[J the Goat]

"2 — Location
Geocaching guides treasure-seekers to a precise set of coordinates. The adventure begins there. Make sure that "there" is the right "there." You should double (even triple) check your coordinates using a dedicated GPS receiver. Avoid using smartphones to establish coordinates for new geocaches."

I know, I know, they're supposed to be getting better, but there are still folks using their iphone 3's to hide caches. Glad GS has finally addressed it

[J the Goat]

And I know that just because they've now said something about it doens't mean anything will change. I'm not that dense

[Trinity's Crew]

J the Goat, on 05 April 2012 - 08:06 AM, said:

And I know that just because they've now said something about it doens't mean anything will change. I'm not that dense

I don't know. If they can keep just one cache from being placed with an old smart phone the world will be a better place.

[uxorious]

J the Goat, on 05 April 2012 - 08:06 AM, said:

And I know that just because they've now said something about it doens't mean anything will change. I'm not that dense

It won't change all of them. However, I do think there are the new cachers that may not have known you shouldn't use the smartphone. They may see this and (hopefully) change.

[jellis]

Also those with GPSs should be sure their units are calibrated, and do averaging. Even experienced cachers can invert numbers so check them on maybe Google Earth or other maps.
Yes I have made these same mistakes. There is one mistake I made on one of my recent caches where I had a set of coords but chose a different location nearby but used the previous coords on the cache page. Ooops!

[GeoTrekker26]

jellis, on 05 April 2012 - 09:51 AM, said:

Also those with GPSs should be sure their units are calibrated...

How do you calibrate a GPSr?

[Castle Mischief]

I think it would have been more accurate (and possibly more confusing) to word that something like "if you use your smartphone to acquire coordinates for a new hide be sure and turn on the GPS function and not gather your location data from cell towers". I find it hard to believe that the GPS chips in smartphones now are any worse than the GPS chips in handheld units available when the hobby started.

It might seem conflicting for a new smartphone user to download one of the many caching apps available and then be told that they shouldn't use their phone- for hiding.

[knowschad]

jellis, on 05 April 2012 - 09:51 AM, said:

Also those with GPSs should be sure their units are calibrated, and do averaging. Even experienced cachers can invert numbers so check them on maybe Google Earth or other maps.
Yes I have made these same mistakes. There is one mistake I made on one of my recent caches where I had a set of coords but chose a different location nearby but used the previous coords on the cache page. Ooops!

How does one calibrate their GPS? I've been using one for six years and haven't figured that one out yet. And as for averaging, the engineers at Garmin officially do not believe in it unless you average coordinates* taken over several days and at different times during the day. I used to average for several minutes (or, hundreds of samples). I no longer do that, and I still get compliments on my coordinates. BUT... I DO take several snapshots, and I DO test them by walking away in several directions and letting my GPS take me back. I then use the one that got me the closest.


* I'll see if I can dig up that paper from their website. I used to have it bookmarked, but apparently deleted it somewhere along the way.

[knowschad]

I could have done without the "lucky adventurer claims a FTF" bit, personally.

[ArcherDragoon]

knowschad, on 05 April 2012 - 10:55 AM, said:

I could have done without the "lucky adventurer claims a FTF" bit, personally.

???

[knowschad]

ArcherDragoon, on 05 April 2012 - 11:53 AM, said:

knowschad, on 05 April 2012 - 10:55 AM, said:

I could have done without the "lucky adventurer claims a FTF" bit, personally.

???

You have a question or three?

[Castle Mischief]

knowschad, on 05 April 2012 - 10:55 AM, said:

I could have done without the "lucky adventurer claims a FTF" bit, personally.

What's a FTF?

[knowschad]

Castle Mischief, on 05 April 2012 - 12:45 PM, said:

knowschad, on 05 April 2012 - 10:55 AM, said:

I could have done without the "lucky adventurer claims a FTF" bit, personally.

What's a FTF?

That's what I wanna know. Apparently there is something lucky about it, though.

[addisonbr]

Castle Mischief, on 05 April 2012 - 10:04 AM, said:

I find it hard to believe that the GPS chips in smartphones now are any worse than the GPS chips in handheld units available when the hobby started.

It might seem conflicting for a new smartphone user to download one of the many caching apps available and then be told that they shouldn't use their phone- for hiding.

I always thought that the advantage dedicated units was also due to having much bigger antennas. But I'm not that well versed in this stuff.

