evenfall

I take no offense at all Spoo, I have a Ham License. Advanced Class... 1559-1610 Mhz, Is the spectrum currently assigned for GPS uses. The Wavelength at these frequencies, is too short to be influenced by D layer Propagation during the Day, nor by E, F1 and F2 layer propagation at dusk and on into the night. These Layers are in fact a component of the way the Sun's radiation is hitting the Ionosphere, especially when the angle of those rays are not direct, but rather slipping over the edge of the globe as exposure to them wanes. These frequencies are very line of sight, very direct, and because they are coming from space to earth at a high angle, almost a right angle to the Ionosphere, are not reflected, though there is some ionespheric refraction, and are not subject to the "Skip Propagation" You refer to. It is of note that they are also Circularly Polarized, Due to the spinning nature of Satellites. Even if we wanted, and no matter how we try, these frequencies at GPS spectrum allocations will not skip. Skip Propagation is most common to frequencies below 54 Mhz, and is, depending on the time of day, a component of low angle RF energy traveling in a straight line off to the horizon, until it connects with Ionespheric conditions, dependent on factors including time of day and the relation to an 11 year sunspot cycle which is currently nearing it's null. The Ionesphere stratifies in changing ways during the day and RF energy at HF frequencies can be reflected off of it and back to earth. It can "skip" like this multiple times. It is the low angle RF that does this like a rock skipping off water. GPS is pointed straight at earth, and the so there is only a High incident angle in addition to the Super High Frequency that will not exhibit this skip. The time of day is the factor for where the sun is and what effect it is having on the ionosphere at the time. Most of the activity is along the "Greyline", which is twilight, either morning or night. This is why here in the States we can have HF radio contact with Europe and Africa in the morning as it is their evening, and during our evenings we can hear Asia and Australia. CB Radios are at 27mhz, and limited to just 4 watts. Low power but skip just fine as you say, and this is also known as the 11 meter band. Just above it from 28-30 Mhz is the 10 meter band. One of the best places on the frequency spectrum for this kind of propagation. Hams can use up to 1500 watts and High Gain antennas to enhance communications in this part of the spectrum. Now The GPS constellation, and where we are surveying, or using this constellation is a separate problem. There are not many Birds to the North and we get our highest quality from the birds that are low on the horizon, because the "spread has the largest sized triangles for radio triangulation solutions. In the foothills and near woods, which is what we have plenty of, the forest trees and foothills can and do climb up and cover that low horizon view of the GPS constellation... Them Dern Satellites are always moving! By afternoon, too many are too far south and too low in the sky to be seeable by our equipment. A look at the Ephemeris for the GPS Constellation which was kept by the USCG and now by NGS Here: http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/GPS/GPS.html will give you a look at where the constellation is at any time... And when you are working in 47 degrees north, you'll have these things. Thanks for raising a good point Spoo, It was something we have not covered before. Rob

No, Not, Not really Shirley. It does not seem productive to attempt to discredit R_C's experience, and the fact he is agreeing with my observation should be of no consequence either. R_C just had a Valid experience. It really happened and the Datasheet helped him. A number of recent threads here in the forum have been about restrictions to Photography as well, in fact there was one a month back. I have had the exact same experience as R_C, and more times than I can count. It goes with the Job if you work in the Survey industry. Contact with the Public is inevitable. Your Milage does vary, but that was just your experience once. Not everyone takes along all the gear you do Shirley, Furthermore, you met a nice Cop, and in the city, they ain't all nice. Not always. It is nice to hear you had a favorable experience too. Not everyone, everywhere will Buy into what you have on your Laptop. An electronic file is not as credible as a piece of paper to many folks. In the past, I have worked in the Beverly Neighborhood in Everett, for a company who has a Big Gravel Pit in the area. Everett Cops are Pretty Particular in that area as this is very close to the Main Boeing Plant at Paine Field, Where the 747, 767, 777 and 787 are built. I have worked on Paine field in the past as well, But these days we all do so after a Background Check. A little over a year ago, I was working the Ballard Neighborhood of Seattle, and working Geodetic Stations inside the Ballard Locks, On Army Corps of Engineers property, along the same time and after this was going down: http://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=en&...cks&btnG=Search And Yes I was asked what I was doing... But I checked in with the office on my way in, I wore my Work Vest, Hardhat and you can bet I had a clipboard full of datasheets to show everywhere I wanted to look... The Guy saw my GPS and Digital Cam too... I had very little problem when I told him I was Searching for USACE survey markers which were included in the NGS Database so I could update their status. He did look at my clipboard. I am sure i was watched the entire time. I have on other occasions, had to call the USCG to obtain permission to enter their areas to recover stations, I have had to obtain parking passes to get where I wanted to go. I had to leave those Passes on my Dashboard to prevent my vehicle from being towed. I have had cops make note, by driving by slow on me many times. Those of us in the field can go on for hours about all the times we are questioned or given the skeptical eye. Sometime the situation can become downright tense. Yes as a mater of fact I have had Cops come and tell me that private property owners were nervous about the surveyors. I have asked permission to go somewhere and have not only been refused but told I might not want to Dawdle while leaving either. So before you give that piece of paper the Brush Think it over. When Printed, it is a legitimate document. If you want to go without it, fine, but most folks travel lighter than you, and that piece of Paper is all the credibility they have. So take it from me before you scoff at the paper. It has it's place. Whether you choose to use it or not, is your personal choice. Geocachers have had their run-ins with the Bomb Squads more than once. It is worth keeping that in mind. It is after 9/11 these days... Civil rights are not what we remember... Many people in this country really are afraid of things. I guess it is time for everyone to brush up on their Auldous Huxley... Rob

