Month: May 2018

Take the GPS Quiz!

The GPS Challenge

Test your knowledge of satellite navigation systems and how they relate to ARDF. Take the quiz!

Q1. From the list below, select the answer that is most similar to: “A multi-billion dollar constellation of satellites, designed and deployed by armies of scientists and engineers, providing precise navigation data only to persons carrying GPS radio receivers.”

a) Local measurements of the Earth’s magnetic field taken with a compass device.
b) Noting the direction toward the rising sun.
c) Map-reading skills honed for determining one’s position on a map.
d) Collaborators outside an ARDF course during a competition communicating guidance information to competitors using out-of-band receivers.

Q2. Select the technology that is most likely to alter the nature of a sport that emphasizes reliance on individual navigation skills:

a) Metal cleats on orienteering shoes.
b) Lightweight equipment.
c) Improved battery technology.
d) A sophisticated navigation system capable of 10-meter position accuracy.

Q3. Complete the sentence: If someone is interested in sports that emphasize reliance on individual navigation skills, then they are most likely to be interested in a different sport that…

a) … includes unbridled use of satellite navigation devices.
b) … requires a $250 equipment purchase just to be competitive with other beginners.
c) … works more like geocaching and less like orienteering.
d) … emphasizes individual navigation skills just like their other sports interests.

Q4. Complete the sentence: Using satellite navigation to travel a straight line through a region of forest lacking many features…

a) … will always require swimming across a lake not shown on the map.
b) … is of no advantage since real orienteers don’t need no stinkin’ features.
c) … isn’t possible using current technology.
d) … can provide a significant advantage on some courses.

Q5. If you purchase an ARDF receiver with built-in GPS, but the receiver provides position information that compares unfavorably with your cell phone or wrist-mounted GPS device, the most reasonable conclusion is:

a) GPS has an allergy to ARDF.
b) Gravity waves from distant pulsars are attracted to fox transmitters.
c) Satellite navigation systems have a negligible impact on the sport of ARDF.
d) The manufacturer has failed to implement a Kalman filter in your receiver’s software. (Hint)

Q6. Choose the false statement regarding the use of GPS in orienteering:

a) The International Orienteering Federation’s (IOF) latest rules only allow competitors to carry GPS-enabled devices provided that they are not used for navigation purposes, and don’t have a map display. (Hint: this might not be false at all!)
b) Until recent changes to IARU Region I ARDF rules, ARDF had always adhered to IOF rules related to the use of GPS in sporting competitions.
c) The Region 1 ARDF Rules allowing the use of satellite-based systems for navigation is a divergence of ARDF away from orienteering, and toward geocaching.
d) ARDF competitions have never relied on the orienteering community for maps, participants, insurance, or any other resource; so ARDF stands to lose nothing by diverging from that sport.

Q7. Choose the wording that correctly completes the sentence: Technological improvements to ARDF receiver sensitivity, or compass accuracy…

a) … wouldn’t be fair in ARDF competitions because they would provide precise lat/lon position data to certain competitors.
b) … would allow collaborators outside a competition to provide navigation assistance to those competitors using that technology.
c) … would make it possible for an inkjet printer to precisely mark fox locations on an official course map.
d) … are in keeping with the spirit of innovation that has always been part of ARDF.

Q8. Which of the following statements about satellite-navigation receivers makes that technology inappropriate for integration into ARDF receivers?

a) Satellite-navigation receivers provide precise position information effortlessly, which is precisely the information that competitors in navigation sports are challenged to derive using their own personal navigational skills.
b) Without a terrain map or even a display, position data can be used to derive helpful navigational assistance such as waypoint distance, rhumb line following, and bearing convergence locations.
c) It is not fair to require humans to compete against machines.
d) All of the above.

Q9. Choose the wording that most truthfully completes the sentence: So long as superior navigation skills afford ARDF competitors some advantage…

a) … satellite-derived position data cannot possibly provide an unfair advantage to those who use it.
b) … the swallows will return to San Bernardino. (Hint: this answer might not be correct!)
c) … any type of technology can be permitted without any negative impacts to the sport.
d) … the sport will remain a navigation sport, but not necessarily a navigation sport that is fair to competitors who rely solely on their own navigation skills.

Q10. Choose the wording that most accurately completes the sentence: An inertial reference system, or a pedometer-based dead-reckoning navigation system…

a) … is no different from a GPS receiver.
b) … can easily provide 10m position accuracy over an entire ARDF course.
c) … is self-calibrating because it determines an initial position using cosmic background radiation.
d) … accumulates error over time much like a human navigator.

The remaining are BONUS QUESTIONS related to the administration of the sport of Amateur Radio Direction Finding.

Q11. Choose the only wording that truthfully completes the sentence: ARDF in IARU Region 2 …

a) … must by law always be conducted in accordance with the rules crafted by the IARU Region 1 ARDF Working Group.
b) … is promoted and administered by a democratically-elected board of directors representing all the participants in the Region.
c) … is organized in a transparent and accountable manner, with medium and long-term goals for ARDF that are documented and tracked to ensure progress toward those goals.
d) … has its own website. (Hint.)

Q12. Choose the wording that correctly completes the sentence: Since the IARU Region 2 Organization has not defined rules for use by Region 2 member societies…

a) … Region 1 rules must be enforced throughout Region 2.
b) … there are no rules in Region 2 and chaos reigns!
c) … foxhunting must be conducted from automobiles.
d) … IARU Region 2 member organizations are free to apply any rules set, constrained only by their Constitutions, Bylaws, internal policies, and by a desire to best serve their membership and cooperate with their fellow societies within and outside Region 2.

