Re: Asian boundarycross

Enclaves H1 and H2 make the point with Dutch
territory...and Very close to another one H1 and H6
http://www.grenspalen.nl/archief/baarle-map%20met%20enclave-aanduidingen-center.jpg

--- Jesper Nielsen <jesniel <at> image.dk> wrote:

> Sorry, no new finding - just a question.
> 
> The boundary cross in Asian is between enclaves,
> right?
> 
> So Jungholz is the only boundary cross involiving
> mainland?
> 
> Jesper

		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. 
http://messenger.yahoo.com

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/WkiolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: Asian boundarycross

right 
& this map reconfirms that the baarle border cross does not
in jespers terms here below
involve belgian mainland
in the way the jungholz cross does involve austrian mainland 
& the known cooch behar cross involves bangladeshi mainland

so 
again in his terms
only the baarle cross is
between 
enclaves

--- In BoundaryPoint@..., Michael Kaufman 
<mikekaufman79 <at> y...> wrote:
> Enclaves H1 and H2 make the point with Dutch
> territory...and Very close to another one H1 and H6
> 
http://www.grenspalen.nl/archief/baarle-map%20met%20enclav
e-aanduidingen-center.jpg
>  
> --- Jesper Nielsen <jesniel <at> i...> wrote:
> 
> > Sorry, no new finding - just a question.
> > 
> > The boundary cross in Asian is between enclaves,
> > right?
> > 
> > So Jungholz is the only boundary cross involiving
> > mainland?

just down the thalweg from caus2camenb

a french canadian plymouth rock 
but yikes it is in the usa
http://www.2theadvocate.com/stories/080104/lif_cover2001.shtml

http://topozone.com/map.asp?lat=45.12833&lon=-67.13389
where you can also zoom out &or pan up to the tripoint
behind the customs house at calais
just to get your bearings

the basques are believed to have settled labrador even
earlier than this tho 
near ca2canfqc

not to mention the vikings or indians again

still it makes for a quaint excursion

		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/WkiolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 

mason & dixon stone setting reenactment

another quaint excursion in the news
http://www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2004/08/01dividinglinedra.html

http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?lat=39.11222&lon=-75.74472

& for what is usually considered to be the mason dixon
line 
pan north from here to demdpa
& then west
etc

		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/WkiolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

Baarle is wonderfull

Re: Visit to BCIDWA (and 49N 117W)

dave 

just to sum up now as much as possible
& then suspend the try until we can do better

> >i was able to copy these nad83 coords for the 1909 disk
> >as presented on the 1998 tablet
> >nlat 48d59m57s110
> >wlong 117d01m56s715

> >& tho the bcidwa monument does appear to be situated near 
the
> >middle of the clearcut & therefore nearly smack dab on caus
> >these coords dont compare well to the nad83 coords for the
> >neighboring markers published by the ibc
> 
> The International Boundary Commission(IBC) website has
> both NAD83 and NAD27 coordinates for the boundary markers.
> Note that the NAD27 ones are listed as being official, while
> the NAD83 coordinates have been derived by software.
> I have sent an email to the IBC asking what version of NAD27
> they have used, but haven't yet received an answer.
> I assumed NAD27 CONUS.

right
& since no news is good news
i am even more prepared now than i already was to assume this 
with you too

therefore
best available ibc coords are as follows
in nad27 presumably conus
monument 195
nlat 48d59m57s42
wlong 117d01m39s71
&
monument 194
nlat 48d59m56s85
wlong 117d04m17s79

& 
the coords for the 1909 idwa marker given above
when converted to nad27 conus 
are 
in fully & equally significant digits
nlat 48d59m57s36
wlong 117d01m52s85

& so by computation
the sight line between monuments 194 & 195
crosses the meridian of the idwa marker at
nlat 48d59m57s37
wlong 117d01m52s85 
also in equally significant nad27 conus

& thus happily
we can forget my earlier rough guesses in the 2 to 3 meter range
which were problematic anyway in not matching the clearcut well
as indicated in your pix 6 & 7 
because 
we can now 
more accurately 
compute 
indeed to the nearest hundredth of a second or whole foot
that the 1909 idwa disk center stands 
1 foot due south of true bcidwa

that is
as opposed to 2 feet or no feet due south of it

so true bcidwa might fall anywhere from 6 inches to 18 inches 
north of this marker

therefore
in this case
if you circled the monument at close range
as i believe you indicated you actually did
& specifically passed by just behind it here in your pic
http://www.confluence.org/photo.php?visitid=8945&pic=2
you couldnt have failed to have made your point class b

so extra congrats are in order effective immediately

but we still wont know more exactly where along these 12 inches 
the tripoint actually lies until the ibc either improves their coords 
to thousandths of a second to match those on the tablet 
or else cleans up the clearcut enough to actually make all 3 
monuments intervisible
as i believe they theoretically should be

but it seems we are as complete & accurate as possible for now 
anyway

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/WkiolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: Re: Visit to BCIDWA (and 49N 117W)