mcl143, I can't speak to the Paperless methods, though I don't have any qualms with it. I prefer the latest copy of an NGS Datasheet on a clipboard. It is all laid out to see, I can write recovery notes on the back. That serves as a paper brian until whenever. You can even use it for logging you measurements and other field notes about the Station. If I am stopped and questioned by anyone, I have an official US Government Document in my hand for use in corroborating my reason for being where I am. That very piece of Paper will put a lot of people at ease, as you become a Surveyor type just doing a job in their eyes really quick. A digital copy of this on a PDA is not official enough in the heat of a moment. Parents especially will involve themselves in your business, by either inquiring on their own or asking the police to do so if you look suspicious and you are where kids play. In this day and age, that piece of paper is and can be worth a lot. Worth Considering. Rob

Terra, Between what Mike and I have Provided as thoughts on this, It is well covered. The only thing I think we left out was to say that these stations were originally placed and measured using Optical methods of survey, Not GPS, and so the pole's hinderance to Satellite tracking would not have been objectionable, nor perhaps even part of a criteria for selecting the location at the time. We have also pointed out the differences in usability, As I pointed out, a private surveyor could find a way to use it for their needs, but a geodetic quality survey, which takes hours to perform could very will be hindered by this pole. The difference between Mike's answer and Mine is one of Usability for What. The what of it will dictate to the user which method they have to adhere to to get where they want to go. I have observed during construction operations in and near foothill areas, that even with a local DGPS set up, often the GPS equipment operating in the Bulldozers, Excavators and Graders will "Go down" in the afternoon, sometimes after 3 PM due to the difficulty they are having in seeing an adequate GPS Constellation. This is made worse when the job sites have a poor southern exposure. We work around this by setting up some usable Survey control which can be used by optical methods for the rest of the day. Rob

Terra, I'd attempt to run GPS over that station. But the problem is that it is useless to me to do so. Until some NGS project includes this Bench and improves it's quality, Using it for much is a waste of time. If were were to GPS this I'd like to know, what direction are we facing in this photo? It could take a little longer to gather data with a standard RTK setup, Due to the proximity of the pole, but it's doable. You would just have to give the GPS Constellation some time over it. I could definitely do it with a rover and some DGPS. It wouldn't be geodetic quality, but good enough for construction staking and layout. It is an interesting Bench Mark: BL1861 *CURRENT SURVEY CONTROL BL1861 ___________________________________________________________________ BL1861* NAD 83(1986)- 30 06 41. (N) 095 50 35. (W) SCALED BL1861* NAVD 88 - 78.72 (+/-2cm) 258.3 (feet) VERTCON BL1861 ___________________________________________________________________ BL1861 GEOID HEIGHT- -27.50 (meters) GEOID03 BL1861 BL1861 VERT ORDER - FIRST CLASS II (See Below) Not Adjusted from NGVD29, where it was adjusted and first order... Now in NAVD88 it is VERTCON which is not very high quality as compared to an adjustment at all... In many cases, I could not tie into it, due to the low quality. VERTCON is for ballpark estimating. It would be interesting as to why it was not included in adjustments. Rob

