h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I see where you're coming from, but I think if you're competent enough to start micronavigating, you'll be comfortable working at 1:25,000 and a more technical compass anyway. I don't think specifying a map scale is necessary, though; you can micronav on a 1:50,000 - on assessments, you spend most of the time working with 1:25,000 but do at least one leg at 1:50,000 - and you can work with orienteering maps as well. I was lucky enough to get hold of a contours only map for one exercise, which was an incredible challenge!

The 'Basics' section was referring to 'The Basics of Micronavigation', in fact, so I've changed that header to be less ambiguous. I've also changed the second paragraph to include the line 'You'll certainly need to be able to read a 1:25,000 map competently, be able to walk on a bearing within 1° of accuracy and be comfortable in taking backbearings and relocation.' Does that care of your concerns with this side of it?

Entry: Micronavigation - A28801820
Author: Skankyrich [?] - The Post's Guest Editor! - U931109

Good as always.

>>>It is used by hill- and mountain-walkers and is similar to techniques used in orienteering, and it can be an interesting way of spending an afternoon as an activity on its own.<<<
-->
>>>Similar to the techniques used in orienteering, it is used by hill- and mountain-walkers but can also be an interesting way of spending an afternoon as an activity on its own.<<<

>>>If you're trying to find a particular point in open country and there is a wall 100m behind it<<<
-->
beyond it

>>>ridges make excellent catching features and with practice you can use a contour line as a handrail<<<
-->
with practice

Alex

Cheers, Alex!

I like that change about basics. I bought a book at the weekend, and a compass, to start learning the very basic basics. Then I might understand this a little more.

I think this entry is excellent. There are some really good things to remember for the next time I go hillwalking.

I'll try to work on that when I get back from Portsmouth, Mina. It's quite difficult to write this sort of thing without diagrams to explain what you're on about, but it seems this one at least has come through ok.

Thank you as well, Aurora

Gloopy servers at work were down, and other RL stupidity

Yeah, Basics bit looks fine now .

Vague suggestion:

At end of Judging Distance: I know you mention the weather as reason you might need µnav in the intro, and the headwind here, but I think extremely limited visibility deserves a mention here - perhaps just before 'Timing demands practice...'

In fog, blizzards, and indeed the dark, people have a natural tendency to slow down, for all sorts of sensible subconscious reasons to do with not wanting to fall over/run into something.

Terrain dependent of course. - on a road, I would say you might be comfortable at 75% of our usual pace in the dark (and you would swear you were at 100%, but you are not, you have slowed down), but expect to be walking at 50% of normal pace off-road.

I seem to have rambled on more than I meant to, but seeing as limited vis is exactly when you need µnavigation the most, it just seems sensible to mention it...

vp

now that Rich is back.

I've added a line about visibility, VP, but I don't want to guesstimate walking speeds any further, as an important part of micronav is learning how much adjustment you need to make personally.

Any more comments about the content? If not, I'll add links

Yes - this is rubbish so it won't be picked this week.



*dusts off hands and goes off to take care of more business*

Thanks, Leo

As I was saying, rubbish. Good thing nobody picked this.

>>The problem is that these scenarios often do not last long; on Britain's uplands the weather can change in an alarmingly brief time, sheep-tracks intersect footpaths, and veering from the right route is surprisingly easy.

- Looking at this sentence until my eyes crossed: it's correct, but the second clause threw me off. As the sentence now stands, it appears that you have two things that can come up: (1) weather (2) intersecting paths which make veering from the route easy. If this is the case, then you need an "and" before the woolly clause.
What I suspect you mean is that the weather changes and the paths get tangled and between the two of 'em, it's easy to get lost.
If you meant the former, please stick in the and. If you meant the latter, can you tangle the sheep tracks with the footpaths instead and make it getting misplaced that is easy?
Thanks - that should slow my heart palpitations.


>>If you expect to cross a bridge after 300m and meet one after only 100m, you might want to stop to think.
- change the "and" to a "but". This one really had me scratching my head. I finally decided that it must be a 200m long bridge. But the following sentences corrected me.


>>Most people will do about 65 - 70 strides per 100m on the level.

- Male, female, or both? Not all of us have those blasted pesky long legs.


>>This takes less concentration but a more accurate watch.

- If a watch can't keep up with this sort of stuff, I don't think you ought to be wearing it. Wouldn't you agree?


>>Many walkers carry a card with walking speeds and distances marked on it in case of emergencies.
- Meaning, how fast you're likely to be going in certain conditions? How incredibly interesting.

