Thank you for that dBA. Some more 'light' reading for me..I think I will sleep well after getting through that lot

Select to expand quote

fangman said..
Yoyo, GPSBabel can read .fit files and then convert to .bin (Navitel binary track) which if I understand correctly maintains the accuracy and Doppler data. Happy to stand corrected tho

say whaaa

Select to expand quote

KevinD002 said..

fangman said..
Yoyo, GPSBabel can read .fit files and then convert to .bin (Navitel binary track) which if I understand correctly maintains the accuracy and Doppler data. Happy to stand corrected tho

say whaaa

I am rapidly getting out my depth here, so if someone else wants to jump in and put the record straight, please do. The Canmore unit output file is a .fit file. I have discussed this type of file with the developers of GPSBabel Software. Their program can read .fit files and will then convert them to .bin files which GPSResults can read. I am guessing the other GPS analysis programs can do the same-can someone confirm?

Select to expand quote

dBA said..
bioresonant.com/dl/dl.htm?name=SDOP.pdf

Basically a similar accuracy value as the HDOP, but then specifically for the Doppler based speed calculations. After scanning the PDF quickly I noticed that Tom says it's a new feature in the SiRFStar 3 chips, but I couldn't find it either in the binary protocol for the latest chip sets. It used to be a parameter in the MSG41 something which our SBN files consist of. Hope this helps...

If memory serves correct, I think the SDOP data was something that Tom directly persuaded the Sirf technicians to implement in the Sirf3 chip, and furthermore persuaded Locosys to give access to in their GT-31 output.

I surmise that Locosys managed to get an equivalent output of SDOP type data from the sirf4 chip they used in the 5hz evaluation prototype they called the GT-52 (wristwatch form) if that is the GPS chip they used. (not confirmed). A conversation I had with Tom recently led me to believe that the 'SDOP' output in that prototype was not in exactly the same format as from the Sirf3.

The Sirf company technicians may be able to help clear this up if it is possible to contact them.

Hi I understand there's still plenty to do in order to have the perfect tool for officially recording the next World record, but was wondering if anyone assessed the 102+ for the more trivial requirements of us poor mortals, such as water resistance reliability. I just had my GT-31 drowned in its bundled Aquapac so would love to avoid both brands in the future and am considering this nice piece of equipment.
(BTW: owning the new Mistral slalom boards makes one definitely not want to leave shore without a gps logger).

Simply double-bag. Put the GPS in a small ziplock bag, and that bag into second waterproof other bag.

I stopped using Aquapac bags more than a year ago. They always started leaking after a few months at most. I switched to cheaper bags made for iPhones. For the Canmore, I currently use a 4x5 inch Aloksak bag (water proof to 60 M, about $2), and put that into an Arkon sports armband for an iPhone ($6). The sports armband is not waterproof, it has openings on both sides. However, it will limit water entry during crashes. So far, this has worked great for about 5-10 sessions. I'm planning to replace the Aloksak bag as soon as I seen any signs of damage. If you use a waterproof armband, a cheaper sandwich or snack plastic bag should do fine.

They may cost $2 and $6 where you live but in Oz it is more like $7(alosak) and $26 (Arkon) but I'm sure a sandwich bag would be fine.

So, should we assume the GP-102+ is as much "waterproof" as the GT-31 is?
I see the GP-102+ can also be bought in bundle with a (seemingly) nice armband, any news about that one?

Select to expand quote

geoITA said..
So, should we assume the GP-102+ is as much "waterproof" as the GT-31 is?
I see the GP-102+ can also be bought in bundle with a (seemingly) nice armband, any news about that one?

theoretically it is worse, IPX6 (Canmore) vs IPX7 (Navi GT31) but reality may be different. the shape and size would seem to favour the smaller Canmore in crashes and make extra sealing easier.

Select to expand quote

geoITA said..
So, should we assume the GP-102+ is as much "waterproof" as the GT-31 is?

That would be overly optimistic. The GT-31 is IPX7, the GP-102 is IPX 6. I would assume that the manufacturers are correct, and that the GT-31 can be immersed in water at low depth and for a limited time, but the GP-102 not. That's what the specs say.

