Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
PPTB

Best coord method for hides

Recommended Posts

I downloaded a gps coordinate app for cache placement and did the averaging trick... popped the resulting coord into Google maps and was off by probably 30 feet. Another coord from the same method was almost spot on. Wife showed me how to drop a pin on Google maps and pull the coord that way. 

 

Without a dedicated GPS, how do you get accurate coords for your cache hides???

Share this post


Link to post

I take several readings and sit the GPS at GZ to allow it to settle. I find that the coordinates on Google maps are quite good for where I live and they usually closely match my Garmin coordinates, but according to some others, they claim that's not the case everywhere. However, wherever you are it's still a good idea to put them in Goggle maps to check the coordinates are in the right area, and not (I have seen this more than one) say 150 metres out.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, PPTB said:

Without a dedicated GPS

 

You didn't say what you aren't without.  So if I detail the best iPhone App that I've tested, and then you say you are also without iPhone, it's tougher to divine an answer for you. B)

 

Although IOS and Android have "GPS Averaging" Apps that are kind of close to what I could do with a dedicated GPS, I greatly prefer the ability of a Garmin GPS to take many waypoints and save them individually, and I select a candidate or two.  Each time I return to the intended cache spot, I check my selected waypoint to see if it's still a good one.  An average of many points is... SURPRISE!... an average. But the results are not terrible in GPS Averaging Apps if you're diligent enough to put the actual work into doing "waypoint averaging".  "GPS Averaging" isn't the best thing for everyone, it's actually more like a whole new level of complicated. “GPS Averaging” gives me coordinates I least like, but I'm not actually returning in all seasons, times of day, in all weather... it's a lot of work to do it, if one's plan is to do “GPS Averaging”. A suitable plan may be to instead take a whole bunch of individual points, and select the one that is most consistently close.

 

I absolutely never use Google Maps to find my cache coordinates, and anyway my caches tend to be among trees in a forest, so I can't just drop a pin.  If your waypoints are over 30 feet off all the time, how are you even finding caches?  Whatever you're doing that gets you finding the cache (really good hints?), that's how you set up your cache page.  If you can't get close by using methods that cause suitable precision (letting the GPS reading settle, choosing a likely point and testing it, whatever), finders may provide help, such as mentioning how far off you are.  Or they provide coordinate corrections.  If you see that in your cache logs, see what you can do to improve the coordinates.

 

Good luck!

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

If you don't trust your coordinates, then test them.

 

Enter your coordinates into your device, and then approach the cache location from at least 100ft/30m away. The arrow should point right at the cache location as you approach. Repeat the process, approaching the cache location from various directions, from at least 100ft/30m away each time. No matter which direction you approach from, the arrow should point right at the cache location.

 

If it doesn't, then adjust your coordinates until it does.

 

Bonus points for repeating the test on another day when the GPS satellites are in a different configuration.

 

Also, the Help Center article How to Get Accurate Coordinates should prove useful.
 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 3

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, niraD said:

Enter your coordinates into your device, and then approach the cache location from at least 100ft/30m away. The arrow should point right at the cache location as you approach. Repeat the process, approaching the cache location from various directions, from at least 100ft/30m away each time. No matter which direction you approach from, the arrow should point right at the cache location.

 

That's pretty much all I ever do, unless I'm playing around with “GPS Averaging” just to see what it does. :)

 

I allow my GPS to settle down, save a bunch of waypoints, pick one candidate, then approach the cache from a few directions to test it, and that's it. Done in a few minutes. When I re-visit my intended hiding spot, I again follow my chosen waypoint. I like to get it as close as I possibly can, but even that first try is almost always just fine for Geocaching purposes.

 

Not every “Phone” is ideal for precise waypoints, even when particular phones are compared. Some are faster than others, or jumpier than others. My iPad doesn't even have a GPS sensor, so it can be miles off, using what “Location Services” it has. You may get a dud, but the average smartphone is OK. You simply need to find a bunch of caches (or even set some waypoints and find them), until you get a feel for what your phone is telling you.

