GPS vs Common Sense

Posted by: Blast

GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 06:25 PM

If the GPS says it's a road then we can drive on it...
A GPS device led a convoy of tourists as...sheer cliff.


-Blast
Posted by: thseng

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 06:43 PM

"Turn left - now. Recalulatiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnggggg..."

Quote:
A friend with navigation device said we should go that way, and we all went that went

That's why I like to do the navigating myself. "Just follow me and don't worry" never turns out well for me.

I wonder what a car GPS does when you're on a "road" that doesn't exist in it's database?
Posted by: steelie

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 06:48 PM

Quote:
Glover said a GPS device is no substitute for good judgment or detailed topographical maps.


that statement just about sums it up...
Posted by: CityBoyGoneCountry

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 06:48 PM

Someone needs to learn the difference between "position" and "condition".
Posted by: unimogbert

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 07:08 PM

Can anyone say "lawsuit?" I knew you could.

No one of us is as dumb as all of us together.
Posted by: 7point82

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 07:12 PM

Originally Posted By: NightHiker
<sigh>

Natural selection diverted - odds are none of them could have used a map either.


+1. Some folks never consider that situations might exist that their GPS, cell phone or debt card can't bail them out of.
Posted by: Russ

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 07:16 PM

Just one reason I pre-flight my GPS routes on a computer before I leave. The Mapsource software that has come with each of my Garmin receivers will link directly to Google Earth so you can see the same terrain from a satellite view.

Anything off secondary roads I go with my 60CSx which also has topo maps installed. Still, that many people with children and they blindly follow a GPS with no back-up?
Posted by: Hikin_Jim

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 07:23 PM

Originally Posted By: Blast
If the GPS says it's a road then we can drive on it...
A GPS device led a convoy of tourists as...sheer cliff.


-Blast

Yipes. Shades of the Kim family.

I was in Boston one time, and my rental car had a GPS unit. It had an utter fit, lol, when I went into one of the underwater tunnels. "[alert noise!] You are off route. Return to route. [alert noise!] You are off route. Return to route. [alert noise!] You are off route. Return to route...". I finally turned it off and used my AAA map. lol.

Another time I was in Miami. I was directed to a smilarly named street (to the one I was looking for) in the wrong part of town. Really wrong. Like scary people staring at you from the front porch following your every move like a predator. Again, I pulled out my AAA map. "Oh, duh, I'm down by the docks. I need to be closer to downtown on this street here." Based on the map, I drove to the nice part of town and pulled safely in to a shiny Marriot. phew! ALWAYS CARRY A MAP (like I need to tell you guys that). And, um check the map as you go. blush Lesson learned.
Posted by: Roarmeister

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 07:34 PM

Originally Posted By: thseng
I wonder what a car GPS does when you're on a "road" that doesn't exist in it's database?


Hey, I've seen roads in the database that don't exist or ever have in real life!

Never blindly follow the GPS. It's a tool, a good tool, but not an infallible one. I use mine everyday while out geocaching and it has gotten me into good trouble more often than not! <very big grin>
Posted by: BobS

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 07:58 PM

Never blindly follow the GPS. It's a tool, a good tool, but not an infallible one. I use mine everyday while out geocaching and it has gotten me into good trouble more often than not! <very big grin>


I question GPS being wrong more then 50%.
Posted by: Russ

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 08:16 PM

I regularly use a GPS on known routes just to see how it does. I don't have a problem with using GPS for nav, but I don't use just the in-car receiver, I also have the software on my PC with the same map/DB as the receiver.

I use the map software so that I'll know the route before I get in the car, then I let the GPS follow along as I drive. Mine says "recalculating" quite often wink But that's one of the Garmin Nuvi receivers. For backcountry driving, a GPS 60CSx with road and topo maps is a much better option. Having the software on a PC so you can get a better picture of what the GPS is doing helps a lot.