But neither waterproofing is sufficient for windsurfing, where crashes can produce much higher water pressure than IPX6 or 7. I have used GT-31s in leaky Aquapac bags without problems, but I have also seen GT-31s die a quick death under similar circumstances. I have taken apart two dead GT-31s. One had a broken housing, probably from falling onto it in a crash that also damaged the Aquapac. By the time I got it a week later, everything inside was corroded. The other one had a bad battery, which may or may not be due to water entry. Both dead GT-31s, as well as my two GT-31s that are still working, have corroded screws on the inside of the SD card cover, indicating that the seal is not perfect. Just a bit of sand on the rubber seals can cause water entry.

I agree with yoyo that the smaller size of the GP-102 may be more relevant than the difference in IPX rating, at least for windsurfing. Damage to the housing in crashes seems less likely, and a broken (or even temporarily deformed) housing will let water in.

Select to expand quote

boardsurfr said..

I stopped using Aquapac bags more than a year ago. They always started leaking after a few months at most. >>>>>

I found there's a weak spot in aquapacs, near the opening, the welded join at the edge there is very narrow.
If there is a lot of air in the bag, and the bag hits anything hard enough, (including water) the resulting air pressure inside the bag will split that seam. It's a very good idea to exclude all air from the bag before sealing it.
I now use paqua midi's they are a better size for the GTs and stronger. They wear out around the opening, but it's gradual and easily monitored. I've never had a total sudden failure, things just start to get a bit damp inside the bag after a few years. The screws in my card recess are still uncorroded, after many years.

My GT-31 was supposed to be able to resist 30' in 1 meter deep water; instead it drowned in a few seconds in maybe 1 cm of water inside the broken bag. So the IPX7 spec is obviously false and unreliable.
And my Aquapac broke about 1 cm of that tiny weld for no apparent reason but just use. Despite longer experience and a relatively (very) high price tag should make one think it's a well designed and built piece of equipment.
By sure I will never again buy from either brand.
If (IF) the Canmore spec (IPX6) is true and reliable, I think then it will be OK. True IPX6 is far better than what the GT-31 showed.

So will they update their firmware to show 2s, 10s and 5x10s averages in knots? Thanks, Mete

There's also a discussion on the Dutch windsurf forum about the Canmore GPS. Some are even considering to do a group purchase and buy 20+ GPS units at once. They get the impression that the current Canmore GPS device is a must buy and a definite succesor to the GT-31 with only a small number of software glitches to be solved which can be done with a software upgrade.

If I understand the discussion here there is still some work to be done to get the Canmore device up to standard. Let alone be a worthy succesor to the GT-31. In short is the current Canmore device a must buy or would you advice to wait another couple of months and see how things develop?

Well Fangy has just received his canmore, hopefully we'll get some wind to test in the next few days, and give a report on it's present state.
I'm sure sailquick will report back on his discussions with canmore once he has some news from them.

My impression is, at the moment it's a good data back up to the GTs, but doesn't have the readouts we know and love in the GT31

^ - my initial impression of the unit is : bloody hell it's small, I will lose that down the crack in the seat upholstery! Second impression is to go and find a couple of coke bottle bottoms so I can read the display. But given I tend to use my gps as a data logger and rarely look at the display I don't think that will worry me: but if you like to see your basic results on water then wear your contacts! ( there is nothing fancy in data display - no speed genie function) Otherwise the plots I have of driving around roundabouts waiting for wind pretty much replicate what has been said before, so just read Boardsurfr's blog and that's sums it up nicely so far.

Select to expand quote

fin151 said..
So will they update their firmware to show 2s, 10s and 5x10s averages in knots? Thanks, Mete

I have written to Canmore with a request to see if they will make firmware mods to better suit out needs. Still waiting for a reply.

Apparently, the current unit displays only KM on the screen, No Knots. Obviously, that is one of the requests.