 

 

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, PPTB said:

I downloaded a gps coordinate app for cache placement and did the averaging trick... popped the resulting coord into Google maps and was off by probably 30 feet. Another coord from the same method was almost spot on. Wife showed me how to drop a pin on Google maps and pull the coord that way. 

 

Without a dedicated GPS, how do you get accurate coords for your cache hides???

 

I am using Garmin GLO to get accurate coordinates into my phone.

 

When using a GPS receiver don't forget to raise it over your head and point the integral antenna (front side) toward the sky. If you keep the device in front of you, your body prevents the best reception.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Keep in mind that Google Maps can be off, too. So you can look at it for a general idea (to make sure your coordinates aren't pointing to the other side of the world), but don't use it to get coordinates for your cache listing.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 3

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, PPTB said:

I downloaded a gps coordinate app for cache placement and did the averaging trick... popped the resulting coord into Google maps and was off by probably 30 feet. Another coord from the same method was almost spot on. Wife showed me how to drop a pin on Google maps and pull the coord that way. 

Without a dedicated GPS, how do you get accurate coords for your cache hides???

 

There's very-little difference in "accuracy" between phones and "dedicated" GPSrs today.  :)

 - And "accuracy" for civilian GPS is still around ten feet.  We find caches around twenty feet the norm in this hobby.

 

We mark a spot.   Go back to parking (or a good distance away if real far...), have a smoke, grab a drink, and head back by those coordinates. 

If real different, we'll mark the spot again.  If way-off, we might do that a coupla times.

We have a lotta iron ore, and hikers do call our area rocksylvania, so sometimes we'll even come back another day before we're comfortable to  present it for publish.

 

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, cerberus1 said:

There's very-little difference in "accuracy" between phones and "dedicated" GPSrs today.

 

Right, the same math works in both devices. Only relevant change is the quality of the input signal, not the CPU.

 

The antenna of iPhone looks this (the tiny part in tweetzers)

iphone_wifi_antenna_470x.png?v=151587134

 

 

Garmin GLO antenna looks like this (The huge blue part on the board)

glonassgarmin3.jpg

 

Do you know why Garmin is using so large part instead of the tiny replacement used in iPhone?

 

Let me guess... it makes this device work in woods. :D

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

 

When using a GPS receiver don't forget to raise it over your head and point the integral antenna (front side) toward the sky. If you keep the device in front of you, your body prevents the best reception.

 

I do this often but then on reading the above the thought came to me that searchers don't approach a cache holding their device at arms length in the air. So that raises a question in my mind that should I just hold my GPS normally as if searching?

BTW I use the waypoint averaging function of my Garmin (sometimes I'll use two at a time). I'll do several averaged readings then when I get home I manually write them all down and average the averages.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, colleda said:

... but then on reading the above the thought came to me that searchers don't approach a cache holding their device at arms length in the air. So that raises a question in my mind that should I just hold my GPS normally as if searching?

 

Don't know if this will help, but we have noticed (with a few handheld GPSrs), that if I keep my phone in a pants  pocket and the GPSr on a belt clip,  it'd be off sometimes a few feet.

Happens often enough that when hiking,  I've clipped the GPSr to a pack strap to be a bit further away.

Doesn't seem to happen when the GPSr is away from the phone, so we kinda ruled out the worn, old bod (even with rods n screws).     

 - So ... when we're nearing GZ, it's remove it from the belt clip,  and hold in my hand "normally",  whether searching or marking a waypoint.  :)

 - I'm definitely not gonna get caught walking around like I give up/should be arrested with my arms in the air.    :D

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, colleda said:

I do this often but then on reading the above the thought came to me that searchers don't approach a cache holding their device at arms length in the air. So that raises a question in my mind that should I just hold my GPS normally as if searching?

 

Only if you want some extra challenge :) I approach caches with my arm raised.

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎9‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 1:11 AM, arisoft said:

When using a GPS receiver don't forget to raise it over your head and point the integral antenna (front side) toward the sky. If you keep the device in front of you, your body prevents the best reception.

 

Keep in mind that the antenna isn't always in the same spot. For example, the Garmin Oregon 600 and 650 have the antenna on the back, so you'll get the best results if you hold it upside-down. I don't know what genius at Garmin thought that was a good idea...

  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, The A-Team said:

 

Keep in mind that the antenna isn't always in the same spot. For example, the Garmin Oregon 600 and 650 have the antenna on the back, so you'll get the best results if you hold it upside-down. I don't know what genius at Garmin thought that was a good idea...

 

It is easier to read when the display is towards the user when the device is above your head. But did they remember to add this important information in the owner's manual?

Edited by arisoft
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post

Except modern smartphones use a combination of different tools to assess location, from GNSS to masts to WiFi networks. 

 

Smartphone also tend to sacrifice some location accuracy by turning the GPS chip on and off. You can use apps which disable that, and use the GPS chip constantly, to get a better location.

 

FWIW, I now use the MyGPSLocation app on my Android phone which seems no more or less accurate than my very expensive Garmin. But the phone can save the co-ordinates.

  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, daddybeth said:

Except modern smartphones use a combination of different tools to assess location, from GNSS to masts to WiFi networks. 

 

Smartphone also tend to sacrifice some location accuracy by turning the GPS chip on and off. You can use apps which disable that, and use the GPS chip constantly, to get a better location.

 

FWIW, I now use the MyGPSLocation app on my Android phone which seems no more or less accurate than my very expensive Garmin. But the phone can save the co-ordinates.

 

I had an iPad for a couple of days before I figured out it had no GPS sensor.  I bought it on sale without realizing it had very different specs from more expensive versions.  It seemed very inaccurate, and very slow to update.  Yet it did get new coords as I drove.  Very tricky!  It was actually pretty hard to figure out that it wasn't using "GPS" for the location updates, when digging around in the device settings and Apps ("inaccurate and slow" doesn't tell me that it's not using GPS, it could well be that the thing is a dud).  This one uses "Location Services", and it decides what it will use.

 

So you'll never see me around here insisting that, collectively, "phones" work comparably to a handheld hiking GPS.  Not until we know more about the phone, and its installed Apps, and its hardware accessories.

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/21/2019 at 8:39 PM, kunarion said:

I had an iPad for a couple of days before I figured out it had no GPS sensor.  I bought it on sale without realizing it had very different specs from more expensive versions.  It seemed very inaccurate, and very slow to update.  Yet it did get new coords as I drove.  Very tricky!  It was actually pretty hard to figure out that it wasn't using "GPS" for the location updates, when digging around in the device settings and Apps ("inaccurate and slow" doesn't tell me that it's not using GPS, it could well be that the thing is a dud).  This one uses "Location Services", and it decides what it will use.

 

":Location Services" is just a wrapper.   It provides applications which need location information an interface which can be called without specifically getting data from a GPS, cell tower triangulation, or whatever a device is capable of using to determine location.   This sort of abstraction is common in software development.  The fact that it's called Location Services doesn't mean that it's *not* using an embedded GPS chip on the device.  On an Android device Location Services are somewhat configurable.  The end user might be able to set the location service to "low accuracy", which would not use an internal GPS even if one was available.  

 

Apparently "wifi" only version of iPads (at least earlier versions) did not include a GPS chip but "Wifi + Cellular" version did.  Both used Location Services to provide coordinates to applications which asked for them.

  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/14/2019 at 10:14 PM, PPTB said:

I downloaded a gps coordinate app for cache placement and did the averaging trick... popped the resulting coord into Google maps and was off by probably 30 feet. Another coord from the same method was almost spot on. Wife showed me how to drop a pin on Google maps and pull the coord that way. 

 

Without a dedicated GPS, how do you get accurate coords for your cache hides???