Thanks for the "Local Knowledge" Matt, No Matter how much experience, what you shared would help anyone in that Locale, a lot. Rob

Matt, When you say Rivets, Are the rivets described as being part of a remaining, or existing steel bridge, or do you find the rivets set into concrete in the same or similar manner you might find a standard survey marker? I am thinking this may help Art with an idea of what you have seen "Rivet" stations appear as on the Pennsy, so he has a better idea of what he's looking for. Gary may correct me, and it can depend on the railroad. I have noticed that BNSF, whether it was old GN or NP right of way often would note what milepost a bridge, semaphore, signal track detector, yard lead, or siding, (beginning and end) is, or was, And sometimes the RR crossings were located at Mileposts. So if you can detect where these features were or may have been, You may use your GPS and a Mountain Bike if this is an abandoned grade. Make a waypoint of where you start from, and ride up the grade to where you approximate where something referenced in the text may have been. then measure conventionally from there. Colorado Papa once mentioned his disappointment over what time had hidden in his hunting out on the D&RGW Narrow Gauge Chama line in Southern Colorado. His hunt was more than 50 years gone too... Someone mentioned trains.com, and I wonder if they can advise anyone inquiring as to where older railroad maps could be obtained, perhaps there is a Pennsy historical society or a collector who would be willing to allow people to see the maps, take notes... Who knows. Sometimes the old Bridge and Building or R.O.W guys will share what they remember too! Hunting sometimes has to be creative, so why not. Rob

Terra, Sorry it has taken so long to get an answer to you on this, but I think I can help you in part, and for the rest, I would recommend writing cheryl.malone@noaa.gov for the things that only she can ascertain. NGS has a number of ways they can use their Database which we have no access to, so searching for Vertical survey with Non Pub Codes of Z may be something she can do. Going forth, there are factors and difficulties involved and here are a few of what I think they are. First, the "Z" Non Pub code only applies to vertical control. It is not used with horizontal control, and this narrows the field of it's use. Vertical Control was historically derived from a survey process called Differential Leveling. you can easily google this is you want to know more, but in short it is a redundant process of following a path starting somewhere and leading to somewhere else and measurements are carefully taken with a Leveling Rod held by the Rod man, rested usually upon a survey marker and in rarer occasions an object determined to be of adequate stability, such as a Rivet in a Bridge or the Top Bolt of a Fire Hydrant. Then the Rod was read with a Survey Level mounted on a Tripod by the instrument man. Then the sum or difference is taken from the previous location to determine the elevation at the new location. The process is repeated many times along the same path to confirm and tighten the overall accuracy, and then all of the measurements are statistically use in further calculations to enhance the accuracy over an entire network of measurements. Now the "Z" code is presumed Destroyed. The inherent problem that follows this especially in leveling, or Bench Marks, Vertical control, is that for the most part, the most common device used to mark a survey station for vertical work was a Brass Disc Monumentation. NGS has very strict rules they adhere to for what can be used or adopted for use as a "Bench Mark", and they are equally strict over classifying these stations destroyed as well, and so most that have gone missing in actuality are classified as not found. So you see, finding benchmarks, make that Vertical Control Marks, that were actually submitted to NGS as destroyed that passed their criteria for destroyed marks are probably the rarest of them all, because most were survey markers in the first place. You will find a lot more destroyed stations in the horizontal plane, as there were a lot more objects considered usable for triangulation as it was optical and used trig to determine locations, and they did not have to be physically touched to measure them. So we have steeples and stacks and towers... All things you cannot use for differential leveling. NGS has a more lenient standard for considering "Landmark Style" Triangulation Stations destroyed. The objects used for vertical control stations were no where near as diverse as those used for Horizontal control. To be sure, Most of vertical control really are marked as pure survey markers, as opposed to adopted objects. So Here we are. What you are looking for is pretty rare. Perhaps NGS can help you search for these in your locale. But please remember this, if it is destroyed in their opinion, it means they were furnished empirical evidence as proof of destruction. So if you can find something, it will be super tough, because it has already been proved to NGS's satisfaction as really destroyed, and they have seen that it really is. It won't be a landmark so rule those out. Maybe a specific spot on alandmark, but if the landmark is gone, so goes the station. I would try providing NGS with whatever information you can about the station you have in question when you inquire, most importantly the Station location in Latitude and Longitude, in Degrees Minutes and Seconds. Ask them if they have any records of a station feel free to add why you are curious, and anything else that you feel will help them help you. Good Luck on this one, It will be pretty challenging. Rob