Select to expand quote

TheTank said..
There's also a discussion on the Dutch windsurf forum about the Canmore GPS. Some are even considering to do a group purchase and buy 20+ GPS units at once. They get the impression that the current Canmore GPS device is a must buy and a definite succesor to the GT-31 with only a small number of software glitches to be solved which can be done with a software upgrade.

If I understand the discussion here there is still some work to be done to get the Canmore device up to standard. Let alone be a worthy succesor to the GT-31. In short is the current Canmore device a must buy or would you advice to wait another couple of months and see how things develop?

I would not rush into making a bulk purchase just yet. If you are desperate for a replacement because your GT-31 or GT-11 is busted, it may be worth getting one to get you by in the short term. There are some simple firmware changes that would make it vastly more useful. I would hold off to see if they are willing to make those updates. If they express interest, we can sweeten it for them with a substantial order which might tip them in the right direction.

Can you post a link here to the Dutch forum discussion please?

Select to expand quote

geoITA said..
My GT-31 was supposed to be able to resist 30' in 1 meter deep water; instead it drowned in a few seconds in maybe 1 cm of water inside the broken bag. So the IPX7 spec is obviously false and unreliable.
And my Aquapac broke about 1 cm of that tiny weld for no apparent reason but just use. Despite longer experience and a relatively (very) high price tag should make one think it's a well designed and built piece of equipment.
By sure I will never again buy from either brand.
If (IF) the Canmore spec (IPX6) is true and reliable, I think then it will be OK. True IPX6 is far better than what the GT-31 showed.

The GT-31 has limited water-proofing as per it's specifications. The waterproofing it has will not consistently resist impact pressure. You would be surprised how small this impact needs to be. The action of vigorous swimming with a leaky bag may be enough and this has happened to me a couple of times. The water resistance IS what the manufacturer claims.

It may be a moot point with the current availability of new GT-31's, but, if you can, why would you not buy the unit that has all the features you need and then just protect it better, when any other alternatives are not yet proven or developed and at best offer very basic features? We call that cutting off your nose to spite your face!

Get a Paqua bag and use a zip lock bag inside it! You would have to do at least that with the Canmore unit anyhow.

Select to expand quote

sailquik said..

geoITA said..
My GT-31 was supposed to be able to resist 30' in 1 meter deep water; instead it drowned in a few seconds in maybe 1 cm of water inside the broken bag. So the IPX7 spec is obviously false and unreliable.
And my Aquapac broke about 1 cm of that tiny weld for no apparent reason but just use. Despite longer experience and a relatively (very) high price tag should make one think it's a well designed and built piece of equipment.
By sure I will never again buy from either brand.
If (IF) the Canmore spec (IPX6) is true and reliable, I think then it will be OK. True IPX6 is far better than what the GT-31 showed.

The GT-31 has limited water-proofing as per it's specifications. The waterproofing it has will not consistently resist impact pressure. You would be surprised how small this impact needs to be. The action of vigorous swimming with a leaky bag may be enough and this has happened to me a couple of times. The water resistance IS what the manufacturer claims.

It may be a moot point with the current availability of new GT-31's, but, if you can, why would you not buy the unit that has all the features you need and then just protect it better, when any other alternatives are not yet proven or developed and at best offer very basic features? We call that cutting off your nose to spite your face!

Get a Paqua bag and use a zip lock bag inside it! You would have to do at least that with the Canmore unit anyhow.

Apart from price, actually as for me the Canmore seems to do exactly what I need: log GPS datas with proper accuracy and frequency. I am not a fan of the speedgenie feature (meaning: if it's there, it's OK; if it isn't, it's still OK), I am really OK with the opportunity to see the (last) highest speed and be able to clear it so to have the device ready for the next one. And then once at home download the datas and go through them. Actually I prefer the Garmin Foretrex 201 interface to the GT's one. So my nose stays all together and my face dry.
Of course it'a a matter of tastes ... but for me the 'old' looks, big size, uncomfortable buttons, poor water resistance of the GT's are big "down"; and the small size, nice looks, (seemingly) easy inteface, easier protection (due to less bulk) of the Canmore are big "plus". Should ever be, on top of that, a "real" IPX6 protection (means: resist to splash/waves/water jets) (in comparison to theorically better but unreliable IPX7 og the GT's - your description is perfect) then for me it's done.
What I do not understand is how can the GT's be IPX7, provided they don't even stand "vigorous swimming", when "inferior" IPX6 protection means resist to "powerful water jets". Or maybe IPX6 and IPX7 are not really "lower" and "higher", but just different? And then maybe IPX6 really is what we do need?