 

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/14/2019 at 10:14 PM, PPTB said:

I downloaded a gps coordinate app for cache placement and did the averaging trick... popped the resulting coord into Google maps and was off by probably 30 feet. Another coord from the same method was almost spot on. Wife showed me how to drop a pin on Google maps and pull the coord that way. 

 

Without a dedicated GPS, how do you get accurate coords for your cache hides???

 

 

I'm anal about getting exact coordinates. I usually do about 4 or 5 coord readings at the site, walk away and then slowly walk to the cache hide, wait a few minutes for the coords to register and then take a photo of them. At home on the computer I'll type in the coords on google map and see which ones point to the exact location. It's a bit time consuming but fun! I love logs that say the coords are perfect! 

  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

 

I'm anal about getting exact coordinates. I usually do about 4 or 5 coord readings at the site, walk away and then slowly walk to the cache hide, wait a few minutes for the coords to register and then take a photo of them. At home on the computer I'll type in the coords on google map and see which ones point to the exact location. It's a bit time consuming but fun! I love logs that say the coords are perfect! 


There are many techniques, but that’s a simple way to do it.  I return to the cache spot a couple of times to finish setting it up, and test my selected coords again. 
 

Yeah, the icing on the cake is seeing logs from finders say the coords are great.  Then I know it’s fine. :P

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, kunarion said:

Yeah, the icing on the cake is seeing logs from finders say the coords are great.  Then I know it’s fine. :P

 

 

Yes! 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

At home on the computer I'll type in the coords on google map and see which ones point to the exact location.

 

That doesn't help much for most of my hides like this one:

 

mapAndSatellite.jpg.c5cd4fd7eac239acb5355ffc60822d7d.jpg

 

Also be aware that there are places where the accuracy of the satellite images and maps isn't all that great, with discrepencies of 10 metres or more.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

Also be aware that there are places where the accuracy of the satellite images and maps isn't all that great, with discrepencies of 10 metres or more.

I've seen examples where the calibration of the satellite imagery was off by more than 30m/100ft. The satellite imagery is well calibrated in many places, but not everywhere. It should be used as a sanity check, not as a way to confirm the exact coordinates.

  • Upvote 4
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/20/2020 at 4:34 PM, barefootjeff said:

 

That doesn't help much for most of my hides like this one:

 

mapAndSatellite.jpg.c5cd4fd7eac239acb5355ffc60822d7d.jpg

 

Also be aware that there are places where the accuracy of the satellite images and maps isn't all that great, with discrepencies of 10 metres or more.

 

 

It has been accurate for me. I highly recommend it. 

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/20/2020 at 4:57 PM, niraD said:

I've seen examples where the calibration of the satellite imagery was off by more than 30m/100ft. The satellite imagery is well calibrated in many places, but not everywhere. It should be used as a sanity check, not as a way to confirm the exact coordinates.

 

 

I never had a problem. 

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post

Also good in our area.  Seems VERY rare that there are significant (like the example above) offset issues now except in very sparsely populated areas where the demand for corrective action might come up.

It's easy enough to check for yourself for any given general area to be sure there aren't major issues that would keep you from depending upon the satellite view if it helps.

 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

It has been accurate for me. I highly recommend it. 

 

Unless it's accurate for any cache, I don't recommend it.  There are some places where the satellite imagery is intentionally skewed but hundreds of feet.  I found a few caches in that area, one of which appeared on the map to be in the middle of a lake (it was a good 100' from the shore).  Although not the problem that it used to,  there used to be a lot of places in the world (this isn't just a game played in  urban/suburban America) where the resolution was so poor it was difficult to even identify features on the map as a building.  There also was an issue of cloud cover completely obscuring what one would see on the ground.  This is an old image be it shows an area in Costa Rica (in a rain forest) where a cache was placed.  The coordinates were actually pretty accurate but were about 30 feet from a 200' steep drop into a river bed.  

