Would Somebody Help Me, Please

[+tastom]

Hi to you all

 

I'm about to set up my first cache (actually multi-cache). At each wpt I let the GPSr avarage the coordinates for about ten minutes, until there is almost no change to the .00x. Then I mark it, walk away to another wpt and then return to the initial wpt, just to find a completely different reading. If I dare to walk away for a second time and then return, I even get a third reading!!

 

I tried to initialize the unit at each wpt, before averaging, and then do the same without initializing. Again, every single time I get different coordinates.

 

I have everywhere a quite strong signal of at least 5 satelites (uo to 8) and I try also to find the best sat geometry. It just doesn't help. What am I doing wrong?

 

I wouldn't mind, if the difference in readings would only be .00X, but it is mostly a difference of 0.0XX or even .XXX

 

What can I do to solve this problem?

 

Thanx for your help?

 

tastom

[+Geo Leo]

What gpsr do you have?

[Earthdog Patrick]

How accurate has your GPSr been on the caches you've found?

[+briansnat]

I'm about to set up my first cache (actually multi-cache). At each wpt I let the GPSr avarage the coordinates for about ten minutes, until there is almost no change to the .00x. Then I mark it, walk away to another wpt and then return to the initial wpt, just to find a completely different reading. If I dare to walk away for a second time and then return, I even get a third reading!!

 

If you're using a Magellan, it might be because your GPS is still averaging and hasn't caught up yet when you return.

[CoyoteRed]

If it's a Magellan here's what you do to get pretty good coords:

 

- Keep the unit stationary for about 5 minutes. Put it down or hang it from something so you don't have to hold it.

 

- Break the averaging by moving it just enough to do so. Usually about 18 to 24 inches.

 

-Put it back in the same spot and let it sit. 10 minutes is generally long enough with open sky, but it doesn't hurt to let it sit longer. You will need to let it sit for a while longer with cover.

 

- Mark it.

 

Walk off, return, and repeat to check.

 

I've been getting .001 max difference off in the few checks I've done in my backyard using this method. I also use WAAS.

[+Renegade Knight]

I'm about to set up my first cache (actually multi-cache). At each wpt I let the GPSr avarage the coordinates for about ten minutes, until there is almost no change to the .00x. Then I mark it, walk away to another wpt and then return to the initial wpt, just to find a completely different reading. If I dare to walk away for a second time and then return, I even get a third reading!!

 

If you're using a Magellan, it might be because your GPS is still averaging and hasn't caught up yet when you return.

Bingo. If you have a magellan this is most likely the issue. Given the two coordinates you have I'd trust the one where you let it sit and average for a while.

[Swagger]

If it's a Magellan here's what you do to get pretty good coords:

 

- Keep the unit stationary for about 5 minutes. Put it down or hang it from something so you don't have to hold it.

 

- Break the averaging by moving it just enough to do so. Usually about 18 to 24 inches.

 

-Put it back in the same spot and let it sit. 10 minutes is generally long enough with open sky, but it doesn't hurt to let it sit longer. You will need to let it sit for a while longer with cover.

 

- Mark it.

 

Walk off, return, and repeat to check.

 

I've been getting .001 max difference off in the few checks I've done in my backyard using this method. I also use WAAS.

Geez, what a hassle!

 

When I mark a wpt with my Garmin, I just mark it and move along. I've used averaging once or twice, but it doesn't seem to matter much - the coords are always good.

[thorin]

I agree. What a painful process. Makes me glad I went Garmin. Though I'm sure for every person that's had trouble with a Magellan there's also someone that had trouble with their Garmin <shrug>

 

Thorin

[CoyoteRed]

Geez, what a hassle!

When I mark a wpt with my Garmin, I just mark it and move along. I've used averaging once or twice, but it doesn't seem to matter much - the coords are always good.

All I got to say is, "Would you rather have this..." (Note unit used in middle bottom of plot.)

 

...or this?"

 

Seems like a no brainer in this aspect of GPS use. (These are linked from here and the reviews on that site is what prompted me to buy the ST while I had originally been leaning towards the Garmin.)

 

Plus, on site, if I'm following the arrow directly in, experience tells me to slow. I can search with my eyes for tattletale clues for the location of the cache. Barring that, I can use the unit to zero in to pretty darn close to where the hider's unit said it is. Then I only have to contend with his accuracy.

 

(Ah, the forever ongoing debate on the better GPS. )

[+SnowLeopard]

When I've placed caches, I've taken to marking several waypoints using the methods above, and then repeating the process when I go to do cache maintenance. I track each waypoint and average the total.

[+The Commissar!]

IMHO, generally what CR said.

 

If when you go back and let the unit average again you should get very close readings but if you just take a "spot" reading when you walk back it may or may not match up closely with the averaged coordinates.

 

I average all my readings. When hunting a cache, If I don't find it fairly quickly, I will set my Meridian down and let it average and see where it points...sometimes very different from the spot readings. Plus with a magellan you have to contend with the slingshot factor when moving and stopping...

 

Hope this helps

[+tastom]

What gpsr do you have?

I have a Magellan Meridian Platinum

[+tastom]

How accurate has your GPSr been on the caches you've found?

When caching I get an accuracy of about 6 to 16 meters (18 to 44 feet), which is not too good

[+tastom]

I'm about to set up my first cache (actually multi-cache). At each wpt I let the GPSr avarage the coordinates for about ten minutes, until there is almost no change to the .00x. Then I mark it, walk away to another wpt and then return to the initial wpt, just to find a completely different reading. If I dare to walk away for a second time and then return, I even get a third reading!!

 

If you're using a Magellan, it might be because your GPS is still averaging and hasn't caught up yet when you return.

How long should I let the GPSr let do the averaging? I was told to do it for about 10 minutes. If I leave it "unattended" for hours, it still would be averaging, should it do that this long?

[+tastom]

If it's a Magellan here's what you do to get pretty good coords:

 

- Keep the unit stationary for about 5 minutes. Put it down or hang it from something so you don't have to hold it.

 

- Break the averaging by moving it just enough to do so. Usually about 18 to 24 inches.

 

-Put it back in the same spot and let it sit. 10 minutes is generally long enough with open sky, but it doesn't hurt to let it sit longer. You will need to let it sit for a while longer with cover.

 

- Mark it.

 

Walk off, return, and repeat to check.

 

I've been getting .001 max difference off in the few checks I've done in my backyard using this method. I also use WAAS.

That's pretty much, what I did, exceot for the break after 5 minutes. So, I will try that as well, and return another day to confirm the reading

[+Stunod]

I'm about to set up my first cache (actually multi-cache). At each wpt I let the GPSr avarage the coordinates for about ten minutes, until there is almost no change to the .00x. Then I mark it, walk away to another wpt and then return to the initial wpt, just to find a completely different reading. If I dare to walk away for a second time and then return, I even get a third reading!!

 

If you're using a Magellan, it might be because your GPS is still averaging and hasn't caught up yet when you return.

How long should I let the GPSr let do the averaging? I was told to do it for about 10 minutes. If I leave it "unattended" for hours, it still would be averaging, should it do that this long?

The directions that CoyoteRed gave are simailiar to what I do.

 

Set the unit down at the cache site and watch the coords. When they stop changing, pick up the unit and wave it around until it stops displaying "averaging". This will clear out the averaged points and start fresh, avoiding using the points taken as the unit was "settling". Set the unit down again and leave it averaging for a few minutes (I usually do it for about 3 mins). Mark the waypoint.

[+tastom]

If it's a Magellan here's what you do to get pretty good coords:

 

- Keep the unit stationary for about 5 minutes.  Put it down or hang it from something so you don't have to hold it.

 

- Break the averaging by moving it just enough to do so.  Usually about 18 to 24 inches.

 

-Put it back in the same spot and let it sit.  10 minutes is generally long enough with open sky, but it doesn't hurt to let it sit longer.  You will need to let it sit for a while longer with cover.

 

- Mark it.

 

Walk off, return, and repeat to check.

 

I've been getting .001 max difference off in the few checks I've done in my backyard using this method.  I also use WAAS.

Geez, what a hassle!

