Subject: Re: CAUS - NY276 (was VTNYQC)<br/>
Date: Nov 13, 2002 @ 05:17<br/>
Author: acroorca2002 (&quot;acroorca2002&quot; &lt;orc@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="7895.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="7913.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic7895.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="7896.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="7898.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-299029424">--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., J Di Battista &lt;meridien24@y...&gt; wrote:<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; <br/>
&gt; Hey - I&#39;m posting via e-mail for the first time.  Sorry to all if this <br/>
 </span></blockquote>doesn&#39;t work.  I figure this is the best way to ship an attachment <br/>
along. And maybe a hyperlink.<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; <br/>
&gt; On the topic of VTNYQC -- Here&#39;s what I gathered from ArcView <br/>
 </span></blockquote>and MS Streets - as you said tho, it goes off USGS topo, but it <br/>
appears (from here anyway) to be valid<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; <br/>
&gt; 45.01083 N<br/>
&gt; 73.34314 W<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; which converts to (I think)<br/>
&gt; N 45d00m38s9880 W 73d20m35s3040<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; Any thoughts?  <br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>congrats<br/>
everything works great<br/>
& i agree with your conversions<br/>
<br/>
if these are nad27 as i assume<br/>
then you are very close to <br/>
yet even farther north than <br/>
the usgs book position you wanted to dismiss yesterday <br/>
for being too far north<br/>
namely<br/>
n45d00m38s9 x w73d20m38s9<br/>
<br/>
such closeness of latitude at least suggests a common source<br/>
but as you can see by further comparison<br/>
you are also 3 or 4 seconds east of the book position<br/>
amounting to a few hundred feet <br/>
which is quite a lot of difference relative to 10 foot circle targeting<br/>
<br/>
this big difference of longitude & small difference of latitude<br/>
were striking & puzzling enough for me to recheck everything<br/>
& tho both my transcription & my conversion are indeed correct<br/>
i was finally led to notice the peculiarly identical 38s9 endings<br/>
in both the latitude & longitude figures above from the book<br/>
<br/>
& such an improbable but exact repetition <br/>
strongly suggests to me a transcription error <br/>
presumably made by the author of the book <br/>
but not by the mapmaker<br/>
who may well have been working from the same source data<br/>
aha<br/>
<br/>
so i think your topo generated coords are very probably more <br/>
reliable than my book generated ones<br/>
<br/>
yet still after all that <br/>
both these sets of coords <br/>
whatever the cause of their great difference in longitude<br/>
remain too far north <br/>
as you have already noted<br/>
so i think you would be right to dismiss them both equally<br/>
in favor of simply averaging the more credible ibc coords<br/>
as suggested & done in message 7873<br/>
 <br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; Anyway.  On my way to Montreal, I snapped this picture of <br/>
 </span></blockquote>NY276, a <br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; road which follows the border a few feet on the US side.  <br/>
 </span></blockquote>Marker 649B is visible.  <br/>
<br/>
nice shot<br/>
you tv guys do border roads well<br/>
<br/>
but unless there has been new road construction in the area<br/>
your map suggests the marker in the pic might be 649a instead<br/>
& that you might be standing very near the position of 649b<br/>
itself possibly no longer standing or no longer visible<br/>
<br/>
a gps reading on the monument in the pic could resolve this<br/>
<br/>
authoritative coords for these & the other monuments discussed <br/>
above are at<br/>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/coordinates/J4">http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/coordinates/J4</a><br/>
5thp.txt</div>