To take that many people with children that far off road following a GPS blindly is a learning experience.
Posted by: Dan_McI

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 08:57 PM

DW and I drove from NYC to near Wilmington, NC last month. We went via the DelMarVa Peninsula and even thereafter stayed off the major highways.

According to the GPS, I drove through a lot of cornfields. It was pretty clear it either did not know where we were or did not know where the road was on numerous occasions, and I suspect the later in most cases.

It's a tool. Only a tool. It needs to be checked against other tools, if you really have no clue as to wehre you are. other tools would include maps and your own common sense.
Posted by: Hikin_Jim

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 09:55 PM

Originally Posted By: BobS
I question GPS being wrong more then 50%.
I'm not sure what you mean? Where did this 50% figure come from and what is it in reference to. Can you say a bit more about this?
Posted by: BobS

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 10:10 PM

Originally Posted By: Hikin_Jim
Originally Posted By: BobS
I question GPS being wrong more then 50%.
I'm not sure what you mean? Where did this 50% figure come from and what is it in reference to. Can you say a bit more about this?



Never blindly follow the GPS. It's a tool, a good tool, but not an infallible one. I use mine everyday while out geocaching and it has gotten me into good trouble more often than not! <very big grin>


(More often then not) to me says that he’s saying it doesn’t work more times then it does, that has to be over 50% of the time. I question this statement.
Posted by: ironraven

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 10:17 PM

This is why I am very reluctant to endorse any kind of wilderness electronics. If you pray the tech gods and let them think for you...

Well, I'd point and laugh if it wasn't so serious.
Posted by: SwampDonkey

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 10:20 PM

I have a simple Garmin vehicle-type GPS that is helpful in urban area but not much use on bush roads. If you are driving on a road that does not exist it just shows you driving on a blank screen. There are also lots of roads shown on the GPS screen that were never there or were overgrown 30 years ago and are now just forest.

It is a handy tool in the bush though to be able to get your location (Lat/Long) from the GPS and use the map to figure out where you are.

Mike
Posted by: Hikin_Jim

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/06/08 10:21 PM

Originally Posted By: BobS
(More often then not) to me says that he’s saying it doesn’t work more times then it does, that has to be over 50% of the time. I question this statement.


Well, maybe, but I've sure seen a lot of GPS failures in mountainous terrain. Down in the bottom of gullies or deep canyons and under heavy tree cover seem to be places where failure to get a fix occurs.

Recently when I was on Marion Mtn (10,600+), the GPS pointed us to a false summit. GPS's are frequently but not always good. I can't say what percentage of the time under what conditions failures occur, but they're very common. I get GPS failures multiple times every hike I go on.

Roarmeister, anything to add?
Posted by: thseng

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 01:16 AM

Originally Posted By: SwampDonkey
If you are driving on a road that does not exist it just shows you driving on a blank screen.

Yes, but then what does it direct you to do?
Posted by: Hikin_Jim

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 01:31 AM

Originally Posted By: thseng
Originally Posted By: SwampDonkey
If you are driving on a road that does not exist it just shows you driving on a blank screen.

Yes, but then what does it direct you to do?
Why, drive off a cliff of course. grin
Posted by: SwampDonkey

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 01:59 AM

Hi thseng,

I do not know, I have not asked the GPS to navigate somewhere when it was "off-road". I will try it tomorrow and let you know what it tells me to do!

Mike
Posted by: BobS

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 02:29 AM

I have a 5-year old Garman GPS unit, an Etrex Legend, it’s a hand held unit as apposed to a car unit. It’s made more for off road then it is for road navigation. And that’s good because that’s where I mostly use it. It has at times not gotten a satellite lock while under some trees that was easily fixed by moving some and it then locked in. And again when I was hiking in a very steep canyon (almost a cave, in an area called “Old Man’s Cave state park” (a very cool place to visit by the way, it’s in central Ohio) the walls were 70 to 120 feet tall and it was only about 30 feet wide. It’s unrealistic to expect it to work in this environment.

