Re: GPSMAP 60Cx or 76Cx?
- From: Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 12:50:04 +0200
Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote:
They also only log 6 decimal places of lat/lon which seems awfully
disproportionate seeing how no other aspect of this format strives for
any kind of efficiency. If they are still using what they call
semi-circles internally, the internal representation is roughly
equivalent to 7-8 decimal places. Arbitrarily truncating it from 8
bytes to 6 in order to save 4 bytes total seems silly. After the fact
averaging could have benefited from the extra information.
Wolfgang, I agree. OTOH it is still one more decimal than any other external format Garmin have used previously. For my 76S WAAS/EGNOS/ESTB tests last year I had to write my own sw to download the semi-circle format binary values directly, having 10-cm level info directly available is _nearly_ as good.
Terje
;; semi-circle is 360 degrees divided into 2^32 equal parts.
(/ 360.0 (expt 2.0 32)) 8.381903171539307e-08
-wolfgang
--
- <Terje.Mathisen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: GPSMAP 60Cx or 76Cx?
- From: Wolfgang S. Rupprecht
- Re: GPSMAP 60Cx or 76Cx?
- References:
- Best GPS unit for track logging?
- From: pixseal
- GPSMAP 60Cx or 76Cx?
- From: pixseal
- Re: GPSMAP 60Cx or 76Cx?
- From: kc
- Re: GPSMAP 60Cx or 76Cx?
- From: Jack Erbes
- Re: GPSMAP 60Cx or 76Cx?
- From: Harald Hanche-Olsen
- Re: GPSMAP 60Cx or 76Cx?
- From: Wolfgang S. Rupprecht
- Best GPS unit for track logging?
- Prev by Date: Re: GPSMAP 60Cx or 76Cx?
- Next by Date: Re: Faulty GPS data led to DART failure - article.
- Previous by thread: Re: GPSMAP 60Cx or 76Cx?
- Next by thread: Re: GPSMAP 60Cx or 76Cx?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|