TOT Google streetview

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 12:38:14 +0000 (UTC), David Taylor wrote:

On 2010-07-16, wrote:
On Jul 16, 9:28*am, PeterC wrote:
The 'driver' was just following the ****nav - not 'is fault, gov.
--
Peter.
2x4 - thick plank; 4x4 - two of 'em.

So presumably the driver of a 4x4 mountain rescue vehicle, following
his satnav to a rendezvous point, is a thick ****.

If he follows it indiscriminately off a cliff, yes.

Indeed - but such people are usually capable of navigating and also
evaluating instructions from a machine; most aren't.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On 16/07/2010 13:55, PeterC wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 12:38:14 +0000 (UTC), David Taylor wrote:

So presumably the driver of a 4x4 mountain rescue vehicle, following
his satnav to a rendezvous point, is a thick ****.

If he follows it indiscriminately off a cliff, yes.

Indeed - but such people are usually capable of navigating and also
evaluating instructions from a machine; most aren't.

Yes, sat-navs are an *aid* to navigation, not a full hands-off
navigation solution!

They are very good at telling you where you are, but not too good at
telling you where you ought to be!

If I'm planning a route somewhere I don't know, I load up the relevant
mapset in Garmin Mapsource on the PC, and manually create waypoints for
where I want to go, and any intermediate waypoints. I will check the
route it auto-routes for me, and change it if I wish.

I then load it all into the GPS: maps, waypoints and all.

So in use, it's simply a moving map, guiding me along a route I've
already determined.

In the car, it's also more convenient to tell the GPS to GoTo a
pre-defined waypoint or route rather than inputting street addresses etc.

Doing a Day Skipper shore-based sailing course helps get aids like GPS
into propper perspective.

--
Ron

On Friday, July 16th, 2010 at 17:21:40h +0100, Ron Lowe explained:

Yes, sat-navs are an *aid* to navigation, not a full hands-off
navigation solution!

Unlike the next generation driving system to put visually challenged
drivers behind the wheel.

http://abcnews.go.COM/Technology/AheadoftheCurve/story?id=8168749&page=1

http://www.foxnews.COM/story/0,2933,595782,00.html

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 16:36:20 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller wrote:

On Friday, July 16th, 2010 at 17:21:40h +0100, Ron Lowe explained:

Yes, sat-navs are an *aid* to navigation, not a full hands-off
navigation solution!

Unlike the next generation driving system to put visually challenged
drivers behind the wheel.

er, no change there, then.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 17:21:40 +0100, Ron Lowe wrote:

On 16/07/2010 13:55, PeterC wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 12:38:14 +0000 (UTC), David Taylor wrote:

So presumably the driver of a 4x4 mountain rescue vehicle, following
his satnav to a rendezvous point, is a thick ****.

If he follows it indiscriminately off a cliff, yes.

Indeed - but such people are usually capable of navigating and also
evaluating instructions from a machine; most aren't.

Yes, sat-navs are an *aid* to navigation, not a full hands-off
navigation solution!

They are very good at telling you where you are, but not too good at
telling you where you ought to be!

Yup - told a chap that I was S of N'pton (NN7); he also had an e-mail with
addy and PC. Got a call "Where are you? I'm at NN17" Nuff said.

snip

Doing a Day Skipper shore-based sailing course helps get aids like GPS
into propper perspective.

Yes - act on what's there and not on blind belief.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

"Tim" [email protected] wrote in message
...

" wrote in
message
...
Take a look at the point where the A171 crosses the river at
Whitby.
Follow it across the bridge. Something very odd happens near
the east
end of the bridge.

From this point on:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&...2,92.6 4,,0,5

Tim



Ah, found the problem - nothing about low flying.

If you progress across the bridge and along the road you will
notice that the silver Mondeo and the red car behind it are
always there in the picture. Clearly the sequence of pictures
must have been taken by the rear facing camera.

You can progress such if you put the mouse on the centre line of
the bridge at the farthest point that a circle appears -
alongside the red car. However try putting the mouse on the
centre line of the bridge just ahead of the silver Mondeo and
double click - it takes you somewhere completely different, in a
housing estate methinks.

Wow!



--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 11:41:55 +0100,
wrote:

On 16 July, 08:20, "Tim" [email protected] wrote:
" wrote in message

...

Take a look at the point where the A171 crosses the river at Whitby.
Follow it across the bridge. Something very odd happens near the east
end of the bridge.

From this point
on:http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&...5,-0.613217&sp...

It's even funnier if you "drive" the other way - same thing happens,
but you can see the road above you!

Cheers,
David.



You can see an error in the underlying mapping if you turn on overlay of
satellite and map, the bridge appears to do a bit of a dog leg, the drive
along follows that (wrong) alignment of the road.

--
Steve

Yes, sat-navs are an *aid* to navigation, not a full hands-off navigation solution!

They are very good at telling you where you are, but not too good at telling you where you ought to be!


This explains it (I think) ;-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cM_UxLMlHtw
--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 17:21:40 +0100, Ron Lowe wrote:

Yes, sat-navs are an *aid* to navigation, not a full hands-off
navigation solution!

They are very good at telling you where you are, but not too good at
telling you where you ought to be!

So are maps, I could find where I was and where I needed to be but
they didn't tell me about the low bridge which my truck wouldn't go
under. Or the five mile detour. Let alone the tree that fell on me
half way round.

On Jul 17, 7:12*pm, Albert Ross wrote:


So are maps, I could find where I was and where I needed to be but
they didn't tell me about the low bridge which my truck wouldn't go
under. Or the five mile detour. Let alone the tree that fell on me
half way round.

Not a brilliant day then?

You forgot to mention the wasp and the half shaft.

Bill