Do the boundary agreements specify one or both of the streams as the boundaries,
or do the lines just happen to meet in a stream bed?
Lowell G. McManus
Leesville, Louisiana, USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "m06079" <barbaria_longa@...>
To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 6:23 PM
Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: ATHUSK/CZPLSK/ATCZSK border maps
thanx mike
now what i still dont understand is how jesper & you
or rolf
or anyone else
decided where to place their particular version of the tripoint
it seems likely enough that it should fall in one of the creeks
& most likely of all at the creek junction
i would tend to agree
all other things being equal or equally unknown
but are you basing this identification on a map depiction
or on a text description
or on measurements from the obelisks
or on alignments with the red hats &or other markers
or on what exactly
& could you sketch the 3 obelisks in relation to the creeks
with or without the supposed boundaries & other markers
& could you guess the distances
both between the obelisks themselves
& between the obelisks & the creek junction
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, Michael Kaufman
<mikekaufman79@y...> wrote:
> Here is my sketch from the GEEBE. The x's mark the
> border. The 3 squares are direct CZ-PL markers.
> CZ-PL goes through a tiny little creek (creek not
> depicted on sketch) very close to the tripoint. This
> tiny creek runs into the larger brook which divides SK
> from CZ and then SK from PL. 3 tripoint witness
> markers not on sketch.
>
> --- acroorca2002 <orc@o...> wrote:
> > if the text & translation & my reading of it are all
> > correct
> > then
> > the 3 obelisks define a circle with the tripoint at
> > its center
> > &
> > the faces with the emblems are perpendicular to the
> > tripoint
> > as well as horizontally equidistant from it
> >
> > but are all 3 obelisks at about the same elevation
> >
> > & again
> > can anyone sketch the full layout
> > whether within or without regard to the diagram we
> > already have
> >
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Peter
> > Smaardijk"
> > <smaardijk@y...> wrote:
> > >
> >
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/message/6091
> > >
> > > Peter S. (acting as Pepijn H. ;-))
> > >
> > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, Petter
> > Brabec
> > > <pete2784west@y...> wrote:
> > > > Hallo, at this link, in Czech, the locals
> > explain how the
> > process
> > > of setting up the monoliths around the tripoint
> > went, all the
> > > necessary measures and other trivia.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.volny.cz/obec.hrcava/trojmezi.html
> > > >
> > > > At the present moment, I'm unable to translate
> > it, so anybody
> > who's
> > > interested can give it a shot. Otherwise, give me
> > a day or two,
> > and
> > > I'll translate the core theme that, as I
> > understand it from the
> > > confusion up to now, is of interest to you.
> > > >
> > > > Petter
> > > >
> > > > Michael Kaufman <mikekaufman79@y...> wrote:
> > > > I think the 1st three pics are CZ instead of SK.
> >
> > > > Because the Sk monument was across the larger of
> > the 2
> > > > streams and all by itself.
> > > > Picture 2 - the small marker was actually on the
> > CZ-PL
> > > > border - direct marker here.
> > > > Picture 5 - my initial guess was that it looked
> > along
> > > > CZ-PL and that it was the PL marker. So now we
> > have
> > > > three different possibilites here! Really this
> > is a
> > > > confusing pic for me. Perhaps it looks at the
> > SK
> > > > marker from the tp? But this would not be along
> > a
> > > > border, just SK territory.
> > > >
> > > > --- Jesper Nielsen <jesniel@i...> wrote:
> > > > > I have already written to the site authors
> > > > > requesting a better quality map,
> > > > > plus the other tripoints. Still wating
> > patiently.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am very interested in seeing especially
> > CZPLSK in
> > > > > a better scale, as I too
> > > > > find it difficult too see what's going on,
> > even
> > > > > after being their in person.
> > > > > I don't recall all spots.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please find enclosed the CZPLSK map with my
> > arrows.
> > > > > The blue arrow shows the
> > > > > angle of which the photo on
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> http://pikomat.mff.cuni.cz/fotky/tabor/1996/f01/24hrcava.html
> > > > > was taken.
> > > > >
> > > > > The red arrow show where I believe I was
> > sitting
> > > > > pointing to the ground
> > > > > facing south, which probably is not the
> > tripoint
> > > > > judging from the map. Looks
> > > > > like it's further east. But it's a very
> > difficult
> > > > > tripoint because it's
> > > > > inside forest and down a valley. It would have
> > been
> > > > > nice to have known this
> > > > > map before we went there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Rolf's site gives a good view af all three tp
> > > > > markers at
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> http://www.vasa.abo.fi/users/rpalmber/BordersCRPS.htm
> > > > >
> > > > > picture 1, the PL tp marker left, SK right.
> > Facing
> > > > > south. The crew is
> > > > > walking N on the path going up a long the
> > border to
> > > > > the road.
> > > > >
> > > > > picture 2, closeup on the PL and SK tp
> > markers. I
> > > > > wonder if Mike Kaufman
> > > > > noted what the small red hat markers said.
> > > > >
> > > > > picture 3, closeup of SK marker
> > > > >
> > > > > picture 5, I think Rolf is wrong here. This is
> > > > > facing S from the TP and show
> > > > > the CZ tp marker. I remember the red hat
> > marker
> > > > > still said CS, so I must
> > > > > have been an indirect marker from CSPL.
> > > > >
> > > > > picture 6, looks very different from mine??
> > > > >
> > > > > I have a picture facing east from the tripoint
> > (or
> > > > > where I belived it was).
> > > > > Want to see it?
> > > > >
> > > > > Jesper
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "acroorca2002" <orc@o...>
> > > > > To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 6:37 PM
> > > > > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re:
> > ATHUSK/CZPLSK/ATCZSK
> > > > > border maps
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com,
> > "Jesper
> > > > > Nielsen"
> > > > > > <jesniel@i...> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > http://www.atlaskrajiny.sk/sk/myimages/2_sub_2.jpg
> > > > > >
> > > > > > these are lovely
> > > > > > & i wish their 2 remaining sister diagrams
> > will
> > > > > arrive soon too
> > > > > >
> > > > > > of course atczsk is the greatest charmer
> > > > > > having been selected as point 2 on gcebe
> > > > > > http://www.geocities.com/graenser/tripoints
> > > > > > & then again as point 1 on geebe
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> http://www.geocities.com/graenser/geebe/tripoints.htm
> > > > > > with some apparent improvement
> > > > > >
> > > > > > the other diagrams are harder for me to see
> > &or
> > > > > read tho
> > > > > >
> > > > > > for example could you show on the czplsk
> > diagram
> > > > > > where you are situated in the geebe point 2
> > pic
> > > > > above
> > > > > > & where the monuments shown in the link
> > below are
> > > > > situated
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> http://pikomat.mff.cuni.cz/fotky/tabor/1996/f01/24hrcava.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > which btw i found at your site too
> > > > > >
> > > > > > & what is the cause of my double vision on 2
> > of
> > > > > the vectors in the
> > > > > > athusk diagram
> > > > > > aka gcebe point 3
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ny versjon av Yahoo! Messenger
> > > > Nye ikoner og bakgrunner, webkamera med
> > superkvalitet og
> > dobbelt så
> > > morsom
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
Yahoo! Groups Links