Other then these few times it has been very reliable and told me just where I was at. It has a basic set of maps in it and when I cross a road or stream it shows that on the map. My brothers and dad have a newer GPS made for car traveling and while I don’t like the map layout, they do work well. I recently drove my dad to Cleveland (from Toledo) and we typed in the address of The Cleveland Clinic and it took us right to the drive for the parking lot. Then again on the way home it took us right to my dad’s home address.

I still like maps and always have a good idea where I’m at and what direction is north, but I don’t seem to have the problems (with all 4 of the GPS units I use) some of you are saying you have with them.

I like them. I actually like my older hiking GPS unit more then the newer ones my brothers and dad have, but that’s just because of the features. My GPS will run 22-hours on a set of AA Batts. The car units are only good for 5-hours and then have to be plugged in for several hours. If my unit gets a dead battery, I just put in a new set of 2 AA batts and I’m good for another 22-hrs. Also it’s waterproof and shirt pocket size.

Being able to pop new batteries in it and then have it running again in seconds for another 20 + hrs is a strong argument for it in a survival situation. Having one go dead in 5-hrs and no way to get it up and running without a time consuming charge (assuming you have a place and the power to charge it) sucks.

Also my dads GPS doesn’t seem to allow for lots of tag points like my unit does; this is a very big reason to not want one like his. I think my unit has the ability for 500 of them.

Posted by: big_al

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 03:12 AM


I have used my Garman map 76 for years in my crew bus. by using breadcrumbs it is very easy to get back to where you started. I have traveled for hours on Forest Service roads to get to a fire, with breadcrumbs turned on, then I knew how to get out. The first order of owning a GPS is Read the book

Posted by: dougwalkabout

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 03:36 AM

Well, it's not 'directing' you anywhere. If you're driving on a real road and the GPS shows a blank screen, it's an indication that the GPS's map database is entirely inadequate to the situation.

This keeps my skepticism intact regarding the real value of GPS.

Time to break out the maps.

[Edit: whoops, several posts beat me to it. I can certainly see the value of waypoints and breadcrumbs, but if I have to carry map and compass anyway, I'm not quite clear how I'm ahead.]
Posted by: Todd W

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 05:03 AM

I stopped trusting GPS after they failed to work on 2 outdoor adventures. 2 Trips, 2 Different GPS units and 2 different types of failures.

1 could not get any signal through the trees, and then said we were off the screen yet we were on a very very very old and popular hwy.

1 could not get any signal through the clouds and snow. We were technically lost on our quads in a snow storm... just when we needed the GPS most it failed. We made our way back, stumbled upon a sheriff learned the trails looped and crossed over, etc. Either way we found our way back by using our brains and thinking.

So, I don't use a GPS anymore. I use trail maps, and google earth shots that I print off and use my BRAIN.

This reminds me I need to sell my other GPS UNIT.

FWIW Both were different model garmins, not $100 cheap either.
Posted by: benjammin

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 12:02 PM

I just call it the "Lemming" effect.
Posted by: 7point82

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 01:55 PM

Originally Posted By: Hikin_Jim
snip...

Well, maybe, but I've sure seen a lot of GPS failures in mountainous terrain. Down in the bottom of gullies or deep canyons and under heavy tree cover seem to be places where failure to get a fix occurs.

Recently when I was on Marion Mtn (10,600+), the GPS pointed us to a false summit. GPS's are frequently but not always good. I can't say what percentage of the time under what conditions failures occur, but they're very common. I get GPS failures multiple times every hike I go on.

Roarmeister, anything to add?


