Topics

1

Compasses / Liquid Prismatic Compasses

« on: May 20, 2012, 08:58:25 AM »

Anyone experience with compasses such as
http://www.pyser-sgi.com/product.asp?ParentID=228

Seen the price I am interested whether anyone has used such a compass and for what and what the experience has been.
I have seen these for over 250 pounds....

2

New Techniques & Learning / Full course in dutch AND English (basic level)

« on: May 16, 2012, 11:20:56 AM »

As promised a long time ago, here the full deck of slides I use for the basic course I run a few times a year. All slides are double, one Dutch and one English, I did not bother to seperate it. If you want to  use slides or the deck just ask (powerpoint format, you can use the jpeg of course).

https://picasaweb.google.com/ivo.brugman/NavigatieBasisFinal13NederlandsEnEngels?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCK3lrufEue_CXA&feat=directlink

Pls do not spread the link outside the forum.

regards,

Ivo

3

Satnav (GPS GLONASS COMPASS Galileo) / GPS Altitude Measurements during tracking

« on: May 15, 2012, 10:50:09 AM »

I have been using an Etrex 10 for about 50k walk in three days past weekend. Now, in general the coarse altitude changes are of course reflection in alignment with the terrain we walked in. Terrain elevation is between 100 and 380m . Now, during the tracking intervals (e.g. 15 seconds) I see quite some fluctuation in altitude, in a lot of cases..impossible in reality (to my taste). Based on those fluctuations I see a total on covered "altitude metres" which of course add up over a 50k course. My question here is, to what extend do such readings approach reality based on GPS technology. It is my understanding that GPS altitude measurement (so not the ones which use an barometric method) is somewhat unreliable, percentage wise certainly, in a 100-380m range. Is that correct?  If so, I need to see whether distance covered, when reading the trip info is inclucing the altitude variable or without.

Any comments on this topic?

4

New Techniques & Learning / Teaching Aids

« on: April 28, 2012, 10:27:45 AM »

I have a few pieces I use when teaching altitude lines. One is a map of Mount St Helens (topgraphical map) together with a poster, matching the same view. Second is a maquette from a southern part of Holland, showing elevation, of course the topographical map I also have in the course.

See the little maquette, which is about 15 years old, Also included the Mount St. Helens stuff.

https://picasaweb.google.com/ivo.brugman/TeachingAids

5

Navigational Questions & Answers / Coordinates vs. Grid Reference [mapping systems]

« on: April 22, 2012, 11:42:28 AM »

In the UNM on page 39 a difference is made between a coordinate system and a grid reference system.

1. Coordinate system point to an exact place. It is my assumption that in the case the geographic coordinate system is meant (Graticule). You also see in the picture that the coordinate lines are "counted", NOT the squares. The setup of this system is different from a grid overlay.
2. A grid reference places you inside the grid.

I am a bit confused. A grid can also place you an an exact location. The first is geographical, the second geodetic. The first uses longitude and latitude, the latter western verticals and southern horizontals. Hence you can use eastings and northings. But, like with the national grid of The netherlands, one is able to indicate the crossings of the grid as exact positions  AND refer to the grid itself, by nature of the design.

SEE ATTACHMENT.

agree?

6

Navigational Questions & Answers / Azimuth or Bearing

« on: January 05, 2012, 01:18:08 AM »

I have been struggling to understand the difference between Azimuth and Bearing, not even knowing how to call it in dutch to be honest, nor have I really researched it, I use..translated, "angle of direction" or in Dutch "richtingshoek". In the book, on page 17, I want to quote: "Azimuth: the azimuth is taken to mean the horizontal angle of a bearing clockwise from north."  What that means I do not fully understand. For  me...I "believe" in the following..in the context of land navigation (context is important)

1. Azimuth is used with a true north reference only
2. Azimuth is used clockwise only
3. Bearing can have other references then true north and simple depicts the angle from a viewpoint between Point A and B, using a reference line of north, east, south, west. Syntax would be like this. E 45° E. Reference is East (90) + add 45 degrees.
4. Bearing can only go to 90 degrees max, azimuth is between 0-360. In the previous example the azimuth would be East, being 90 degrees + 45 = 135 degrees.

My questions:
- is the quotation simple saying that azimuth and bearing are actually the same?
- would the four above statements make sense to use as a guideline? Or..is it maybe symantics only and just a difference which exist in usage between e.g. countries like U.K and U.S.A? (when taking the context of land navigation into account?)
- Taking it further, we have different types of bearing, would a "true bearing" be the same as an azimuth?

Any thoughts / comments / answers ?

thanks, Ivo

7

New Member Introductions / Greetings from Holland

« on: December 29, 2011, 01:28:52 AM »

Hi, my name is Ivo and just enrolled in the forum after receiving Lyle's book in the mail. In my daily job I manage IT projects at Philips Netherlands and besides that I have a teaching degree in geography. My main hobby is hiking, wilderness survival, bushcraft. I also have a one-man bussiness (for fun) in which I teach basic navigation courses of which I did one so far :-) which gave me the feedback I needed to further tweak it. I am currently busy designing the advanced course which is nearly finished. I have loads of books on navigation and this seems to be the most comprehensive one, with a focus on "need to know" topics and very nice, clear illustrations. I used the teaching approach from NNAS as a guide for my course setup but am beginning to change it here and there. So far I used the W. Linke manual as my main referrence, also because it has exercises in it I can use for the course. My course is plit in a theoretical part in a classroom setting and a practical part in which we apply all theory. All done from a small town in The Netherlands. What I have seen so far the book explains a lot of must know terminology short and sweet. For me, it took some time to get the know all the terminology in English and now...I know it better than in Dutch. I have the english version, not the Dutch version.

Long story...but I wanted to get past the point of saying, Hi..I am Ivo and I bought your book :-)