Jump to content

mloser

Members
  • Posts

    1267
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mloser

  1. Since it is the gubmint it needs no logic. I noticed that they have nicely PRINTED signs stating that things are closed. What great planning! And what a waste of money. The shutdowns are calculated to make us whine the most. Everybody will miss the national parks and complain about it to their congressmen. They hope. Also notice that congress will continue to get paid. Maybe if we stopped paying them they would act faster. Not smarter, but faster. What's the opposite of progress? Congress.
  2. That has to be simply a spite move. It isn't like they couldn't have left the computer running.
  3. I agree with Ernmark! Now it's PERSONAL! So they couldn't leave a computer running when they locked the door behind them? That might explain why it is so slow at times. It must be running on someone's desktop system.
  4. If you want to see the mark on a map and can identify the USGS quad chances are you can locate it at the NY GIS clearinghouse site.
  5. Click Advanced Search and enter the stamping in the Designation field. Note that anything 3 or less characters will be an exact match search.
  6. I'm surprised Bill92 hasn't chimed in yet--he knows all this stuff by heart. What you found is a Transit Traverse mark set by someone whose initials are MC. The USGS had three (I think) types of traverse, good ol' standard traverse, transit traverse and electronic traverse. Marks set by the methods were stamped T, TT and ET, with the number following it being the count of that station on the traverse line, so you have the 73rd mark in the line. You can contact the USGS office in Rolla, Mo. if you want to find out more about it.
  7. It is indeed available on the Play Store. I have used it since the first Beta and love it. Mike has done a great job and the program keeps getting better and better (and faster). He even has a backup database for when the NGS database is down.
  8. It didn't even occur to me to think that but yes, it worked when I put in "pid map". Maybe if you have two words??
  9. Short notice so I probably won't make it. Also, a bit too much emphasis on the geocaching end of things. I am saving myself for the Surveyor's Historical Society Rendezvous in Philadelphia next week! Bill93 and I are going to that event.
  10. Did you measure from the driveway of 1349? Kayakbird's coords and my Google Earth measuring put the mark in the same spot (in that dead-end driveway). What is that thing in the driveway that I posted on the benchmark page? It is impossible to tell from the Google Street View pic. Do you know how the road was widened, or even if it was? If it was widened to the north the mark is gone. If it was widened from the center the mark is exactly where the Kayakbird's coords place it. If it was widened to the south the mark is in the bushes near the fence corner.
  11. Not a problem John. I was surprised that Foxtrot wasn't aware of Zhanna's map but he must have come on board after she became less active. She and Richard still seem to hunt marks but she isn't nearly as active as she used to be and her website isn't updated very often. I couldn't even find the link to the PID map on it but instead relied on a search of this forum and found the link from 2006. Based on a quick search of the database here it seems there are both "O" and "I" station names. I guess when they run a level line all letters are equally loved!
  12. John, you are thinking of the disk name, Foxtrot was looking at PIDs and he is correct, there are no PIDS starting with "I". Here is a PID map that Zhanna did years ago. It shows that there is indeed a method to the PID numbering madness and that there are "O" PIDs but no "I" PIDs. Has anyone else noticed that these PIDS must have been assigned when they computerized, all at one time (in my area the PIDs are subcategorized into number ranges, with tri-stations being in the higher, e.g. 3000+ range). After the initial conversion new marks were added starting with "A" and without regard to the original scheme. They appear to be up to about "DF" now. I just got back from a trip to Illinois and the area I was hunting had tons of "D" marks, most set post-2009.
  13. I concur with Kayakbird, since his results are the same as mine . In Google Street View I could see the mailbox in the driveway and it IS indeed 1349. By following the line of the gravel driveway to the street you can get a good idea where the center line most likely used to be. Other than that he mades good points--nothing is the same as it was in the previous recoveries. The 161 feet is all you would have to go by.
  14. I think you are looking east of the actual location, where the coords put you. Bench marks can be quite a distance from the coordinates and I think this is one of them. If you look at the image I uploaded to the log, I measured the distance from the driveway mentioned in the description and it puts the mark west of where you were looking. I would guess that quite a bit has changed since the last recovery but there are a few things that remain, and the driveway to 1349 is one of them. There are also fences at the edges of the property, but they are probably new and can't be counted on. Note that while the mark was exposed 6 inches in 1942 it is now about a foot below the level of the road. The description doesn't say it is below ground but it could well be. I also posted a street view pic that shows SOMETHING about where the 161.1 foot mark from the driveway is. I can't tell what it is in the image, but it could be the concrete post. It could also be trash in the grass. I just looked again and I am pretty sure it is trash. However, I would definitely search for the mark in the brush at the corner of the fences. The biggest issue is how the street has been widened. If it was widened from the center or the south it should be near the fence corner as originally described. If it was widened to the north, then 32' is about at the curb. See the second street view pic for an interesting image.
  15. I agree with Artman. How long did it take to fix the link to this forum? 3 months? It was a change of a single digit too.
  16. If you ever find your way to PA it's near N 41° 41.734 W 075° 57.014 PA does have a database of control markers, but I don't think it includes yours. Check here: PennDot PAMS. It is map based and a bit quirky. It also doesn't seem to search by coords, so you would have an easier time looking at the road where you located the mark. I did a little digging and didn't see anything near the coords you gave.