 

When I mark a wpt with my Garmin, I just mark it and move along. I've used averaging once or twice, but it doesn't seem to matter much - the coords are always good.

Maybe one day, when I can afford it, I should switch over to Garmin... Originally, I was told that the Platinum is a high-end unit

[CoyoteRed]

One sticking point might be availability of WAAS. Some people don't use it, but my accuracy is based on using it.

 

Try some experiments in your backyard to see how long it takes to get repeatable numbers. You'll go through some batteries so I suggest some rechargables.

 

Hope this helps.

Edited June 9, 2004 by CoyoteRed

[+tastom]

Geez, what a hassle!

When I mark a wpt with my Garmin, I just mark it and move along. I've used averaging once or twice, but it doesn't seem to matter much - the coords are always good.

All I got to say is, "Would you rather have this..." (Note unit used in middle bottom of plot.)

 

...or this?"

 

Seems like a no brainer in this aspect of GPS use. (These are linked from here and the reviews on that site is what prompted me to buy the ST while I had originally been leaning towards the Garmin.)

 

Plus, on site, if I'm following the arrow directly in, experience tells me to slow. I can search with my eyes for tattletale clues for the location of the cache. Barring that, I can use the unit to zero in to pretty darn close to where the hider's unit said it is. Then I only have to contend with his accuracy.

 

(Ah, the forever ongoing debate on the better GPS. )

So, after second thought, I should be well off with the Platinum, although it's not the ST.

 

I understand that I am not totally wrong with the assumption that my unit is not the one with the worst performance

[+Stunod]

You have a very good GPS unit...you just need to get used to it's "quirks" and how to minimize their effects.

[+tastom]

When I've placed caches, I've taken to marking several waypoints using the methods above, and then repeating the process when I go to do cache maintenance. I track each waypoint and average the total.

Would you do a manual averaging? If so, how do you do it?

[+tastom]

I'm about to set up my first cache (actually multi-cache). At each wpt I let the GPSr avarage the coordinates for about ten minutes, until there is almost no change to the .00x. Then I mark it, walk away to another wpt and then return to the initial wpt, just to find a completely different reading. If I dare to walk away for a second time and then return, I even get a third reading!!

 

If you're using a Magellan, it might be because your GPS is still averaging and hasn't caught up yet when you return.

How long should I let the GPSr let do the averaging? I was told to do it for about 10 minutes. If I leave it "unattended" for hours, it still would be averaging, should it do that this long?

The directions that CoyoteRed gave are simailiar to what I do.

 

Set the unit down at the cache site and watch the coords. When they stop changing, pick up the unit and wave it around until it stops displaying "averaging". This will clear out the averaged points and start fresh, avoiding using the points taken as the unit was "settling". Set the unit down again and leave it averaging for a few minutes (I usually do it for about 3 mins). Mark the waypoint.

Thanks a lot! I think, I just make myself more nervous than I should. I'll mark the second reading, and go with that. I still will have the option to ask hunters to let me know about more accurate coords they might have found

[+Gloom]

Would you do a manual averaging? If so, how do you do it?

I used to do manual averaging, with my magellan 315, but found it didn't make that much of a difference and was a big waste of time.

 

The basic process was: turn the unit off, then back on (to make sure there is no averaging involved. Plus mine seemed to have a quirk where it would go 20+ miles from the actual location and get stuck there, only restarting it would fix it) then let it get a good lock and make a way point. Do this about 10 times. Then you just average the way points (simple math). You should find that only the decimal parts of the minutes should change. Just add up the decimal portions and devide by the number of points you took. For example if you took 5 points:

 

121 45.293

121 45.290

121 45.296

121 45.294

121 45.292 the math would go (.293+.290+.296+.294+.292)/5 = .293

 

So your averaged point would be 121 45.293. Do this for both lat. and long.

 

I also found that using the automatic averaging on my Meridian Platinum was a waste of time, unless the signal was very poor. These days I just find the spot, make sure I'm getting a decent signal and mark it. If the signal is really poor I might average for a couple of minutes first. This usually gets me good enough coords for the cache to be found without complaints.

[+tastom]

Would you do a manual averaging? If so, how do you do it?

