eTrex Summit
kevin
mentioned and I said I had seen a message saying that it was available in
the uk for £177 here follow the message. I have not delt with this company
before but I think I maybe checking my bank account.
http://www.future-horizons.co.uk/ has them for £177 inc. VAT.
"Robin Lucas-Evans" <ro...@altitude3000.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8k0b4j$5qi$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
> I've seen the standard eTrex advertised for sale in the UK, but not the
> eTrex Summit, which looks a far more useful unit for use in the hills
> (compass and altimeter as well as OSGB coordinates).
>
> Does anyone know where I can order the Summit in the UK (and how much
> I'll have to pay for it...)
>
> Cheers
>
> Robin.
>
>
Philip Powell
<ke...@g7nhw.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>"Robin Lucas-Evans" <ro...@altitude3000.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:8k0b4j$5qi$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>> I've seen the standard eTrex advertised for sale in the UK, but not the
>> eTrex Summit, which looks a far more useful unit for use in the hills
>> (compass and altimeter as well as OSGB coordinates).
>>
>> Does anyone know where I can order the Summit in the UK (and how much
>> I'll have to pay for it...)
>During one of the many discussions during the weekend the eTrex Summit was
>mentioned and I said I had seen a message saying that it was available in
>the uk for £177 here follow the message. I have not delt with this company
>before but I think I maybe checking my bank account.
>
>http://www.future-horizons.co.uk/ has them for £177 inc. VAT.
+ 5ukp p/p I believe.
Still beats the price I found of 189ukp [inc p/p] at
http://www.scws.com/gps/ [based in Cheltenham for anyone in that area].
--
Philip Powell
Looking north across the Derwent Valley and Northumberland
to The Cheviot
Gordon Harris
>mentioned and I said I had seen a message saying that it was available in
>the uk for £177 here follow the message. I have not delt with this company
>before but I think I maybe checking my bank account.
>
>http://www.future-horizons.co.uk/ has them for £177 inc. VAT.
>
How many track points can it store before wrapping/stopping on each
track?
A site I looked at last night claimed an exclusive download to give 20
or 30 routes at 50 waypoints each.
--
Gordon
Gordon Harris
<gor...@g3snx.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <8ki8g5$kp2$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>, kevin
><ke...@g7nhw.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>>During one of the many discussions during the weekend the eTrex Summit was
>>mentioned and I said I had seen a message saying that it was available in
>>the uk for £177 here follow the message. I have not delt with this company
>>before but I think I maybe checking my bank account.
>>
>>http://www.future-horizons.co.uk/ has them for £177 inc. VAT.
>>
>Does anyone have the answer to Paul's question yet:
>How many track points can it store before wrapping/stopping on each
>track?
>
me browse the manual and ask a lot of questions before buying.
Plotted the route home by car, but have been unable to download the
track to the PC, although I can get the waypoints uploaded to the Etrex
ok.
It's smaller and neater, but all buttons have been removed from the
front panel and placed on the sides.
I miss the easy access to the "pan" control, but like the way you can go
to the waypoint list, select a waypoint and "beam" yourself there.
You can also survey all the waypoints stored, up to the maximum 800mile
range, and turning the compass round swings them round on the screen,
making it easier to orient yourself towards any point.
On the GPS12, I think you can only "see" the nearest 10 waypoints to
your current position, and it isn't as easy to "transport" yourself with
the GPS12.
The Etrex compass is easy to calibrate, and works like a lightly damped
magnetic compass. The barometer agreed with my watch barometer when I
checked them out.
I still think the GPS12 is a good buy, but half the number of batteries
is a big bonus.
I did two side by side switch-on tests with overcast sky, and the Etrex
beat the GPS12 by several seconds each time, in acquiring a fix.
--
Gordon
kevin
"Gordon Harris" <gor...@g3snx.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:lOIOoDAt...@g3snx.demon.co.uk...
> How many track points can it store before wrapping/stopping on each
> track?
>
> or 30 routes at 50 waypoints each.
> --
> Gordon
I asked Garmin European support about how the track log is built up to
figure out
how usable my Etrex would be to map out routes in the Norwegian
mountains.The
following landed in my inbox several hours later...
