Best coordinates

[+CacheMule]

Hi, I know this question has probably been asked before so thank you for bearing with me. How does one obtain the best coordinates for a new geocache site using a Garmin Dakota 10? The cache location is in a moderately wooded area and the terrain is flat with no hills or ravines or anything like that.

 

thanks

 

-CacheMule

Edited January 28, 2015 by CacheMule

[+Markwell]

What I have seen work is take a good reading - let the GPS sit on the spot for a while, and then just take the coordinates. If you really want to verify that the coordinates are good, come back on another day and follow the coordinates in your GPS. If it leads you to anywhere within 20-30 feet of the cache it's probably good. You could also plug the coordinates in to Google Earth for a quick "is this in the right general area" look.

 

But if you get it wrong - never fear. Everyone that has coordinates more than 30 feet away will give you their corrected coordinates. Never feel bad about having to correct coordinates later. Go out and verify them again and update as needed.

[+SageTracey]

Never feel bad about having to correct coordinates later. Go out and verify them again and update as needed.

 

Good advice and a lesson that I had to learn for myself! It's too easy to take it personally when another cacher suggests that your coords aren't quite right. Better to go out and check them again.

[+Chrysalides]

Corollary : don't complain about coordinates being way off when you're using a phone (or if your GPS receiver hasn't had time to "warm up", or if you're in a location with less than ideal reception.

 

The procedure to obtain better coordinates is called waypoint averaging. The GPS receiver (or smartphone app) takes multiple readings. Each reading has a weight based on how good the GPS thinks the fix is. As Markwell said, if you want the most accurate coordinates your equipment can give you, come back another day (when there are different satellites in the sky) to take another reading. Garmin has an article on waypoint averaging : http://garmin.blogs.com/softwareupdates/2009/04/waypoint-averaging.html

Edited January 28, 2015 by Chrysalides

[+Team Microdot]

Hi, I know this question has probably been asked before so thank you for bearing with me. How does one obtain the best coordinates for a new geocache site using a Garmin Dakota 10? The cache location is in a moderately wooded area and the terrain is flat with no hills or ravines or anything like that.

 

thanks

 

-CacheMule

 

The dakota 10 has an averaging feature which can help with this

 

The first thing I would do if I were planning to obtain coords for a new cache placement is fire up my Dakota while I have a clear view of the sky and allow it to get a good fix.

 

I got a windscreen mount for the unit on Ebay and I find that if I fire the unit up while it's in that mount say 10 / 15 minutes before I get to where I plan to use it, it seems to get a really good fix - even better than if I fired it up for the same time but was walking with it. Of course I might be imagining that extra bit of accuracy but that's the way it seems.

 

So - once the unit has a good satellite fix, place it at your intended cache location.

 

Tap the Waypoint Averaging button on the screen - it has an icon of a large flag with smaller flags around it.

 

Tap the Create Waypoint button***

 

Wait until the Sample Confidence reaches 100%

 

If your screen times out to save battery while you're waiting, don't worry - the unit is still taking measurements and you can just tap the screen again to bring back the display to check what's happening.

 

Once the progress bar indicates 100% Sample Confidence, tap the Save button - this will create and save a waypoint on your unit with a unique name - usually a sequential number.

 

Tap the red cross button to return to the main menu.

 

You can view the waypoint you created by tapping the Waypoint Manager button and then scrolling through the list of stored waypoints until you get to the one you want. The list of waypoints is organised by distance from where you are standing - so if you're still standing at the location you took the waypoint it will be at the top of the list.

 

NOW - you CAN repeat this process immediately in a bid to make the averaged waypoint as accurate as possible - but the unit will advise that ideally you should leave at least 45 minutes between samples. If you're taking a waypoint in a wooded area and want it to be as accurate as possible I would recommend following that advice. If you're taking a waypoint under clear sky on flat, open terrain then you'll probably get away with walking away from GZ with the GPS a little distance, then walking back and placing it back in situ and running the averaging process again. If I were taking a waypoint in a heavily wooded area and wanted really accurate coordinates I'd probably make several visits on different days at different times until I was entirely happy - usually two or three visits but more on occasion.

 

I've taken an averaged waypoint under clear sky for 20 minutes before today - and gone back the following day to find that it was out by 10 metres - but that sort of thing is quite rare - usually I would expect to be within 4 metres. Re-averaging that same waypoint on that second day made it more accurate.

 

It's also a good idea to give your waypoints a meaningful name, to make them easier to identify / remember:

 

Find the waypoint you wish to edit in Waypoint Manager and tap the button to display that waypoint

 

Tap the Change Name button

 

Tap to the right of the current name to position the cursor using the arrows that will appear on the display then hit the check mark

 

With the cursor positioned to the right of the current name, use the back arrow to the right of the text to delete the current name.

 

Type your desired new name

 

Tap the green check mark to save your changes

 

Tap the back arrow to return to the list of waypoints

 

Tap the red cross to return to the main menu.

 

Hope that helps

 

*** If you're trying to improve the accuracy of a waypoint you've taken before by going through the waypoint averaging process again, tap the name of the waypoint you already created at this point in proceedings rather than creating a new waypoint.