I used to do manual averaging, with my magellan 315, but found it didn't make that much of a difference and was a big waste of time.

 

The basic process was: turn the unit off, then back on (to make sure there is no averaging involved. Plus mine seemed to have a quirk where it would go 20+ miles from the actual location and get stuck there, only restarting it would fix it) then let it get a good lock and make a way point. Do this about 10 times. Then you just average the way points (simple math). You should find that only the decimal parts of the minutes should change. Just add up the decimal portions and devide by the number of points you took. For example if you took 5 points:

 

121 45.293

121 45.290

121 45.296

121 45.294

121 45.292 the math would go (.293+.290+.296+.294+.292)/5 = .293

 

So your averaged point would be 121 45.293. Do this for both lat. and long.

 

I also found that using the automatic averaging on my Meridian Platinum was a waste of time, unless the signal was very poor. These days I just find the spot, make sure I'm getting a decent signal and mark it. If the signal is really poor I might average for a couple of minutes first. This usually gets me good enough coords for the cache to be found without complaints.

Thank you very much for your explanation of the "how to".

 

You're "recomforting" me by saying that you also have problems with the Platinum. So it isn't only my fault, if I don't get proper readings.

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Trust a Garmin owner to know about Magellan GPSrs.

 

I suggest you step out your front door and set a waypoint in your driveway. Leave and come back to it and compare the readings.

 

Check to see how many sats you are picking up and check the "EPE" (expected position error). If your tracking 5 or more sats your GPSr should put you within 15 - 20 feet (probably quite closer - like less than 10 feet). The "EPE" should be under 30 feet when you set the waypoint, for better result.

 

We do own 2 Meridian Platinums. His and Hers. Yet to see the "slingshot" effect!

 

John

[Keystone]

I own both a Garmin V and a Magellan SporTrak Color. Both are excellent units. They will both get you to the cache. They have different features. The Garmin has turn by turn autorouting, the SporTrak has a built-in electronic compass, etc. etc. I like the Garmin better in the car, and the SporTrak better in the woods. I have been beaten to cache after cache -- very handily -- by people using MeriPlats vs. my Garmin. Interesting, they all had way more finds than I did - perhaps they just "know" their GPS better than I did at that time. Take the time to get to know how your GPS behaves, what its personality is like. They're different.

 

All told, I don't get sucked into the Garmin vs. Magellan argument. They both make a great product!

 

For my views on manual or automatic averaging, which mirror much of what has been said here, see my pre-existing post here in the FAQ Topic that is pinned at the top of this forum.

[+tastom]

Thank you all for your valuable input, answers, suggestions, recommendations and help!

 

I think, I can got out tomorrow again to mark the coords and set up a report for the approver.

 

The bottom line is that I'm well off with the Platinum, but that I have to get used to the "quircks" of this unit and to be a bit less critical about myself.

 

By the way:

My multi-cache will be called "Steinhölzli" (Steinhoelzli), literally translated "Stone woodstick", with is the name of the forest where the cache is hidden. The cacher will first have to find two hints in order to calculate the coords of the final cache. Don't expect me to give away spoilers, you will have to come over here and find it yourself

 

Thanx again and happy hunting

 

Tom

[+tastom]

I own both a Garmin V and a Magellan SporTrak Color. Both are excellent units. They will both get you to the cache. They have different features. The Garmin has turn by turn autorouting, the SporTrak has a built-in electronic compass, etc. etc. I like the Garmin better in the car, and the SporTrak better in the woods. I have been beaten to cache after cache -- very handily -- by people using MeriPlats vs. my Garmin. Interesting, they all had way more finds than I did - perhaps they just "know" their GPS better than I did at that time. Take the time to get to know how your GPS behaves, what its personality is like. They're different.

 

All told, I don't get sucked into the Garmin vs. Magellan argument. They both make a great product!

 

For my views on manual or automatic averaging, which mirror much of what has been said here, see my pre-existing post here in the FAQ Topic that is pinned at the top of this forum.

Thank you. I think that is the best solution: To own 2 GPSr's, my actual MeriPlat and later on an ST, which gets good critics.

 

I am eager to come to the US again, and do some geocaching there.

 

Good luck

 

Tom