Are other, dedicated GPS units much better? More sensitive receivers? Any GPS
is dependent on getting multiple satellite
signals.
More sensitive receivers, better antenna. My decent quality Garmin
Montana 650 does a very good job. Capable of sub 5m accuracy, typically
seldom exceeds 10m even under cover. It is the EM1 of the gps world. I
went out with the Nat'l Park tech who uses a Trimble with < 1m accuracy
for which taxpayers forked over 10x the price of mine. Then there are
suryerors' instruments + $10x again.
Sure, it's a little flaky under tree cover, but a little watching and moving
around, combined with the contour lines, roads, streams and trails on the map,
can actually be quite useful in locating oneself.
Yes, from the track I posted one can guess the amount of cover. One
thing which concerns us (Trails Committee, Nat'l Pk, etc.) is the number
of people getting disoriented in our maze of trails. e.g. young mother
w/ infant in stroller and a toddler getting turned around and exiting
after dark 4mi from her vehicle. Luckily she ran into a friend of mine
who got her out and drove her around to her car.
I've created some QR codes to post at trailheads linking to an
down-loadable map which is keyed to on-the-ground signage which the NP
is in the process of installing before the summer flood. However I would
like to link to a free app like your suggestion Moose (or another) and
overlaying our trail system... work in progress. I've conversed with
Scott G. about NFC tags but so far the Park isn't on board and that's
where the funding comes from.
Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|