Has GPS accuracy gotten worse in the last 10 years?

[+jd350az]

I started geocaching back in 2006. Lots of fun with my old Magellan and printing out cache descriptions. From what I remember the GPS seemed a lot more accurate back then. It would get me within a few feet of the cache and depending on how small or how well it was hidden it would take some looking but eventually find it. I got away from it for  probably the last 12 years or so and recently got back into it and figured the phone would be much better these days. My phone won't even update that close and usually is stuck in a spot until I'm 50 feet away then it will update. So narrowing down coords is impossible and pretty much rely on the map image and trying to figure out which tree it's marked closest to. Is there a way to get better GPS updating on the phone? Samsung Galaxy 23 ultra? 

 

So I figured I would try an actual GPS unit again and ordered a Garmin etrex 22x. It seems better and shows every foot updating but I still had FTF on caches that were supposed to be easy and the one I did find was showing me 15' away from the listed coordinates. Has GPS lost accuracy or is there something off in calibration or has it always been this way and I'm just misremembering how it was in 06-12? It's fun either way but just seemed different now. 

[+cerberus1]

If I'm 23' accuracy I'm okay with it, and at 15' I'm a happy camper.    Sorry JD but I think you're "misremembering"...   

Cell phones today are just as accurate as a handheld GPSr.  I still use a long-discontinued GPSr.

Maybe it's just me, but I like to use a gizmo that does one thing well...

[+Atlas Cached]

Didn't matter how accurate your GPSr is when so many cache hiders are not taking the time to collect good coordinates with good equipment for their hides. If they are off by 30' (or more) when they publish,  you are likely to be even farther away when you think you are at GZ.

[+jd350az]

Well that's weird, how can phone GPS be just as accurate when it doesn't even show you moving? My gpsr shows me moving constantly. Phone will show me stopped them update with a location 50 feet away then go back and it stays there until I pass 40' or so then show me back in the original location. And I also went to a geocache event back in 2012 or so and one of the events was one person went around a list of coordinates, like 10-15 all within 100 yards of each other and we each went around with our GPSr and marked it with flags and the original went back and gave a prize for the closest. We were all within 5-7' and the winner was within a foot and they weren't even the same brand GPS. Almost every winner was different but they were all close. Just seems impossible that was +/- 20' accuracy back then. I mean it wasn't perfect back then but it seemed I was always within 5' or so, not 20' away. I don't know how you find a bolt head micro cache when it could be anywhere within a 50 foot radius and hundreds of bolts 🤣

[+barefootjeff]

5 hours ago, jd350az said:

My phone won't even update that close and usually is stuck in a spot until I'm 50 feet away then it will update.

 

I rarely use my phone for geocaching, preferring the Garmin, but on the rare occasions I have, I've also observed that problem, although it's not consistent and doesn't always do it. One that particularly comes to mind was when I was planning some virtual waypoints for a multi and realised when I got to the location that I'd forgotten to bring the Garmin, so I recorded my preliminary coordinates on my phone so I could at least make a start on the cache page. Two of the waypoints, about 14 metres apart, were recorded with the same coordinates on my phone, fortunately I noticed at the time and was able to correct it by walking a good distance away from each one and coming back. The same thing probably happened on a multi published by another local cacher, as two of her waypoints, from memory about 20 metres apart, had almost the same coordinates.

 

There's probably some "clever" bit of code in either the app or the phone's GPS service that thinks it can save a bit of battery life by not taking readings when it thinks you're stationary.

[+SpiritGuide]

50 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

There's probably some "clever" bit of code in either the app or the phone's GPS service that thinks it can save a bit of battery life by not taking readings when it thinks you're stationary.

 

Exactly, app developers each choose how they want to implement location services from the underlying device using a combination of network and GPS positioning with battery saving techniques. Different apps on the same phone can show different location results.

[+Goldenwattle]

I find the GPS more accurate. I have experienced that problem often with phones. They don't change unless you cover distance. In fact, it seems phones are being used not for GPS tracking, but for looking at the satellite views of the map to find the cache. I'm in Singapore at present, and that's exactly how I am finding it. Although here often a GPS can't be used, as caches are often in building basements, or on level six, etc. Even if outside, between tall buildings a GPS struggles. A whole new world of caching. Look at the satellite map to find the cache I'm told.

[+Viajero Perdido]

1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

I have experienced that problem often with phones. They don't change unless you cover distance

 

The post before yours is the winning answer.  It's the app's fault, not the phone.  Try another app.  The one I use has no such problem.