;oj Leighhale, What BlackDog seems to have trouble saying here is that the National Geodetic Survey was known as the Coast and Geodetic Survey back in the 1950's. They are the same agency handling geodesy, and CONTINUOUSLY in existence since 1807. Same Database, Same Survey Markers, Same People... They are preparing their Bicentennial celebration for 2007. I want to say it like this, The National Geodetic Survey did in fact exist in the 50's but the Name was different. There was a name change in the 1970's when NOAA took over the management of the agency. Along the same time, the design of the Survey discs was changed as well. For a while in the 70's and 80's, all the discs said NOS, or National Ocean Service on them, and that was the NOAA agency that geodesy fell to. In the 90's the NGS name came to play, something all the Geodesists and Surveyors were hoping for, and happy to see. NGS Discs came after that. We can tell from the photo you provided that the Disc you saw was from a period which was after the NOAA Take over. These days, the survey marker has changed a lot, and these brass discs are an older technology. In many cases you will see a rod inside a plastic cover if you are looking at the newest marks... You can be helped by knowing that if you find a Disc and it has US COAST & GEODETIC SURVEY embossed on it, then it was placed in the field more than likely prior to the NOAA Formation in the 1970's. Surely some of the old discs were used afterwards until they were used up. But Knowing the looks of the various discs will help you to know the era your station may have been originally monumented... There is more to the story but that is a good start for now... Those who want to read more can read the Links I left up the thread a ways... Rob

Brian, FWIW, If you can physically confirm that the disc is missing from this location, since it is vertical control, It certainly is worth a not found report at NGS. If you feel you found the location and see the disc is missing you can also call it "Poor" with a note in the descriptive text. If the disc is missing for vertical data, we in the field typically will not consider the location valid for high quality surveys because me must physically rest an instrument on the Survey marker to measure a height or "Orthometric Height" If the disc is missing even if we have the location, the data we collect will not match the datasheet and this will not often comply with other standards we have to meet. Either way, If you choose to file with NGS, the note will tell future Surveyors that there is little left there worth using for most surveys, yet the numbers collected form that location still serve Geodetic studies from the database... HTH, Rob

I am Calm and relaxed John, I even enjoy beer. I just think we can do better than this entire thread has shown, and I feel both you and BlackDog could go a long way towards better futures by choosing a different behavior in your dealings with me. CGS USCGS and USCG&S are all Acronyms for United States Coast and Geodetic Survey. To say the Geodetic Survey didn't exist in 1950 is incorrect. It did, and the words Geodetic Survey were in the name of the agency then as they are now. I left links to the history of the agency that completely support the history and the point I am making. In other words, I can back my claims with facts and I am. Leighhale did not ask anything of the history or the look of the discs in any era like that in the initial question, and it might be safe to assume that they could be completely unaware of any difference at this stage of the game. No Matter, BD poorly covered it in his reply. He basically answered something which wasn't asked and he went about the answer incorrectly. If he would have said "National" along with "Geodetic Survey did not exist in 1950", he would have only been somewhat more correct, but not as correct as he could have been. The truth is, the Geodetic Survey has always existed. It has never not existed in the last 198 years. The Name change came with the NOAA change over in the 70's and so did the look of the Brass discs. Perhaps you have not read the history on the "Geodetic Survey", But I highly recommend it to anyone, as it answers a lot of questions, enmasse. BD's reply was a string of incomplete thoughts at best and to a newcomer, it tells them a lot less that it tells an established member in this forum who has studied the subject awhile. Had BlackDog just said that he could not find any published data for a station in that location in the public database, and that they should write NGS at one of the addresses he could choose, Probably best to ask Cheryl Malone on that one, then inquire if this un-stamped disc at this location was a pending survey mark KE0135 was not what leighhale found: I can surmise without looking at the datasheet that even leighhale sees something odd here, and that is correct. The Photo submitted from the location certainly is indicative of a station monumented well after the 1950's era. Getting back to BlackDog's reply, It was not a correct statement John, and your support of his statement isn't correct either. Sorry John, Check your facts. It answered nothing at best and at worst it answered it completely wrong. It could have been done better a number of different ways. Beyond that John, This is not your Dog. I am happy to debate you on any dog you like though, and I'd keep that thought under your hat, for future reference too. :-) Still your Ball. Rob