----------SNIP---------
The automatic tracklog recording criteria that is used in our GPS's is
based on a resolution figure (normally 82ft). Basically the GPS projects
a possibly location from your current position based on your current
course and speed, if the next GPS fix differs from this projected
location by more than the resolution figure, a new point is added to the
tracklog.
So if you are following a steady course and speed, less points are
recorded than if you were manouvering a lot.
----------SNIP---------
And in a later mail...
----------SNIP---------
The tracklog is 2000 points. When a tracklog is saved it is reduced to
250 points.
----------SNIP---------
The manual I have downloaded from the website tells me that the unit has
500 waypoints
1 route with 50 waypoints
10 saved tracks
The problem I have seen at the moment is the automatic tracklog noted above
which will not record if you are walking very slowly, rather than a
recording a point after a certain period. I have read that garmin are
planning to change this soon in a software upgrade.
I have a unit on order and will do some trails and report back when it
arrives.
--
Kevin Mckane
Looking west to Bodmin Moor
84 Wainwrights 102 Nuttals
ke...@g7nhw.freeserve.co.uk
Gordon Harris
<ke...@g7nhw.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>
>"Gordon Harris" <gor...@g3snx.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:lOIOoDAt...@g3snx.demon.co.uk...
>> In article <8ki8g5$kp2$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>, kevin
>> Does anyone have the answer to Paul's question yet:
>> How many track points can it store before wrapping/stopping on each
>> track?
>>
> The automatic tracklog recording criteria that is used in our GPS's is
> based on a resolution figure (normally 82ft). Basically the GPS projects
> a possibly location from your current position based on your current
> course and speed, if the next GPS fix differs from this projected
> location by more than the resolution figure, a new point is added to the
> tracklog.
> So if you are following a steady course and speed, less points are
> recorded than if you were manouvering a lot.
I have discovered you can specify whether the Etrex uses the compass or
the GPS info to plot, based on a speed threshold which you can set.
> ----------SNIP---------
> And in a later mail...
> ----------SNIP---------
> The tracklog is 2000 points. When a tracklog is saved it is reduced to
>250 points.
>
The percentage use of memory is reported, rather than waypoints used.
>----------SNIP---------
>
>The manual I have downloaded from the website tells me that the unit has
>
>500 waypoints
>1 route with 50 waypoints
Looking at the routes screen on mine, it states "20 routes available",
which is correct, I wonder?
>10 saved tracks
>
>The problem I have seen at the moment is the automatic tracklog noted above
>which will not record if you are walking very slowly, rather than a
>recording a point after a certain period.
See above, it seems to use the compass for a dead reckoning plot below a
specified speed, (I set mine at 2mph for the time being).
> I have read that garmin are
>planning to change this soon in a software upgrade.
Mine is at 2.02
>I have a unit on order and will do some trails and report back when it
>arrives.
>--
Thanks, I plotted my car journey home after purchase, but have been
unable to download the track to OziExplorer, so maybe the Etrex is not
fully supported yet by OE.
Thanks for your comments.
--
Gordon
Paul Saunders
<snip info>
Thanks.
--
Paul Saunders
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
uk.rec.walkers
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/urw/urw.html
Paul Saunders
news:8lslu5$8dj$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
> The tracklog is 2000 points. When a tracklog is saved it is
reduced to
> 250 points.
What does saved mean exactly? They're not explaining this very
clearly are they? I'm assuming from this that there's a single track
recorder with 2000 points, and 10 save slots, when you save a track it
"compresses" it, thus losing detail. Can anyone confirm or deny this?
Sounds like the 10 tracks isn't such a good feature as I was hoping,
although it's still better than what I've currently got.
Paul Saunders
> Thanks, I plotted my car journey home after purchase, but have been
> unable to download the track to OziExplorer, so maybe the Etrex is
not
> fully supported yet by OE.
Are you using the very latest version? I've just checked and version
3.85.2 has just been released two days ago, I'm downloading it now.
According the program history page, eTrex support has been added, but
I didn't notice the Summit specified.