75mIzZB.gif

 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Obviously if the imagery isn't good to begin with in some area, it won't be very useful.

Each CO should perform their own test in their own area to see if this particular tool is dependable enough for use.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/22/2020 at 8:23 PM, NYPaddleCacher said:

Unless it's accurate for any cache, I don't recommend it.  There are some places where the satellite imagery is intentionally skewed but hundreds of feet. 

 

 

I highly recommend our method. We use it after taking the coords at the location. Never had a problem with this method. Sorry you do. 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, yes, Darin, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with using GE as a double check (particularly against fat fingering, which happens) when it is accurate in a CO's area.  Especially true when in urban canyons where reception can be very sketchy to begin with.

 

Please note that the OP said "I downloaded a gps coordinate app for cache placement and did the averaging trick..."

 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

 

I highly recommend our method. We use it after taking the coords at the location. Never had a problem with this method. Sorry you do. 

 

So essentially you're saying that because it's not a problem for you, it's not a problem.   There are a lot of caches hidden in densely wooded areas where satellite imagery would bot be sufficient to identify a location specific enough to derive an accurate set of  coordinates.  Not everyone geocaches the same way you do.   You don't seem to get that.

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, ecanderson said:

Yes, yes, Darin, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with using GE as a double check (particularly against fat fingering, which happens) when it is accurate in a CO's area.  Especially true when in urban canyons where reception can be very sketchy to begin with.

 

That's fine if you're just using it to make sure you're in the right general area, but using it to fine-tune the last few digits isn't a good idea. Here's another example of the discrepencies I recently came across when setting a location for an AL. The lookout on the edge of the cliff has a 360 degree view of the sky and my GPSr reading was rock-steady while standing there, yet the high resolution satellite imagery on the NSW Government's SIX Maps site put my coordinates about ten metres out. The plaque on the lookout is where the yellow arrow is pointing and the red flag is where SIX Maps thinks my coordinates are:

 

GerrinPointSIXMaps.jpg.11e3a9550f0edfef9ed9e5e182dc60e5.jpg

 

Google Earth's much lower resolution imagery seems more consistent with what I measured with my GPSr but it's a bit hard to tell on that just where the lookout is:

 

GerrinPointGoogleEarth.jpg.83a6fd1a12cad45725c68b8ef8c95449.jpg

 

In light of the discepency, I visited the location three times on three separate days, using both my GPSr and phone to make sure what I had was right and the error really was in the SIX Maps imagery. Curiously, the other locations in that AL appear to be within a couple of metres on SIX Maps so there's probably just an alignment error on one of their tiles but, with most of the area being either tree tops or ocean, it's a bit hard to spot.

 

SIXMapsWideView.jpg.82ddbbf71553ba290c90e2523ea9cd85.jpg

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Your complaint is with the NSW maps, then?  And GE demonstrated that your placement was as you had hoped? 

Granted, you say GE gives some problems in your area (obvious when there are clear, visual tile alignment issues), but it clearly worked well enough in this case.

I certainly never see any 10m errors anywhere around here, much less 30m errors, but they have clearly made some effort at tile alignment here, too.  One thing that users of GE far too often don't think to check is the imagery DATE, and perhaps their use (or disuse) of the history slider when viewing their bit of territory.  More recent imagery is far more likely to be quite accurate, not to mention at a better resolution.  An image that hasn't been updated for a decade or more is another story, and is more likely to contain errors.

 

Good alignment seems to happen anywhere that one finds more developed areas - possibly DUE to requests for better imagery products in those areas, they are also more frequently updated.

 

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, ecanderson said:

Your complaint is with the NSW maps, then?  And GE demonstrated that your placement was as you had hoped? 

Granted, you say GE gives some problems in your area (obvious when there are clear, visual tile alignment issues), but it clearly worked well enough in this case.

