whoops
it appears from what you say that you may still have your lines
slightly crossed

so let me review just to make sure you will have them straight in
the moment of truth

for purposes of finding the true atchlin position
there is nothing at all wrong with the position of marker 135

& the alignment of 135 & 134 is quite good
& indeed very substantially correct
& could only be out of line with 136 by an infinitesimally thin sliver
at most

so thin that 134 should lead you almost directly to 136 if you
sight thru 135

but it is the alignment of 135 & 136 that is absolutely correct
because this is the definitive terminal segment

133 on the other hand is definitely several degrees off the correct
terminal alignment

therefore
the alignment of 133 with any of the others is least good of all

so forget 133 if you can find & use either 134 or 136 with 135

also bear in mind
if you are having difficulty finding 134 & 136
just follow the line on top of 135 carefully in both directions

straight across the river for 136 of course
& i believe 54 meters straight upland for 134

in a nutshell
the alignment of 135
is
perfect when used with 136
& very nearly perfect with 134
but not nearly good enough with 133

--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Jesper Nielsen"
<jesniel@i...> wrote:

> Yes.
>
> The 135's alignment is not good if it was meant to hit 134 or

133.

>
> Jesper
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: aletheia kallos
> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 12:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] ATCHLIN was Map sites

(ATCHFLN)

>
>
> aha yes
> i just spotted the people
> they are so tiny
>
> yes
> relatively speaking
> by or near the people there
>
> but
> following the line on top of the monument in the
> foreground
> i would guess closer to the haystack & cow just to the
> left of these people
>
> & this discrepancy should give you a clue as to
> roughly how far off the true line marker 133 stands
>
> --- Jesper Nielsen <jesniel@i...> wrote:
> > See attached alignment from 135 to 133 (by the signs
> > at the hill). Could 134 be there by the people?
> >
> > Jesper
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: aletheiak
> > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 5:11 PM
> > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Re; Map sites
> > (ATCHFLN)
> >
> >
> > yes yes yes
> > it is common practice to mark river tripoints this
> > way
> >
> > & the geocoordinate data brought by peter vouch
> > that precisely
> > this is the case here
> > or at least was once the case here
> >
> > if you see marker 136 then that is all you will
> > need to align with
> > the already found 135
> >
> > alternatively if you find 134 that would be
> > practically enough too
> > as there is only the slightest difference in
> > alignment among the 3
> >
> > if you find neither of these
> > then the top line on 135 alone would still be
> > substantially correct
> > tho not as good
> >
> > & last & least
> > the data dont support 133 except as a very general
> > check
> >
> > however
> > whether mats is right or not
> > all the indications are that you were
> > substantially on line the first
> > time
> >
> > what we are doing now is just for corrobation &
> > fine tuning
> >
> > & only if you are wanting to improve the existing
> > class d visit to a
> > class b
> > would any of these considerations become very
> > interesting
> >
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Jesper
> > Nielsen"
> > <jesniel@i...> wrote:
> > > Would they place a ATFL marker in CH?
> > >
> > > Doubt it.
> > >
> > > But we can check.
> > >
> > > Jesper
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Ernst Stavro Blofeld
> > > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 9:28 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Re; Map sites
> > (ATCHFLN)
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Jesper Nielsen <jesniel@i...> wrote:
> > > > What happened to 136?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I think I can see it.
> > >
> > > See red circle on attached picture from Peter.
> > >
> > > M
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty
> > viruses.
> > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > ADVERTISEMENT
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/
> > >
> > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an
> > email to:
> > > BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > >
> > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > the Yahoo! Terms
> > of Service.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/
> >
> > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an
> > email to:
> > BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> > Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> >
> >
>
> > ATTACHMENT part 2 image/jpeg name=135atli.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign!
> http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms

of Service.