also realized in morning light
your topo generated position falls nearly 5 seconds or several
hundred feet from our best available estimate for midriver
namely the one based on the monument positions
but the legal tripoint does fall by definition & agreement at the
midpoint of the caus transsect of the river
& the topo depiction of the monument positions leaves no
chance that they might be so asymmetic in relation to their
respective banks as to produce anywhere near 5 seconds of drift
off center
also
measuring on the topo
the distance along caus from the tripoint position to both shores
reveals the tripoint is positioned by usgs closer to the right bank
than the left
for reasons unknown
but the upshot of all these little observations is that the topo
position is further discredit
& looks increasingly like just another usgs blunder
--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "acroorca2002" <orc@o...> wrote:
> --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., J Di Battista <meridien24@y...>
wrote:
> >
> > Hey - I'm posting via e-mail for the first time. Sorry to all if this
> doesn't work. I figure this is the best way to ship an attachment
> along. And maybe a hyperlink.
> >
> > On the topic of VTNYQC -- Here's what I gathered from
ArcView
> and MS Streets - as you said tho, it goes off USGS topo, but it
> appears (from here anyway) to be valid
> >
> > 45.01083 N
> > 73.34314 W
> >
> > which converts to (I think)
> > N 45d00m38s9880 W 73d20m35s3040
> >
> > Any thoughts?
>
> congrats
> everything works great
> & i agree with your conversions
>
> if these are nad27 as i assume
> then you are very close to
> yet even farther north than
> the usgs book position you wanted to dismiss yesterday
> for being too far north
> namely
> n45d00m38s9 x w73d20m38s9
>
> such closeness of latitude at least suggests a common
source
> but as you can see by further comparison
> you are also 3 or 4 seconds east of the book position
> amounting to a few hundred feet
> which is quite a lot of difference relative to 10 foot circle
targeting
>
> this big difference of longitude & small difference of latitude
> were striking & puzzling enough for me to recheck everything
> & tho both my transcription & my conversion are indeed correct
> i was finally led to notice the peculiarly identical 38s9 endings
> in both the latitude & longitude figures above from the book
>
> & such an improbable but exact repetition
> strongly suggests to me a transcription error
> presumably made by the author of the book
> but not by the mapmaker
> who may well have been working from the same source data
> aha
>
> so i think your topo generated coords are very probably more
> reliable than my book generated ones
>
> yet still after all that
> both these sets of coords
> whatever the cause of their great difference in longitude
> remain too far north
> as you have already noted
> so i think you would be right to dismiss them both equally
> in favor of simply averaging the more credible ibc coords
> as suggested & done in message 7873
>
> > Anyway. On my way to Montreal, I snapped this picture of
> NY276, a
> > road which follows the border a few feet on the US side.
> Marker 649B is visible.
>
> nice shot
> you tv guys do border roads well
>
> but unless there has been new road construction in the area
> your map suggests the marker in the pic might be 649a
instead
> & that you might be standing very near the position of 649b
> itself possibly no longer standing or no longer visible
>
> a gps reading on the monument in the pic could resolve this
>
> authoritative coords for these & the other monuments
discussed
> above are at
>
http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/coordinates/J4
> 5thp.txt