Ozi waypoint data does include an altitude field, so I would guess
that would support the summit waypoints.
kevin
"Paul Saunders" <pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8lt782$s9a$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> kevin <ke...@g7nhw.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:8lslu5$8dj$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> > The tracklog is 2000 points. When a tracklog is saved it is
> reduced to
> > 250 points.
>
> What does saved mean exactly? They're not explaining this very
> clearly are they? I'm assuming from this that there's a single track
> recorder with 2000 points, and 10 save slots, when you save a track it
> "compresses" it, thus losing detail. Can anyone confirm or deny this?
>
> Sounds like the 10 tracks isn't such a good feature as I was hoping,
> although it's still better than what I've currently got.
use the main memory. The best place to find out is the sci.geo.satellite-nav
newsgroup if you ask on there you a likely to get an answer.
--
Kevin Mckane ke...@g7nhw.freeserve.co.uk
kevin
"Gordon Harris" <gor...@g3snx.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xKALpBAOFgg5Ew6$@g3snx.demon.co.uk...
> which is correct, I wonder?
I think they changed it when they released the software update. They can,t
info in the manual that you can download from the website.
> >The problem I have seen at the moment is the automatic tracklog noted
above
> >which will not record if you are walking very slowly, rather than a
> >recording a point after a certain period.
>
> See above, it seems to use the compass for a dead reckoning plot below a
> specified speed, (I set mine at 2mph for the time being).
That is the speed that it changes over from compass to gps. The problem with
the tracklog is if you are walking but have not moved a certain distance
before it decides to log that point it will not log the new point. This can
leave the track not be a true recording of your movements.
>
> > I have read that garmin are
> >planning to change this soon in a software upgrade.
>
> Mine is at 2.02
>
> >I have a unit on order and will do some trails and report back when it
> >arrives.
> >--
> Thanks, I plotted my car journey home after purchase, but have been
> unable to download the track to OziExplorer, so maybe the Etrex is not
> fully supported yet by OE.
Oziexplorer has been setup for the Etrex for a couple of months. It even has
the Etrex symbol set.
If you want more info of the problem with the tracklog have a look at some
of the messages on sci.geo.satellite-nav newsgroup.
>
> Thanks for your comments.
> --
> Gordon
Gordon Harris
<ke...@g7nhw.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>
>"Paul Saunders" <pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:8lt782$s9a$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
>> kevin <ke...@g7nhw.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:8lslu5$8dj$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>>
>> > The tracklog is 2000 points. When a tracklog is saved it is
>> reduced to
>> > 250 points.
>>
>> What does saved mean exactly? They're not explaining this very
>> clearly are they? I'm assuming from this that there's a single track
>> recorder with 2000 points, and 10 save slots, when you save a track it
>> "compresses" it, thus losing detail. Can anyone confirm or deny this?
>>
>> Sounds like the 10 tracks isn't such a good feature as I was hoping,
>> although it's still better than what I've currently got.
>I believe that it does compress the points when it saves so I think I will
>use the main memory.
<MeToo>
A similar thing happens on the GPS12 if you use "backtrack" I think, ie
the number of crumbs is reduced to those marking significant turns,
which is sometimes less than optimum.
> The best place to find out is the sci.geo.satellite-nav
>newsgroup if you ask on there you a likely to get an answer.
>Kevin Mckane ke...@g7nhw.freeserve.co.uk
--
Gordon
Roger Chapman
well (from Slickcode). I doubt if I will be contributing further to
this thread (other than to ask questions) as there seems to be much
to learn if one is to take advantage of all the available features
and at present I know too little to take advantage of any. :-)
--
Roger
Looking North over the Aire Valley (and Marley Gasworks) to Rombolds Moor
Paul Saunders
news:200007291...@zetnet.co.uk...
> In a moment of weakness I have followed the herd and bought one as
> well
Congratulations Roger, nice to have you with us! I'm sure you'll be
an expert on the subject before very long.
Philip Powell
<gor...@g3snx.demon.co.uk> writes
>> I have read that garmin are
>>planning to change this soon in a software upgrade.
>
>Mine is at 2.02
d/l 2.03 from Garmin's site.
>>I have a unit on order and will do some trails and report back when it
>>arrives.
