

 

Hey, if you look at it from above the cache on the International Space Station must pass directly over many caches. 😊

Link to comment

As the placement guidelines are currently written, both caches would be at the same coordinates (at least pretty darn close), I would say NO.

 

Obviously elevation in this instance plays a role, but it would still be the same ground coordinates.

It may be possible to have an "exception" granted (should the fee problem be resolved).

Existing natural barriers sometimes provide an exception. I'm just not so sure this would.

 

Your reviewer would probably be the best one to pose this question to.

Link to comment

Theoretically, I suppose it might work. Although not for any of the buildings that you mentioned, since they have a fee to go up them. ;)

 

Although there *is* a virtual on top of the Empire State building.

 

Bottom line. Geocache coordinates are two dimensional. I have seen some interesting caches that did take advantage of the vertical component though. There was one that had lat/long coordinates at a stairwell of a 9 story parking garage. The description mentioned that they were able to obtain really good coordinates from the cache location and the hint was "Think laterally". Guess where it was hidden.

 

 

Link to comment

Theoretically, I suppose it might work. Although not for any of the buildings that you mentioned, since they have a fee to go up them. ;)

 

Although there *is* a virtual on top of the Empire State building.

 

<snippy>

But it was also placed in 2002. ;)

 

The last time I went up the Empire State building was before the cache existed (in 2001), so I haven't found that one yet.

Link to comment

Interesting,but how would you know what floor to search on? I know we have difficulty when doing caches that are on cliff paths knowing how far up/down we need to go. GPS says cache is 10m away but no idea if it is left/right/up or down.

Link to comment

Interesting,but how would you know what floor to search on? I know we have difficulty when doing caches that are on cliff paths knowing how far up/down we need to go. GPS says cache is 10m away but no idea if it is left/right/up or down.

 

Elevation listed on cache page maybe?

Link to comment

...should the fee problem be resolved...

What fee problem? The existence of an access fee does not automatically preclude a geocache from being hidden. Heck, there's even an attribute for it! fee-yes.gif

 

As long as a cache complies with guideline II-1.-4. "Commercial geocaches are disallowed", it should be fine. I'm sure you could successfully argue that an access fee to get to the top of the Empire State Building doesn't really qualify as "suggests or requires that the finder go inside a business, interact with employees and/or purchase a product or service."

 

Looking at the saturation guideline, there isn't anything there that restricts caches to two dimensions, so you might be good to go there. All it says is that caches need to be "at least 0.10 miles (528 ft or 161 m) apart." It doesn't say it has to be in the horizontal plane. Of course, there's always the overarching "At times a geocache may meet the requirements for publication on the site but the reviewers, as experienced geocachers, may see additional concerns not listed in these guidelines that you as a geocache placer may not have noticed."

Link to comment

Interesting,but how would you know what floor to search on? I know we have difficulty when doing caches that are on cliff paths knowing how far up/down we need to go. GPS says cache is 10m away but no idea if it is left/right/up or down.

 

Elevation listed on cache page maybe?

 

Here's what the Garmin pages has about accuracy of elevation in their GPS units:

 

"It is not uncommon for satellite heights to be off from map elevations by +/- 400 ft."

If there is a vertical component to the hide, assuming the CO doesn't intentionally want it be very difficult to find, this is where an addition to the cache description or a hint would be useful. I could even see naming the cache such that it provides a subtle hint regarding how high or low be searching at the two dimensional lat/long coordinates. I know of another cache that is on a multi-level metal stairway (about 150 feet high). The hint was just a number, and one had to figure out that it was the number of step one must climb from the bottom to reach the cache.

Link to comment

Interesting,but how would you know what floor to search on? I know we have difficulty when doing caches that are on cliff paths knowing how far up/down we need to go. GPS says cache is 10m away but no idea if it is left/right/up or down.

 

Elevation listed on cache page maybe?

 

:)

 

Now that would work but would the GPS work inside to give you that information when you were heading up in the lift/elevator? (depending on the side of the pond you are on)

Edited by whh0
Link to comment

The caches in the same building wouldn't necessarily have the same lat/long. as they could, for example, be at different corners within the building.

In the past I found a couple of caches which differed by only one minute in longitude. One was in a tunnel below the other and required a journey of about 3 miles by car and foot to reach from the above ground one which had access instructions and coordinates for the tunnel entrance.

Link to comment

In the past I found a couple of caches which differed by only one minute in longitude.

I assume you mean one second? A minute of longitude at the equator is over a mile.

 

The Stanford Linear Accelerator is in a building about two miles long. I suspect there would be permission issues but one could theoretically place quite a few caches on the same building, but it's only one story high so there wouldn't be much of a third dimension. One of our forum regulars has a 5 star D puzzle cache at one end.