Whatever floats your boat

www.gpslodge.com/gps-reviews/

Select to expand quote

sailquik said..

TheTank said..
There's also a discussion on the Dutch windsurf forum about the Canmore GPS. Some are even considering to do a group purchase and buy 20+ GPS units at once. They get the impression that the current Canmore GPS device is a must buy and a definite succesor to the GT-31 with only a small number of software glitches to be solved which can be done with a software upgrade.

If I understand the discussion here there is still some work to be done to get the Canmore device up to standard. Let alone be a worthy succesor to the GT-31. In short is the current Canmore device a must buy or would you advice to wait another couple of months and see how things develop?

Can you post a link here to the Dutch forum discussion please?

forum.windsurfing.nl/viewtopic.php?f=62&t=13883884&start=80

Select to expand quote

sailquik said..

dBA said..
bioresonant.com/dl/dl.htm?name=SDOP.pdf

Basically a similar accuracy value as the HDOP, but then specifically for the Doppler based speed calculations. After scanning the PDF quickly I noticed that Tom says it's a new feature in the SiRFStar 3 chips, but I couldn't find it either in the binary protocol for the latest chip sets. It used to be a parameter in the MSG41 something which our SBN files consist of. Hope this helps...

If memory serves correct, I think the SDOP data was something that Tom directly persuaded the Sirf technicians to implement in the Sirf3 chip, and furthermore persuaded Locosys to give access to in their GT-31 output.

I surmise that Locosys managed to get an equivalent output of SDOP type data from the sirf4 chip they used in the 5hz evaluation prototype they called the GT-52 (wristwatch form) if that is the GPS chip they used. (not confirmed). A conversation I had with Tom recently led me to believe that the 'SDOP' output in that prototype was not in exactly the same format as from the Sirf3.

The Sirf company technicians may be able to help clear this up if it is possible to contact them.

Phew! I have been wading through the SIRF Binary Protocol and the updated SIRF Binary OSP Protocol and it is tough going for an old bloke!

Message 41 has a part called 'estimated horizontal velocity error': EHVE in m/s x 102(SiRFDRive only)

It is apparently only normally available in the SIRFDRive firmware version if Surf GPS modules.

It seems to fit what I have been told that Tom/Locosys may have persuaded SIRF to make a firmware change in the SIRF111 Chip they used so as to capture this message.

There is also this message: Navigation Subsystem - Message ID 48, Sub ID 3

It also appears to contain the same speed error calculation, but it us not clear to me if this message is also specific to the SIRFDRive firmware.

If you have more insight I'd love to hear it.

Here is a link to my session yesterday which included a test of the canmore device-

www.gpsteamchallenge.com.au/sailor_session/show?date=2014-08-11&team=10

Contact made with Canmore and it was a positive reaction to possible firmware and even maybe hardware changes. Lots of work to do but I am optimistic. More news when I have it.

Good new Andrew, I saw fangy's today, and the first change I think it needs is a much larger font for our readouts, I'll see if I can get a comparison pic between it and the GT31 to show you.
I think the Canmore screen is big enough it's just that the speed read out occupies a very small part of it.

Select to expand quote

sailquik said..
Contact made with Canmore and it was a positive reaction to possible firmware and even maybe hardware changes. Lots of work to do but I am optimistic. More news when I have it.

Great news Andrew, thank you for all your work so far:-)

another session comparison, this time missing the hr numbers from the canmore.

gpsteamchallenge.com.au/sailor_session/show?date=2014-08-12&team=10

when I get a chance I will re process through results

Great work Sailquik.

Snides, any idea why the canmore didn't register an hour result in latest session?

I lost my hour result as well, but assumed I had messed up with the conversion somewhere. I will investigate some more when I get a chance.