[DragonsWest]

Should be a check box on the cache submission page: Are you really sure these are accurate coordinates?

[AZcachemeister]

Cell phones with actual GPS chips CAN be nearly as accurate as a dedicated unit. The antenna is in fact the biggest issue with a smartphone's accuracy.
What a lot of people don't understand it that any type of GPS needs to be turned on for a while and will only be even reasonably accurate if it has had a signal lock for at LEAST several minutes.

User turns on GPSr.
GPSr gets preliminary position.
User fails to notice the estimate positional error is 250 feet.
User marks position anyway.
Bad user!


As the nearsighted canine mentions, truly accurate co-ordinates would take several days to acquire, regardless of the equipment used. (Well maybe not if you have a survey-grade GPSr and use post-processing to analyze the results.)

[JesandTodd]

knowschad, on 05 April 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

How does one calibrate their GPS? I've been using one for six years and haven't figured that one out yet.

Hit the calibrate button and spin in two circles.

[ScooterDawg]

AZcachemeister, on 05 April 2012 - 07:08 PM, said:

User fails to notice the estimate positional error is 250 feet.
User marks position anyway.
Bad user!

Pshaw. 250 feet is plenty accurate! That's only a couple hundred thousand square feet to search, right? Piece of cake... if you have the geosenses.

[GOF and Bacall]

I like the 4th point "Creative Caching"

Quote

4 — Creative Caching
Place the geocache in a location you would like people to visit. Ask yourself, "Would I show my favorite person in the world this geocache?" Is the geocache placed in a scenic overlook? Does it reveal a hidden history or is the geocache experience creative? If you answered at least one "yes," you're on the right rack to placing a great cache

[power69]

J the Goat, on 05 April 2012 - 08:05 AM, said:

"2 — Location
Geocaching guides treasure-seekers to a precise set of coordinates. The adventure begins there. Make sure that "there" is the right "there." You should double (even triple) check your coordinates using a dedicated GPS receiver. Avoid using smartphones to establish coordinates for new geocaches."

I know, I know, they're supposed to be getting better, but there are still folks using their iphone 3's to hide caches. Glad GS has finally addressed it

YES!

[power69]

ScooterDawg, on 05 April 2012 - 09:27 PM, said:

AZcachemeister, on 05 April 2012 - 07:08 PM, said:

User fails to notice the estimate positional error is 250 feet.
User marks position anyway.
Bad user!

Pshaw. 250 feet is plenty accurate! That's only a couple hundred thousand square feet to search, right? Piece of cake... if you have the geosenses.

and if gz is an acre lot full of pebble stones and hide is a nano

[BBWolf+3Pigs]

DragonsWest, on 05 April 2012 - 06:51 PM, said:

Should be a check box on the cache submission page: Are you really sure these are accurate coordinates?

Locally, cachers recently placed a cache that was 0.4 miles from the posted cooridnates, and another that was over 5 miles from the posted cooridnates!

A simple check of the map would have solved these two (likely data entry) problems. But for some reason, people just type in the numbers and hit "Submit". No sanity checking.

[BBWolf+3Pigs]

knowschad, on 05 April 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

How does one calibrate their GPS? I've been using one for six years and haven't figured that one out yet. And as for averaging, the engineers at Garmin officially do not believe in it unless you average coordinates* taken over several days and at different times during the day. I used to average for several minutes (or, hundreds of samples). I no longer do that, and I still get compliments on my coordinates. BUT... I DO take several snapshots, and I DO test them by walking away in several directions and letting my GPS take me back. I then use the one that got me the closest.


* I'll see if I can dig up that paper from their website. I used to have it bookmarked, but apparently deleted it somewhere along the way.

Garmin Blog
Garmin FAQ

[knowschad]

JesandTodd, on 05 April 2012 - 08:50 PM, said:

knowschad, on 05 April 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

How does one calibrate their GPS? I've been using one for six years and haven't figured that one out yet.

Hit the calibrate button and spin in two circles.

That is only calibrating the compass. Does nothing to provide more accurate coordinates.

[knowschad]

GOF and Bacall, on 06 April 2012 - 01:12 AM, said:

I like the 4th point "Creative Caching"

Quote

4 — Creative Caching
Place the geocache in a location you would like people to visit. Ask yourself, "Would I show my favorite person in the world this geocache?" Is the geocache placed in a scenic overlook? Does it reveal a hidden history or is the geocache experience creative? If you answered at least one "yes," you're on the right rack to placing a great cache

We seem to have a lot of people around here that love showing stop signs to their favorite person in the world. Stop (and other street signs) have become our new LPC.

