>>thus
as likely wgs84 as any<<
definitely won't be WGS84 since that was not in use until 1984 (hence the
"84" in its name).
I suspect that the Egypt 1907 Datum might have been used - but see http://www.fig.net/pub/cairo/papers/ts_45/ts45_01_abidin_etal.pdf where it notes, using Indonesian maritime
boundaries as its focus, that often the datum is NOT specifically denoted
in a relevant treaty and discusses the issues that arise as a result. If you
don't have time to read the whole paper the following section from the summary
can help to understand the thesis:
"The uncertainty in geodetic datum of boundary points introduces
complications and problems
in spatial management of Indonesia’s maritime
boundaries, since it can displace the boundary
lines from their assumed true
location. The displacements of boundaries in WGS84 datum are
generally in the
order of a few hundred meters, i.e. about 200 to 400 m, depending on
the
assumed original geodetic datum of the boundaries stated in the treaties.
These boundary
displacements are spatially advantageous for Indonesia in some
cases and also
disadvantageous in others."
Googling "latitude longitude datum egypt" will provide a host of other
links too numerous to reproduce here that will provide a wealth of additional
information.
there is no mention in any of the relevant ibs numbers that the
1925 italian egyptian
agreement establishing this tripoint or the 1934
italo british egyptian agreement
reaffirming it included any official maps
or even specified any official datum or datums
various british french
american & north african maps of the 1930s thru 1960s tho are said
there to reliably depict the various borders convergent here at
eglysd
& one cant conclude the datum is elusive for it might well
just be the common &
nonelusive default datum of
none specified
& thus as likely wgs84 as any
in which case the try or rather the
result would indeed be a very loose class b
as represented by the little
man in the gully in the first pic
or more likely a tight class c at
probably 14 meter range
but if this is not correct
then there remains
some possibility of a class d or even class e
for there also remains
an outside chance that the tripoint is in fact marked
whether by an
official durable marker
since some other parts of these remote borders are
so marked
or even by just some little cairn or something these folks could
have missed
since there is also no evidence that they were really studying
the border alignments or
trying for the tripoint in any other way than
just for the lat long intersection
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak" <aletheiak@y...>
wrote:
>
> wow
> nicely done
> & a pleasure to see
the shots back on goal & the discussion back on target again
>
> & since all 3 ibs numbers
> 10 & 18 & 61
>
join brownlie in indicating this tripoint is unmarked
> or at least was
unmarked as recently as 1979
> it is hard to argue with the bona fides
of their perfect gps readings
> no matter what datum they may have been
using
>
> but since even they are only claiming 14 meter range at
best
> & were having difficulty getting it
> i think i would
credit them only with a class c
> as in seeing the objective for
certain with their eyes
> somehow
> at some point
> in
their overall visitation process
> rather than a class b
> as in
necessarily having been at the exact spot with their bodies
> for i
think that honor would remain to be won
> in this unusual
circumstance
> by someone with a better quality gps receiver
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Jesper Nielsen"
<jesniel@i...> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks to the unknown
visitor to Borderbase, who submitted the entry
> >
>
>
> >
> > http://www.confluence.org/confluence.php?lat=22
>
> <http://www.confluence.org/confluence.php?lat=22&lon=25>
&lon=25
> >
> >
> >
> >
Jesper
> >
> >
> >
> > --
>
>
> > Borderbase - your online guide to international borders and
tripoints
> >
> > http://www.nicolette.dk/borderbase
>
>
>