Pictures 1 and 3 show a different side from picture 7 -
apart from the leftmost character, which is the same on both sides, the words
look to be completely different otherwise.
I have asked an arabic friend for a definitive
reading
most probably just an entering or welcome to sudan sort of
sign
since it just says the sudan in arabic on the north side
there
is no known egds demarcation
& no known south side of this sign i
might add
funny that it chanced to hit an integral degree &
border intersection tho
of which sudan has a good dozen or so
including
eglysd herself
so it is even funnier that none was reported at the
eglysd intersection
& funniest of all that none of the other dozen
candidate intersections are reported at
project intersection
er i mean
project confluence
but wouldnt it be just too much fun to start a
real confluence documentation project & call
it project
intersection
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Jesper Nielsen"
<jesniel@i...> wrote:
>
> Could this be EGSD
demarcation?
>
> http://www.confluence.org/photo.php?visitid=11575
>
<http://www.confluence.org/photo.php?visitid=11575&pic=ALL>
&pic=ALL
>
>
>
> Who reads Arabic? Isn't
the left symbol five-something?
>
>
>
>
Jesper
>
>
>
> _____
>
> Fra: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com] På
> vegne af aletheiak
>
Sendt: 5. januar 2006 07:56
> Til: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>
Emne: [BoundaryPoint] Re: EGLYSD class b
>
>
>
> & a very sweet dream indeed as well as a brilliant analysis &
synthesis dear
> doctor
> but off the top of my head
> egsd
even in the wadi halfa nile salient was last reported totally
>
undemarcated as of 1962
> per ibs
> so your valiantly won
trilaterality & tridatum intersection appears to
> evaporate in the
> desert
>
> but hardy & steady as she blows matey for
we are whaling in mirage country
> here
>
> & something
seems to be turning up
>
> yes
> per the other ibs
> egly has its mediterranean border base at a place called beacon
point
> no relation
> & was reportedly marked by beacons 206
miles inland from there
>
> & this strange note with perhaps
a new clue
>
> on 15dec1937 a commission met & arranged to
move some of the boundary
> pillars
> westward in order to
improve intervisibility & to delimit the boundary as a
> series of
> straight lines between beacons instead of the previous line which
followed
> the tracks
> between the beacons
> & 9 extra
beacons were erected at this time bringing the total to 187
> & this
whole chain of permanent beacons was reported satisfactorily
> completed
in a proces
> verbale dated 3may1938
> which
> could well
tell us or lead us to the egly datum
> if we ever did find an egsd datum
> for completing the still elusive intersection & triangulation you
propose
>
> also & stranger
> a whole fresh chain of
border arcs mike kaufman & i missed in our crazy arc
> census is
> built into egly tho not quite nakedly visible in here
> http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/collection/LimitsinSeas/maps/bs61.html
>
but thats just for titillation & profits us nothing
>
>
> &
> aha
> but here in the lysd ibs your point &
synthesis are finally made in earnest
> still hypothetically of course
but its a warm lead
> for it indicates
> 23 or 24 miles south of
eglysd
> lysd appears to be demarcated by 12 boundary beacons
>
> however no info available on their type or condition
>
>
funny way to put it & unusual circumstance too
> but it points
toward a lost treaty text & in it perhaps a lost lysd datum
>
which
> when combined with our more hopefully found egly datum
>
completes your proposed trilateral datum cross artifice by the back
door
>
> of course we still have to track down the one ordinary
egly & this other
> mystery lysd treaty
> but its a way to
proceed
> superchallenging as it may seem
>
> but something
better to pursue in daylight i would think
>
> so keep on
dreamin
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G.
McManus" <lgm@w...> wrote:
> >
> > While the EGLYSD
tripoint has almost certainly never been surveyed
> according to
> > any datum whatsoever, it seems likely that other segments of the
EGLY
> meridional
> > boundary (farther north) and of EGSD (in
the vicinity of the Nile Valley)
> have
> > been surveyed and
demarcated. Shouldn't the same datum that was used in
> those
> > surveys be applied along the whole length of the respective
meridian and
> > parallel, since it has already been accepted by the
parties?
> >
> > I am reminded that it was the ancient
Egyptians who invented surveying to
> > reestablish cadastral
boundaries when the annual Nile floods erased
> landmarks.
> >
> > Lowell G. McManus
> > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
>
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >
From: "aletheia kallos" <aletheiak@y...>
> > To:
<BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, January
04, 2006 10:51 PM
> > Subject: RE: [BoundaryPoint] Re: EGLYSD class
b
> >
> >
> > > nice stuff thanx
> >
> & please look for quite a few inserts ahead
> > >
>
> > --- Hugh Wallis <hugh@o...> wrote:
> > >
>
> >> >>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).
