Specific GPS Question On Routes (i.e. Paging DougPaul....paging Dr. Doug Paul.. :) )

[DayTrip]

My goal is to be able to navigate competently in less than ideal conditions (i.e. fog, dense woods, etc) where the benefit of seeing landmarks, distant objects, etc is not possible. On clear days with reasonable views I feel comfortable I can navigate from Point A to Point B. But deep in unfamiliar woods, where the undulations of the terrain are not significant to register on a map and easy landmarks are not available lies the challenge. That is why I want to understand EXACTLY what the GPS is telling me because I can see the obvious benefit of such a device in those circumstances.

In the woods I practiced in Sunday I had a CalTopo map with 40' contours and the vast majority of the land features I encountered did not register on the map. The quality of the map you have also plays a role.

It is interesting too how one pays much more attention to details when walking in the woods intentionally trying to find a route versus just hiking down a trail. I think having all the electronics in the pack dulls all the senses to items that should be paid attention to "just in case". Last year I had asked some winter navigation questions on this forum and someone (I forget who) had an excellent reply describing how he walked the terrain and "read" what it was telling him (feeling the firm ground of a snowshoe track under fresh powder with a trekking pole versus the soft sides off of it, what the ripples in the drifts said about the underlying terrain, what the types of trees said about elevation, etc). I try to make myself more aware of these details when I hike now and reference my GPS data when it is applicable as practice for when they might actually be needed.

 

[Nessmuk]

My teaching goal is not to say GPS should not be used, but rather to ensure that anyone who ventures well off trail (or even those who stay on trail) is able to determine their position at any time when in fog, dense woods, and in so-called "flat" terrain, and to find safe ways out, even if the GPS fails. Taking a step further, to have enough pre-trip planning and experienced navigation sense to do the same when GPS fails, the map blows away, and the compass is smashed. Maybe extremely difficult in some places, but not impossible, especially here in the terrain varied northeast. You only get there by considerable practice, and seeking to learn by taking those navigation skill risks that will teach you what works and what you need to do.

It is interesting too how one pays much more attention to details when walking in the woods intentionally trying to find a route versus just hiking down a trail.

I think in many situations it can be far easier to navigate when not on a trail than when on a trail. On a trail you tend to daydream, just walking along. Pretty soon you lose any idea of how far you have gone, how many turns you have made, and begin to think about the side trail you may have missed. But when off trail, all of your senses are tuned to the details of your surroundings and where you are every step of the way. At least for me this is very true.

 

[HH1]

On clear days with reasonable views I feel comfortable I can navigate from Point A to Point B. But deep in unfamiliar woods, where the undulations of the terrain are not significant to register on a map and easy landmarks are not available lies the challenge. That is why I want to understand EXACTLY what the GPS is telling me because I can see the obvious benefit of such a device in those circumstances.

DayTrip,

You have provided articulate and nuanced observations on both your wilderness navigation challenges and need for GPS. So this opens the door to take the conversation to the next level.

Travelling over unfamiliar and unremarkable terrain in low-visibility conditions is a considerable challenge for all we navigators. However, as a M&C-only user, I have yet to encounter a situation in typical, woodsy Northeast landscape where I can't navigate with reasonable confidence regardless of the weather. Putting it another way, at anytime, when I'm navigating I could tell you where we are on the map to +/- 50 meters or less.

Would it be possible to provide us a detailed description, or better yet a map, of an A to B leg over unremarkable terrain where you feel compelled to use your GPS? I have no intention of critiquing your navigation style; rather I and I'm sure others like Nessmuk would like to comment on how we would choose to navigate A to B with confidence under M&C.

 

[Nessmuk]

DayTrip,

You have provided articulate and nuanced observations on both your wilderness navigation challenges and need for GPS. So this opens the door to take the conversation to the next level.

Travelling over unfamiliar and unremarkable terrain in low-visibility conditions is a considerable challenge for all we navigators. However, as a M&C-only user, I have yet to encounter a situation in typical, woodsy Northeast landscape where I can't navigate with reasonable confidence regardless of the weather. Putting it another way, at anytime, when I'm navigating I could tell you where we are on the map to +/- 50 meters or less.

Would it be possible to provide us a detailed description, or better yet a map, of an A to B leg over unremarkable terrain where you feel compelled to use your GPS? I have no intention of critiquing your navigation style; rather I and I'm sure others like Nessmuk would like to comment on how we would choose to navigate A to B with confidence under M&C.

Perfect. I'm always glad to help out a traditional method navigator.

 

[DayTrip]

DayTrip,

You have provided articulate and nuanced observations on both your wilderness navigation challenges and need for GPS. So this opens the door to take the conversation to the next level.

Travelling over unfamiliar and unremarkable terrain in low-visibility conditions is a considerable challenge for all we navigators. However, as a M&C-only user, I have yet to encounter a situation in typical, woodsy Northeast landscape where I can't navigate with reasonable confidence regardless of the weather. Putting it another way, at anytime, when I'm navigating I could tell you where we are on the map to +/- 50 meters or less.