>>--
>Thanks, I plotted my car journey home after purchase, but have been
>unable to download the track to OziExplorer, so maybe the Etrex is not
>fully supported yet by OE.
d/l ok here to OE 3.85 - although I see from Paul's posting that there
is a later version.
Gordon Harris
<pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>Roger Chapman <r.ch...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:200007291...@zetnet.co.uk...
>
>> In a moment of weakness I have followed the herd and bought one as
>> well
>
>Congratulations Roger, nice to have you with us! I'm sure you'll be
>an expert on the subject before very long.
First impression is that it gives less control (like distance between
trackpoints), no proper panning, gives worse EPE figures than the GPS12,
but the multiple tracks are handy.
I don't think the plotted tracks are as precisely accurate as with the
GPS12 either, and have to say that the 12 is better *value for money*,
but I couldn't resist the other facilities . . .
I downloded 3.85 of OE, and updated the Etrex software to 2.04 and there
can definitely be 20 routes of 50 waypoints.
Like Paul, I find that feature less important than being able to save
different tracks, or legs of a walk. Handy on a week's jaunt.
When you download the saved and active tracks to PC you get em all, but
I then select the individual tracks after removing dud points, and save
in separate files.
--
Gordon
kevin
"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.org.uk> wrote in message
news:SJdiJVAh...@btinternet.com...
> In article <xKALpBAOFgg5Ew6$@g3snx.demon.co.uk>, Gordon Harris
> <gor...@g3snx.demon.co.uk> writes
> >> I have read that garmin are
> >>planning to change this soon in a software upgrade.
> >
> >Mine is at 2.02
>
> d/l 2.03 from Garmin's site.
>
haven,t seen any reports yet if it works.
Simon Caldwell
<r.ch...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>In a moment of weakness I have followed the herd and bought one as
>well (from Slickcode). I doubt if I will be contributing further to
>this thread (other than to ask questions) as there seems to be much
>to learn if one is to take advantage of all the available features
>and at present I know too little to take advantage of any. :-)
Oh no, not you as well - this is getting a bit like a vampire movie as
one by one everyone falls victim. Who'll be the last one left, to
save everyone by wielding a sachet of dried garlic and a sharpened
walking pole?
S.
--
Simon's Web Site is at http://users.breathemail.net/scaldwell
Now with added Skye Pages!
--
Sin has many tools, but a lie is the handle that fits them all
- Oliver Wendell Holmes
Paul Saunders
> First impression is that it gives less control (like distance
between
> trackpoints), no proper panning,
Don't you just hate it when they give you more but cut corners thus
giving you less?
I was suspicious about the lack of buttons, I like buttons, the more
the merrier. I really hate the marketing concept that "it's really
easy to use, only two buttons do everything!"
> gives worse EPE figures than the GPS12,
> but the multiple tracks are handy.
I was afraid of that, I think that only using two batteries is
equivalent to having power save mode permanently on. I presume it's
still accurate enough to be useable though?
> I don't think the plotted tracks are as precisely accurate as with
the
> GPS12 either, and have to say that the 12 is better *value for
money*,
> but I couldn't resist the other facilities . . .
The other facilities are highly desirable, pity that accuracy has to
suffer, but it's obviously going to be more accurate once you've
passed the point that the GPS12 would have run out of batteries and
track points. A rough track is better than no track at all.
> I downloded 3.85 of OE, and updated the Etrex software to 2.04 and
there
> can definitely be 20 routes of 50 waypoints.
That's good to hear, potentially very useful even if I don't use it
much myself.
I had a feeling that my GPS12 may not become completely redundant when
I get one. I can see advantages in both now, the eTrex for long,
lightweight trips, the GPS12 for greater accuracy on day walks (but
taking the eTrex also for it's other facilities). Perhaps I could use
the eTrex as a low power consumption track recorder, and use the GPS12
for occasional use, switching it on when needed for highly accurate
fixes.
Or would using two GPSs be the ultimate in walker sadness?
Dominic Sexton
<pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>> but the multiple tracks are handy.
>
>I was afraid of that, I think that only using two batteries is
>equivalent to having power save mode permanently on. I presume it's
>still accurate enough to be useable though?
Garmin's EPE has always been over optimistic (in reality the accuracy
was only within the EPE about 50% of the time).