> > >
> > > hahaha you certainly may
disallow me & i knew dat
> > > about 84
> > > but
i dont infer wgs84 should be ruled out for that
> > >
reason
> > >
> > > on the contrary i think the
relative newness &
> > > universality of wgs84 may especially
recommend &
> > > automatically promote it in this special
case
> > >
> > > for diametrically unlike the maritime
borders of
> > > indonesia
> > > where technical &
legal complications create a
> > > particular urgency to get all
these datums clarified
> > > the situation at eglysd smacks of
complete
> > > indifference & utter neglect over many
decades
> > >
> > > & so i reason in the apparent
absence of any evidence
> > > of a specified datum for this point
since its creation
> > > in 1925 til the present
> > >
that it either remains unspecified until today & thus
> > >
highly subject to the wgs84 default principle
> > > or else that
any specificity it may have acquired
> > > would most likely have
occurred post 1984 & would thus
> > > very likely be in the
form of wgs84 for that reason as
> > > well
> >
>
> > > also where so many as 3 parties are involved
universal
> > > norms tend to be preferred to local ones
>
> >
> > > your indonesia text says flat out
> >
> for its own special case but with universal
> > >
applicability in this case
> > > wgs84 seems to be most sensible
to adopt
> > > &
> > > all decisions should be
legally agreed by all
> > > countries involved
> >
>
> > >> I suspect that the Egypt 1907 Datum might have
been
> > >> used
> > >
> > > but what
in particular leads you to guess egypt 1907
> > >
> >
> i can imagine egypt & sudan adopting it but not so
> > >
readily libya
> > >
> > >> - but see
> >
>>
> > > <http://www.fig.net/pub/cairo/papers/ts_45/ts45_01_abidin_etal.pdf>
>
> >>
> > > 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
> > >
> > > exactly my point as well
as my guess here at eglysd
> > > since day 1 in 1925 & even up
to the present
> > >
> > >> and discusses
the
> > >> issues that arise as a result.
> >
>
> > > yes naturally many in the worlds busiest seas but
none
> > > in the worlds most desolate wasteland
> >
>
> > >> If you don't have
> > >> time to
read the whole
> > >> paper
> > >
> > >
who me
> > > i have all the time in the world for such
>
> > deliciousness
> > >
> > >> 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,
> > >
> >
> indeed did you notice 420m was the max they cited
> > > later
in the article
> > >
> > > sounds like your datum
shift demo wants to take place
> > > in the indonesian
jungles
> > >
> > >> 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."
> > >
> > > i
also appreciated & hope you did too the specific
> > >
reference in this article to the attainment of
> > > submeter
level accuracy in pilotage by ecdis dgps in
> > > 2004
>
> > which nicely fills in a blank space in our earlier
> > >
discussion here
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/message/18568
>
> >
> > > end inserts
> > > & sweet
dreams
> > >
> > >
> > >> The following
paper might be relevant to EGLYSD -
> > >>
> > > http://www.asprs.org/resources/grids/06-2003-kenya.pdf
>
> >> - although it
> > >> primarily refers to Kenya it
also mentions the use
> > >> of various datums in
> >
>> Egypt and the Sudan.
> > >>
> > >>
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.
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>>
> > >>
> > >> _____
>
> >>
> > >> From:
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > >>
[mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com]
> > >> On Behalf Of
aletheiak
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 8:33
PM
> > >> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> >
>> Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: EGLYSD class b
> >
>>
> > >>
> > >> 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
>
> >>
> > > <http://www.confluence.org/confluence.php?lat=22
>
<http://www.confluence.org/confluence.php?lat=22&lon=25>
&lon=25>
> > >> &lon=25> &lon=25
> >
>> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
>
> > >> > > Jesper
> > >> >
>
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
>
> >> > > --
> > >> > >
> >
>> > > Borderbase - your online guide to international
>
> >> borders and tripoints
> > >> > >
>
> >> > > http://www.nicolette.dk/borderbase
>
> >> > >
> > >> >
> >
>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>> _____
> > >>
> > >> YAHOO!
GROUPS LINKS
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>>
> > >> * Visit your group "BoundaryPoint
> >
>> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint>
" on
> > >> the web.
> > >>
> >
>>
> > >> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
> > >>
BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > >>
> >
>
<mailto:BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> > >>
Yahoo! Terms of Service
> > >>
> > > === message
truncated ===
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> >
> > >
> > >
__________________________________________
> > > Yahoo! DSL -
Something to write home about.
> > > Just $16.99/mo. or
less.
> > > dsl.yahoo.com
> > >
> >
>
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups
Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
>
>
>
Photographs
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Photographs&w1=Photographs&w2=Boundary&
>
w3=Trail&w4=State+line&w5=Outdoors&c=5&s=72&.sig=_axhZeOWvnPyIrc-Wsx5Nw>
>
> Boundary
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Boundary&w1=Photographs&w2=Boundary&w3=
>
Trail&w4=State+line&w5=Outdoors&c=5&s=72&.sig=y8s7FKcUl0wjGyfaCt_Zjw>
>
> Trail
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Trail&w1=Photographs&w2=Boundary&w3=Tra
>
il&w4=State+line&w5=Outdoors&c=5&s=72&.sig=X82tBrznid5yQeaQbPtosQ>
>
>
> State
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=State+line&w1=Photographs&w2=Boundary&w
>
3=Trail&w4=State+line&w5=Outdoors&c=5&s=72&.sig=dkU3etGXNOZj3mbqSK_6wQ>
>
line
>
> Outdoors
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Outdoors&w1=Photographs&w2=Boundary&w3=
>
Trail&w4=State+line&w5=Outdoors&c=5&s=72&.sig=yYMxBvJA6YF01zKh-YOVRg>
>
>
>
>
>
>
_____
>
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
>
> * Visit your group
"BoundaryPoint
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint>
" on the web.
>
> * To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>
BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
<mailto:BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of
Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
Terms of Service.
>
>
>
>
_____
>