eTrex Vista Averaging?

[+Firefishe]

Just a quick question on the Vista.

 

Does it have waypoint averaging?

[+park2]

Nope

 

(Quick answer )

[+park2]

Nope

 

(Quick answer )

[+Firefishe]

quote:

---

Originally posted by park2:

Nope

 

(Quick answer )

---

 

Well, I'll be! No averaging? Could've sworn I'd read somewhere that it did!

[+Firefishe]

quote:

---

Originally posted by park2:

Nope

 

(Quick answer )

---

 

Well, I'll be! No averaging? Could've sworn I'd read somewhere that it did!

[+Firefishe]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firefishe:

quote:

---

Originally posted by park2:

Nope

 

(Quick answer )

---

 

Well, I'll be! No averaging? Could've sworn I'd read somewhere that it did!

---

 

Ummm..is this really that important for geocaching? or anything else for that matter? I'm taking a serious look at the Lowrance GlobalMap 100.

[+Firefishe]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firefishe:

quote:

---

Originally posted by park2:

Nope

 

(Quick answer )

---

 

Well, I'll be! No averaging? Could've sworn I'd read somewhere that it did!

---

 

Ummm..is this really that important for geocaching? or anything else for that matter? I'm taking a serious look at the Lowrance GlobalMap 100.

[Atilla the Pun]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firefishe:

 

Ummm..is this really that important for geocaching? or anything else for that matter? I'm taking a serious look at the Lowrance GlobalMap 100.

---

 

My understanding from reading all these forums (I don't own a GPS yet) is that you only need averaging for when you place a cache. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Thanks,

 

AtP

[+Vertigo]

It's a good idea to average when placing a cache, but not totaly necciary. There are other methods to do if you cant (i.e. eTrex), but I dont think it's as good as averaging.

 

You dont need averaging at all for hunting, only placing a cache.

[+Firefishe]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Atilla the Pun:

quote:

---

_Originally posted by Firefishe:_

 

Ummm..is this really that important for geocaching? or anything else for that matter? I'm taking a serious look at the Lowrance GlobalMap 100.

---

 

My understanding from reading all these forums (I don't own a GPS yet) is that you only need averaging for when you place a cache. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Thanks,

 

AtP

---

 

Well, I am going to be both Seeking *and* Placing geocaches eventually. I'm getting close to having enough $$$ to buy a first--and only-one-for-a-while unit. Therefore, my first purchase has to do, in a word, *everything*.

 

I've been looking up and down the feature list of all the units available. I thought I might just as well go with the GPSmap 76S that's out now, but I just read on gpsinformation's (Yezel & Co.), that the GPSmap 76S is not as accurate for caching as the Vista--primarily due to the Vista's horizontal antenna alignment. But without averaging, I wonder if perhaps another gps is the answer now. I'm just not sure.

[+park2]

I'd agree it is more important for placing.

 

Hmm, this is where my Mag knowledgelessness may be showing up, I was thinking of the setting on some Garmins where when you are defining a waypoint (such as a cache), you can tell it to average for as long as you want to stand there and it comes up with a pretty good answer.

 

Did I read something about Mags that say hey average as you are finding a cache?

 

On the Garmins, averaging is only when making a waypoint and the time it would take to define and average a bunch of points when walking towards a cache would be better spent just looking under rocks.

 

Further, the usual point to ponder: You can't get more accurate then the reading taken when placing the cache and who knows how well they were taken when the cache was placed? Maybe the placer didn't use his GPS to the fullest of its abilities, maybe it couldn't average, etc.

 

I'm more than happy with my Vista and my older G12. I'm sure Maggies would say the same about theirs.

[Kerry.]

Why would one want averaging for anyway

 

Cheers, Kerry.

 

I never get lost everybody keeps telling me where to go

[Kerry.]

Why would one want averaging for anyway

 

Cheers, Kerry.

 

I never get lost everybody keeps telling me where to go

[+apersson850]

No, why? Since almost all studies show that averaging doesn't add any precision, now when SA is gone.

 

I think looking at the sat page, to assure that you have as many sats received as possible, is just as good.

