Ent wrote:The base data for Contours Australia comes from the NASA SRTM data that for Australia uses 3 arc (90 metre) measurements. Found out that the Government has access to 1 arc measurement but this is or maybe was for sale only to commercial users and government departments so it is likely that some commercial maps use this. The basic issue with Contours Australia 5M is they convey a degree of precision that they simply do not have. You see nice slopes rather than cliffs. Also they slow down a GPS and result in screen clutter. The one arc set stand a better chance of picking the high points and the extrapolation would be better but I have no idea what commercial products use them. They still would be only "true" thirty metre data. Also I think Tasmap has their own data from years of measurement so nothing can be a Tasmap for find a cliff but they are still guesstimates.
But if you are ever up in Launceston I have them so you can as well. They are around 2GB for Australia. I am working on downloading them direct from NASA in any level needed but as usual struck the geek language barrier. Hopefully some nice German will help me out what I am doing wrong.
. . . .
The basic issue with Contours Australia 5M is they convey a degree of precision that they simply do not have. You see nice slopes rather than cliffs
I also have the 1sec SRTM HDEM data but just doing a quick conversion to vector contours will land you with some crazy data. Any product finalised for on-ground use takes time and effort in ground truthing before it can be useful.
The truth is that beyond a certain scale- asking for topographic data is only armchair bushwalking anyway.

...(my favourite pastime

).
I'm as big a map geek as anyone here (made a career of it) but I still feel that if you cant read the landscape and navigate through it (with a map and compass only for when it's blind or for broad perspective) you shouldn't be out there.
Do you need to know the true extent to the nearest 5 metre of every hill and hummock? Are you planning your walk to the nearest 100m? Are you using a GPS because you expect better accuracy than map or track notes? Are you GPS reading because you can't follow a map / read the landscape? Will the resolution of your data that affect your walk? Can you use vegetation growth, footprint patterns and scats to guess a route?
Venturing beyond the NPWS groomed walking trails requires a degree of skill and the best thing you can do is let go of any reliance mapping/modelling/implied safety and learn your surroundings.
Tassie topo maps are 1:25,000 which is as good as anywhere in Aus (better than most) and as good as you need for anything short of minutia biological surveys or treasure hunting.
More of an issue than resolution is currency. But that's another issue.
You need to be sure you have enough physical capability in reserve to compensate for inaccuracies in your mapping
and then some. Don't plan your walk to match exactly your abilities. You will always find the world more challenging than the model. Your GPS won't predict the weather nor factor the condition of the track or your pack weight and can never factor in your overall capability.
Hi-res mapping is great for desktop modelling and tracking past walks (guilty

) but is a very VERY poor cousin (and dangerous) to actual on-ground landscape interpretation skill
In situhttp://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/travel/travel-news/taking-the-most-direct-route-to-straddie-20120315-1v85m.htmlSorry for the rant - if it applies to you you'll probably ignore it and if it doesn't you'll probably agree and move on.
cheers
Steve