Would it be possible to provide us a detailed description, or better yet a map, of an A to B leg over unremarkable terrain where you feel compelled to use your GPS? I have no intention of critiquing your navigation style; rather I and I'm sure others like Nessmuk would like to comment on how we would choose to navigate A to B with confidence under M&C.

I don't feel compelled to use it. I just want to learn the in's and out's because I can see where it could be a very useful tool. Since I started the more remote 4k's awhile back I bought a GPS to carry for navigation if needed. Other than a few brief periods where the trail was ambiguous and I glanced at the map to confirm I hadn't lost trail I can't say I've ever really had to use it. The main purpose of carrying my GPS has been track recording and statistical record keeping. I've never really found myself actually lost hiking. But that's not to say that day won't come. Like safety gear, I prefer to have as many option as possible if called upon.

The most obvious benefits to me of the GPS is how quickly and easily you can establish your location and a direction. I can certainly take out a map, estimate my location and decide on a direction to go which will be reasonable. And I'll likely get where I'm going. But with the GPS it is instantaneous: pick a way point from where I was positive of my location, take the bearing and I'm off and running almost immediately. In foul weather, say with heavy winds that make pulling out and reading a map highly irritating at best, being able to do that is a major benefit.

At least for me I don't personally see how why you'd want to use one or the other when you have both. I always study my route on a paper map in advance. In fact I usually plot my route, estimate times, doodle some compass bearings, etc on a paper copy. I like referring to the paper copy. It is hard to "see" the whole situation on a tiny GPS screen like you can on a big old paper map. I enjoy the planning phase of my hikes during the week and spend an absurd amount of time on it because I enjoy it. But then when it comes time to navigating to a way point, choosing a bearing, etc the GPS really is far more convenient. Having knowledge of your exact elevation, roughly how far you walked, etc are all highly useful finding yourself on the map even if you never look at the GPS map.

So I'm probably just rambling on and on here but I would summarize it this way: I am pretty confident I can get from A to B with map and compass when I know where A is. Doing that the old fashioned way is a true skill and challenge at times. The GPS eliminates all that guesswork by accurately telling you where A is and doing the leg work for telling you where B is. It's kind of like old school math when I was in school. Yah I could find the cosine of an angle, look up a value in a table, and solve an equation, etc because I understood the process. But when I broke out my TI-82 calculator years later and just hit the button and arrived at the same answer in a tiny fraction of the time that is pretty cool too.

 

[Nessmuk]

DayTrip, you are not rambling at all, thanks for detailing and providing a little of your philosophy of getting from A to B. With that there's no reason to doubt your navigation skills. I'll just say that some folks prefer to go on backcountry trips to most enjoy what's involved with being on the hunt itself, while others would rather just go straight for for the kill. Nothing wrong with preferring either way, that's just the way it is. Though my profession is engineering (I like math and solving problems), for me the real reward is in the journey.... reaching the destination is just the final nail in the house. My knowledge and use of GPS comes in two flavors; from marathon canoe racing, and a necessary tool for strict no-nonsense requirements as a SAR crew boss and state level land navigation instructor. My love of recreational traditional navigation methods is due to the awesome satisfaction it gives me every step of the way.

 

[DougPaul]

So I'm probably just rambling on and on here but I would summarize it this way: I am pretty confident I can get from A to B with map and compass when I know where A is. Doing that the old fashioned way is a true skill and challenge at times. The GPS eliminates all that guesswork by accurately telling you where A is and doing the leg work for telling you where B is. It's kind of like old school math when I was in school. Yah I could find the cosine of an angle, look up a value in a table, and solve an equation, etc because I understood the process. But when I broke out my TI-82 calculator years later and just hit the button and arrived at the same answer in a tiny fraction of the time that is pretty cool too.

I carry M&C and a GPS. I rarely need or use the GPS for navigation but it has been the key to progress on several occasions (at night and on deep snow) where we otherwise would have had to turn back. Its reliability and accuracy were key factors.

Doug

 

[HH1]

Daytrip, appreciate your comments, which among other matters, reminds me of the many navigation styles and combination of navigation tools we choose to employ, something I tend to overlook at times. For me your key statement in your last comment was:

I am pretty confident I can get from A to B with map and compass when I know where A is.

Here's why: If I do NOT know where A is, I backtrack, I'm outta there.

But that hasn't happened in a decade. Like you I really enjoy doing prep work on a backcountry outing, including identifying the intended route that will take our small group to several destination landmarks. At these landmarks, there are usually several clues that allow me to confirm the location. I try as best I can to explore areas that are entirely new to me. No memory of location keeps my navigation skills honed.

Here's the major issue with my traditional, M&C style which I instruct to tens of people each year: your navigation hat, except for lunch, is on from hike's start to finish, at least if you want to know for certain where both A and B are. Based on what I've seen over that last fifteen years, this is a stumbling block for many participants who express initial interest in learning this craft. At least where I live, an urban area, in-hike socializing (i.e. conversing) for most hikers is just as important as getting out in the fresh air. Bottom line is, you can traditionally navigate, or you can socialize with fellow participants (or nature watch, etc.), but not both. Continuous concentration is required, making M&Cing a relatively solitary affair at times. But like Nessmuk, I love it.