Your experience sounds similar to mine. I carry a GPS on some backcountry trips because it's an easy, quick way to verify my position IF I can get a fix. In the areas I frequently go I wouldn't be surprised if coverage was <50%. It's not unusual for me to decide that there isn't going to be enough open ground on a given trip and leave the GPS at home. I haven't tried the GPS units with built in topo maps yet so my experience is is limited to the in car units and my basic hiking model(s). Either way, I can't imagine leaving the map, compass & altimeter at home.
Posted by: Russ

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 04:30 PM

Yeah, the newer GPS SiRF receivers are much more sensitive -- the 60CSx being one of them. Still, map and compass work regardless of satellite coverage and the batteries won't run out. I take both with key points on the map marked as waypoints in the GPS.
Posted by: BobS

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 04:34 PM

GPS is no different then a Bic lighter. They both are great tools and have a lot of nice features. No one should forgo a map and compass or waterproof matches when venturing out. But most of us will get by fine with the GPS and the Bic. While never pulling the map, compass and the matches out of the pack.
Posted by: comms

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 06:11 PM

I fire up my Garmin eTrex Vista to bookmark a position that I want to remember like a cave or fishing hole. Then later mark out in my travel journal or transfer to the map perfectly.

My main problem with GPS, and maybe newer models have adjusted for this, is the difference between Lat/Long and Military Grid Reference System (MGRS) which is very similar if not exact to UTM and what I prefer to use.

I suppose growing up in one system or the other has something to do with it. Sailors I am sure are better at L/L than a soldier, and vice versa with soldiers using MGRS.

GPS maybe has just become another toy, "door to door' and not so much the incredible resource it is to 'actually know where you are in relation to things."

Not sure if that all made sense....
Posted by: sodak

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/07/08 10:19 PM

I have a Garmin eTrex also. It takes forever to get a fix, and loses it quickly in a forest. Once it actually gave me a wrong reading, standing next to a high cliff.

Other than that, it works great.
Posted by: Am_Fear_Liath_Mor

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/08/08 01:24 AM

The problem with GPS is the illusion that it is generally regarded as being infallable by the user. Just as there are the ineviatable errors associated with maps (the map is only as good as the original accuracy of the survey together with the fact the map features can move e.g. rivers may change their course or dry up, cliff edges may receed over time, introduction of new roads and the plantation of new wooded areas with older wooded areas being cut or burnt etc) and compass errors (magnetic declination and local geomagnetism), the GPS also has associated errors with it. Some can be quite considerable if the GPS is not setup correctly.

Additional problems occour when aligning the computed GPS position in the WGS84 Lat/Lon coordinate system to the map wether it is a paper or electronic one. The electronic map may have even more errors associated with it because they may have been generated from the paper version. The paper to electronic conversion will again introduce some form of error i.e. the scanning and conversion from a bitmap image to a vector image. This may involve some considerable computer graphical editoring, which may again involve some form of human error.

General GPS errors can be helped along by ensuring the GPS almanac and Ephemeris details are upto date by leaving the GPS to download this information especially if the GPS has been turned of for a few weeks or months.

WAAS and EGNOS being turned on can help considerably with the GPS accuracy providing differential GPS to help eliminate mostly atmospheric and multipath broadcast signal errors. This will tend to improve GPS accuracy from around 10-20 metres (CEP) to 1-5 metres (CEP).

Ensure that the correct mapping datum and position format match the paper map which is in use. The conversion from GPS WGS84 to the local map such as UTM MGRS or OSGB grid involves some complex calculation as can seen from the following link
http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/gps/docs/convertingcoordinatesEN.pdf

More modern higher sensitivity GPS models help with aquiring low power lock on to the satellite signals in wooded areas etc. Not all GPS's are created equal.

Ensure that the lasted firmwire for the GPS is also up to date. Some errors that might have introduced errors especially with coordinate transformations may well have been reported and consequently fixed.

If after ensuring that the GPS (with the latest firmware) has a good signal with a fresh almanac and Ephemeris and that WAAS or EGNOS is turned on and that the correct position format and datum are selected for the map you are using and you still find that the GPS is apparently giving the incorrect location then chances are the map itself will be wrong.