At 12:58 PM 2004/08/01, aletheiak wrote:
>dave
>
>just to sum up now as much as possible

> > I have sent an email to the IBC asking what version of NAD27
> > they have used, but haven't yet received an answer.
> > I assumed NAD27 CONUS.
>
>right
>& since no news is good news
>i am even more prepared now than i already was to assume this
>with you too

I'm still waiting. The person I emailed has been out of the
office. I spoke to the secretary of the commissioner last
week, and she is going to try and get the person I emailed
to contact me this coming week, after the long weekend.

>& so by computation
>the sight line between monuments 194 & 195
>crosses the meridian of the idwa marker at
>nlat 48d59m57s37
>wlong 117d01m52s85
>also in equally significant nad27 conus

What program/method are you using to do the computations?

I'm still hoping that eventually I'll hear back from the
surveyor who set the LSAW plaque. He said to me on the
phone that at some point(1998?) he did the calculations
to determine the distance from the monument to the border.

>so true bcidwa might fall anywhere from 6 inches to 18 inches
>north of this marker
>
>therefore
>in this case
>if you circled the monument at close range
>as i believe you indicated you actually did
>& specifically passed by just behind it here in your pic
>http://www.confluence.org/photo.php?visitid=8945&pic=2
>you couldnt have failed to have made your point class b

Yes, I walked 'all around' the monument, more than once,
as I took notes, pictures, and video.

>until the ibc either improves their coords
>to thousandths of a second

Aside from the datum issue, if the IBC website coordinates
are indeed official, then by implication the thousandths
of a second are already known - either they are shown on
the IBC website listing, or they are zero.

>or else cleans up the clearcut enough to actually make all 3
>monuments intervisible
>as i believe they theoretically should be

Due to the topography of the area you will never be able
to see BCIDWA from monument 195, but monument 194 is to
the west, up on a ridge, and from there you may be able
to see both BCIDWA and monument 195. My photos show the
ridge as seen from both BCIDWA and monument 195, but
I don't know exactly where monument 194 is located, so
it might, for example, be possible to see 195 from 194,
but not see BCIDWA.

-- 
Dave Patton
Canadian Coordinator, Degree Confluence Project
http://www.confluence.org/
My website: http://members.shaw.ca/davepatton/

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/WkiolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: Visit to BCIDWA (and 49N 117W)

> I'm still waiting. The person I emailed has been out of the
> office. I spoke to the secretary of the commissioner last
> week, and she is going to try and get the person I emailed
> to contact me this coming week, after the long weekend.

thats ok

it isnt absolutely necessary to check this any more 
for if it had been nad27 canada
the known 5 meter northsouth offset from nad27 conus 
would have driven the target position out of the clearcut 
& into the tall woods

which isnt a possibilty

> >& so by computation
> >the sight line between monuments 194 & 195
> >crosses the meridian of the idwa marker at
> >nlat 48d59m57s37
> >wlong 117d01m52s85
> >also in equally significant nad27 conus
> 
> What program/method are you using to do the computations?

i dont know what to call it
but it was just simple arithmetic
because the available accuracy level isnt great enough 
nor the distances involved long enough 
for the curvature of the earth to have any noticeable impact

so 
first
i found the longitude differentials of the 3 monuments

namely
from 194 to 195 
15808 centisecs

& from 194 to 1909
14494 centisecs

& from 1909 to 195
1314 centisecs

& then 
i applied the ratio of these differentials
to the latitude differential of 57 centisecs between 194 & 195 

this gave the latitude in centisecs to the nearest whole centisec 
for the point where the great circle sight line of 194 & 195 
crosses the meridian of idwa

& this came out 1 centisec north of the converted plaque coords

& a centisec of latitude is almost exactly 1 foot

> I'm still hoping that eventually I'll hear back from the
> surveyor who set the LSAW plaque. He said to me on the
> phone that at some point(1998?) he did the calculations
> to determine the distance from the monument to the border.

