Toolbox suggestions

Discussion about the Geocaching Australia web site
Post Reply
Laighside Legends
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 1281
Joined: 05 October 10 10:20 pm
Location: Yorke Peninsula, South Australia

Toolbox suggestions

Post by Laighside Legends » 17 January 14 12:56 pm

I'm not sure if there's a proper thread somewhere for this sort of thing but anyway...

http://geocaching.com.au/toolbox/
Just an idea, how about line intersection but entering 2 sets of coords and 2 bearings as opposed to the current 4 sets of coords?

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16251
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Toolbox suggestions

Post by caughtatwork » 17 January 14 1:16 pm

Sure, I'll add it to the list of stuff to do.

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16251
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Toolbox suggestions

Post by caughtatwork » 17 January 14 10:12 pm

The weather has cooled down ... niiiiiiiiiiiice, so I've opened up the box and had a go.

Try this:
http://geocaching.com.au/toolbox/lineintersectbearing/

I know there should be two points at where they cross, but I can't work out how to do that (yet). I think this should suffice for your need though.

Laighside Legends
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 1281
Joined: 05 October 10 10:20 pm
Location: Yorke Peninsula, South Australia

Re: Toolbox suggestions

Post by Laighside Legends » 19 January 14 12:24 pm

caughtatwork wrote:I know there should be two points at where they cross, but I can't work out how to do that (yet). I think this should suffice for your need though.
I think the other one would always be on the exact opposite side of the world??? So it probably doesn't matter...

The other thing I thought of was something to help with the cracking of transposition ciphers. Only I'm not really sure how to make it work given the large number of possible shapes and routes through them...

User avatar
WazzaAndWenches
5000 or more caches found
5000 or more caches found
Posts: 372
Joined: 08 April 07 10:28 pm
Location: Echuca, Vic

Re: Toolbox suggestions

Post by WazzaAndWenches » 29 December 19 11:52 am

Toolbox/Distance and Direction between two points...

Would it be possible to change the output result from a simple "n.nn metres, xx" (ie 100.02m NE) to something like "n.nnn metres, xxx degrees" (ie 100.025m 143deg)?

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16251
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Toolbox suggestions

Post by caughtatwork » 01 January 20 2:32 pm

Sure. Done.

User avatar
WazzaAndWenches
5000 or more caches found
5000 or more caches found
Posts: 372
Joined: 08 April 07 10:28 pm
Location: Echuca, Vic

Re: Toolbox suggestions

Post by WazzaAndWenches » 08 January 20 8:40 pm

caughtatwork wrote:
01 January 20 2:32 pm
Sure. Done.
Luv ya work. Thanks.

Any chance of an extra decimal place in the distance ie. 1m accuracy rather than the current 10m?
Yeah, I know we don't need 1m to find a cache (sadly, some cachers expect a neon sign and 10cm accuracy ](*,) ), but the result could go toward a complex solution where accuracy is much more critical.

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16251
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Toolbox suggestions

Post by caughtatwork » 09 January 20 7:45 am

I can but there is an assumption that the method you use will be the same method the site uses.

i.e. we use a spherical earth calculation for this particular tool. This is where we assume the earth has an $earth_radius = 6378.1370 km.

Some of our other projection tools use different models.
i.e.
Ellipsoidal Earth Model (Most Accurate)
Spherical Earth Model (Fizzycalc Radius) $radius = 6366.7072;
Spherical Earth Model (Great Circle Radius of Ellipsoid) $radius = 6372.7976;
Spherical Earth Model (Equitorial Radius) $radius = 6378.1370;

The ellipsoidal method also has a different calculation method vs. the spherical models.

Any difference in any of those vs. the pure distance calculation (where there is no direction, just distance between two points) will result in far less accuracy, even if we increase the precision of the answer to 3 or more digits.

I am initially against making the change as the perceived precision is probably less accurate than the two digits, but if you have a compelling point, then make it and we can see what whether we can agree to the method and any disclaimer.

User avatar
WazzaAndWenches
5000 or more caches found
5000 or more caches found
Posts: 372
Joined: 08 April 07 10:28 pm
Location: Echuca, Vic

Re: Toolbox suggestions

Post by WazzaAndWenches » 09 January 20 9:04 pm

caughtatwork wrote:
09 January 20 7:45 am
...if you have a compelling point...
No compelling reason. (Well, not enough to make it worth the coding work.) Just working on something and thought 1m would help eliminate potential geotrails. I can work another way around it easily enough.

Over shorter distances (such as what I was planning) any spherical method would be plenty accurate enough, though. Yeah, I know some will want to work over vast distances.

n0w0rries
4000 or more? I'm officially obsessed.
4000 or more? I'm officially obsessed.
Posts: 11
Joined: 21 July 14 9:34 pm
Twitter: https://twitter.com/n0w0rries_
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rod.lyon.5
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Contact:

Re: Toolbox suggestions

Post by n0w0rries » 22 July 20 11:57 pm

AUSLAN
Since we have many cachers and caches dependent on AUSLAN is there any chance of adding it to the toolbox?

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16251
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Toolbox suggestions

Post by caughtatwork » 23 July 20 3:19 pm

Do you have an example?

All we can really do is include the finger spellings. We can't automate the solution as we can't read the images to see what they are. You could use it to create the cipher, but not to decipher.

Post Reply