who's responsibility?

[FatBoy]

It's the distance away from the flag at which the detail gets covered by the circle. If you are 90m away from the flag you aren't going to be looking at that sort of detail (or else you're way lost). If say at 1:5,000 you still use 6mm circle you are getting features only 30m away obscured - the sort of distance you will be looking at the fine detail even on 1:5,000.

It's all very well saying break the circle but in many places that can't be done thoroughly otherwise you will have no circle left!

[distracted]

It's the distance away from the flag at which the detail gets covered by the circle. If you are 90m away from the flag you aren't going to be looking at that sort of detail (or else you're way lost). If say at 1:5,000 you still use 6mm circle you are getting features only 30m away obscured - the sort of distance you will be looking at the fine detail even on 1:5,000.

But you're actually only half that distance away... A bit different now, I'd hope you agree!

[FatBoy]

Doh. You're right. Was struggling to justify 1:10,000 at 60m but at 30m makes more sense!

[BJ]

"Rule 7.2.3 The site of each control shall be shown as the centre of a circle of 5 to 6mm diameter."
I think some people need to get themselves up to date and look at the latest version of the Rules.
In the 2003 version Rule 7.2.3 applies to collaboration during an event. The Rule 7.2.3 above is from the 1997 Rules. No wonder we get some duff events.

[Guest]

The main reason for increasing the circle size on 1:10000 maps is to avoid needing different control descriptions on each scale - avoids extra labour and potential for error when both 1:15 and 1:10 maps are used for different courses.

Side benefit is that they are easier to see for the old guys. Doesn't fit the rules but is a good thing.

[Guest]

If you use 9mm circles on a 1:10000 map for a yellow course, then typically about 50% of the course will be "circles" and 50% lines, ie the average distance between controls is about the width of the control circle.

If you can't evenly-space the controls there is a distinct possibility that some circles will overlap, which isn't ideal.

[RJ]

If you can't evenly-space the controls there is a distinct possibility that some circles will overlap, which isn't ideal.

Which is one good reason to use 1:5000 scale for White and Yellow. See concurrent thread.

[Guest]

Quote:
When 1:10 000 and 1:15 000 maps are used, the size of the symbols on the 1:10 000 maps may be 150% greater than on the 1:15 000 maps.

The above is a straight copy from the IOF Map specification booklet. There it is quite clear that if the event is only using 1:10,000 maps then the control circle should be 6 mm.

[Safety]

Back to the original point. I find that the worst things covered up by lines are the little tags on contours to show which way down it is. I know there are otherways of telling using common sense but whilst running along, it is sometimes hard to think of these so the tags are the best way of finding out. I had one the other day where a boulder was in a big re-entrant and I was running up and down the spur beyond it. Only after stopping for a minute and really studying the map did I see the tag sticking out from under the overprint.
Paths are definetly the second worse as minutes can be taken off your time if you spot one.
And then where multiple pits are covered up leaving just the one with the control visible. Very off putting when you 'stumble' upon several pits and end up searching them all
A friend of mine used to draw 'curved' lines between the controls (when marking his own map up) to avoid this. Obviously it makes it harder to take a straight bearing but could it be an option to take the line away from the optimum and straight line routes. In the end they are only there to show you which control is next which can easliy be done by the numbers.

[graeme]

Is it possible, in OCAD, to put the "overprint" below all the line and point features?

If so, why wouldn't you do that?

Graeme

[RJ]

Yes you can put the course below whatever you want, but you get a very surprising effect.... the overprinted course is overprinted! Quite often the numbers are unrecognisable, but that can be solved by having another purple further up the colour table.

However, the course markings can be severely disjointed and can lead to a great deal of confusion.

Look at the thickness of the purple joining line. Try reducing that in thickness... that helps. OCAD8 also allows you to produce a transparent map, which deals with this problem. However, the file is enormous and takes a long time to print.

If 8 is used to set up the courses then you only have to split the circle once for the master set of control sites, and you can obviously spend a bit of time doing that while defining the control descriptions.