great
tho unless he had better input data than we have i dont see how 
he could get a more accurate result than we already have

> >so true bcidwa might fall anywhere from 6 inches to 18 
inches
> >north of this marker
> >
> >therefore
> >in this case
> >if you circled the monument at close range
> >as i believe you indicated you actually did
> >& specifically passed by just behind it here in your pic
> >http://www.confluence.org/photo.php?visitid=8945&pic=2
> >you couldnt have failed to have made your point class b
> 
> Yes, I walked 'all around' the monument, more than once,
> as I took notes, pictures, and video.
> 
> >until the ibc either improves their coords
> >to thousandths of a second
> 
> Aside from the datum issue, if the IBC website coordinates
> are indeed official, then by implication the thousandths
> of a second are already known - either they are shown on
> the IBC website listing, or they are zero.

i dont believe that the published coords are nearly as official as 
the monuments themselves

todays professional grade survey art could get us from 2 decimal 
places of degminsec all the way down to 5 decimal places of it

thats submillimetric accuracy 

& it will undoubtedly become the standard in due time
as it is already wherever new surveys are made

so we can expect 
future generations of ibc surveyors to improve upon these 194 & 
195 coords
& future generations of trypointers to use these improvements to 
improve upon our try

> >or else cleans up the clearcut enough to actually make all 3
> >monuments intervisible
> >as i believe they theoretically should be
> 
> Due to the topography of the area you will never be able
> to see BCIDWA from monument 195, but monument 194 is to
> the west, up on a ridge, and from there you may be able
> to see both BCIDWA and monument 195. 

yes 
this is clearly the best hope now
& i think a very good hope indeed
for an eyeballed try rather than a merely computed try

> My photos show the
> ridge as seen from both BCIDWA and monument 195, but
> I don't know exactly where monument 194 is located, so
> it might, for example, be possible to see 195 from 194,
> but not see BCIDWA.

they are almost always set on the ridge line 
especially in such remote areas
so as to be as visible as possible generally
as well as to be intervisible in both directions
& thus to require as few monuments as absolutely necessary

the topo confirms this too

just bushwhacking west along the clearcut from bcidwa might 
well be the best way to reach 194

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/WkiolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: Re: Visit to BCIDWA (and 49N 117W)

At 03:29 PM 2004/08/01, aletheiak wrote:
> > My photos show the
> > ridge as seen from both BCIDWA and monument 195, but
> > I don't know exactly where monument 194 is located, so
> > it might, for example, be possible to see 195 from 194,
> > but not see BCIDWA.
>
>they are almost always set on the ridge line
>especially in such remote areas
>so as to be as visible as possible generally
>as well as to be intervisible in both directions
>& thus to require as few monuments as absolutely necessary
>
>the topo confirms this too
>
>just bushwhacking west along the clearcut from bcidwa might
>well be the best way to reach 194

No, the best way, at least from the East, would be to follow
the gravel road past the turnoff I took to get to BCIDWA,
and along until it ends near the power lines(off the
right-hand side of my photos, north of the boundary)
and then walk southwest up the ridge to the boundary.
The topo map posted along with my confluence visit:
http://www.confluence.org/photo.php?visitid=8945&pic=13
shows the power lines as the dashed line, along with
the gravel road. In retrospect, I wish I had done
that when I was there, but too late now.

-- 
Dave Patton
Canadian Coordinator, Degree Confluence Project
http://www.confluence.org/
My website: http://members.shaw.ca/davepatton/

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/WkiolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Point intersections

I haven't got my book to hand, but I recall the boundary cross being 
between Bangladesh proper and one of its enclaves in India
Thus it is like Jungholz: mainland meeting enclave at a point.

At Baarle the point intersection (point #5109) is between two enclaves: H1 
and H2.
H1 and H6 do NOT meet at a point, but are 11.26m apart (point 1573 on H1 
and 1590 on H6).

There will be a nice map in my forthcoming book on Baarle.

>Enclaves H1 and H2 make the point with Dutch
>territory...and Very close to another one H1 and H6
>http://www.grenspalen.nl/archief/baarle-map%20met%20enclave-aanduidingen-center.jpg

>--- Jesper Nielsen <jesniel@...> wrote:
> > Sorry, no new finding - just a question.
> > The boundary cross in Asian is between enclaves, right?
> > So Jungholz is the only boundary cross involiving mainland?

Brendan  

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/WkiolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/