GPS on the other hand solves that - a leader can have his cake and eat it too, in the form of part time navigating. With one or two clicks of the GPS, like you said, you can precisely find your location and quickly determine your bearing to your next destination.

I now agree there is no right or wrong here, just individual preference. What's most important is that you are taking the time and effort to be the best navigator you can.

 

[DayTrip]

Daytrip, appreciate your comments, which among other matters, reminds me of the many navigation styles and combination of navigation tools we choose to employ, something I tend to overlook at times. For me your key statement in your last comment was:



Here's why: If I do NOT know where A is, I backtrack, I'm outta there.

But that hasn't happened in a decade. Like you I really enjoy doing prep work on a backcountry outing, including identifying the intended route that will take our small group to several destination landmarks. At these landmarks, there are usually several clues that allow me to confirm the location. I try as best I can to explore areas that are entirely new to me. No memory of location keeps my navigation skills honed.

Here's the major issue with my traditional, M&C style which I instruct to tens of people each year: your navigation hat, except for lunch, is on from hike's start to finish, at least if you want to know for certain where both A and B are. Based on what I've seen over that last fifteen years, this is a stumbling block for many participants who express initial interest in learning this craft. At least where I live, an urban area, in-hike socializing (i.e. conversing) for most hikers is just as important as getting out in the fresh air. Bottom line is, you can traditionally navigate, or you can socialize with fellow participants (or nature watch, etc.), but not both. Continuous concentration is required, making M&Cing a relatively solitary affair at times. But like Nessmuk, I love it.

GPS on the other hand solves that - a leader can have his cake and eat it too, in the form of part time navigating. With one or two clicks of the GPS, like you said, you can precisely find your location and quickly determine your bearing to your next destination.

I now agree there is no right or wrong here, just individual preference. What's most important is that you are taking the time and effort to be the best navigator you can.

I have never truly been lost while hiking and would definitely back track if it ever came to that. The only times I can recall really not being sure of my current location was on the Avalon Trail last winter and approaching the Mt Eisenhower Trail off the Dry River Cut Off. My awareness level seems to automatically rise as the surroundings become less familiar.

On Avalon, there was a lot of snow, including some recent powder. Everything was going along as planned. I was maybe 1/2 mile past the split going to Mt Tom heading up Avalon. Someone had tracked it already and I was just plodding along until I got to a fairly steep area with some rocks. I had only been on this trail one other time and didn't recall such a "technical" area. Abruptly the tracks I was following stopped. Was pretty sure I was off the trail at that point. Did a little looking around and I wasn't sure if I was left or right of the trail. I descended back a ways and saw no tracks other than what I had followed. So I went back up paying more attention to everything. Nada. I again descended down until a point where I could see the last trail blaze on a tree that I had seen. No tracks. Enter the GPS. I fired up the map, scrolled out and discovered I was right of the trail. The trail junction was a ways down so I started bushwhacking and picked up the trail about 200' from where I was and was on my merry way. Could have continued back down until I was sure where I was and took another crack at it but the GPS saved me that inconvenience.

In the case of the Mt Eisenhower junction I arrived at a river crossing went across and nothing looked like trail anywhere. I was positive I was on trail when I started across river. Having reviewed the map I knew the trail would swing to the right and recross another river just above a junction. After a short walk through the trees I came to a well cleared camp site with side paths everywhere. I took one that led me up the hill somewhat along the bank of the river and regained the trail. Never needed the GPS because I remembered the terrain from the map and AMC Guide description. There was even a series of branches that had pink ribbons tied to them leading in the wrong direction (I presume to a favorite swimming hole or high water crossing spot). Was nice to figure it out the old fashioned way.

So on the two times I found myself unsure of my location I went old school once and modern day the other time. It is quite enjoyable using your brain when you're out there. Adds another element to the enjoyment.

 

[Nessmuk]

Just one last comment.... please don't misconstrue what I said about my preferred method for learning and teaching land navigation, IMO best learned without the crutch of GPS as a tempting bailout device whenever confusion arises. And also my personal traditional method of recreational backcountry navigation. However...Certainly any and all navigation aids, to include GPS of course, with all nav aids and landscape clues making sense together, are valid tools when there is a job that needs to get done in the most expeditious way, whenever safety dictates, or simply as a preference.

 

[DayTrip]

Just one last comment.... please don't misconstrue what I said about my preferred method for learning and teaching land navigation, IMO best learned without the crutch of GPS as a tempting bailout device whenever confusion arises. And also my personal traditional method of recreational backcountry navigation. However...Certainly any and all navigation aids, to include GPS of course, with all nav aids and landscape clues making sense together, are valid tools when there is a job that needs to get done in the most expeditious way, whenever safety dictates, or simply as a preference.

I understood what you meant. No problem. Until you understand the nuts and bolts at its basic level, like my TI-82 calculator example, you can go awry with these electronic aids. Garbage in, garbage out.