 

 

Anders

[jfitzpat]

I'd have to second (uh, third) Kerry. There are many threads on the headaches of averaging when searching, and, as Anders points out, the hard evidence suggests averaging is typically less accurate than single point sampling.

 

-jjf

[+MrGigabyte]

Kerry, Anders, jfitzpat are spot on. All averaging is going to do for a novice is average bad positions based on bad geometry. It may be an average, but it is still wrong.

 

Keep an eye on the satellite page. Wait until you have the best reception and geometry and set a waypoint. If you have to move 5m to get out of the tree shadow, then do so. Moving that 5m may increase your accuracy by a factor of 10.

 

Now keep watching the satellite page for as long as you can stay there. Take more waypoints. The satellites will move 30 degrees of arc in an hour. This will make a huge difference to your accuracy. Just wait, be patient, improve your view of the sky and take multiple waypoints when the satellite view is good.

 

Now, just zoom in on your map screen on yor GPSr and manually select the best position from the grouping of waypints you recorded.

 

[Kerry.]

Planning to be at location when conditions are most favourable will give a position much more reliability and confidence rather than any averaging because as someone has already mentioned averaging bad data will only produce a bad average.

 

Sometimes not always possible to plan ahead but at least one then knows when is the best (better) times to be at a certain location and just as important (sometimes even more so) when it's not.

 

Maybe a simple planning package is something the site could look into providing? Most packages unfortuneately are not freeware and one also requires a regular updated almanac (generally on a daily basis is usefull).

 

Cheers, Kerry.

 

I never get lost everybody keeps telling me where to go

[Kerry.]

Planning to be at location when conditions are most favourable will give a position much more reliability and confidence rather than any averaging because as someone has already mentioned averaging bad data will only produce a bad average.

 

Sometimes not always possible to plan ahead but at least one then knows when is the best (better) times to be at a certain location and just as important (sometimes even more so) when it's not.

 

Maybe a simple planning package is something the site could look into providing? Most packages unfortuneately are not freeware and one also requires a regular updated almanac (generally on a daily basis is usefull).

 

Cheers, Kerry.

 

I never get lost everybody keeps telling me where to go

[+Renegade Knight]

Get a Garmin GPS V. Averaging, Mapping, Routing, Better antanai, and longer batter life (by using twice as many!). It doesn't have an altimeter and an electronic compas. I've seen the compas in operation and it was handy while wading through 4 feet of snow, but generally I can get withing 12' before having to do the hula. When you are that close, the Hula doesn't help much anyway.

[+Firefishe]

Wow! Great advice, all! Thanks for the input.

 

The part about waiting for as many satellite fixes as possible, taking multiple waypoints, zooming in, then selecting the most appropriate one was the best for me.

 

I really do like the sound of it, it sounds like it'd work great.

 

As to the GPS-V. No doubt! But the thing is $419 and that's a bit steep for me at the moment. I can get the GPSmap 76 for $319, but for $290, I get 24mb of memory, the altimeter and active compass, although the GPSmap 76 has averaging, tide data, and the like. I may just wait for the GPSmap 76S, although I just read a blurb on gpsinformation.com that said it wasn't as accurate as the Vista for Geocaching, due to the vertical polarization of the antenna on the map76S as apposed to the horizontal polarization on the Vista. This sounds kinda fishy to Fishey.

 

Any thoughts?

[Kerry.]

Since the discussion is about averaging (and assumably improving accuracy) why would anybody prefer a GPS-V over say a GPS76 or a GPS12 or a 48 or a ....

 

As far as polarization of antenna's goes, if either is not used correctly they are both going to be as bad as each other.

 

Cheers, Kerry.

 

I never get lost everybody keeps telling me where to go

[Kerry.]

Since the discussion is about averaging (and assumably improving accuracy) why would anybody prefer a GPS-V over say a GPS76 or a GPS12 or a 48 or a ....

 

As far as polarization of antenna's goes, if either is not used correctly they are both going to be as bad as each other.

 

Cheers, Kerry.

 

I never get lost everybody keeps telling me where to go