Link to comment

Theoretically, I suppose it might work. Although not for any of the buildings that you mentioned, since they have a fee to go up them. ;)

There is no prohibition about there being a fee to gain entry to a cache location. I am doing two in Calistoga, CA next week at the Geyser and Petrified Forest and then there are all the ones in parks that have a fee for entry. There was one in Palm Springs where you had to enter a museum and take note of some things displayed there.

Link to comment

...should the fee problem be resolved...

What fee problem? The existence of an access fee does not automatically preclude a geocache from being hidden. Heck, there's even an attribute for it! fee-yes.gif

 

As long as a cache complies with guideline II-1.-4. "Commercial geocaches are disallowed", it should be fine. I'm sure you could successfully argue that an access fee to get to the top of the Empire State Building doesn't really qualify as "suggests or requires that the finder go inside a business, interact with employees and/or purchase a product or service."

 

Looking at the saturation guideline, there isn't anything there that restricts caches to two dimensions, so you might be good to go there. All it says is that caches need to be "at least 0.10 miles (528 ft or 161 m) apart." It doesn't say it has to be in the horizontal plane. Of course, there's always the overarching "At times a geocache may meet the requirements for publication on the site but the reviewers, as experienced geocachers, may see additional concerns not listed in these guidelines that you as a geocache placer may not have noticed."

 

Theoretically, I suppose it might work. Although not for any of the buildings that you mentioned, since they have a fee to go up them. ;)

There is no prohibition about there being a fee to gain entry to a cache location. I am doing two in Calistoga, CA next week at the Geyser and Petrified Forest and then there are all the ones in parks that have a fee for entry. There was one in Palm Springs where you had to enter a museum and take note of some things displayed there.

There's a fine line between a business and a non profit. State/National parks and such are in the non profit category, bringing in money to run the park. I'm not really sure where something like the Empire State Building would fall. I guess there could be an argument that maybe the observation deck is not a part of a business, but I don't know where the admission fees go to.

Link to comment

Theoretically, I suppose it might work. Although not for any of the buildings that you mentioned, since they have a fee to go up them. ;)

There is no prohibition about there being a fee to gain entry to a cache location. I am doing two in Calistoga, CA next week at the Geyser and Petrified Forest and then there are all the ones in parks that have a fee for entry. There was one in Palm Springs where you had to enter a museum and take note of some things displayed there.

http://coord.info/GCR10B top of my FP league table. I'd stored it as being central, but had not bothered to translate the page (ich spreche deutsche nicht...) - so got quite a surprise with 544 steps to climb! Worth the entry fee (€3 IIRC). Photo "Da Hoch!" on 17/4/14 nicely captures the internal view of the spire as you climb it.

There was a 252 foot gap (with the River Thames in it!) from one of my caches to the next. The other one's now archived.

Link to comment

3rd dimension's nothing. I once hid a cache in the 4th dimension. That was my time-traveling turtle cache. Unfortunately, due to it being hidden decades before geocaching was invented and people loving their stats too much, there was a major public outcry. :(

Yep, FindStatGen in GSAK just couldn't handle such a paradox and refused to run. :laughing:

Link to comment

3rd dimension's nothing. I once hid a cache in the 4th dimension. That was my time-traveling turtle cache. Unfortunately, due to it being hidden decades before geocaching was invented and people loving their stats too much, there was a major public outcry. :(

Yep, FindStatGen in GSAK just couldn't handle such a paradox and refused to run. :laughing:

 

Indeed. Fortunately I was able to calculate the right g-force to close the wormhole and repair the fabric of space-time, but not before 2 local cachers were sucked into the Delta quadrant. :ph34r:

Link to comment

Only just noticed this thread.

 

Since there are buildings that are more than 528 feet high, would it be possible, within Groundspeak's guidelines, to place multiple caches in such a building?

There are 3 caches at a cathedral in Ulm, Germany, stacked on top of each other. Although quite a hike climbing the stairs, it isn't 528', so I assume an exception was made when they were published in 2004.

 

There were also a couple caches near Richmond, CA, that stacked on top of each other in 2007: Ferry Point and For the Birds (a multi, but with a pointer hidden at the posted coordinates). One's in a tunnel, the other at the top of the hill. I don't know if anyone considered whether 528' separated them, and I don't think there is.

Link to comment

There's a fine line between a business and a non profit. State/National parks and such are in the non profit category, bringing in money to run the park. I'm not really sure where something like the Empire State Building would fall. I guess there could be an argument that maybe the observation deck is not a part of a business, but I don't know where the admission fees go to.

 

I don't work for Groundspeak ... but my 800th cache find (http://coord.info/GC13V61) was atop the tallest building in Cincinnati. You had to pay $2 to get to the observation deck. Didn't seem to be a problem for Groundspeak when it was created ...

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...
×
×
  • Create New...