>>There are other factors, of course; for example, with a headwind you might add 10% to your time, and some say that you should add or subtract from your timing depending on the terrain and whether you are walking up or downhill. Visibility can also play a part, as walkers tend to naturally slow down in fog or darkness. Timing demands practice in all sorts of conditions to be perfected.
- Hm. Sounds to me like a calculator should become standard walking equipment.

>>The two create a kind of funnel, and you could just follow the stream you arrived at until you met the other.
- You CAN just follow


>>simply, if you hit the wall, you've gone too far!
- why not stick a semicolon before the simply? and remove the exclamation point, please. 99.9% of the time they're not necessary in writing. Keep 'em for when you're speaking.


>>Micronavigators will 'aim off', taking a bearing not to the bridge but to a point off to one side. Then, although they will not arrive at the bridge itself, they will know for certain whether it lies to the left or to the right.

- Brilliant!

>>Find a kink in a contour line at night
- So when is that Entry coming through?

...OK, maybe it wasn't *completely* rubbish. It certainly was interesting. Yes, I would say it had some redeeming features. Not bad.

This is great Rich, Took me back to my mountain/hillwalking days and training.
Langmuir doesn't say anything about adding time when walking downhill, it's certainly no quicker, bearing in mind that Mountain Rescue statistics show the majority of accidents in the hills are when folk are descending. Usually because they're tired after the ascent, go too fast and stumble/fall and descending is also the main cause of twisted ankles and painful knees. It can in some situations be slower descending.

I agree that this is not total rubbish

In fact, I'd go so far as to say I found it fascinating - and in a non-rubbishy sort of way

>>you'll be able to navigate to all sorts of tiny features<<
Like molehills? I'll assume rather that you mean tiny features on the map.

Pacing is a subject of endless debate among surveyors. There are two basic schools - one is to determine what your natural pace is, as you recommend, and the other is to make your pace conform to something easy to count (but only when you are actually pacing and not just walking along) For example, you can easily make your pace conform to two strides per 10 feet, or two per meter if you prefer. Then you count at each step 1-2-3-1, 1-2-3-2, 1-2-3-3 and you are at 30 feet, or 3 meters as the case may be. In either case, you need to calibrate yourself over a known distance. Anyhoo - if this is not generally worried about or argued over by hikers than please ignore what I said - I already have.

The 'aiming off' suggestion is new to me - I will try it tomorrow. If you don't hear from me soon then I misunderstood the technique.

Excellent

Ah well, surveyors .

Suspect for long walks the recommendation would be to walk at whatever stride comes most naturally, and to learn how far it takes you.

Incidentally, how can you "easily make your pace conform to two strides per 10 feet". I guess you just need a pair of seven league boots huh?

I meant two strides as in four steps - but I see another difficulty in that my 'metric conversion' is off by a factor of three causing a similar fate for the hiker using it as for a certain mars lander (ie, unknown, but probably somehow involving a crater).

Best to ignore everything I said. I blame the lateness of the hour when I said it, but you may chalk it up to plain stupidity.

I've addressed all the points - thanks guys!

ST, apparently Languir does make a distinction between steep and gentle slopes, and presumes a slightly faster pace on gentle downhills and a much slower pace on steep uphills. I can't confirm this, as my copy has been lent to someone by the look of things, but it is mentioned in connection with L in various places on the Internet, and is quoted in a Leeds University study. I'm steering clear of going into that in too much detail, as people are taught different things by different people. Instead, I've suggested that people make their own judgements through practice

Hikers use their natural pace, pailaway. If you're walking all day, particularly over difficult ground, you can't force yourself to take strides of a particular length - certainly among the heather and bogs of Dartmoor, I'd be very amused to watch someone try to make their paces fit the distance

For hiking I absolutely have to agree with you on using one's natural pace.

Surveyors adjust their pace because we're just that way. I was recently pacing along a difficult line to find a property monument 500 feet away - so picture measured paces and straight line. Meanwhile, the buyer who was a hiker instead was tagging along but he meandered to avoid shrubs, rocks and other annoyances and remarked that I sure chose a difficult path.

A fine piece, this (you know, for rubbish)

Although if you are interested in how hikers measure distance, there's also A28909380 in review at the moment. It's pretty rubbish, but I thought I'd mention it

I don't know. I was doing ok a week ago. Now I'm grumpy again, and all my Entries are rubbish. I suppose it was inevitable that I'd join the Scouts again