Just because the EPE is higher in a different unit or with a different
software version it does not mean the unit is any less accurate.
--
Dominic Sexton
http://www.dscs.demon.co.uk/
Dominic Sexton
<pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>kevin <ke...@g7nhw.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:8lslu5$8dj$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
>> The tracklog is 2000 points. When a tracklog is saved it is
>reduced to
>> 250 points.
>
>What does saved mean exactly? They're not explaining this very
>clearly are they? I'm assuming from this that there's a single track
>recorder with 2000 points, and 10 save slots, when you save a track it
>"compresses" it, thus losing detail. Can anyone confirm or deny this?
>
>Sounds like the 10 tracks isn't such a good feature as I was hoping,
>although it's still better than what I've currently got.
I think it uses a similar system to the III / III+ which compress the
active log down to ~250 points and removes the time stamps from each
point in the compressed log.
In practice I don't think the loss of resolution will make much
difference to the record but losing the time stamps might be a bit of a
bind.
Trevor Dennis
>Don't you just hate it when they give you more but cut corners thus
>giving you less?
We do it all the time in the motor industry. ;)
--
Trevor Dennis
Paul Saunders
news:$zPSOXAB...@dscs.demon.co.uk...
> In article <8m09te$1ia$2...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>, Paul Saunders
> Garmin's EPE has always been over optimistic (in reality the
accuracy
> was only within the EPE about 50% of the time).
Are you sure about that, it seems pretty damn accurate with summit
heights (allowing for the geoid difference of course).
> Just because the EPE is higher in a different unit or with a
different
> software version it does not mean the unit is any less accurate.
That's good to hear.
Paul Saunders
> On the way home I got two nearside wheels on the edge of the tarmac
on a
> 50/60 mph RH bend and when the back end slid I over-corrected and
got in
> a right-hand slide. When I corrected that, the wheels gripped and
we
> became intimately involved with a dry-stone wall which spun us
through
> 180 degrees. Not a scratch, although the police insisted on a
hospital
> checkup, apart from Mavis having seat-belt bruises, so we were
lucky.
> The car is a write-off and I will be busy for a while getting
sorted.
Glad to hear you're ok, I've always said that driving to the hills is
the most dangerous part of a hill walk.
Paul Saunders
> I think it uses a similar system to the III / III+ which compress
the
> active log down to ~250 points and removes the time stamps from each
> point in the compressed log.
>
> In practice I don't think the loss of resolution will make much
> difference to the record but losing the time stamps might be a bit
of a
> bind.
I wasn't even aware that the track recorded timestamps. How could I
access this data? There doesn't seem to be a way of doing it in
OziExplorer.
Gordon Harris
<{d}@dscs.demon.co.uk> writes><pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>>
>>> gives worse EPE figures than the GPS12,
>>> but the multiple tracks are handy.
>>
>>I was afraid of that, I think that only using two batteries is
>>equivalent to having power save mode permanently on. I presume it's
>>still accurate enough to be useable though?
>
>was only within the EPE about 50% of the time).
>
>software version it does not mean the unit is any less accurate.
>
Etrex that eats batteries (about 3 hours duration on brand new dry AA
cells today) so it will be going back.....
.... or it will when I get some wheels. :-(
On the way home I got two nearside wheels on the edge of the tarmac on a
50/60 mph RH bend and when the back end slid I over-corrected and got in
a right-hand slide. When I corrected that, the wheels gripped and we
became intimately involved with a dry-stone wall which spun us through
180 degrees. Not a scratch, although the police insisted on a hospital
checkup, apart from Mavis having seat-belt bruises, so we were lucky.
The car is a write-off and I will be busy for a while getting sorted.
Plotted the Etrex track tonight and it fitted exactly on the scanned
map, so it's ok, but I won't be parting with the GPS12.
--
Gordon
Gordon Harris
<ke...@g7nhw.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>
>"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.org.uk> wrote in message
>news:SJdiJVAh...@btinternet.com...
>> In article <xKALpBAOFgg5Ew6$@g3snx.demon.co.uk>, Gordon Harris
>> <gor...@g3snx.demon.co.uk> writes
>> >> I have read that garmin are
>> >>planning to change this soon in a software upgrade.