[knowschad]

BBWolf+3Pigs, on 06 April 2012 - 03:34 AM, said:

knowschad, on 05 April 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

How does one calibrate their GPS? I've been using one for six years and haven't figured that one out yet. And as for averaging, the engineers at Garmin officially do not believe in it unless you average coordinates* taken over several days and at different times during the day. I used to average for several minutes (or, hundreds of samples). I no longer do that, and I still get compliments on my coordinates. BUT... I DO take several snapshots, and I DO test them by walking away in several directions and letting my GPS take me back. I then use the one that got me the closest.


* I'll see if I can dig up that paper from their website. I used to have it bookmarked, but apparently deleted it somewhere along the way.

Garmin Blog
Garmin FAQ

Thanks! The Blog article is the one that I was referring to. I thought it odd that the FAQ entry, which links to the blog article, seems to disagree with it.

[AustinMN]

jellis, on 05 April 2012 - 09:51 AM, said:

Also those with GPSs should be sure their units are calibrated...

How do you calibrate a mathematical calculation? Anything that might be made "calibratable" when it comes to the coordinates (such as receiving frequency) would cause the GPSr to not work at all, not give incorrect coordinates.

Austin

[jholly]

JesandTodd, on 05 April 2012 - 08:50 PM, said:

knowschad, on 05 April 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

How does one calibrate their GPS? I've been using one for six years and haven't figured that one out yet.

Hit the calibrate button and spin in two circles.

Oh, I thought it was click your heels together three time. No wonder I always end up in Kansas when I calibrate.

[AustinMN]

knowschad, on 06 April 2012 - 07:10 AM, said:

BBWolf+3Pigs, on 06 April 2012 - 03:34 AM, said:

[Snip by AustinMN]

Garmin Blog
Garmin FAQ

Thanks! The Blog article is the one that I was referring to. I thought it odd that the FAQ entry, which links to the blog article, seems to disagree with it.

I don't see an inconsistency between those two. Both reccomend sampling for at least 5 minutes and preferrably 7-10 minutes for short term, and 4-8 samples at least 90 minutes apart for long term.

Austin

[knowschad]

AustinMN, on 06 April 2012 - 07:44 AM, said:

knowschad, on 06 April 2012 - 07:10 AM, said:

BBWolf+3Pigs, on 06 April 2012 - 03:34 AM, said:

[Snip by AustinMN]

Garmin Blog
Garmin FAQ

Thanks! The Blog article is the one that I was referring to. I thought it odd that the FAQ entry, which links to the blog article, seems to disagree with it.

I don't see an inconsistency between those two. Both reccomend sampling for at least 5 minutes and preferrably 7-10 minutes for short term, and 4-8 samples at least 90 minutes apart for long term.

Austin

Yeah, but the blog article all but calls the concept all but a myth. They then go on to say, "if you MUST average, at least do it right". The FAQ comes right out and says that it is important to average. Also, I think that it is worth thinking about that Garmin originally released both the Oregon and the Colorado without a waypoint averaging feature, and only added one after somebody had figured out how to do it using a very popular Wherigo script.

[CanadianRockies]

knowschad, on 06 April 2012 - 02:50 PM, said:

AustinMN, on 06 April 2012 - 07:44 AM, said:

knowschad, on 06 April 2012 - 07:10 AM, said:

BBWolf+3Pigs, on 06 April 2012 - 03:34 AM, said:

[Snip by AustinMN]
Garmin Blog
Garmin FAQ

Thanks! The Blog article is the one that I was referring to. I thought it odd that the FAQ entry, which links to the blog article, seems to disagree with it.

I don't see an inconsistency between those two. Both reccomend sampling for at least 5 minutes and preferrably 7-10 minutes for short term, and 4-8 samples at least 90 minutes apart for long term.

Yeah, but the blog article all but calls the concept all but a myth. They then go on to say, "if you MUST average, at least do it right". The FAQ comes right out and says that it is important to average.

I read the blog article very differently than you did. It says there are many occasions when averaging isn't important (e.g., marking your campsite) and a single coordinate reading usually will be within 30 feet of the true location.

