GCPC EPISODE 420 – Distinguishing A Geocache Size, Terrain and Difficulty

coverart

Sponsored by: Cache-Advance.com

Streamed live on Sep 30, 2015

In tonight’s episode of the Geocaching Podcast:
The guys try to figure out why there appears to be an ever growing set of discrepancies with geocache size, difficulty and terrain ratings.
Looks like Taz427 has the night off while getting his family moved to California. Will be an interesting discussion for sure.

Be sure to check it out!

We meet on Wednesday nights at 9:30PM ET at http://www.geocachingpodcast.com/live so you can see us record the show live and join in the chat room. See you there!

——————————————————————-

The Video Version of our Podcast

Show Notes Episode 420

GCPC EPISODE 420 – Distinguishing A Geocache Size, Terrain and Difficulty

This week’s discussion is confirming to the best of our abilities what is the best way to correctly distinguish what a geocache’s size, terrain and difficulty should be.

Containers Explained

Sizes

micro: Less than 100ml. Examples: a 35 mm film canister or smaller, typically containing only a logbook or a logsheet. A nano cache is a common sub-type of a micro cache that is less than 10ml and can only hold a small logsheet.

small: 100ml or larger, but less than 1L. Example: A sandwich-sized plastic container or similar. Holds only a small logbook and small items.

regular: 1L or larger, but less than 20L. Examples: a plastic container or ammo can about the size of a shoebox.

large: 20L or larger. Example: A large bucket.e.g. 5-gallon bucket (about 20 liters)

other: See the cache description for information. Unusual geocache containers that just don’t fit into other categories.

Geocache Rating System
https://www.geocaching.com/hide/rate.aspx

Ratings for Difficulty and Terrain (D/T)
https://support.groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=82

——————————————————————-
LINKS
Videocast
Audio Podcast
Google Search
Geocaching Podcast Website

Subscribe To The Show
RSS Show Feed

Please Support The GCPC
Please like & share: