Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: double line bug & nautical miles<br/>
Date: Nov 23, 2001 @ 23:45<br/>
Author: m donner (&quot;m donner&quot; &lt;maxivan82@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="4630.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="4632.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic4627.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="4630.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="4632.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-2010569333">grant<br/>
where is that  here  of yours<br/>
  not just in the uk i hope<br/>
for i can scarcely ignore a purported united states standard measurement for <br/>
purposes of determining the position of a purported united states standard <br/>
federative tripoint<br/>
on the contrary<br/>
you have perfected the preparatory phase of my quest<br/>
so major thanx for this utmost new variegation<br/>
<br/>
now can you or anyone possibly also steer me to the precise trigonometric <br/>
understanding necessary for completing the degminsec geocoords of the target <br/>
tripoint in just as many decimal places<br/>
which i believe are capable of roughly millimetric perfection<br/>
<br/>
or must i just sink or swim 6076point11549 feet 3 times over<br/>
  for a total of 18228point23098 feet<br/>
due west from orwa turnpoint 1 & read my superdeluxe gps receiver in nad83 <br/>
when i get there<br/>
<br/>
m<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt;From: &quot;Grant Hutchison&quot; &lt;<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:granthutchison@...">granthutchison@...</a>&gt;<br/>
&gt;Reply-To: <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com">BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com</a><br/>
&gt;To: <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com">BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com</a><br/>
&gt;Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: double line bug & nautical miles<br/>
&gt;Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 20:35:52 -0000<br/>
&gt;<br/>
&gt;Michael:<br/>
&gt; &gt; received values continue to proliferate from exactly 6076 feet to well<br/>
&gt; &gt; beyond 6077 ft  for it does now appear that the most prestigious<br/>
&gt; &gt; authorities agree only upon exactly  6076 feet & 1 tenth  yes 6076point1<br/>
&gt; &gt; period  tho many others still variegate crazily into 4 decimal places<br/>
&gt;<br/>
&gt;I can variegate better than that - it says here the US nautical mile<br/>
&gt;was defined in 1954 as exactly 6076.11549ft.<br/>
&gt;Here in the UK we rejoice under a nautical mile that is supposed to be<br/>
&gt;equal to one minute of longitude at the equator: 6082.66ft. Out of a<br/>
&gt;sense of reality, the Admiralty rounded this to one &quot;Admiralty mile&quot;:<br/>
&gt;6080ft.<br/>
&gt;Does anyone know why the US went for such unfeasibly submillimetric<br/>
&gt;accuracy?<br/>
&gt;<br/>
&gt;Grant<br/>
&gt;<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>_________________________________________________________________<br/>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp">http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp</a></div>