Related
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

gps+glonass or gps+galileo

Dani
over 3 years ago

I would like to know and have confirmation from Garmin, is it useful to select gps+glonass or gps+galileo?

I mean does it improve accuracy on anything? because I have had two forerunner945 and I have not seen improvement in any test.

In my last race it even deviated 1km (gps+glonass). I think it's placebo effect.

Thanks

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    This is mostly community forum, so I'm highly doubtful you are getting any confirmation from Garmin even if you like to have it.

  • 0 over 3 years ago
    Dani said:
    I think it's placebo effect.

    Placebo effect?  How so? 

  • 0 over 3 years ago
    Dani said:
    because I have had two forerunner945 and I have not seen improvement in any test.

    In which case you can use GPS only and get enhanced battery life. The choice of satellite constellations is not cut and dried and very much depends on location. Basically, use the one that you think gives you the best results most consistently.

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    Glonass is the Russian Satellite system, Galileo the European one. As to which is the most accurate, I don't know.
    To make sure you have teh best accuracy, make sure "ultraTrack" is OFF 
    You could also change data recording to "every second" from "smart" 

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    It depends on your location. Check it by yourself. For me (Poland) in Fenix 5 galileo was better, for 945 glonass is better Slight smile

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    In most cases, it makes no difference, and GPS alone is good enough. 

    It takes being able to "see" a minimum of 4 satellites to get a fix, and in a narrow mountain valley with a limited horizon, having access to 2 constellations of satellites increases your chances of being able to see 4 satellites. Both GLONASS and Gallileo have about the same number of satellites in orbit, so I don't think it really matters which you pick.

    The major user-controllable factor for GPS accuracy is to wait for the watch to get a solid positional fix BEFORE you start moving at the beginning of an activity.

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    Well, theoretically there's difference and those go like:

    1. Galileo
    2. GPS
    3. Glonass

    But in practice things are not so clear.

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    Most useful to find out which option to go is to do a test:

    Record a walk for about 1h through different areas, like woods, open field, etc. but try to avoid urban areas as they always mess up signals.

    Do this on 3 different days to have some basic sampling and try to repeat the same route as exactly as possible.

    Then change to the other mode (e.g. from Galileo to Glonass) and repeat the 3 walks.

    Download all GPX files to your computer and label them accordingly (e.g. Galileo_d1, Galileo_d2, etc.)

    Import them into Goole Earth, all of them, and use a different color for each track.

    Now you will be able to see how the settings performed compared with each other. Choose the one you like most.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to HUMODDA

    The answer to the question isn't static because it depends on the status of the satellite constellation at the time - the location of the sats, and the number serviceable. I use an iphone called GPS Plan which provides information about the sats in real time, and you can decide which is better for a given timeslot.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to HUMODDA

    I did it, for this reason, i wrote in this forum, the diferences are minimal and they dont depend if the couple options, the results are totally random

    regarding my tests, the couple system sats do not work propertly or better than gps (alone)

    thank you

    (i use to run ope field)