>> >
>> >Mine is at 2.02
>>
>> d/l 2.03 from Garmin's site.
>>
>2.04 released yesterday with the claim that it fixes erroneous track logs. I
>haven,t seen any reports yet if it works.
See my other post after d/l 2.04 and 3.65 OE. Spot-on track today, but
ridiculous 3 hrs battery duration. Must be a faulty unit. :-(
--
Gordon
zeus
Mark
Gordon Harris
<pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>
>Glad to hear you're ok, I've always said that driving to the hills is
>the most dangerous part of a hill walk.
You're right. I'm afraid Mavis is rather uncomfortable tonight, she
got thrown about more, and was more conscious of the wall rushing to
meet us, whereas I was too busy opposite-locking to see anything.
The mobile phones were invaluable on this occasion . . .
I have just plotted the full "active" Etrex track along with the GPS12
track, and the two sets of trackpoints are virtually inter-mingled.
Either the Pennine Way has been re-routed at Old Ing, or it is wrongly
placed on LS 21 map. :-)
This Etrex unit will have to go back when I get some wheels organised,
with only 3 hours battery duration there must be a fault.
The electronic compass feature is apparently heavy on battery use, so I
set the switch-over[1] speed at 2mph.
The Etrex switches to compass plotting below this speed, rather than
satellite plotting.
--
Gordon
Paul Saunders
> I have just plotted the full "active" Etrex track along with the
GPS12
> track, and the two sets of trackpoints are virtually inter-mingled.
Have you tried saving the active track and then overlaying that to see
how much detail is lost?
> The electronic compass feature is apparently heavy on battery use,
so I
> set the switch-over[1] speed at 2mph.
>
> The Etrex switches to compass plotting below this speed, rather than
> satellite plotting.
Which means that it'll eat batteries every time you stop (an awful lot
in my case). I'd suggest switching it off as a default (if you can do
that) and only switching it on if you actually need to use it whilst
stationary or moving slowly.
By the way, what's the verdict? Should I buy one?
Paul Saunders
> If however you download the active track into OE, select the
trackpoints
> and save them into a file, you preserve the time stamp.
Ah, so I can see them in the file.
> So much for multiple tracks. :-(
But how important are timestamps anyway? Do you really need to know
the exact time you reached a particular summit?
I suppose it could be useful if you wanted to analyse your walking
speed on different gradients to compare it to Naismith for instance.
Roger might find that interesting.
Paul Saunders
> >Have you tried saving the active track and then overlaying that to
see
> >how much detail is lost?
> >
> Yes, and it compares quite well for accuracy. The two devices were
> virtually always within 3 metres of each other.
No that's not what I meant. I meant have you tried saving the active
track to one of the ten slots on the Summit to compress it, then
overlay that onto the active Summit track to see what the compression
effect is.
Gordon Harris
<pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>Dominic Sexton <{d}@dscs.demon.co.uk> wrote;
>
>> I think it uses a similar system to the III / III+ which compress
>the
>> active log down to ~250 points and removes the time stamps from each
>> point in the compressed log.
>>
>> In practice I don't think the loss of resolution will make much
>> difference to the record but losing the time stamps might be a bit
>of a
>> bind.
>
>I wasn't even aware that the track recorded timestamps. How could I
>access this data? There doesn't seem to be a way of doing it in
>OziExplorer.
The *active* track log is time-stamped at each trackpoint, but after
saving the track to the Etrex's memory the time stamps are lost, as far
as my experiments go.
If however you download the active track into OE, select the trackpoints
and save them into a file, you preserve the time stamp.
So much for multiple tracks. :-(
--
Gordon
Dominic Sexton
<pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>Dominic Sexton <{d}@dscs.demon.co.uk> wrote;
>
>> I think it uses a similar system to the III / III+ which compress
>the
>> active log down to ~250 points and removes the time stamps from each
>> point in the compressed log.
>>
>> In practice I don't think the loss of resolution will make much
>> difference to the record but losing the time stamps might be a bit
>of a
>> bind.
>
>I wasn't even aware that the track recorded timestamps. How could I
>access this data? There doesn't seem to be a way of doing it in
>OziExplorer.