Generally I have not had a problem with my very basic Garmin eTrex when used in conjuction with the UK Ordnance Survey maps in providing a very accurate position. GPS accuracy in relation to the Ordnance Survey maps is a claimed 2 metres by Ordnance Survey.

I wouldn't trust the Garmin to point me in the right direction though. But that's what a compass is for.

What I do find interesting though is the idea that a GPS is somehow easier to use and therefore can be introduced to the navigator starting out before introducing map and compass work. Surely it must be the other way around.





Posted by: thseng

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/08/08 01:05 PM

Originally Posted By: Am_Fear_Liath_Mor
What I do find interesting though is the idea that a GPS is somehow easier to use and therefore can be introduced to the navigator starting out before introducing map and compass work. Surely it must be the other way around.

I went head to head with Doug on this a while back.

Quote:
I'm not saying a GPS is bad, I think they are great and can really get you out of trouble sometimes. But I wouldn't encourage someone who was befuddled by a map and compass to use it as a crutch. I'd advise them to stay home.
Posted by: comms

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/08/08 03:23 PM

I will say one thing in defense, perhaps, of my Brunton 8096 compass, it has GPS confidence circles. Meaning that when you transfer a point to a map from your GPS or just WAG (Wild Ass Guess)your destination, there is a stencil on the base plate for a 100 yard circle to put around it.
Posted by: benjammin

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/08/08 05:07 PM

My greatest use for GPS is finding residences and common places of interest while driving. Have no idea where an address is in the greater metro area? Type it into my little nuvi and I now have a guided route to get there. For finding myself in the big woods, or on top of the mountain, maybe not so much. Up at elk camp I much prefer orienteering my way around, first by studying a map of the area real good before I ever get there, then by identifying landmarks I can hopefully use from any location nearby, then by planning my hiking so I have a good idea where I am headed and what will be around me.
Posted by: ducktapeguy

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/08/08 08:31 PM

Originally Posted By: BobS
GPS is no different then a Bic lighter. They both are great tools and have a lot of nice features. No one should forgo a map and compass or waterproof matches when venturing out. But most of us will get by fine with the GPS and the Bic. While never pulling the map, compass and the matches out of the pack.


This is the most intelligent response I've heard so far. A GPS is what it is, it's a tool with limitations. The main function of the GPS is to tell you where you are, not where to go.

This situation could have easily have happened with our without the GPS. If the families had gotten lost while using map and compass, almost everyone here would be admonishing them for NOT having the GPS, a la James Kim. With the GPS, they're being criticized for having too much dependence on it. It seems you can't win either way, there is always going to be the monday morning quarterbacks who will tell you it's wrong.

Who can say for sure that a map would have been any more accurate than their GPS was? I've been to plenty of places that looked fine on a map, only to find out the route is a dead end. At least the GPS maps should be updated more frequently than paper maps, but that still doesn't mean they're 100% accurate. Sure the GPS doesn't work in the forest, canyons, or snowstorm, but a map and compass don't work any better in those conditions either.

No matter what equipment you use, there's alwasy the possibility of getting lost.
Posted by: Hikin_Jim

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/08/08 10:32 PM

Originally Posted By: ducktapeguy
Sure the GPS doesn't work in the forest, canyons, or snowstorm, but a map and compass don't work any better in those conditions either.
I think I would disagree with you there. In a forest, you may not be able to do a resection, but you can calculate a bearing on your map and then walk your bearing. In a canyon, there are a lot of tricks canyoneers use. You can count the number of side canyons, checking them off on your map as you pass. You can shoot a bearing up each side canyon and check the bearing against the map. You can check off the twists and turns of the main canyon as you pass through them, marking them on your map. Again, you would verify that you're in the twist or turn that you think you are in by shooting bearings. Even in a snow storm, you can still calculate and walk a bearing.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not disagreeing with you overall. BobS's analogy with matches vs. a lighter is a good one. I'm merely pointing out that there are a few tricks left in the ol' map and compass bag even in the situations you point out above. Of limited utility under some conditions (whiteout), but tricks nonetheless.
Posted by: ducktapeguy

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/09/08 02:56 AM

You're correct, but I was thinking more along the lines locating your position vs navigating. If you have no idea where you are, taking a bearing would be of limited use. With a GPS you need a clear unobstructed view of the satellites to pinpoint your position, but a map and compass also needs clear view of your surroundings to do the same. Each one has their pluses and minuses. And you can get lost with either one.