But it indicates there also are times when short-term averaging is desireable: "This technique removes large temporary errors in GPS position and is most beneficial when conditions are challenging (such as dense tree cover) but can not mitigate errors from the current satellite constellation."

Short-term averaging is better than a single-coordinate reading, but multi-sample averaging is better than short-term averaging: "For optimal results, at least 4-8 samples should be collected spaced at least 90 minutes apart (allowing the satellite constellation sufficient time to change)."

I couldn't find the quotation you cited: "if you MUST average, at least do it right."

[TerraViators]

Castle Mischief, on 05 April 2012 - 12:45 PM, said:

knowschad, on 05 April 2012 - 10:55 AM, said:

I could have done without the "lucky adventurer claims a FTF" bit, personally.

What's a FTF?

I believe it's half of an equation to obtain a soda.

[Mr.Yuck]

knowschad, on 06 April 2012 - 07:05 AM, said:

JesandTodd, on 05 April 2012 - 08:50 PM, said:

knowschad, on 05 April 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

How does one calibrate their GPS? I've been using one for six years and haven't figured that one out yet.

Hit the calibrate button and spin in two circles.

That is only calibrating the compass. Does nothing to provide more accurate coordinates.

My WindowsPhone has an electronic compass like the higher-end GPS units. I have to move it vigorously in a figure 8 pattern. And someone saw me doing it the other day, and gave me such a look.

[power69]

knowschad, on 06 April 2012 - 07:07 AM, said:

GOF and Bacall, on 06 April 2012 - 01:12 AM, said:

I like the 4th point "Creative Caching"

Quote

4 — Creative Caching
Place the geocache in a location you would like people to visit. Ask yourself, "Would I show my favorite person in the world this geocache?" Is the geocache placed in a scenic overlook? Does it reveal a hidden history or is the geocache experience creative? If you answered at least one "yes," you're on the right rack to placing a great cache

We seem to have a lot of people around here that love showing stop signs to their favorite person in the world. Stop (and other street signs) have become our new LPC.

oh i LOVE the artistic view of a walmart parking lot and PERFECT square of the cover. don't you?

[jellis]

GeoTrekker26, on 05 April 2012 - 09:59 AM, said:

jellis, on 05 April 2012 - 09:51 AM, said:

Also those with GPSs should be sure their units are calibrated...

How do you calibrate a GPSr?

On my Garmin you bring up the Map page and press the menu and go down to Calibrate and follow the instructions.

[The A-Team]

jellis, on 10 April 2012 - 05:52 PM, said:

GeoTrekker26, on 05 April 2012 - 09:59 AM, said:

How do you calibrate a GPSr?

On my Garmin you bring up the Map page and press the menu and go down to Calibrate and follow the instructions.

What model do you have? My Oregon only has calibration for the compass.

[Clan Riffster]

CanadianRockies, on 06 April 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

But it indicates there also are times when short-term averaging is desireable: "This technique removes large temporary errors in GPS position and is most beneficial when conditions are challenging (such as dense tree cover) but can not mitigate errors from the current satellite constellation."

Short-term averaging is better than a single-coordinate reading, but multi-sample averaging is better than short-term averaging: "For optimal results, at least 4-8 samples should be collected spaced at least 90 minutes apart (allowing the satellite constellation sufficient time to change)."

In my very early days playing this hobby, I used to utilize the averaging feature built into my GPSr, thinking it must be giving me better coordinates. Experience has taught me that this is not the case. In reading that blurb, I'm thinking that Garmin have have realized that as well. I admit it may be my inner bias interpreting things, but I read it to mean there was a distinction between short term averaging and multi-sample averaging.

To my way of thinking...

Short term averaging is letting the GPSr rest whilst running the averaging software built into the device. Multi-sample averaging is taking a reading at ground zero, walking off a hundred feet or so. Return and check your first reading, grabbing another set of coords. Repeat this a few times, heading off in different directions. When you get home, average out the numbers from the various readings, tossing any that appear outside the acceptable range. Consider this your official ground zero... for now. Go back the next day and test your coords.

[Clan Riffster]

The A-Team, on 10 April 2012 - 07:23 PM, said:

jellis, on 10 April 2012 - 05:52 PM, said:

GeoTrekker26, on 05 April 2012 - 09:59 AM, said:

How do you calibrate a GPSr?