You can view the track control - click on the track you are interested
in and click on the View Track List button in the middle on the lower
toolbar in the track control window.
Dominic Sexton
<pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>Dominic Sexton <{d}@dscs.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:$zPSOXAB...@dscs.demon.co.uk...
>accuracy
>> was only within the EPE about 50% of the time).
>
Yes - Garmin's EPE (on the 12, II+, III etc. series) was studied at some
length and discussed by several people on sci.geo.satellite-nav a couple
of years ago. The conclusion was that it was an almost exact match with
the diameter of circle with a 50% probability of containing the points.
People have always overestimated the accuracy of their receivers ever
since they have become widely available. The Garmin EPE may well have
added to this overestimation.
A lot of people don't realise that the EPE is based on a combination of
satellite geometry and a signal from each satellite which estimates the
error in the range from that satellite. It is a statistical indicator
not an indicator of absolute accuracy at a specific moment.
Unfortunately with the 50% statistic it was not very statistically
significant!
> it seems pretty damn accurate with summit
>heights (allowing for the geoid difference of course).
>
The EPE is referring to the horizontal accuracy and this Geoid
difference has not yet been resolved to my satisfaction. It seems that
there is a positive altitude bias in the older Garmin units which cannot
be attributed solely to the Geoid-ellipsoid separation.
I will be looking into this further when I get a few spare hours but
have noted from casual observations that the eTrex (not summit) I have
just purchased reads consistently lower, by a few metres, than the
GPS12.
I was pleased to note that the eTrex also stores altitudes with the
track points and waypoints. This makes it a bit easier to observe these
anomalies back at home rather than spending too much time on a walk
studying the finer points of Garmin's implementation!
Gordon Harris
<pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>
>> I have just plotted the full "active" Etrex track along with the
>GPS12
>> track, and the two sets of trackpoints are virtually inter-mingled.
>
>how much detail is lost?
>
Yes, and it compares quite well for accuracy. The two devices were
virtually always within 3 metres of each other.
>> The electronic compass feature is apparently heavy on battery use,
>so I
>> set the switch-over[1] speed at 2mph.
>>
>> The Etrex switches to compass plotting below this speed, rather than
>> satellite plotting.
>
>Which means that it'll eat batteries every time you stop (an awful lot
>in my case). I'd suggest switching it off as a default (if you can do
>that) and only switching it on if you actually need to use it whilst
>stationary or moving slowly.
>
Yes, you can do that, (via 2 levels of menu).
Well there is a "Stop Navigation" command, if you can remember which
menu it's in, but that is only accessible when you have a GOTO or a
ROUTE active. For wandering and plotting a detailed track you would
have to switch off when you stop. I assumed from the lousy battery
life that this unit is faulty, but it may be due to excessive compass
use when moving slowly or stopped. I'll try it at 1mph switch-over,
(and with the compass switch-over delay much higher than the 15 seconds
I used on Sunday), and also with the compass disabled altogether. I'll
also use the method of saving the active log only for most of my walks.
You certainly have to watch the way you use the b***** thing compared
with the GPS12.
>By the way, what's the verdict? Should I buy one?
There seems to be quite a long "wish list" in sci.geo.sat/ at the
moment, the menus are fiddly.
It's nice to get the total ascent added up for you as you undulate, and
to view the walk profile point by point, and have only 2 AA cells to
carry as spares.
I'd say wait for the Mk 2 or 3. ;-)
--
Gordon
Mike Clark
> Gordon Harris <gor...@g3snx.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:mK8OpCA6...@g3snx.demon.co.uk...
>
> > I have just plotted the full "active" Etrex track along with the
> GPS12
> > track, and the two sets of trackpoints are virtually inter-mingled.
>
> Have you tried saving the active track and then overlaying that to see
> how much detail is lost?
>
> so I
> > set the switch-over[1] speed at 2mph.
> >
> > The Etrex switches to compass plotting below this speed, rather than
> > satellite plotting.
>
> Which means that it'll eat batteries every time you stop (an awful lot
> in my case). I'd suggest switching it off as a default (if you can do
> that) and only switching it on if you actually need to use it whilst
> stationary or moving slowly.
