right bill & thanx for filling this in just right
the fifth & hopefully last source of error is that the 20 foot buoy mooring in under 8 feet of water gives the buoy itself a variability of more than 35 feet
so to be honest we are not yet absolutely positive but only still cautiously optimistic that we have it right down to the full second of lat & long
or about a baseball infields worth of grass
but there were no other buoys within a whole ballparks worth of area
& the lake bottom was too murky to see any markers
so it seems we were the first to mark the point
& since we touched this mark
even if it was also we who left it
the visitation at least should count as a true class a
m
>From: "Bill Hanrahan" >Reply-To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com >To: "BoundaryPoint" >Subject: [BoundaryPoint] glhemaokpa margin of error >Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 17:26:43 -0500 > >Recap from Mike's previous posting regarding glhemaokpa margin of error: > >"our 2 gps receivers were not fully synchronized & >actually disagreed in the end by a couple hundred feet i believe >tho i was trusting & going with bills more than toms >since tom couldnt even say which nad he was using >& was probably using " > >I believe that Cpt. Tom was using NAD27 as I was. His older Magellan >handheld GPS correlated within .02 nautical miles of my Garmin handheld >unit. Given that one nautical mile = 6,076 feet (about 1,852 meters), this >would translate to 121.52 feet (assuming that the ".02" is a precise number, >which it is not.) Obviously, this also doesn't take into account the >"standard" GPS margin of error (with Selective Availability turned off). >Anyway, we were close...and could indeed be at the exact spot. > >Bill