[+MountainWoods]

Corollary : don't complain about coordinates being way off when you're using a phone (or if your GPS receiver hasn't had time to "warm up", or if you're in a location with less than ideal reception.

 

The procedure to obtain better coordinates is called waypoint averaging. The GPS receiver (or smartphone app) takes multiple readings. Each reading has a weight based on how good the GPS thinks the fix is. As Markwell said, if you want the most accurate coordinates your equipment can give you, come back another day (when there are different satellites in the sky) to take another reading. Garmin has an article on waypoint averaging : http://garmin.blogs.com/softwareupdates/2009/04/waypoint-averaging.html

Yep. That's what I did with my GCs: waypoint averaging. Even over a couple of days. Never had anyone complain about the coordinates yet -- knock on wood. ("Ouch! Not that. That was my head!")

[+CacheMule]

Corollary : don't complain about coordinates being way off when you're using a phone (or if your GPS receiver hasn't had time to "warm up", or if you're in a location with less than ideal reception.

 

The procedure to obtain better coordinates is called waypoint averaging. The GPS receiver (or smartphone app) takes multiple readings. Each reading has a weight based on how good the GPS thinks the fix is. As Markwell said, if you want the most accurate coordinates your equipment can give you, come back another day (when there are different satellites in the sky) to take another reading. Garmin has an article on waypoint averaging : http://garmin.blogs.com/softwareupdates/2009/04/waypoint-averaging.html

Yep. That's what I did with my GCs: waypoint averaging. Even over a couple of days. Never had anyone complain about the coordinates yet -- knock on wood. ("Ouch! Not that. That was my head!")

 

I always thought waypoint averaging was for measuring in a straight line but I guess if you stay stationary it's like counting the waypoint on top of itself...?

[+GeoTrekker26]

Corollary : don't complain about coordinates being way off when you're using a phone (or if your GPS receiver hasn't had time to "warm up", or if you're in a location with less than ideal reception.

 

The procedure to obtain better coordinates is called waypoint averaging. The GPS receiver (or smartphone app) takes multiple readings. Each reading has a weight based on how good the GPS thinks the fix is. As Markwell said, if you want the most accurate coordinates your equipment can give you, come back another day (when there are different satellites in the sky) to take another reading. Garmin has an article on waypoint averaging : http://garmin.blogs.com/softwareupdates/2009/04/waypoint-averaging.html

Yep. That's what I did with my GCs: waypoint averaging. Even over a couple of days. Never had anyone complain about the coordinates yet -- knock on wood. ("Ouch! Not that. That was my head!")

I always thought waypoint averaging was for measuring in a straight line but I guess if you stay stationary it's like counting the waypoint on top of itself...?

A waypoint is just that a point. Yes, the GPS remains in one place and takes repeated readings, which are then averaged. I'm not sure what you mean by measuring a straight line. If you want the distance, mark a waypoint and set the GPS to navigate to the waypoint. It will give you the distance to the waypoing which will increase or decrease depending on your direction of travel.

[+Chrysalides]

I always thought waypoint averaging was for measuring in a straight line but I guess if you stay stationary it's like counting the waypoint on top of itself...?

If you want a line (straight or otherwise) you capture a tracklog (which is essentially a bunch of waypoint / time). Useful for marking trails, but not directly supported by geocaching.com.

[+CacheMule]

[A waypoint is just that a point. Yes, the GPS remains in one place and takes repeated readings, which are then averaged. I'm not sure what you mean by measuring a straight line. If you want the distance, mark a waypoint and set the GPS to navigate to the waypoint. It will give you the distance to the waypoing which will increase or decrease depending on your direction of travel.

 

The only reason I said a straight line is because a reviewer once showed me how to find a coordinate in an alleyway by taking 2 measurements at the beginning and the end of the alley. Then he explained to me how to mathematically average the two points on paper. Sorry if I confused you. Yeah, I think I'm going to use the averaging feature for this geocache.

[+Team Microdot]

The only reason I said a straight line is because a reviewer once showed me how to find a coordinate in an alleyway by taking 2 measurements at the beginning and the end of the alley. Then he explained to me how to mathematically average the two points on paper. Sorry if I confused you. Yeah, I think I'm going to use the averaging feature for this geocache.

 

In reality that's precisely how waypoint averaging works - even using the automated tool on your garmin.

 

Let's pretend that feature didn't exist for a moment and you were going to do it manually.

 

1. Place your GPSr at GZ.

 

2. Decide how many samples you are going to take over what period of time - let's say one sample every 10 seconds for 10 minutes - that would give you 60 sample sets of coordinates.

 

3. Every 10 seconds you look at the GPS coordinates displayed on your GPS and list them down on paper.

 

4. Once you have all your samples, add together all the norths and divide the total by 60 - then do the same for the wests - and you have your averaged coordinates.

 

In the reviewer's alley example the objective was a waypoint for the middle of the alley - hence one waypoint at each end, added together and divided by 2. It was basically an exaggerated example of the way waypoint averaging works - take multiple variable waypoints and then work it the point that's in the middle of them.