On my Garmin you bring up the Map page and press the menu and go down to Calibrate and follow the instructions.

What model do you have? My Oregon only has calibration for the compass.

That's true for all of them. It's just that some models have menu options in multiple screens. With my 60CSx, I can run the compass calibration from the compass screen, the map screen and the setup screen. But as mentioned, no matter what screen you are running it from, the only thing you are calibrating is the compass.

[Castle Mischief]

GOF and Bacall, on 06 April 2012 - 01:12 AM, said:

I like the 4th point "Creative Caching"

Quote

4 — Creative Caching
Place the geocache in a location you would like people to visit. Ask yourself, "Would I show my favorite person in the world this geocache?" Is the geocache placed in a scenic overlook? Does it reveal a hidden history or is the geocache experience creative? If you answered at least one "yes," you're on the right rack to placing a great cache

There should be a sub-section to this point: "Ignore the previous advice and just list your 1000 film-can power trail anyway."

[thebruce0]

Castle Mischief, on 05 April 2012 - 10:04 AM, said:

I think it would have been more accurate (and possibly more confusing) to word that something like "if you use your smartphone to acquire coordinates for a new hide be sure and turn on the GPS function and not gather your location data from cell towers". I find it hard to believe that the GPS chips in smartphones now are any worse than the GPS chips in handheld units available when the hobby started.

It might seem conflicting for a new smartphone user to download one of the many caching apps available and then be told that they shouldn't use their phone- for hiding.

This.


There are good users and bad users.
A dedicated GPSr doesn't guarantee accurate coordinates.
A smartphone doesn't guarantee incorrect coordinates.
Know your device, verify your readings.
There is more chance a dedicated GPSr will provide more accurate coordinates depending on models, but "smartphone"!="fail".

Better wording on that part in the newsletter would have been more accurate, imo.
Perhaps something along the lines of:
"Many smartphone models don't provide as accurate a GPS reading as many dedicated GPS devices. Whether you use a smartphone or dedicated GPS device, however, you should verify your coordinate readings before publishing your geocache. For example, take multiple waypoint readings over time and average them; test the coordinates with other devices; or have friends test your coordinates."

It's more wordy, but it's more interesting, instructional, educational, and accurate.

[JesandTodd]

thebruce0, on 11 April 2012 - 06:13 AM, said:

This.


There are good users and bad users.
A dedicated GPSr doesn't guarantee accurate coordinates.
A smartphone doesn't guarantee incorrect coordinates.
Know your device, verify your readings.
There is more chance a dedicated GPSr will provide more accurate coordinates depending on models, but "smartphone"!="fail".

Better wording on that part in the newsletter would have been more accurate, imo.
Perhaps something along the lines of:
"Many smartphone models don't provide as accurate a GPS reading as many dedicated GPS devices. Whether you use a smartphone or dedicated GPS device, however, you should verify your coordinate readings before publishing your geocache. For example, take multiple waypoint readings over time and average them; test the coordinates with other devices; or have friends test your coordinates."

It's more wordy, but it's more interesting, instructional, educational, and accurate.

+1

Agreed. I frequently test my 60CSx against my iPhone 4s. They are both very, very similiar. Oftentimes, the iPhone is more accurate. Even in the woods. In the rain. Under the clouds. With a leaf blowing by...etc, etc.

It's all about knowing and understanding your devices.

[Moose Mob]

JesandTodd, on 11 April 2012 - 06:26 AM, said:

<snip> I frequently test my 60CSx against my iPhone 4s. They are both very, very similiar. Oftentimes, the iPhone is more accurate. Even in the woods. In the rain. Under the clouds. With a leaf blowing by...etc, etc.

It's all about knowing and understanding your devices.

The problem doesn't come from you. The problem is from 'them'.

It is 'them' that we need to get informed and 'them' isn't always in the forums. A few of 'them' may read the newsletter or maybe a few more of 'them' talk to someone that read the newsletter.

[knowschad]

CanadianRockies, on 06 April 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

I couldn't find the quotation you cited: "if you MUST average, at least do it right."

That wasn't a quote. It was a summary.

[CanadianRockies]

Clan Riffster, on 10 April 2012 - 07:25 PM, said:

CanadianRockies, on 06 April 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

But it indicates there also are times when short-term averaging is desireable: "This technique removes large temporary errors in GPS position and is most beneficial when conditions are challenging (such as dense tree cover) but can not mitigate errors from the current satellite constellation."