If you've got the discipline to count landmarks or canyons, then you wouldn't even need a compass to tell you where you are. Of course, if you could do that, you wouldn't need a GPS signal either. hmm...

Posted by: BobS

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/09/08 03:23 AM

Originally Posted By: ducktapeguy
Originally Posted By: BobS
GPS is no different then a Bic lighter. They both are great tools and have a lot of nice features. No one should forgo a map and compass or waterproof matches when venturing out. But most of us will get by fine with the GPS and the Bic. While never pulling the map, compass and the matches out of the pack.


The main function of the GPS is to tell you where you are, not where to go.



That's what woman are for, to tell us where to go! eek
Posted by: Roarmeister

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/09/08 06:43 AM

Originally Posted By: BobS
Originally Posted By: Hikin_Jim
Originally Posted By: BobS
I question GPSr being wrong more then 50%.
I'm not sure what you mean? Where did this 50% figure come from and what is it in reference to. Can you say a bit more about this?


Never blindly follow the GPSr. It's a tool, a good tool, but not an infallible one. I use mine everyday while out geocaching and it has gotten me into good trouble more often than not! <very big grin>

(More often then not) to me says that he’s saying it doesn’t work more times then it does, that has to be over 50% of the time. I question this statement.


Ahemm... by GOOD TROUBLE I meant that it was useful in my hobby as it just gave me just another good reason to get outside and have fun. Getting outdoors is "GOOD". The GPSr itself works wonderfully. Apparently the emphasis and <very big grin> wasn't interpreted correctly.

BTW, technically, I should have GPSr or GPS receiver instead of just using the acronym of GPS.
Posted by: Roarmeister

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/09/08 07:07 AM

Originally Posted By: 7point82
Originally Posted By: Hikin_Jim
snip...

Well, maybe, but I've sure seen a lot of GPS failures in mountainous terrain. Down in the bottom of gullies or deep canyons and under heavy tree cover seem to be places where failure to get a fix occurs.

Recently when I was on Marion Mtn (10,600+), the GPS pointed us to a false summit. GPS's are frequently but not always good. I can't say what percentage of the time under what conditions failures occur, but they're very common. I get GPS failures multiple times every hike I go on.

Roarmeister, anything to add?


Your experience sounds similar to mine. I carry a GPS on some backcountry trips because it's an easy, quick way to verify my position IF I can get a fix. In the areas I frequently go I wouldn't be surprised if coverage was <50%. It's not unusual for me to decide that there isn't going to be enough open ground on a given trip and leave the GPS at home. I haven't tried the GPS units with built in topo maps yet so my experience is is limited to the in car units and my basic hiking model(s). Either way, I can't imagine leaving the map, compass & altimeter at home.


While out and about in the great wilds, I can usually get some pretty good accuracy even under heavy tree/brush cover. I have located caches to within 1 metre of the given co-ordinates on the GPSr in the bush although that was more luck and coincidence than accuracy. I have also used it in the mountains of Kananaskis valley south of Banff and had no problems with the high cliff ridges blocking too much signal. My 60CSx is one of the better models that doesn't suffer nearly as much as the Etrex line as it uses a helix antenna and a high sensitive receiver chip.

The newer Colorado/Oregon/Etrex H series GPSr are also very capable receivers under cover. My receiver will often pick up 8-10 channels in my home and almost always 10 or better channels outdoors. IN testing at my office tower in the middle of the bldg, I usually only get 2/3 channels because of the blockage with the structure.

Another factor is the ability to use the WAAS or ground based stations to increase the accuracy by a factor of 2-3x. In mountain cover you probably won't get WAAS reception but where I am on the prairies the nearest WAAS station is Winnipeg which was turned on last summer. The best accuracy I've noted on the receiver is 1.8 metres which is extremely good.

As far as maps go, I use both the 1:50k Canadian Topo and the North American City Navigator maps and switch to whichever makes the most sense to use. When I mentioned in my original article that I had problems with road locations - yes that has happened but it is always because of what tools the company used to generate the maps in the first place. Not every map will be bang on all the time, especially in areas of high urban development so they issue yearly updates.

When out camping, I probably don't use the GPSr as much as I will do when geocaching because I am not interested or require the higher accuracy but it is fun to create a track and then load it up in the computer or Google Earth and find out where I have been. smile The added sensors for altitude and compass readouts are bonus and satisfy my curiosity more than me using them correctly.

Anything else you curious about?
Posted by: benjammin

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/09/08 04:33 PM

Digressing for a moment, is anyone else fascinated at how many coincidental phenomena exist that aid in navigation? I mean, it isn't like someone stuck a bunch of arrows all around and little monuments, but I find it beyond coincidence and intriguing that, with a little mental effort on our part, virtually all the answers are there for us. It just seems like someone created this system where the answers weren't obvious, but if we sat and thought about it and applied our reasoning ability some, we could solve the equations that help us get around. It is almost like someone wanted us to go explore and discover and figure it all out, but they made it so we had to earn it. Everything from the magnetic pole, to the starfield, to time, to trigonometry, to rf propogation, it is all there, but had to be figured out first before we could see it.

It reminds me of handing a kid a paper with a bunch of numbered dots, telling him to connect them in order, then to color the resulting geometric shapes a certain way, based on certain rules. Only after doing it all can the kid see that he has made a picture of a sailboat on the water. This is just way too cool.

Now we have GPS, and so all those skills we had to develop along the way aren't so necessary anymore; just push a button and all the answers are there. At least until the button breaks, in which case we get to re-learn all those great methods again.
Posted by: clarktx

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/10/08 02:42 PM

The only thing that saved them was, when they reached the edge of the cliff, the GPS announced "You have arrived".

If you own a car GPS you know its true!
Posted by: comms

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/11/08 02:11 AM

I have the Garmin etrex vista but never uploaded the after market North American City Navigator CD. Is it worth the 75-$100 for this purchase?
Posted by: Russ

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/11/08 02:34 AM

I do all my trip planning using Garmin/Mapsource software, North American City Navigator being a big part of the app.
Posted by: SwampDonkey

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/11/08 03:13 AM

I was working in the bush today and tested my Garmin Nuvi off-road. If you are on a track and drive off the road it says "Re-calculating" then it shows you driving on a blank screen; the directions in the headliner say "navigate to unpaved road" or to named highway if you are close to one. I was in an area of old overgrown roads and very new roads, the GPS gave me bad information for most of the day. I find it works well on main establihed roads and in towns/cities.

Mike
Posted by: comms

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/11/08 05:30 AM

Great feedback SwampDonkey.
Posted by: KenK

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/11/08 03:07 PM

For you folks who have had problems getting a GPS lock in vegitative cover or in canyons, I'll second the recommendation to try out the Garmin high senstivity receivers. Their ability to lock is amazing compared to older units.

Ken
Posted by: Susan

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/11/08 03:59 PM

You can buy a GPS, but you can't buy common sense.

If the GPS isn't working correctly, or you don't know how to read it, or don't know how to figure, or don't know how to read a map, or don't know how to think, you're still stuck, even if you're holding a GPS in your hand.

Electronics are no replacement for brains.

Sue
Posted by: comms

Re: GPS vs Common Sense - 08/11/08 05:55 PM

That's what PLB's are for grin