Good Luck Brian and thank you for your work on this. Best Regards, Rob

BDT - I wish you would get your facts straight, just because the question referenced a disk monumented in 1950 doesn't matter. We all know the name change to the "NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY" happened quite a few years after that disk ( that was linked to) was monument! That being the case NO disk from 1950 would have that stamped on it. Obviously Someone didn't read the question and answers very carefully, now did they? I hope this clears things up for you.... John To be certain John, I can clear this up for you, BlackDog and anyone else who feels the need to chime in with confusion. This is not something that would qualify you as having a Dog in the fight. Further, the people who know the difference have the advantage over those who do not. Since you seem to feel the need to add your .02, allow me to set this all out in the clear for everyone. Leighhale, having just five posts in the forums here at Geocaching is not someone I would assume as being someone who knows what you know, or what BlackDog thinks he knows, as based on his recent show of attempting to get it right. I believe we can (and should) do better research for those who ask, as the asker deserves correct answers, or at least a warning that certain aspects of the answer may not be correct. If we cannot rise to that level, then perhaps we should refrain form any comment. Saying "we all know" assumes a lot and isn't supportive at all of those who do not. Many many people read this forum without asking you for permission John, so it is safe to say that there is a lot that you and BalckDog cannot control. The askers of most questions are pure and honest, and they deserve good answers. BlackDog made statements which were incomplete thoughts at best and incorrect at worst. BlackDog would have been correct if he had said that the Geodetic Survey had a different name in 1950, but he was blatantly incorrect in saying that it did not exist. Leighhale in no way whatsoever asked any question regarding the 1950 history of this location. BlackDog didn't Ask either, but he used the history of KE0135 to support his theory. I did not attack his theory, I questioned the accuracy of his statement because in or out of context the statement "The Geodetic Survey didn't exist in 1950." is not now nor never was true. As to reading carefully John, sorry, but I am afraid that backfires on you. There is nowhere in the first paragraph from BD to leighhale where the Acronym NGS nor the Name National Geodetic Survey was mentioned to support BD's thinking. In fact, BD never said either NGS or National Geodetic Survey in his entire answer, so without him having done so John, you cannot make your point. Go ahead, Overcook the Spaghetti John, it still won't stick to the wall. You can't take something out of context that has not been put in. By resorting to snickering and snide comments, along with the host of emoticons you feel the need to use in order to convey your bottomless desire to act like a Troll only drives the point home over how much of a childish person you are. I hope you can get a handle on your insecurities soon, because a lot of us here seem less clear all the time about what your motivations seem to be. Both you and BlackDog ought to reconsider your motivations for acting out in this way. It is pretty disrespectful and disruptive to the rest of us. My Motivation has never been to flame you, but rather point out your inappropriate actions, which I disagree with and to ask you to stop. The major difference between most of the rest of the fine people here and I is that I have been the focus of your disrespectful actions, and I have no qualms about calling you on it. Of course I could allow you to bully me and allow you and BlackDog to try to rule how I act, But I am afraid you have chosen a wrong person to bully. If that is your motivation, you have found nothing less than a rival and potential adversary. I would caution you to not follow such a path. I would not blame the other fine people of this forum for not wanting to become involved, or associating with the likes of your troll like actions. In other words, John, BlackDog, Neither of you have any place to act smug here. I have no plans on offering you a free pass to continue acting as you have, So think it over. You can fight or switch, But I can wait you out till you just switch. Mocking me is making you look a lot worse than you hope it will affect me. I haven't acted inappropriately towards anyone, not even you. Forums are most certainly a great place to have a Healthy depate. It is a place where we can learn, evolve and discuss. Please learn to disagree in a more respectful, productive way, or keep your comments to your self. This is not an elementary school playground. Try to be proactive and remember the advice everyone's Grandmothers gave, "If you have nothing nice to say, then keep your comments to yourself". The ball is and will remain in your court, so fly right. Rob

I think emailing Jeremy with your input as Buck has is a great course of action, It is proactive and involving yourself in the process. It gives Jeremy input, which should be pretty valuable to him if you have done a great deal of Benchmark hunting and are aware of the many nuances. I agree also with John, "Going from an organized sport to what?" would be the least desirable option, when we have been saying as a community in different ways that we would benefit from some clearer more refined organization as it is. Less organization would result in something that would have little good come from it. Even a Poker Game has agreed upon, up-front rules. Going without them would simply mean anarchy. That, in my opinion wouldn't be worth the bother. Rob