Q13. Complete the sentence: A bright future for ARDF in all IARU Regions…

a) … can be ensured by bringing home the most medals from World Championships competitions.
b) … demands maximum participation from competitors in the 50+ age groups.
c) … can’t be influenced by the competitors since they have no impact on the sport.
d) … requires youth participation, transparency and accountability in the sport’s administration, and a strategy with clear goals and support from the ARDF community.

Grade Yourself:

There are no wrong answers though, granted, some of the choices were a bit far-fetched. Well, OK, in most cases choices “a”, “b”, and “c” were just plain wrong, except for a few cases where those choices were dope-slap blow-me-down ding-dong crazy wrong. But we don’t want anyone to feel discouraged!

If after careful review you answer “d” to just about everything, then isn’t it about time to call for changes to how ARDF is administered in Region 2?

Following

ARDF has a number of problems that keep it from being more popular: cost, complexity, and (sadly) cheating – particularly following. But a few changes to the way the sport is conducted might go a long way toward removing the advantage to be gained by following one’s competitors.

Unless things have changed significantly since 2008, IARU World Championship events are rife with followers. In fact, sometimes the Championships have resembled a herd sport, with groups of a dozen or more migrating about the course. Following wasn’t and still isn’t allowed under the official rules, so participating in it could have resulted in disqualification. But rules against following were almost never enforced – in fact, if they had been, a large minority of competitors might have received DQs at some championships.

The root of the problem isn’t a lack of rules, or even a lack of rules enforcement, but rather a fundamental defect in the design of events. Consider: what if competitors had no way of knowing if other competitors were visiting the same transmitters they are seeking? There would be no point in following since doing so might result in not completing the proper course.

How then to remove the common transmitter assignment without introducing the unfairness of imposing different route requirements on competitors in the same age/gender category? The answer: Let the competitors choose!

An event that includes a greater number of foxes than any competitor is required to locate, would allow each competitor to choose which subset of transmitters to find. Provided that competitors don’t know which subset of transmitters the competition has chosen, they would be ill-advised to follow others who might have chosen other transmitters to find.

The next problems then are when a competitor must commit to their subset selection, and how to record the selection. If competitors were required to select and submit their subset selections shortly after starting a competitive run, say before they locate their first “fox” transmitter, then the advantage of following would be largely obviated. An example of how this might work will help illustrate the concept.

Example Event: Select Four of Six
The course:
  • One Start
  • One Finish
  • Six Foxes: three on two different frequencies, each transmitting for 1 minute on a 3-minute cycle.
The Instructions:
  • Each competitor must find four foxes, with the winner decided by the most foxes found and ties settled by shortest time on the course.
  • Each competitor must select which four foxes to find, and make that selection before arriving at the first fox
  • Each competitor must record their fox choices and submit them to organizers using a private, verifiable, time-stamped method
  • Locating foxes that are not among one’s selected subset will not count toward one’s total fox count
Example Benefits

The above rules preserve an emphasis on competitor skill since those who are able to choose and locate the most optimal fox subset in a short period of time will have an advantage. The event is fair because all competitors have exactly the same selection options on the identical course. Following is discouraged because, if the course designers did a good job, there is the likelihood that another competitor has selected a different subset of foxes. The example above provides 15 different combinations of fox selections!

Skilled course designers would need to carefully design such courses so as to prevent the winners from being determined by chance. It must be possible for a sufficiently-skilled competitor to determine the best subset of transmitters to visit by the time the decision point is reached. Only one subset should be best, and no others equally good. Yet, it should not be obvious which is the best subset to choose.

Another tricky part of implementing the above event is the private, verifiable, time-stamped method for competitors to submit their subset selections. This could be implemented using pure technology (e.g., a “personal electronic selection-recording device”), or by the addition of course-selection submission station(s) marked on competitors’ maps (e.g., drop an envelope in one of several boxes shown on the map), or by some other method.

A cleverly-crafted event might even allow for mass starts, or at least for more competitors to start together, thus resolving another headache associated with the status quo: long drawn-out starting sequences that aren’t always fair and can take hours to complete.

Outside The Field of Play

An OTFOP navigation system is any technology that supplies navigation information derived from sources outside the competition boundaries. They include navigation beacons someone might erect outside a competition venue, or teammates radioing their fox bearings taken from outside the course to those in competition, and of course they include multi-billion dollar satellite systems such as GPS and GLONASS that provide satellite-based signals for precise geographical locating and progression tracking. IARU rules allow the use of satellite systems for navigation in ARDF.

Practical reasons to oppose OTFOP navigation as permitted under current IARU rules:

1. OTFOP systems are banned for any navigation purpose in orienteering; and the more ARDF diverges from the sport of orienteering, the less support and participation ARDF should rightly expect to receive from the orienteering community.

2. The inclusion of OTFOP technology adds cost to the equipment used by those participating in the sport, raising the cost barrier to newcomers’ participation in ARDF.

3. Having OTFOP users compete against those without is not fair play, but there is no distinction made in the rules allowing segregation of OTFOP navigation users from competitors relying solely on their own navigation skills.

Philosophical reasons to oppose OTFOP navigation as permitted under current IARU rules:

1. OTFOP navigation systems significantly diminish the need for some navigation skills that make ARDF unique from geocaching and similar satellite-based navigation sports.

2. Allowing OTFOP navigation opens the door to all forms of supplemental navigation technology that might be argued as no more detrimental to the sport: drone guidance, on-foot guidance by Google/Apple maps, etc.

3. Although fairness dictates that those who choose to utilize OTFOP technologies compete in a separate category from those who don’t, currently there is no effective way to influence the rules applying to Region 2 (much less inter-regionally) in order to correct that unfairness.