Must admit im one of the old guard,i like to use map & compass, get lost, work it out & back on track.Its 50% of the pleasure of the walk.
There is a general trend at the moment to Buck authority and rules/regs.We enter walks with set routes then do all we can not to follow them.
The lanes too muddy!use the road,we can cut the corner here, etc, why enter???
Could the organisers save time & energy,no working out a route description etc,just charge an entry fee & let you do your own 25mls.
It really is an insult to the organisers, fellow competitors etc if it becomes too prevalent.

No problem Alan, and no, you didn't distract from the enjoyment, we were more intrigued at how we could be running, overtake you and then be back behind you again, and must confess we found the walk very tough and it was more than a bit soul destroying to say the least!

More jealous than anything of your ability to use and cope with technology - I'm having enough of a battle trying to sort an MP3 player out for the 100! Interested to know however how many miles you managed to shave off the route? Might join you next time in employing this technology and agree it was a pain having amendments at the last minute. Hope you enjoyed the event.

Hi Rebecca
It was me you kept encountering on the WF 50 and yes I was using a GPS to navigate round the route. There are are two issues which I think your post brings out.
The first one concerns the use of a GPS to follow the organisers route. There is no software available that I know of which can pick the best way on paths on a route in the same way as a SatNav can do on the road. What is available is the capabilility of imposing a route on very basic mapping and then to use the satellite signals to keep you on that route. If you stray then you know you have done so by observation. Now I have to say that I find very little difference between following the route from amap, a route description or a GPS. If you go wrong then you will not be able to match your next turn to your chosen method of route following. All the GPS does is to tell you quicker of your error and more efficiently. Take your pick if you want to make it harder for yourself use map and compass. Unfortunately I can now hardly read a 1:25000 map so I go for a GPS.
The second issue is the question of the route to be followed. My original intention was to follow to the letter the route the organisers intended.
For their own good reasons the organisers did not issue their route description until the 9th April. My first step therefore was to plot the route on the map probably something which most participants deemed unnecessary to do as I seemed to be the only one carrying a map in my hand.
Unfortunately despite all the information given I was unable to put the route on the map in many places. There were errors in grid references, evidence that the description was written by at least two people and a missing checkpoint. Often there was no path shown on the ground in particular in the Forest of Dean which I expected to cross in darkness. Being new to the area and not knowing how good the RD would turn out to be I decided to redraw the route as close as possible to the organisers route. I would have gone and checked the tricky bits of the original route but given Davd Street's comments elsewhere on the Forum I respected his wishes and refrained from doing so.
We were not in a race, we walked it and enjoyed a glorious day. I have no complaints against the organisers. They have to make do with what is in their area. For me it was a very enjoyable weekend but it would not have been so if I had been lost in those dark woods after 40 miles. My apologies to you if my actions lead to a lessening of your own enjoyment.

It is allright to use a GPS, it is a handy back up tool but the most important tool is the route description, because the challenge is to follow that and the map if you do otherwise you are not completing the challange. So what is the point of entering?. Having said that, mistakes will be made, which may lead to corners being cut.
David H

Having done the Wye, I wondered what people thought of 'GPS cheats'. We kept jogging past this same couple, and then coming across them again in front of us!

Initially we thought we must have gone wrong enabling them to get ahead but this happened so many times that we worked out they must have put the grid references of the checkpoints into the GPS which was navigating them via the quickest route between. Of course if there is a self clip at an unknown location then this would eliminate this, but if the grid reference of the self clip is provided then it still wont stop people being inventive with the route.

Not that LDWA events are meant to be competitive, but I thought that unless you were on a 'canter' event where you can choose your route, that you were meant to stick with the provided route? It was just a bit annoying as the use of a GPS in this way must have shaved miles off the correct route!

I have already consigned the SH compass to a seperate drawer to the NH ones. Though I may 'lend it' to mates before a navigational event - that should slow the beggars down !!

Interestingly in New Zealand, the magnetic to grid deviation on their maps was 221/2%. A totally ridiculous amount (can't they change it, reprint the maps or something?). The guy who pointed it out to me said a lot of NH walkers etc. make serious navigational errors in the mountains because they are unaware of the huge difference, and just imagine it is a degree or 2 as it is at home, so don't bother on basic navigation. Matt.

Good to have you back Matt, all you have to do now is remember which hemisphere you are in and pick up the right compass ;-)

I'm a ludite and make no bones about the fact. I wouldn't have a clue how a GPS works, never mind anything more advanced. But I do enjoy the benfits of modern 'kit', and embrace them fully.
The fact is, that I enjoy using a map and compass, and I enjoy the challenge of navigating by them. I've been using them for years and still have plenty to learn (that is, I still become 'misplaced', regularly). Quite frankly I don't want it made easier, what's the point? I'm out there to stretch my muscles to the limit and I want to do the same with my few remaining functioning brain cells. Matt.