BD, I read leighhale's original post and they did not ask that question, nor did they imply the year 1950, you did. You didn't ask a question, you made an erroneous statement. Your claim simply isn't supported in or out of context. The punctuation and sentence structure you used made your intention clear. The Geodetic Survey existed in 1950. It is the same geodetic survey that began in 1807 and exists today. As I said, they had a name change but that is the lion's share of the difference as far as these survey markers are concerned. As you would expenct, the Discs themselves reflect the name change... If you were referring to the era from which a particular disc design was in use, you could have been more clear in your communication. In either case, your statement was erroneous, just as the one at the beginning of the thread where you claimed that Most CGS discs are not in the database we use. Perhaps the NGS Database is the cumulative effort of the 200 years this agency has been keeping data, perhaps the database is comprised of the best data they have, and other data which is in there, while shielded from public for various reasons is still a part of that very database. There is no crime in not knowing, No crime in saying you don't know. No crime in only answering what you think you know and leaving what you don't know unanswered. We all have things we can learn everyday. But I don't see any reason to answer in ways that change what is true, or that attempt to teach things that simply are not so. There is also implications in assuming people know what at background you are referring to is all about when you allude to is but don't support it and they are new to this and trying to learn. People read these forums to learn from us and I believe we owe them the best answers we can give. There is no added value, nor anything to be gained in people reading this forum and coming away with false understandings. Shortcuts can be throat cuts... Many people enjoy the background info. It helps them understand the how and why of all this. It is easiest to credit your answers to facts that can support what you say. If you can't, then either say so, or make note that you are postulating or sharing opinion. Opinions don't have to be facts, they just have to be noted as being opinions. NGS is not keeping any secrets, and a lot of the information is available on their website. All that is needed is to take the time and read. Rob

BD, You must obviously be trying to see how often I can sort this out for you. I can tell you that at the beginning of this thread you said "the majority of CGS monumentations are not in the Database we use" If this is so, then "Houston? We Have a Problem!" Now you say the Geodetic Survey didn't exist in 1950... But I am afraid it did. That is just plain not true. The CGS, or CG&S or USCG&S is the Coast and Geodetic Survey. The very same, continually operating government agency it has been for 198 years now, but with a name change in the 1970's when they became a department governed under NOAA... Today it is known as the NGS or the National Geodetic Survey. They never missed a beat and have only ever had their database. Still the agency for geodetic control for nearly 200 years, and the longest operating scientific agency in the US Government. So how would you justify that most of their marks are not in the database we use, when their very database is the database we use? Perhaps the majority of what you may remember about the NGS needs a brush up eh? Perhaps your memory will be refreshed by some of these? http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/PUBS_LIB/geodetic_survey_1807.html http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/PUBS_LIB/geodetic_...eying_1940.html http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/historic/c&gs/geodesy.html Please BlackDog, I feel you see yourself as an authority on this subject and are quick to answer questions for people here, and I respect your desire to help, but in your zeal, you seem to miss some important details. A good bit of what you have told the Leighhale is way super questionable. From the beginning of this thread on up to today, I find what you seem to know about this topic as not terribly accurate or well understood. Thinking back over many conversations over the past year, you have attempted to take me to task many times, over facts that are historically documented and easily researched. Why you seem to enjoy arguing with people who work in the survey field over things they know professionally is a very interesting question. You are even known not to accept the answers that the Chief Geodetic Surveyor of the NGS gives you, but things are what they are never the less, even if you aren't convinced. The Facts again speak for themselves. Please, no haughty smirks are necessary, just simply put your pride aside and do your homework. It's not about any of us, It should be about trying to be as correct as we can. Oh and for clarity, the 2 ways the game is played DOES cause confusion as this thread continues to point out and that is why I raised the comments I made. Though some of you feel violently at odds with me for my opinion, in fact some of you have been a lot less than kind or constructive in your arguments with me, yet I continue to espouse the same sentiment and I am further justified in doing so by the continued confusion. I would like to see Geocaching follow NGS as it would be of no harm at all and a lot less confusing. Rob