Short-term averaging is better than a single-coordinate reading, but multi-sample averaging is better than short-term averaging: "For optimal results, at least 4-8 samples should be collected spaced at least 90 minutes apart (allowing the satellite constellation sufficient time to change)."

I admit it may be my inner bias interpreting things, but I read it to mean there was a distinction between short term averaging and multi-sample averaging.

I agree. I read the blog as suggesting that you should use short-term averaging when you need better accuracy than a single-coordinate reading, and you should use multi-sample averaging when you need better accuracy than short-term averaging.

Clan Riffster, on 10 April 2012 - 07:25 PM, said:

Multi-sample averaging is taking a reading at ground zero, walking off a hundred feet or so. Return and check your first reading, grabbing another set of coords. Repeat this a few times, heading off in different directions. When you get home, average out the numbers from the various readings, tossing any that appear outside the acceptable range. Consider this your official ground zero... for now. Go back the next day and test your coords.

Yes and no. What you described certainly qualifies as multi-sample averaging, if by "reading" you mean "a sample average." As the blog notes, however, each sample average should be taken at least 90 minutes apart if you want to seriously reduce the errors caused by the current GPS satellite constellation.

By the way, the Oregon GPSr will perform multi-sample averaging for you. No need to do it manually when you get back home.

This post has been edited by CanadianRockies: 11 April 2012 - 08:17 AM

[Castle Mischief]

Moose Mob, on 11 April 2012 - 06:55 AM, said:

JesandTodd, on 11 April 2012 - 06:26 AM, said:

<snip> I frequently test my 60CSx against my iPhone 4s. They are both very, very similiar. Oftentimes, the iPhone is more accurate. Even in the woods. In the rain. Under the clouds. With a leaf blowing by...etc, etc.

It's all about knowing and understanding your devices.

The problem doesn't come from you. The problem is from 'them'.

It is 'them' that we need to get informed and 'them' isn't always in the forums. A few of 'them' may read the newsletter or maybe a few more of 'them' talk to someone that read the newsletter.

...and the newsletter just told them to not use a smartphone. Not "you may want to consider using a dedicated GPS" or "accuracy with smart phones may not be on par with dedicated GPS" but a simple DON'T.


How exactly is that an informational experiance? There's no information there, just a gross overstatement.

[CanadianRockies]

knowschad, on 06 April 2012 - 02:50 PM, said:

Yeah, but the blog article all but calls the concept all but a myth. They then go on to say, "if you MUST average, at least do it right". The FAQ comes right out and says that it is important to average.

knowschad, on 11 April 2012 - 07:21 AM, said:

CanadianRockies, on 06 April 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

I couldn't find the quotation you cited: "if you MUST average, at least do it right."

That wasn't a quote. It was a summary.

Putting a summary inside quotation marks is often misleading. Quotation marks normally indicate a quotation rather than a personal summary.

If I was to summarize that blog, it probably would go something like this: When creating a waypoint, use a method that produces suitable accuracy for the task at hand.

This post has been edited by CanadianRockies: 11 April 2012 - 08:10 AM

[knowschad]

CanadianRockies, on 11 April 2012 - 07:55 AM, said:

knowschad, on 06 April 2012 - 02:50 PM, said:

Yeah, but the blog article all but calls the concept all but a myth. They then go on to say, "if you MUST average, at least do it right". The FAQ comes right out and says that it is important to average.

knowschad, on 11 April 2012 - 07:21 AM, said:

CanadianRockies, on 06 April 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

I couldn't find the quotation you cited: "if you MUST average, at least do it right."

That wasn't a quote. It was a summary.

Putting a summary inside quotation marks is often misleading. Quotation marks normally indicate a quotation rather than a personal summary.

If I was to summarize that blog, it probably would go something like this: When creating a waypoint, use a method that produces suitable accuracy for the task at hand.

I never intended for anybody to take it as seriously or as literally as you are. I was just saying something, not writing a technical document.

[Clan Riffster]

CanadianRockies, on 11 April 2012 - 07:44 AM, said:

By the way, the Oregon GPSr will perform multi-sample averaging for you. No need to do it manually when you get back home.

Yeah, I know. It's a fairly decent unit, all things considered. But since I do not know how the algorithm works when dealing with stray waypoints, too far away from the group to be useful, I prefer to do it myself.