It should surely be possible to embrace new technology without forsaking the old. I find it useful and interesting to use a GPS regularly but would rarely leave map and compass behind. I quite accept that some do not need or desire to use this combination but I would also expect them to respect my point of view.
Maybe the traditionalists at the time when present map and compass technology appeared were similarly doubtful and preferred to rely on tried and tested methods perhaps involving wet fingers in the air and studying the sun and stars – or am I being unfair?!
Route descriptions are often invaluable and even indispensable especially on low level paths through fields and villages etc. Fair enough though on high ground, and moorland etc to navigate between checkpoints.
One of the most challenging Events around must be the annual Lake District Mountain Trial held in September. Though not an LDWA event (actually it is a fell race) it is a fascinating and demanding long–O (orienteering) which should be enough of a challenge for most! More details at http://www.ldmta.org.uk/

David for my part i have no objection to the use of modern clothing/ footwear, catering equipment etc it is logical to adopt these items to provide the comfort and labour saving that they afford.

In Fact none of the above items were in question until you raised them, the only point i raised was the use of technology as opposed to traditional map, compass and common sense to supposedly assist navigation, and the way the use of such equipment would remove one of the most satisfying aspects of LONG DISTANCE WALKING/RUNNING.

There is another consideration should the use of GPS become common place and that is that it could lead NAVIGATIONALY CHALLENGED folk into remote places and for whatever reason should there equipment go down then would they have the Knowledge to get themselves out and would as has already been said the sweepers know where to look for them.

That said i reckon that the few that could be bothered to respond to this thread, overwhelmingly like the challenge and satisfaction of navigating using grid references, map and, compass all of which is basic light and simple.

I wonder how a 24 hr navigation instruction based walk would go down, i.e. a couple of competent navigators ( in an advisory capacity) (i am not good enough) a group of navigationaly challenged folk, a bunch of grid references,maps, compass, camaraderie,team spirit and maybe somewhere between 50-75 miles to cover in the 24hrs, somehow i reckon friends will be made and a lot would be learned, why you could even take a GPS to record the errors that where made during the 24hrs and to endorse the fact that GPS is the rocket science and the good old map and compass or even moss on trees is the simple way to navigate.

No i am not a Luddite i love and am excited by techonology but i am even more excited by pushing my own boundaries and gaining knowledge through my what i was provided with by nature which is the prime reason i love the outdoors.
Just A Thought

GEE do i Waffle


JohnK

What do people want to do, go back to boots only with a minimal tread that is checked at the kit check, insist on grouping on the night sections and folded paper maps that are too large to handle or accept the use of modern kit.

A few thoughts. I really prefer to be given just the grid refs of checkpoints and then have to do the work myself - the Calderdale Hike is an excellent test of navigational skills. However, how do the sweepers know which way to sweep?

As far as GPS and night-navigation is concerned I keep the GPS as back-up. Didn't use it once during the Yoredale 100 except to countdown the distance to the next cup of tea!

Garfield

If the 'future' of long-distance events is really to make night navigation easier then I think that's rather sad. In fact I'd prefer it if mobile phones and GPS systems were for 'emergency use only' on events. I only carry a phone when walking alone and don't own a GPS (although I appreciate they are excellent for analysing/recording routes & performance).

I agree. I find LWDA events lacking in excitement and hence interest due to the written instruction sheets, by far favoring those simply giving a grid reference with no suggested path. I am new to the LDWA, is there a listing of those events with challenging navigation?

Author: Christopher A Dawes
Posted: Sat 1st Nov 2008, 12:09
First Joined: 1972 Local Group: Marches
I've seen the future and it works(some american said that of the russian revolution in the 1920, and look what happened. So be warned), I refer to the online route mapping on that event's website that incorporates mapping, satellite imagery and a hybrid of the two formats. Thus you can look down on the actual countryside traversed by the 100 with road names included. With mobile phone technology already including GPS location then the time is imminent when your progress around a route can be imposed on Google mapping and the problems of night navigation, and daytime as well, will be a thing of the past. Go to the web site and se the results for yourself. Well done Wessex.

Christopher A Dawes made the above post on the wessex 100 thread.

The idea of using technology for night nav etc is surely taking away a real big chunk of pleasure and satisfaction that is achieved by successfully navigating through night sections using the good old map, compass and common sense.

In fact the biggest problem i used to have with night navigation was the reflected light from the head torch when it hit the laminate on the map, now overcome by using waterproof paper and ink.

I do use a Timex GPS device to record my progress and to download it onto a PC after an event as a log for my analysis but i can`t yet anticipate using technology to assist my progress, where is the satisfaction in that, what do you folk think
JohnK