Oohhh ppuullease John ~= 6.28 ~= 6 9/32John Gray wrote: It's actually 2Ï€" ~= 6.28".
One must not mix imperial with decimal....it is just so passe
Oohhh ppuullease John ~= 6.28 ~= 6 9/32John Gray wrote: It's actually 2Ï€" ~= 6.28".
That link mentions Selective Availability (the US Government's way of saying "we are messing with the signal to try to limit the effectiveness of our enemies in using GPS in targeting algorithms"). SA was discontinued in May 2000 at the request of the US FAA. Wikipedia has more information on GPS than I ever want to read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;jezza wrote:I have theory this may have something to do with it WAAS
There are two factors in any measurement: "accuracy"- how close to the real value and "precision" - how consistent the measurement is.JoeP wrote:Accuracy of the GPS unit?
Joe
Lane 1 | 400.0 Metres |
Lane 2 | 407.2 Metres |
Lane 3 | 414.9 Metres |
Lane 4 | 422.6 Metres |
Lane 5 | 430.4 Metres |
Lane 6 | 438.2 Metres |
Lane 7 | 446.1 Metres |
Lane 8 | 453.6 Metres |
Quite so.John Gray wrote:ChrisGreaves wrote:Quite easily worked out as the difference between the two circumferences
Hi JerryDue to the nature of the run I have a very strong feeling that as I run on the white line between Lane 1 and 2 I could potentially be adding 7.2 metres to my laps.