tried out new eTrex Venture

[Guest Cold Chuck]

My new gps just arrived earlier today. I promptly stabbed batteries in it and upgraded version 2.10 to 2.24 and took off for a seach of first cache. While enroute to the cache, I am a right handed person and not used to having important controls on "wrong side" of the Venture. Accuracy was 13 feet without WAAS. I havent tried WAAS setting yet. I wished Garmin would redesign the layout. Im tired of flipping though the pages to get what I wanted everytime I powered it on. Also, I planned to junk the serial interface cable in favor of Pfread cable. Another thing about the "click stick" or joy stick is that it looks awfully fragile (the lack of better word for it). I worry about it more than any other items. Since I am a newbie and I didnt have anything to compare against, I thought it offers the most bang for a buck anyone could ask for. Just my .02 cents on Venture.

 

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

Cold Chuck of Colorado

[Guest Cold Chuck]

Update on eTrex Venture testing. I finally got to test WAAS feature on the top of biggest hill in Colorado Springs. Nope. Zip. Glitch. I will try to get on the top of Pikes Peak and see if I get WAAS signal (14,000+ feet elevation). Will post it.

 

Accuracy is superb without WAAS. average reading was 13 to 7 feet! Still the click stick concerns me....

 

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

Cold Chuck of Colorado

[Guest bob_renner]

When you're trying to get WAAS to work make sure you have the unit in Normal mode and not Battery Save mode (and of course WAAS enabled).

 

Bob

[Guest Cold Chuck]

Of course, I checked the battery mode. I am not recieving any WAAS Satellite on the top of big big hill in Colorado Springs. But, I'll try it on a MOUNTAIN (Pikes Peak 14,000+ feet). Will let you know.

 

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

Cold Chuck of Colorado

[Guest jeremy]

Ok. Heard something interesting.

 

Apparently the WAAS satellites are circling around the equator. So if you're in a mountainous region (such as the Pacific Northwest, or obviously Colorado) it is rare you will get a satellite lock on a WAAS satellite, if ever. Even standard tree cover would be enough to block the signal.

 

However, if you are in a relatively flat location (like Arizona) you may be able to acquire a line of sight to the satellite.

 

So for most purposes, I might as well turn off WAAS.

 

Jeremy

[Guest bob_renner]

Before your GPS receiver will use any of the WAAS satellites you need to have it download the almanac data from them. There's a good explanation of this by Dale DePriest at

http://celia.mehaffey.com/dale/dgps.htm

The procedure you should follow is listed about half way into the article.

 

The main thing to remember is that the initial acquisition procedure may take 30 minutes or more. Be patient.

 

Bob

 

[This message has been edited by bob_renner (edited 22 June 2001).]

[Guest bob_renner]

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeremy:

...However, if you are in a relatively flat location (like Arizona) ... Jeremy

---

Apparently you have never been to Arizona. We may not have the mountains like CO, but I would not describe AZ as "relatively flat".

 

Bob

[Guest jeremy]

That's true. It isn't flat. I guess in my mind I was thinking about how, in Seattle, we have high mountains on all sides, and in Colorado (where Cold Chuck is), he has a similar issue. Being farther north the curvature of the earth reduces the ability to get clear signals line of sight.

 

Jeremy

 

Jeremy

[Guest bob_renner]

The latitude and longitude are the biggest factors. The satellites are geostationary over the equator, as are the TV satellites. If you know of anyone with a satellite TV dish, you could check what elevation they have their dish set at to get an idea of how close to the horizon those satellites are. There is probably some information on Joe MeHaffey's web site (http://joe.mehaffey.com/) somewhere that can tell you what az/el you need for the WAAS satellites given your lat/long.

 

However, I have heard of people in Seattle having success with WAAS.

 

Bob

[Guest bob_renner]

Cold Chuck,

 

Apparantly the WAAS satellite over the Atlantic (PRN 122 or Garmin #35) was out of service on June 21. This is probably the only one you can see from your location in CO. I think the Pacific satellite (PRN 134 or Garmin #47) is too far west for you to see (at least by the chart on Dale DePriest's info page. http://celia.mehaffey.com/dale/dgps.htm

 

Check out the Historical information on the Raytheon WAAS page for the date and time of the outage.

http://wwws.raytheontands.com/waas/#SCHEDULE

 

Bob

[Guest Cold Chuck]

Well, folks. I understand how WAAS operates. Since, I never heard anyone from Rocky Mountain region (Utah, New Mexico, Wyoming, the like) was able to get those type of signal. I could be wrong. The purpose to why I posted the WAAS aquistion "problem" was to inform others who are considering certain GPS with WAAS capability what to expect. Now, I still haven't gone up the "America's Purple Mountain" just yet. Checking WAAS sat maps of coverage, it seems that Eastern Sat get better coverage than Western one (like Bob said). But like Bob said, at that time of testing, the eastern one was out of commission. I checked the site and it did not say when it will be back online. So, in nutshell, a further testing is required before drawing conclusion, folks!

 

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

Cold Chuck of Colorado

[Guest Cold Chuck]

Well, after visiting Paul Barclay's stash today, I tried on WAAS. I GOT WAAS!!!! I was on the top of May Peak (8,500 ft elevation on eastern side of the Rockies. After loaded the almanic and other junk, it shows that I've got "D" letters in the bars on all the birds that I was getting (except for number 31 and 41 which is way over in the west and is blocked by the mountains). Accurancy is still the same...12 to 6 feet. I turned off WAAS. Didnt need it right now. Still learning right now, folks.

 

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

Cold Chuck of Colorado

[Guest myotis]

I've used the WAAS here in flat Illinois with lots of sucess. I've found it to generally be accurate to about 5 feet. I have a point that I have marked with a WAAS reading. I have been back to that point about 30 times and the reading is always within 10 feet when I have a WAAS fix. When I do not, it has been off as much as 25 feet.

 

I've been able to get a reading in the woods several times. If you have a small opening in the trees in the right direction, you can get a reading.

 

The key to using the WAAS is knowing where the WAAS Satlite is and pointing the GPS at it. In IL, you point to the SE. If you stand still for a couple of minutes, you can usually get a good WAAS reading. Once you get the reading, you have to keep the unit pointed in the right direction.

 

I have also got a WAAS reading in the car numerous times.

 

The accuracy reading on the Vista does not appear to take into account the WAAS reading. Many times I go to the point I have marked and it has the Ds and says it is accurate to 20 or 30 feet, but it actually is within 10 feet.

[Guest Cold Chuck]

lthough its accuracy has "slightly" improved than regular feature. I dont know what I miss anyway. I dont really know whats all hoopola over this.

 

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

Cold Chuck of Colorado

[Guest bunkerdave]

Ditto Chuck.

 

Got the WAAS upgrade as soon as it was released about a month ago, and can usually get the western bird (at least that is where it shows up on my sat status screen) wherever go. (Utah) Have noticed some improvement in accuracy, but it is not consistent enough to really be useful. Most caches with and without WAAS I was getting down to less than 10 feet with, anyway, so the whole thing has been kind of a let-down. Maybe our little handhelds just aren't sensitive enough, or at least mine. Anyone know of there is an external antenna for the Mag. Map330?