Topics

Some new geopdfs seem to give a georegistration error in OM. For example, the 2022 (NSW, Australia) geopdf Potsville 1:25K seems to be incorrectly georeferenced in OM (about 100 m N of actual location). This error is not present in the 2016 version of the same map (although it was slightly west of true location in OM). According to metadata shown by TerraGo, both versions use GDA94 (athough the new ones are distributed as GDA2020). In any case these datums are very close to WGS84.  Both map versions give the same (I assume correct) location in Adobe Reader Geospatial Location Tool.

The full reference to the map with the biggest problem in OM is: 9641-3S Pottsville 4th Edn CollarOn_2022 (at https://portal.spatial.nsw.gov.au/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=06e3c2e0de1e4efda863854048c613c6).

The screen shots are from OM 7.4.28 with a track overlay. Is there a problem with the way OM interprets metadata (Geo Registration?) in the new files?

I use OM 7.4.28, but I have checked up to 10.5.3beta18, and (if I can use a Titanic analogy) the changes seem to be mostly rearranging the deckchairs, with few added iceberg avoidance features. But unless users tell Orux, he can not know what they really want. Hence this thread.

What one feature would you most like to see added to OM? Not your wish-list, just the top wish.

Would you pay (more) for it?

If you agree with a feature request, +1 it. How else will Orux know if it is a popular wish?

I will start the ball rolling:

When creating a route on the map screen with waypoints loaded, can we please have an option if we 'hover' over a waypoint to use that waypoint instead of some nearby map location as a route point? Garmin Basecamp does it well. This is very useful for waypoint (= direct, = straight-line) navigation when off-track hiking (so we can see the distance and magnetic bearing to the next waypoint if we choose that in the top dashboard). The current method of creating a route from an ordered list of waypoints (without seeing them on a map) is very difficult for users who have lots of waypoints and use complex routes.

Yes, I would pay (more / again) for this feature.