I certainly never see any 10m errors anywhere around here, much less 30m errors, but they have clearly made some effort at tile alignment here, too.  One thing that users of GE far too often don't think to check is the imagery DATE, and perhaps their use (or disuse) of the history slider when viewing their bit of territory.  More recent imagery is far more likely to be quite accurate, not to mention at a better resolution.  An image that hasn't been updated for a decade or more is another story, and is more likely to contain errors.

 

About two or three years ago, Google downgraded the resolution of their imagery in this area from something similar to what I get on SIXMaps to just a blur that's for the most part useless. To the north-east, there are still regions with higher resolution images but those are dated 2016, the latest (2020) ones are all low resolution. Even their historical images are now blurred so it's probably a marketing or "security" thing.

Edited by barefootjeff

Share this post


Link to post

Weird.  Wonder why they did that?  How do the GE images look in the more populated areas of NSW?

 

They're at fantastic resolution here.  You can identify very small features like a telephone pedestal (the little cans in yards) and individual overhead electrical wires,  and very easily follow very small dirt paths around natural areas.  It makes planning access to geocaches a heck of a lot easier, especially in the mountains where trail maps aren't always as complete as we'd like.  You could just about give names to most of the rocks, and this shot is randomly chosen way out in the boonies of a national forest.

 

EP.thumb.jpg.1e91400e1e3bf5e08fb2969cbbc75903.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, ecanderson said:

Weird.  Wonder why they did that?  How do the GE images look in the more populated areas of NSW?

 

It varies a lot. Here's the boundary north-east of here with the older high-resolution image on the right and the new improved version on the left:

 

GoogleSatDegradation.jpg.d9a704a650f7d552f2d4ffad1c700e3e.jpg

 

Sydney still has the higher resolution images, for example this is the ferry wharf at Watsons Bay on the harbour in which the name on the ferry is easily read and the shadows of the individual railings along the walkway are clearly visible.

 

WatsonsBay.jpg.c7c9bf16a5f7c557541d11f2d97110ae.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/24/2020 at 7:28 PM, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

So essentially you're saying that because it's not a problem for you, it's not a problem.   There are a lot of caches hidden in densely wooded areas where satellite imagery would bot be sufficient to identify a location specific enough to derive an accurate set of  coordinates.  Not everyone geocaches the same way you do.   You don't seem to get that.

 

Not at all. It shouldn't be a problem for anyone. It takes skill and a good eye. Perseverance. You don't seem to get that. 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:
On 10/25/2020 at 10:28 AM, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

So essentially you're saying that because it's not a problem for you, it's not a problem.   There are a lot of caches hidden in densely wooded areas where satellite imagery would bot be sufficient to identify a location specific enough to derive an accurate set of  coordinates.  Not everyone geocaches the same way you do.   You don't seem to get that.

 

Not at all. It shouldn't be a problem for anyone. It takes skill and a good eye. Perseverance. You don't seem to get that. 

 

Okay, with your skill and good eye you should be able to pinpoint where on this satellite image the cave is...

 

CaveLocation.thumb.jpg.f946ffb268414b7e8c1788104cb64077.jpg

 

I'll even give you a hint - it's somewhere near the middle.

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

Okay, with your skill and good eye you should be able to pinpoint where on this satellite image the cave is...

 

Dear, that went over your head. My coords are perfect due to my method for my cache hides. The original CO of this post was asking for advice. I gave her my method. It works. So, where are your coords?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Surprised 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

Dear, that went over your head. My coords are perfect due to my method for my cache hides. The original CO of this post was asking for advice. I gave her my method. It works. So, where are your coords?

 

The coordinates I took with my GPSr for the cave are where I've indicated with the arrow. So am I close?

 

image.png.daf9c9182cc58fea3ce75a4f008a5ffc.png

 

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, barefootjeff said:

 

The coordinates I took with my GPSr for the cave are where I've indicated with the arrow. So am I close?

 

image.png.daf9c9182cc58fea3ce75a4f008a5ffc.png

 

 

Oh, gee. Guess you need to use another method. 

