maps/map reading/ navigating

[kutkota]

In a class for map and map reading/navigating and talking about resection and intersection, the thought came that I would rather use resection versus a pace count to try and identify where I am. Of course the issue would be identifying several points and a semi detailed small area map. There are several reasons I was thinking this namely that terrain association is fairly easy, and rocky terrain is difficult at best to keep a pace count. Not to mention if you are bugging out with family it will change significantly with multiple stops.

I realize there are ways to mitigate those issues, but never the less it is yet another option. Or so I thought. Those giving the class did not like the idea and said while yes it is an option, it is not a good one.


What am I missing? I would think a map and compass/protractor would be more accurate than a pace count while worrying about everthing else in a bug out situation?

[kutkota]

Also what is your choosen map suppliers?

[pathwinder14]

Were the instructors military trained? Pace count would be near second nature to them. A map and compass and shooting bearings is more accurate. Pace counts are unlreliable in incline/decline situations.

Were they USGS maps? Those are the most reliable maps.

[kutkota]

Sorry pathfinder, it was a class from my Army unit. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. Pace count is great, but I have at four pace counts. walking, running, walking with load, running with load, and of course we don't always take the easiest path. They were maps from the military intel of A-stan. Navigating in a desert is clearly different than navigating in the woods, but I thought it was easier than remebering pace counts. As a medic I just follow the leader but if SHTF either in the military or civilian I am leaning towards my option.