Seven is correct. The survey data is more about the position than it is about the lighthouse. This is true of any survey mark. If the position is moved, it is no longer the position. This renders the data bad. Destroying a landmark's position is something NGS has little problem doing as they have little control over landmarks like these. Positional accuracy is the highest priority. This station is destroyed, and since it was a landmark third order station NGS will likely destroy it too. I would send Artman's link as supporting evidence to deb.brown@noaa.gov and ask that the lighthouse be considered a destroyed survey mark, as it no longer occupies it's original location. Good Luck! Rob

I Began 6 months ago and raised the comment several times now that the Benchmark Hunting Community needs to come together, decide how it would most enjoy the future of the hobby, Then petition Jeremy and Geocaching for that outcome. I was met with resistance and wait and see and oh let's just let Jeremy show us... You folks basically voted by remaining abstinent from these discussions and doing nothing. It went on a day or two, most never said a thing and the thread died with little or no follow up. Now you are beginning to see an outcome which is not all that you had hoped. I hope now the folks here will come together and discuss what they would like to have and in a UNIFIED way, petition Jeremy for that. It is not enough to WATCH. You must become your own voice, and then speak with it. I have said all along that the squeaky wheels get greased and that Jeremy watches the Geocaching website thread. Won't you all now consider taking action and becoming an active part of your hobby's future? If not, you will have to settle for what you are given, and remember, Geocaching is growing into aspect of the game that are not centered around this aspect and that will eat up time and take resources, not to mention adding more squeaky wheels to the pool which will lobby against you for the creators time and control. You now even have a little devil in here, a geocacher who has not been an active part of your hobby beyond 15 found Benchmarks in 4 years, nor a contributor of your forum telling you that they think they understand your hobby better than you do. The little devil thinks you are closed minded. But has the Little Devil been here amongst you all along? Do you think the little devil has Jeremy's ear? Do you think the Little devil has your interests in mind? What's in a name, Metaphorically speaking, anyway? The only way Benchmark hunters can be a part of the outcome is if they attempt to become part of the process. I am afraid the wait and see approach is not going to get the job done. So I hope you folks come to your senses and decide what it is you would like to see happen, and then start showing Jeremy what you as a community would most like to see. If you don't, your worst fears could come true. Take it to mind folks, before it is too late and not what you want. I would not wait too long. You may wind up paying for what you used to get for free... Rob

It is a National Park Service Marker, set for a reason they have, and they have the documentation for. They keep track of a number of different things in the Parks. Trails, erosion, special places... It could even be a TBM to aid a local construction detail such as a camp site, campsites often need to be planned where water wont be a problem and the type of camping in them may need further engineering. It is like millions of other survey markers. It means something but only to the people using it. It is not a Geocaching game piece. If you like, You could write to the National Park Service and inquire about it. Be sure you provide them the designation, and the location coordinates when you inquire. Good Luck, Rob

Art, It is easy to do a little research here with the Geocaching search, and you can compare the stations at NGS after you have determined the PID. I looked up a few of the Army Corps Discs I have actually used in the past. The Current NGS Datasheets does still use the Disc Logo in the description on all of them. However as Mike said, I have not seen USE stamped into the disc either. I can say that if the designation said USE that the disc was monumented by the Corps of engineers... If you would like to look at this a bit deeper, simply go to this page: http://www.geocaching.com/mark/nearest.aspx Type in a space the the letters USE into the "By Designation" Box after selecting it, and then choose most any coastal state. The search engine will bring you several pages of Marks with USE in the designation. You will see that the Army used naming conventions which were similar to NGS at times... Names and Level Line Designations, You will also see single numbers, and you will also see elevations stamped into these discs which do not concur with either NGVD 29 or NAVD 88 elevations, but they are what the Corps Leveled at the time they did it using whatever they did. It is important to not that these stations are in the NGS Database as guests. They were not Monumented by NGS or CGS and may not have originally followed their standards. Some may have been submitted to NGS directly by the army, or NGS personnel may have adopted them later. The USE in the designation has usually always meant that it was an Army Corps Disc. I concur with Mike on that, and a call to an old mentor of mine has his agreement with mike as well. He has never seen USE stamped into the disc either, but he remembers USE as almost always being part of the designation if the disc was an Army Disc, and usually in the vicinity of a project or waterway that the Army Corps of engineers was involved with. Again after looking at a few in random state across the nation here, I do find myself wondering why the one you are working has changed designations, since so many are as they have always been. This one looks more like a one off case. I would recommend checking into it with Cheryl. HTH, Rob

