GPS's now cheaper than a good compass!!!

"Dave McLaughlin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The world's going mad. You can now buy a cheap GPS for less than the
cost of a decent compass!!

Have a look at http://www.gpsw.co.uk/details/prod1165.html for the GPS,
and

http://www.outdoorgarage.com/acatalog/copy_of_Silva_Compass_54B_360_6400_360_Military_Compass.html

Quoted message said:

for the compass.
Time to sell the Silva shares and get into Duracell? :-)
--
Dave McLaughlin

If anyone's serious about getting a Silva 54, they ought to try the one
below as well. I think it's easier to use, and probably tougher.

http://www.adventureshop.co.uk/suunto/handbearing_compass.htm

--
M Stewart
Milton Keynes, UK
http://www.megalith.freeserve.co.uk/oddimage.htm

In article <[email hidden]>, Malcolm Stewart
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Dave McLaughlin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The world's going mad. You can now buy a cheap GPS for less than the
cost of a decent compass!!

Have a look at http://www.gpsw.co.uk/details/prod1165.html for the GPS,
and

http://www.outdoorgarage.com/acatalog/copy_of_Silva_Compass_54B_360_6400
_360_Military_Compass.html

Quoted message said:

for the compass.
Time to sell the Silva shares and get into Duracell? :-)
--
Dave McLaughlin

If anyone's serious about getting a Silva 54, they ought to try the one
below as well. I think it's easier to use, and probably tougher.

http://www.adventureshop.co.uk/suunto/handbearing_compass.htm

They are easy to use and very tough but you can't use them to take
bearings from or plot bearings to the map. You need a separate
protractor for that (unlike most of the Silva / Suunto offerings).

--

Dominic Sexton

"Dave McLaughlin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

The world's going mad. You can now buy a cheap GPS for less than the
cost of a decent compass!!

Is there a GPS that wieghs less than a decent compass ?

Malcolm Stewart said:

If anyone's serious about getting a Silva 54, they ought to try the one
below as well. I think it's easier to use, and probably tougher.

Quoted message said:

http://www.adventureshop.co.uk/suunto/handbearing_compass.htm

It's much easier to use, and probably the toughest thing I carry on a
walk. I've had one (or its predecessor) for a few decades.
--
Chris Malcolm [email hidden] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Dominic Sexton said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Malcolm Stewart
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Dave McLaughlin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The world's going mad. You can now buy a cheap GPS for less than the
cost of a decent compass!!

Have a look at http://www.gpsw.co.uk/details/prod1165.html for the GPS,
and

http://www.outdoorgarage.com/acatalog/copy_of_Silva_Compass_54B_360_6400
_360_Military_Compass.html

Quoted message said:

for the compass.
Time to sell the Silva shares and get into Duracell? :-)
--
Dave McLaughlin

If anyone's serious about getting a Silva 54, they ought to try the one
below as well. I think it's easier to use, and probably tougher.

http://www.adventureshop.co.uk/suunto/handbearing_compass.htm

Quoted message said:

They are easy to use and very tough but you can't use them to take
bearings from or plot bearings to the map. You need a separate
protractor for that (unlike most of the Silva / Suunto offerings).

You don't need to plot bearings on a map if you've got a GPS. For
example, to triangulate a distant point from two bearings, project a
waypoint which is too far from each position along the indicated
bearing, plot a route which includes both bearing lines, display the
route, and see where they cross. If you want to see where it is on a
paper map, put a waypoint there to get the map co-ords.

It's much easier to do that in the wind and rain than draw lines on a
paper map :-)

--
Chris Malcolm [email hidden] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

In article <[email hidden]>, Chris Malcolm
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Dominic Sexton said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Malcolm Stewart
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Dave McLaughlin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> The world's going mad. You can now buy a cheap GPS for less than the
> cost of a decent compass!!
>
> Have a look at http://www.gpsw.co.uk/details/prod1165.html for the GPS,
> and
>
http://www.outdoorgarage.com/acatalog/copy_of_Silva_Compass_54B_360_6400
_360_Military_Compass.html
> for the compass.
> Time to sell the Silva shares and get into Duracell? :-)
> --
> Dave McLaughlin

If anyone's serious about getting a Silva 54, they ought to try the one
below as well. I think it's easier to use, and probably tougher.

http://www.adventureshop.co.uk/suunto/handbearing_compass.htm

Quoted message said:

They are easy to use and very tough but you can't use them to take
bearings from or plot bearings to the map. You need a separate
protractor for that (unlike most of the Silva / Suunto offerings).

You don't need to plot bearings on a map if you've got a GPS. For
example, to triangulate a distant point from two bearings, project a
waypoint which is too far from each position along the indicated
bearing, plot a route which includes both bearing lines, display the
route, and see where they cross. If you want to see where it is on a
paper map, put a waypoint there to get the map co-ords.

It's much easier to do that in the wind and rain than draw lines on a
paper map :-)

I can't remember the last time I drew lines on a paper map! Your method
will work but is far fiddlier than using a protractor compass with the
map and you are solving a problem which is very rare in navigation -
working out the position of a feature.

In normal navigation we are more concerned about where we are than where
other things are. Much of the time we travel along linear features such
as a ridge, path or stream. All it takes then is one quick sight to a
feature to the side which is easily identifiable on the map. Get the
bearing with the compass, refer the compass to the map in seconds and
you find where you are along the feature.

Similarly you can use an altimeter (or the altitude from a GPS ;-) to
very quickly fix your position on a sloping ridge - if the contours are
easily read it is much quicker than trying to plot a grid ref.

--

Dominic Sexton

Chris Malcolm said:

You don't need to plot bearings on a map if you've got a GPS. For
example, to triangulate a distant point from two bearings, project a
waypoint which is too far from each position along the indicated
bearing, plot a route which includes both bearing lines, display the
route, and see where they cross. If you want to see where it is on a
paper map, put a waypoint there to get the map co-ords.

It's much easier to do that in the wind and rain than draw lines on a
paper map :-)

If I change plan on a walk, decide I need to go *that* way, it takes a
few seconds to get the bearing off the map with a protractor compass.
That's a lot quicker than buggering about with a GPS, and also far more
likely to be something I want to do than triangulating distant points
from two bearings.

The lack of ability to use the Suunto as a protractor was why I got a
Silva 54, but it must be said I rarely use the sighting aspect of it,
and I'd be okay witha "normal" Silva 4.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Dominic Sexton said:

I can't remember the last time I drew lines on a paper map! Your method
will work but is far fiddlier than using a protractor compass with the
map and you are solving a problem which is very rare in navigation -
working out the position of a feature.

In normal navigation we are more concerned about where we are than where
other things are. Much of the time we travel along linear features such
as a ridge, path or stream. All it takes then is one quick sight to a
feature to the side which is easily identifiable on the map. Get the
bearing with the compass, refer the compass to the map in seconds and
you find where you are along the feature.

This is much easier with a GPS though. You push a button, and you know
where you are, including in zero visibility when a special sighting
compass is pretty well moot. The key for good navigation without a GPS
is know where you are the whole time, and then you never have to work it
out as a distinct process.

The main problem in navigation shouldn't be working out where you are,
it should be working out the best way to get to where you're going.
Conditions you can experience for yourself on the ground that aren't
obvious from a map mean it can be worth changing plans, and that isn't
easy with a GPS because entering new routes in the field just doesn't
work well, at least on units I've seen. With a protractor compass,
OTOH, it's easy to make new plans and routes on the fly.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:17:59 +0100, Peter Clinch <[email hidden]>
wrote:

| Dominic Sexton wrote:
|
| > I can't remember the last time I drew lines on a paper map! Your method
| > will work but is far fiddlier than using a protractor compass with the
| > map and you are solving a problem which is very rare in navigation -
| > working out the position of a feature.
| >
| > In normal navigation we are more concerned about where we are than where
| > other things are. Much of the time we travel along linear features such
| > as a ridge, path or stream. All it takes then is one quick sight to a
| > feature to the side which is easily identifiable on the map. Get the
| > bearing with the compass, refer the compass to the map in seconds and
| > you find where you are along the feature.
|
| This is much easier with a GPS though. You push a button, and you know
| where you are, including in zero visibility when a special sighting
| compass is pretty well moot. The key for good navigation without a GPS
| is know where you are the whole time, and then you never have to work it
| out as a distinct process.
|
| The main problem in navigation shouldn't be working out where you are,
| it should be working out the best way to get to where you're going.
| Conditions you can experience for yourself on the ground that aren't
| obvious from a map mean it can be worth changing plans, and that isn't
| easy with a GPS because entering new routes in the field just doesn't
| work well, at least on units I've seen. With a protractor compass,
| OTOH, it's easy to make new plans and routes on the fly.

Which is why I carry both Compass and GPS

--
Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
Beware of anyone posting X-No-Archive yes,
they must have something to hide or something to be ashamed of.
Your task, should you wish to accept it, is to determine *what*.

Dave Fawthrop said:

Which is why I carry both Compass and GPS

I generally don't bother with the GPS for walking (it's very useful on
skis, but that brings a whole set of tricky problems that don't really
apply to walking). If you keep in touch with where you are then it
doesn't really have anything to tell you, except that you've taken
something you don't need...

Having said that, constantly staying in touch with your position does
take a degree of effort and if it's the sort of effort that dents your
pleasure then it makes a degree of sense not to bother if you can throw
some technology at it. For me, though, the staying in touch with where
I am on the map enhances my day rather than diminishes it because I have
much more of a feel for the landscape I'm moving through. I want to go
to my next point because I can see from the map /why/ I'm going there,
not because I'm slave to a GOTO arrow.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch said:

Dave Fawthrop said:

Which is why I carry both Compass and GPS

I generally don't bother with the GPS for walking (it's very useful on
skis, but that brings a whole set of tricky problems that don't really
apply to walking). If you keep in touch with where you are then it
doesn't really have anything to tell you, except that you've taken
something you don't need...

Having said that, constantly staying in touch with your position does
take a degree of effort and if it's the sort of effort that dents your
pleasure then it makes a degree of sense not to bother if you can throw
some technology at it. For me, though, the staying in touch with where
I am on the map enhances my day rather than diminishes it because I have
much more of a feel for the landscape I'm moving through. I want to go
to my next point because I can see from the map /why/ I'm going there,
not because I'm slave to a GOTO arrow.

I've never had a GPS (although I guess I'd like one) but I agree
that one of the fun parts of walking is navigation. Having said that,
I rarely move outside areas that aren't bounded in some way by
endstops like roads or rivers, but I do enjoy maintaining my
current position on the map as accurately as possible.

I would like a GPS though for tracking my route and all the post
walk stats. Just haven't managed to steel myself to buy one -
like all boys with toys I'd like a do everything possible expensive
one that's got enough processing powers to plot a route from here
to Timbuktu, and they're always too expensive, even as the techmology
moves on and the same features get cheaper, there's always the
next model with even more wizzy usless stuff on it. So, I may
never get one!

--
Nobby

Nobody Here said:

I would like a GPS though for tracking my route and all the post
walk stats.

It's not really navigating, of course, but if you want this ability then
a GPS is far and away the best and easiest way of gathering such info.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch said:

Nobody Here said:

I would like a GPS though for tracking my route and all the post
walk stats.

It's not really navigating, of course, but if you want this ability then
a GPS is far and away the best and easiest way of gathering such info.

Yeah, I didn't mean tracking in real time, I meant to record after the event
where I had been. - I usually mark it on the map in pencil anyway, but
I've in mind a compter map of some sort.

--
Nobby

Peter Clinch <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

If I change plan on a walk, decide I need to go *that* way, it takes a
few seconds to get the bearing off the map with a protractor compass.
That's a lot quicker than buggering about with a GPS, and also far more
likely to be something I want to do than triangulating distant points
from two bearings.

That's true, but I adopt the P**l S******s method if I think I might
change plan during a walk. I have the route waypoints uploaded, but
I always plot some extra waypoints at key places such as path crossings,
footbridges, etc surrounding the planned route. This gives a good
idea roughly where I am relative to a set of fixed points, wherever I
wander.

Of course I don't get far off the beaten track these days, but the same
system can be used to plot key natural features,
--
Gordon Harris

Stuart <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Dave McLaughlin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

The world's going mad. You can now buy a cheap GPS for less than the
cost of a decent compass!!

Is there a GPS that wieghs less than a decent compass ?

That's another point!
If you lose your paddle, and your canoe is drifting towards dangerous
water, it's no use tying a cord to a magnetic compass and throwing it
ashore as an anchor, or throwing it over the paddle to draw it towards
you.
You can with a GPS, and the bigger and heavier the better.
--
Gordon Harris
(up the creek)

Peter Clinch <[email hidden]> wrote in news:3h7o9tFff806U1
@individual.net:

Quoted message said:

If I change plan on a walk, decide I need to go *that* way, it takes a
few seconds to get the bearing off the map with a protractor compass.
That's a lot quicker than buggering about with a GPS, and also far more
likely to be something I want to do than triangulating distant points
from two bearings.

As well as my intended route (actually I use a saved track but that's
another story), I scatter-bomb the area I am walking with auto-numbered
waypoints on every path junction or other feature or likely aiming point,
it doesn't take long to do using Tracklogs. These get printed on the A4 map
I am using, so if my plans change, it is still easy to see where I am
relative to these waypoints.

Sometimes I might just wander in a general direction taking whatever path
looks interesting. These waypoints then allow me to work out where I am
quickly without the need to plot a map reference, something like: "I'm 1/3
of the way from W23 to W24."

John

The message <[email hidden]>
from Peter Clinch <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I would like a GPS though for tracking my route and all the post
walk stats.

Quoted message said:

It's not really navigating, of course, but if you want this ability then
a GPS is far and away the best and easiest way of gathering such info.

It is the reason I got a GPS in the first place and the principal reason
why I almost always carry one when out walking these days. I do
occasionally use some of the navigation functions in an effort to
familiarise myself with the GPS but mostly I find the preparation too
much bother particularly if it involves scanning and calibrating a map
in Ozi.

Last Thursday I actually went as far as putting a route in for a short
walk in Mid Wales (using Fugawi for the first time) but the only time I
looked at the GPS during the whole walk was after about 10 minutes to
belatedly turn the track on. OTOH I had the map (a laminated sheet of A4
blown up from 1:50000 to 1:25000) in one hand or the other at all times
except when I stopped to tie my boot laces up (which was often). And no
I didn't use my compass either, nor my whistle, nor the anorak and I
didn't touch my sandwiches or water until I was back to the car. What a
waste of effort in lugging that and and otherwise empty rucksack around
for 3 and a bit hours. :-)

--
Roger Chapman so far this year 43 summits
New - 20 (Marilyns 6, Nuttalls 5, Outlying Fells 10)
Repeats - 23 (Marilyns 7, Nuttalls 14, Wainwrights 12, Outlying Fells 0)

John Yale said:

As well as my intended route (actually I use a saved track but that's
another story), I scatter-bomb the area I am walking with auto-numbered
waypoints on every path junction or other feature or likely aiming point,
it doesn't take long to do using Tracklogs.

"Every possible aiming point" is anything at all distinctive on the map
though, including linear features which don't really work as points.
And in some cases "distinctive on the map" can mean slope aspects,
contour re-entrants and the like.

Quoted message said:

These get printed on the A4 map I am using

Depending on the area, this is potentially going to give you a map that
consists of nothing but numbered waypoints obscuring the actual map
information!

It'll do you in most situations, but it isn't as versatile as just
making it up according to what's needed (assuming you've got the
navigational chops to do that). I don't take a GPS walking because it
just doesn't really help me if I'm already fairly happy with where I am,
and I'm not interested in archiving where I've been. And it's not like
I don't have one and am just arguing against them because I'm a luddite...

Seeing how well good orienteers navigate I know I've got a long way to
go, but they can pick their way through reasonably dense plantation
forest straight to a point over 100s of meters where you wouldn't even
get a GPS signal! I aspire to be that in tune with the map as it
describes the ground, and a GPS removes me from that rather than gets me
nearer.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

In article <[email hidden]>, Gordon Harris
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Stuart <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Dave McLaughlin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

The world's going mad. You can now buy a cheap GPS for less than the
cost of a decent compass!!

Is there a GPS that wieghs less than a decent compass ?

That's another point!
If you lose your paddle, and your canoe is drifting towards dangerous
water, it's no use tying a cord to a magnetic compass and throwing it
ashore as an anchor, or throwing it over the paddle to draw it towards
you.
You can with a GPS, and the bigger and heavier the better.

Ah but your base plate compass has a bigger area than a GPS and is less
aerodynamic making it a much better paddle...

--

Dominic Sexton