 

To the OP's question...  Given how many useful GNSS systems are now overhead (GPS is just one), accuracy should be getting better for anybody with modern equipment.  My phone gets 28 satellites on a good day, from Europe, China, Russia, even USA.  And it rocks.  Current Garmins might too, dunno.

 

Look for "Quad GNSS" or similar when shopping for your next phone.  (Fashion phones might not specify this, philistines.)  A rugged model never hurts too; then you can use it for everything.

 

Edited August 12 by Viajero Perdido
Tangent

[+Goldenwattle]

1 hour ago, Viajero Perdido said:

A rugged model never hurts too; then you can use it for everything.

I prefer a GPS because it fits in my hand better. Will fit in jeans pockets. My phone won't. Other reasons too, but this has been mentioned before.

[+barefootjeff]

59 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

2 hours ago, Viajero Perdido said:

A rugged model never hurts too; then you can use it for everything.

I prefer a GPS because it fits in my hand better. Will fit in jeans pockets. My phone won't. Other reasons too, but this has been mentioned before.

 

I prefer a dedicated GPSr for various reasons, including the daylight-readable screen that doesn't have to be constantly woken up, the scale on the map which I constantly look at to get a sense of how far I am from the next navigation feature (track junction, creek crossing, etc.), its ruggedness (I'm always dropping things onto rocks), its independence from any mobile data access* and, with the GPSMAP 67 I bought last year, the incredibly long battery life between charges. GPS accuracy may or may not be better than a modern phone, but that's way down my list.

 

*Yes, I know about off-line lists and all that, but the last time I tried to use the phone app to look at a photo on the cache page, I had no data access there and the app logged me out with the dreaded "Expired session" message.

[robertlipe]

"There's probably some "clever" bit of code in either the app or the phone's GPS service that thinks it can save a bit of battery life by not taking readings when it thinks you're stationary.

I've worked with - and on- that clever code. These days it's a feature in the correlators called "static navigation" that can be enabled, disabled, or ignored.

A GPS never knows where it is. I knows within N% confidence that it' somewhere inside a circle of R meters. As the ionosphere changes and the constellation moves, that circle and its assumed position in the point cloud will change. If a GPS in your car reported your position as moving back 2m NNE this second, 3NW this second, 5m SE this second, and so on while you were waiting at a stoplight, you would through it through the window, especially if that drift took you into an adjacent land and the girl in the box shouted out "rerouting1". As some point, MOST users want 'stopped' to mean stopped. If you're a geocacher looking for a tube stuck in the ground (ew!)  you may actually want that, but most civilians don't. That mode is called Constant Navigation.

I didn't know what it was called when I wrote this page 18 years ago (I wasn't even sure it was still public, actually) but I graphed three of the most popular GPS receivers in .. 2006(!) I sat a GPS 60Cs (the one with the stupid chip that would lose lock in tall grass) the 60CSx and the Magellan Explorist 600 and collected the location that it reported to the computer over the course of many hours. The 60CS basically didn't know where it was. The 60CSx of that era roamed all over, traveling over a mile while..sitting at my desk while the Magellan - which was famous at the time for doing a bit of aggressive position averaging - moved less than 1/5th of that, with about half of that in one short burst. Those last two actually used the same GPS chip, the SirfStar III, and I now believe that one used static navigation setting and one used constant navigation.

https://www.mtgc.org//robertlipe/showdown/index.html   

I think Atlas' answer is probably the "right" one, IF there is an actual measurable difference. In the old days, people were more meticulous and more "gadgety" in respectful use of their equipment. Now, it's taken for granted and it's much more likely to talk up to a rock, drop a box behind it, snap 'mark' and walk away instead of taking 30 minutes of averaged locations as was common when coordinates came in roman numerals.

As for the tease at the end that was fashionable in that era, I lost interest in caring about such things and was still able to go outside and play instead...

[+luvvinbird]

On 8/11/2024 at 6:43 PM, Atlas Cached said:

Didn't matter how accurate your GPSr is when so many cache hiders are not taking the time to collect good coordinates with good equipment for their hides. If they are off by 30' (or more) when they publish,  you are likely to be even farther away when you think you are at GZ.

So true. When I see a new geocache published, I immediately check to see how many finds and hides the CO has. It seems many newbie cachers are posting coordinates that are nowhere near the container. I suggest reviewers take a few extra minutes to ask how coordinates were gathered and if they were tested.