>
I've found that the eTrex Summit is very heavy on batteries if you leave
everything turned on by default. The trick is to decide which features of
navigation you need and then go to the system screen and turn the others of
off. It's quite interesting to see the little battery guage go up and down
as you turn features on and off.
If you can afford it the Summit has many features over the standard eTrex
which might be of use to walkers/mountaineers/ski-tourers. However you
could also make do with a combination of eTrex, standard compass and
an altimeter.
Also keep an eye on the Garmin website as they keep updating the software
with new features and bug fixes. I'm already on my third software update
since getting a Summit a few weeks ago.
Mike <URL:http://www.path.cam.ac.uk/~mrc7/>
--
o/ \\ // || ,_ o Mike Clark, "An antibody engineer who also
<\__,\\ // __o || / /\, likes the mountains"
"> || _`\<,_ // \\ \> | Cambridge Climbing and Caving Club
` || (_)/ (_) // \\ \_ <URL:http://www.path.cam.ac.uk/~mrc7/cccc/>
Gordon Harris
<pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>I meant have you tried saving the active
>track to one of the ten slots on the Summit to compress it, then
>overlay that onto the active Summit track to see what the compression
>effect is.
Yes, sorry, I worded it badly. The most noticeable difference is when
the route is fairly straight, when the Etrex can miss quite a few
points.
I think the best thing is for me to send you the two versions of
Sunday's walk as attachments then you can plot them yourself and
compare, if you have OE 3.85. I think I saved both versions, so look
out for an email, but Goldilocks is here at the moment . . .
--
Gordon
Philip Powell
<mr...@cam.ac.uk> writes
>In article <8m608d$unt$6...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>, Paul Saunders
><URL:mailto:pv...@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>> Gordon Harris <gor...@g3snx.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:mK8OpCA6...@g3snx.demon.co.uk...
>>
>> > I have just plotted the full "active" Etrex track along with the
>> GPS12
>> > track, and the two sets of trackpoints are virtually inter-mingled.
>>
>> Have you tried saving the active track and then overlaying that to see
>> how much detail is lost?
>>
>> > The electronic compass feature is apparently heavy on battery use,
>> so I
>> > set the switch-over[1] speed at 2mph.
>> >
>> > The Etrex switches to compass plotting below this speed, rather than
>> > satellite plotting.
>>
>> Which means that it'll eat batteries every time you stop (an awful lot
>> in my case). I'd suggest switching it off as a default (if you can do
>> that) and only switching it on if you actually need to use it whilst
>> stationary or moving slowly.
>>
>> By the way, what's the verdict? Should I buy one?
From my limited experience of the Summit [and being out previously with
others using G12/G12XL], I'd suggest hanging on to your G12 for now.
>I've found that the eTrex Summit is very heavy on batteries if you leave
>everything turned on by default. The trick is to decide which features of
>navigation you need and then go to the system screen and turn the others of
>off. It's quite interesting to see the little battery guage go up and down
>as you turn features on and off.
>
>If you can afford it the Summit has many features over the standard eTrex
>which might be of use to walkers/mountaineers/ski-tourers. However you
>could also make do with a combination of eTrex, standard compass and
>an altimeter.
>
>Also keep an eye on the Garmin website as they keep updating the software
>with new features and bug fixes. I'm already on my third software update
>since getting a Summit a few weeks ago.
Got mine Friday morning, upgraded from 2.02 to 2.03 on Friday evening
and to 2.04 on Saturday evening!
Gordon Harris
>everything turned on by default. The trick is to decide which features of
>navigation you need and then go to the system screen and turn the others of
>off. It's quite interesting to see the little battery guage go up and down
>as you turn features on and off.
>
and Altitude Auto-calibrate. Am I missing something?
I must admit I only spotted the tiny battery indicator after you
mentioned it. :)
The GPS12 gives a far better idea of how many sats are in view and
captured, I miss that with the Summit.
--
Gordon
Trevor Dennis
>Glad to hear you're ok, I've always said that driving to the hills is
>the most dangerous part of a hill walk.
Or having rocks kicked on
you by careless tourists.
--
Trevor Dennis
Gordon Harris
<tre...@tdennis.demon.co.uk> writes
--
Gordon