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Oh, gee. Guess you need to use another method. 

 

That's what everyone's been trying to tell you. Your method might be fine in urban streetscapes, assuming the satellite images are correctly aligned (which is a big if in many parts of the world), but the satellite's of no use at all in forested areas where all you can see are the tree-tops. Most of my hides are in places just like that one.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

That's what everyone's been trying to tell you. Your method might be fine in urban streetscapes, assuming the satellite images are correctly aligned (which is a big if in many parts of the world), but the satellite's of no use at all in forested areas where all you can see are the tree-tops. Most of my hides are in places just like that one.

 

 

I don't care what "everyone" was trying to tell me. The CO asked how to get accurate coords and I told her my method. It works for me. I then post the coords with my cache hide. No one had a problem with finding the hides. 

 

Edited by HunterandSamuel
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, HunterandSamuel said:

Oh, gee. Guess you need to use another method. 

 

That's pretty much all of mine, obscured by tree cover.  I have two models of handheld GPS, so that might help me be confident of my coords.  But while setting up my new cache, if either GPS returns me to the same spot within 10 feet or so, it's probably right.

 

The OP didn't mention how they are getting coordinates, but did mention "averaging", which is not something to play around with, on the assumption that a bunch of points that are by definition NOT where the cache is, will magically be accurate if averaged.  They are the average of a lot of points, and the real way to perform "averaging" is an art and very technical.  It's not a button click and done.  And after a ton of work, you get a point that you could have gotten quickly as I (and others in this thread) already mentioned.

 

But the OP had a point that may be 30 feet off, and another that seems closer.  Depending on the cache, either one may be fine for Geocaching purposes.

  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

 

I don't care what "everyone" was trying to tell me. The CO asked how to get accurate coords and I told her my method. It works for me. 

 

Fine, but you then went on to say "It shouldn't be a problem for anyone. It takes skill and a good eye. Perseverance. You don't seem to get that." You don't seem to get that it doesn't work for everyone. It won't work for you either if at some time in the future you go to place a cache in a forest or in an area where the satellite tiles aren't accurately aligned.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, kunarion said:

But the OP had a point that may be 30 feet off, and another that seems closer.  Depending on the cache, either one may be fine for Geocaching purposes.

 

True. But I'm anal about my coords. I personally would not want my cache to be 30 feet off. 

  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

You don't seem to get that it doesn't work for everyone. It won't work for you either if at some time in the future you go to place a cache in a forest or in an area where the satellite tiles aren't accurately aligned.

 

I think you are putting too much thought into my method. If someone tries it and it doesn't work for them, then so be it. Give it a rest. 

  • Funny 1
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

True. But I'm anal about my coords. I personally would not want my cache to be 30 feet off. 

 

My first cache was likely no more than 4 feet from the actual coordinates.  I tried everything I could think of, plus I passed the spot every day as I walked in the park, and checked it frequently.  Just for gee-whiz.  Nobody cares if it's 30 feet off or "0" feet off, at least not when there are only so many likely spots upon arrival, plus a description and hint.  Just ensure there's an extra distance cushion, so there's no saturation issue later.

 

So it's possible that I'll find it anyway.  But if it IS 30 feet off or more, I probably won't say in my log that the coords are great. :P

 

 

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, kunarion said:

 

My first cache was likely no more than 4 feet from the actual coordinates.  I tried everything I could think of, plus I passed the spot every day as I walked in the park, and checked it frequently.  Just for gee-whiz.  Nobody cares if it's 30 feet off or "0" feet off, at least not when there are only so many likely spots upon arrival, plus a description and hint.  Just ensure there's an extra distance cushion, so there's no saturation issue later.

 

So it's possible that I'll find it anyway.  But if it IS 30 feet off or more, I probably won't say in my log that the coords are great. :P

 

 

 

In my area, people care about accurate coords and if they are off, they say it in their log. It's equivalent to a NM. lol 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

×
×
  • Create New...