[+WarNinjas]

When we started we used as many GPS devices as we had to get coords. Our car one and my phone and my daughters then average them. Now I just use my phone that has a pretty good gps and the averaging app. I run it a few times and email the results to myself. When I get home I check Google earth just to make sure it is close. I never really have any problems with it.

[+Roman!]

No matter how good your coordinates are they will be off for the next person.

[+Team Microdot]

No matter how good your coordinates are they will be off for the next person.

 

Which is precisely why it's important to make the effort to get the best coordinates we can

[+lynskynbnd]

Great info here!

I'm getting ready to place my first geocache in the next month or so.

[+CacheMule]

No matter how good your coordinates are they will be off for the next person.

 

Which is precisely why it's important to make the effort to get the best coordinates we can

 

 

I think what he mean is all GPS receivers or cellphones have a certain range of inaccuracy. So even if you have perfect coordinates a geocacher might not be able to find them right off the bat. I (with my garmin) seem to make most of my finds when I'm 14-20 feet away from the GZ, whether it's their inaccuracy or mine I'll never know, go figure :) .

 

cachemule

[+Team Microdot]

No matter how good your coordinates are they will be off for the next person.

 

Which is precisely why it's important to make the effort to get the best coordinates we can

 

 

I think what he mean is all GPS receivers or cellphones have a certain range of inaccuracy. So even if you have perfect coordinates a geocacher might not be able to find them right off the bat. I (with my garmin) seem to make most of my finds when I'm 14-20 feet away from the GZ, whether it's their inaccuracy or mine I'll never know, go figure :) .

 

cachemule

 

Sorry - I thought that you opened this thread seeking guidance on obtaining the best coordinates - not looking for reasons why doing so was probably a waste of time.

 

I had viewed my input as an investment. Now I'm not so sure.

[+CacheMule]

big mistake on who I was correcting.

Edited February 7, 2015 by CacheMule

[+CacheMule]

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 

It was not waste of time, I learned a lot from this thread. So thank you for the input. I also believe that there were lots of people who have received good information here as well. While I may know a fair bit of knowledge when it comes to finding a geocache I really was unsure as to how to obtain the most accurate coordinates, and as well did not know who in this thread I was correcting (big mistake). I was just trying to put in my two cents. Sorry. And thank you for the waypoint averaging information.

 

cachemule - SORRY ABOUT THE QUOTATION I WAS ON MY MOBILE

Edited February 7, 2015 by CacheMule

[+Chrysalides]

I think what he mean is all GPS receivers or cellphones have a certain range of inaccuracy. So even if you have perfect coordinates a geocacher might not be able to find them right off the bat. I (with my garmin) seem to make most of my finds when I'm 14-20 feet away from the GZ, whether it's their inaccuracy or mine I'll never know, go figure :) .

To counter Roman!'s snarky comment :

 

Here's why it is worth the effort of getting the best possible coordinates you can. Let's assume the coordinates you end up with has an error of ≤ 3 ft.

 

Finder comes along. If his device has an error of ≤ 15 ft, worst case he'll be 18 ft away.

 

Now, if your coordinates has an error of ≤ 15 ft, and his is similar, worst case he'll be 30 ft away.

Edited February 8, 2015 by Chrysalides

[+CacheMule]

 

To counter Roman!'s snarky comment :

 

Here's why it is worth the effort of getting the best possible coordinates you can. Let's assume the coordinates you end up with has an error of ≤ 3 ft.

 

Finder comes along. If his device has an error of ≤ 15 ft, worst case he'll be 18 ft away.

 

Now, if your coordinates has an error of ≤ 15 ft, and his is similar, worst case he'll be 30 ft away.

 

That Is so true. I'm thinking about getting better coordinates for all my hides now. lol.

[+Harry Dolphin]

 

To counter Roman!'s snarky comment :

 

Here's why it is worth the effort of getting the best possible coordinates you can. Let's assume the coordinates you end up with has an error of ≤ 3 ft.

 

Finder comes along. If his device has an error of ≤ 15 ft, worst case he'll be 18 ft away.

 

Now, if your coordinates has an error of ≤ 15 ft, and his is similar, worst case he'll be 30 ft away.

 

That Is so true. I'm thinking about getting better coordinates for all my hides now. lol.

 

We've found five of your caches. The coords were acceptable on all of them (Well, the alley was a few feet off, but there was only one place to hide that...)

[+CacheMule]

 

To counter Roman!'s snarky comment :

 

Here's why it is worth the effort of getting the best possible coordinates you can. Let's assume the coordinates you end up with has an error of ≤ 3 ft.

 

Finder comes along. If his device has an error of ≤ 15 ft, worst case he'll be 18 ft away.

 

Now, if your coordinates has an error of ≤ 15 ft, and his is similar, worst case he'll be 30 ft away.

 

That Is so true. I'm thinking about getting better coordinates for all my hides now. lol.

 

We've found five of your caches. The coords were acceptable on all of them (Well, the alley was a few feet off, but there was only one place to hide that...)

 

Great thanks for the heads up ?