Guys, I think I might have been through this a while back, but I got chatting to a chap I know about the problem I've had getting a reliable computer setup on my Gemini. I don't want to get into the use/don't use, need/don't need discussion of the pros/cons of bike cimputers but he mentioned an interesting angle about the use of GPS to do the same.
As he explained it to me. Bill Clinton scrapped Selective Availability when he left office. That eliminated the GPS signal scrambling that varied its accuracy around +/- 50m and most units are now better than 3m accuracy. The UK Ordnance Survey uses a 6 digit reference, like TQ401354 but the accuracy of the GPS units now give a 10 digit accuracy, like TQ4018935472. I digress.
There are GPS units that also display altitude. Take a map, draw a straight line, disregard contour intervals, and all you have is a straight line distance. A bike computer would do a reasonably good job of the true distance travelled. An altitude GPS unit should in theory be able to do the same. Ignoring cost, battery life, and other issues, has anyone actually used one in such a context?
I have a reason for asking. The OS maps, like all maps, are never as uptodate as you'd sometimes like them to be. The UK Forestry Commission is quite tolerant about people riding on their land, providing you don't stray into areas that are unsafe, such as where they are doing felling/logging operations. The forest tracks change. Some fall into 'disuse', and new ones open. Maps can't keep up with that. GPS though, if you use accurate coordinates, will let you add the course of tracks to the maps, and that might be useful for exchanging routes with your pals.
Any idea or comments about this?
Have you used GPS in such a case?
Or is still just a yuppie toy?