  17. See you there Bill! I arranged my trip yesterday.
  18. Since I am only 100 miles away I am seriously considering this event. I have been to the Stargazer's stone and would love to visit with informed surveyors. Bill93 is right--it isn't cheap, but it is in line with similar professional conferences.
  19. As LSUFAN said, don't trust the coordinates other than to get you close to the mark. Go by the description, and both descriptions have the marks on a headwall of a culvert. Culverts can be anything from a tiny trickle under the roadway up to, but not including, a true bridge. The headwall is parallel to the roadway. Also notable is that both marks were established in 1979, which is eons ago in terms of roadways, and I am almost certain that 307 was widened since then. In reference to TU0915, it looks like they may have kept the original roadway and added the northbound lane (westbound? I am not sure since the road goes southeast to northwest). If you head a bit southeast of the point where your maps shows the mark you will see headwalls, and they could certainly be the ones you are looking for. Their choice of directions is probably based on road direction, so the east headwall would be based on a road direction of north, and would be the one to the northeast side of the road. However, if 307 was widened by adding a new roadway to the north, the headwall you want is the one north of the southern lanes of the highway. TU0857 may also be there but I would bet that the intersection was rebuilt, and if that is the case chances are they rebuilt the culverts, as it is harder to keep them in place in that sort of situation. Your problem here will be measuring anything without getting run over. On busy roadways I tend to pace the distance instead of trying to measure it. It isn't precise but it much faster.
  20. Tillamurphs, Why are you interested in more information on this mark? As someone else said the coords are adjusted so you should be able to get quite close to it without any description. One thing that I noticed is that it is called Chiseled SQUARE OFFSET, which implies that there is a chiseled square somewhere about (is that what you are looking for?). Offset marks are usually placed when the main mark is not in a convenient spot for a survey crew, so they put a new, carefully measured mark nearby and use it. I have only seen a few of them but they are typically within 50 feet of the original mark. There is a lot of documentation of old bench marks online--usually triangulation and leveling books on Google books, but they date mostly from the turn of the 20th century. I don't remember seeing anything from as recent as 1934. However, it may be possible that the original mark was set earlier and you might find something about it. My method of research for local marks was to look for "leveling" and "triangulation" and some of the areas I wanted to search. The NGS has a lot of old documents at http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/ but they are not indexed and it is hard to find anything useful in them.
  21. I agree that RMs are usually withing a tape's length of the station, but I have at least one notable exception, NINE in Lancaster County, PA has a reference mark that is 100 meters from the station! JV4771|---------------------------------------------------------------------| JV4771| PID Reference Object Distance Geod. Az | JV4771| dddmmss.s | JV4771| NINE RM 1 156.530 METERS 01940 | JV4771| NINE AZ MK 0895057.4 | JV4771| NINE AZ MK 2 0963448.2 | JV4771| JU3837 WASHINGTON NY AWY BCN 64 APPROX.39.6 KM 1395435.9 | JV4771| NINE RM 2 63.030 METERS 16131 | JV4771| NINE RM 3 11.070 METERS 18021 | JV4771| NINE RM 4 100.000 METERS 33427 | JV4771|---------------------------------------------------------------------| Since this is the only surviving RM it has made finding the station nearly impossible. The tiniest error when sighting from the RM to the station, or vice versa, leads to a large distance error, plus the lack of ability to swing the tape (I only own a 50 meter tape, and to make things worse the RM is across a ROAD!) means even the distance isn't accurate. The station is also 14 inches underground. So far 4 visits have turned up nothing. Well, not nothing--I found destroyed RM 3, underground without it's concrete base and gave it to the farmer. It had been folded in half, most likely by a plow. Even more fun, it is in a large garden, so while they don't mind me digging in it, on one of my visits they had JUST spread manure on the garden. Yep, I still went after the station, and dug a 10' x 4' x 14" hole.
  22. Does the Nook have GPS? I have a Kindle fire and it does not. So while I might be able to side-load it to my Fire it wouldn't be too useful. I have been using Benchmap on both a tablet (Motorola Xoom) and a phone (Motorola X2)and have found it very useful. I agree that the phone is a bit too small, but I also think the 10" tablet is too big. A 7" tablet might be the best size for being easy to carry but big enough to see well. Maybe Verizon will start carrying the Samsung Note soon.
  23. mloser, where did you find the information for BM 7? kayakbird I found it on Google Books
  24. I might agree on datasheet error. BM 7 was set in a nearby hotel, and was bolt with USPBM chiseled near it. This may have been set because the hotel was torn down or it was more convenient to a survey being done. It also doesn't look like there is room for a disk between the U and S, nor does there appear to be evidence of the disk in the stone.
  25. I have the same detector as Ernmark and it has served me well for about the same time frame. It is lightweight and even telescopes so I can put it in my backpack for longer treks into the woods. It reacts well to disks--about 6 inches is my guess, equally well to aluminum cans, sadly, and also well to ferrous materials. I turn the volume up all the way, the sensitivity all the way, then tune it so it just stops making a constant noise. Then I am ready to go. A long time ago we had a big discussion on here about metal detectors and someone found a great sale at Radio Shack, so I ran out and got a high end detector. I used it maybe twice because it is awkward to carry and really has to be tuned to what you want to find by setting it USING said object. So it sits in the corner of my basement, unused and I keep carrying the cheapo model and loving it. As a matter of fact, I don't even remember replacing the BATTERIES on my cheap detector in the 7 years I have used it!
×
×
  • Create New...