Qstarz Gps View Download
Sharyl Kimbro
Over the course of the lap, both devices report pretty similar traces, except for the trace recorded by the QStarz 818XT at Luffield. You can see this in the red trace that leaves the track completely for a while before finally rejoining the circuit. A more detailed view is show below.
1.Although the LT-8000GT will normally pick up a satellite signal within 1-2 minutes after powering on the device, it may take longer time if you are in an area with more geographic obstructions. Please make sure you have placed it in a position that has clear view to the sky and not obstructed by metal objects.
2.Please try to use Cold Start your LT-8000GT in GPS mode and search again for the GPS satellite.
I have got it working using the supplied data view software and the mini USB cable into the laptop. Lightroom does a good job of embedding and dsipalying the nav info into photos so happy with that part.
I have not tried to get the qtravel software or dataviewer software to connect via bluetooth.
Maybe there is a way connecting the device to the PC via bluetooth. I believe when a bluetooth device connects a com port is assigned to it. Then you can configure the software to communicate with the device over the assigned com port.
The 32 channels is a little superfluous as there are only 24 GPS satellites, plus a few spares and some WAAS/SBAS birds, but only a limited number (up to 12) can be viewed and tracked at any one time. Each satellite that is tracked uses a single channel, therefore realistically you only need a maximum of 13.
This was then followed by a trip to Silicon Valley California, where we had a 2 day road trip around Yosemite valley, and a further visit to San Francisco. In Yosemite it was extremely cold, never coming above freezing. The cold didn't affect the Qstarz GPS at all. I did have some slight issues with frozen fingers... I kept the GPS in my jacket pocket, but I had to have the PDA in my hand to view the screen. Thankfully I had my skiing gloves with me...
I have found an anomaly.
The viewing direction of the photo is always 0 degrees if the following image has the same coordinates.
This is quite understandable.
However, I have certainly changed my location between the two photos.
I guess I will have to check the way I assign GPS data to my photos.
I have now checked the log file of my GPS data logger.
The device has indeed logged the same position over and over again in a time frame of 23 seconds.
There are two photos in this time frame. In these seconds I have moved at least 10m.
Such sequences occur in the log file again and again and then cause the error in determining the viewing direction of those pictures.
As a backup and test facility it may be worth running a GPS logger additionally on a nearby mobile phone. If the track drops out on both it may be an interference source. If only the Solmetta then possibly review firmware, power and settings?
To transfer data from the unit to your computer, you have two options: USB cable or bluetooth. Naturally, battery life is consumed a tad faster if you use bluetooth connectivity. There are two reasons to connect your GPS to your computer: transfer logged data to your computer (so you can view the trek and waypoints on a map, see where each photo was taken, etc); tether your GPS to your laptop (or PDA) so you can see where you are while driving (via MS Streets & Trips or any other GPS-compliant software).
Since I had already proven that the GT-120 could track accurately, I took a more leisurely route this time. I drove by some well known landmarks so that I would have a good visual reference for geotagging. At one point in my route, I took the GT-120 and the QStarz units and hid both of them in the storage console of my car, while leaving both of my Garmin units on the dash. I wanted to see how the GT-120 tracked without a clear satellite view, and would compare it to the QStarz.
When we embarked on the study, construction of the busway was under way and its opening was scheduled for spring 2009. The original study design envisaged three annual phases of survey data collection from the cohort: one before the intervention (phase 1, in 2009) and two after (phase 2, in 2010, and phase 3, in 2011). However, the completion of the busway was significantly delayed, and by the time it was formally opened our third annual phase of data collection was already more than half complete. We kept the evolving situation under review, reflecting on the scientific and operational options for managing the unpredictable implementation timetable in our regular progress reports to the Public Health Research programme and at the regular meetings of our independent study steering committee. With the support of the steering committee, once the busway was opened we sought a funded extension to the original study design, which was approved by the Public Health Research programme. We thereby extended the study to a fourth year (phase 4, in 2012) to obtain post-intervention data to support the main evaluation of the busway. The core questionnaire was reissued to all participants who had taken part in previous phases, and phase 4 thereby effectively replaced the original phase 2 as the phase of the study in which the main outcomes of the intervention were ascertained.
The intercept survey was conducted in two phases, each lasting 14 consecutive days, in July and September 2012. The survey was carried out at each of five sites along the busway with two interviewers present, one assigned to path users and one assigned to bus users at each site. To ensure recruitment of a quasi-random sample of users, each interviewer was instructed to approach the next adult walking or cycling on the path, or waiting for or alighting from a guided bus, after completing data collection from the previous participant. Users who were unable to complete the survey were provided with a date-stamped, credit-card-sized survey card giving details of how they could later complete a web-based version of the survey. If a user declined to participate in the survey, this was recorded along with details about the size of the group in which they were travelling (if any) and the number of children in the group. When there were no potential users on either the bus or the path, interviewers sampled from the other user group. Data collection commenced at 06.30 daily and ceased at 19.00. Interviewers worked in shifts between these times.
We describe the composition of the achieved sample of busway users later (see Chapter 5, Patterns and predictors of busway use). Respondents were not invited to become part of the main study cohort, but some of those who completed the survey and gave consent to be reapproached were subsequently invited to take part in a qualitative interview.
We also explored the commuting contexts, decisions and experiences of participants in a series of qualitative substudies. This entailed more than 120 semistructured interviews, as well as a photo-elicitation study, ethnographic participant observation, media analysis and a qualitative study of the final stakeholder forum for the project.
In 2009 and 2010, participants in the main study cohort who had reported using different usual modes of transport for commuting were interviewed about their travel to and from work, typical journeys, routes and modes of transport, and time and other factors that shaped their commuting choices and possible alternatives.50 A total of 49 participants were interviewed in two phases: 19 between March and August 2009 and 30 between March and September 2010.
Our evaluation of the intervention included an analysis of discourse about the busway in print and social media.53 Newspaper articles dating from 21 October 2004 to 21 November 2012 were retrieved from the LexisNexis database (LexisNexis Group, London, UK), which includes national newspapers of various formats as well as local titles. Tweets were identified from the online archive Topsy (www.topsy.com; Topsy Labs, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA). In addition, the media analysis incorporated data from the semistructured interviews conducted in 2013, as described above.
The qualitative substudies produced a range of qualitative data, most notably interview transcripts but also participant-produced photos, ethnographic field notes, and documents (newspaper articles and tweets). All qualitative data were analysed using variations of thematic content analysis in which data were categorised and synthesised into emerging themes. The initial coding was usually carried out by the researcher who collected the data in the context of a particular substudy, with subsequent refinement and interpretation in collaboration with other members of the research team. Various theoretical frameworks informed particular analyses, for example practice theory and normalisation process theory from the fields of medical sociology and anthropology, respectively (see Chapter 4, Active commuting in context, and Chapter 5, Understanding the intervention).
dca57bae1f