Art, The best way to know what actually is the case is to write to Cheryl Malone, and ask her to help research and clarify the change, since the station is locked behind a gate. She will have access to the records that show what did happen. It is hard to ascertain what the disc does say as based on the datasheet. Maybe you can ask permission to see the station and clarify to NGS what is what. As I said earlier in this thread, there are plenty of stations designated USE. I have set over them on more than one occasion. It is the only way to get all the actual facts on the table. It helps keep the guessers at bay as well. Better to go with what can be actually and empirically known. Not that fast and loose stuff some people resort to. Good hunting, Rob

Don't put your arm out of socket there Black Dog... emphasis on idle speculation, and that is about all.

I don't get the "not real" idea...there are gazillions of benchmarks out there, placed by thousands of different people and organizations...the point of them all is to mark the location of a point...sometimes for boundary markers, sometimes for summit markers, sometimes for building projects that never happen, sometimes for marking historic landmarks, sometimes for use in navigation using a GPS...any surveyor coming across a gps-fun benchmark would know that its not the one he/she is looking for, so what harm could come of it? At any rate...the important thing is, congratulations to Spoo for monumenting his own benchmark...I think it's both "real" and real fun! nfa-jamie Fwiw, it is real, real enough. NFA has a legit idea and he is ascribing data to the disc and keeping records for it. It isn't survey data of high quality but they do have GPS derived locations to a limited accuracy, and are not telling a fib. Their express purpose is about a game. They have as much validity as the station Spoo set for himself. Any future surveyor will look up Spoo's station in any way they can, and they will likely find no registered data in any agency where certified data is found, and they will then simply not use it as it won't qualify for use. That does not take away from it being the monument that Spoo set for his Family Legacy on his land. A Surveyor can easily look at these and see what they are and what they are not. I mean, Jamie has been up front. it is about GPS FUN, Not GPS Work Or GPS Accuracy... Y'know? This is a GPS GAME. No harm no foul. I mean, a Surveyor routinely sees a lot of survey markers. We are not confused by them, nor are we overly curious beyond the ones we need to work with right now. That right there disqualifies a lot of survey markers... I think Jaime is going about this just fine. He makes no bones about what his markers are for, and what they are not. His honesty about that is what brings integrity to his game. Rob

Good on you for what you did Spoo, and if you want to kick it up a notch, kc2ixe left a little clue in the NGS forum a couple months ago... http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/iessg/gringo/ that is if you feel like playing with it... Jamie, I have been an advocate of your GPS Fun in the past, and I feel that if you build it, they will come. So Keep Marketing! Rob

The Arrow with the Triangle is embossed and is original to the 1918 monumentation. What I mean is that the arrow is a factory stamping. Let me say this again for clarification. This disc is where it is and has been since 1918. Let me also clarify, (again) that it was unstamped in 1942, and found to be stamped in 1954. CGS personnel took no credit for having stamped it. This station is both a Triangulation Station and a Bench Mark, As it has both kinds of Data Ascribed to it. The Data was collected and submitted to CGS back in the day. It met the requirements. HV7066 *CURRENT SURVEY CONTROL HV7066 ___________________________________________________________________ HV7066* NAD 83(1993)- 38 15 22.05436(N) 076 57 42.61389(W) ADJUSTED HV7066* NAVD 88 - 0.959 (meters) 3.15 (feet) ADJUSTED HV7066 ___________________________________________________________________ It looks as if it may be a RM type disk, but this is not what NGS is using it for. It would not be a reset, as the same monumentation would be rendered destroyed. you would not be able to intermix the data. It would be a start over with a new PID. Those are hard fast rules. The 1942 recovery describes the station, unstamped: HV7066 STATION RECOVERY (1942) HV7066 HV7066'RECOVERY NOTE BY COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY 1942 (WDP) HV7066'THE FOLLOWING DISCREPANCIES WERE NOTED IN THE FIELD WITH THE U.S. HV7066'COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY PUBLICATION DESCRIPTIONS OF HV7066'TRIANGULATION STATIONS, POTOMAC RIVER, PART I, SMITH POINT TO HV7066'PERSIMMON POINT, VIRGINIA AND MARYLAND-- HV7066' HV7066'(1) DELETE ALL REFERENCES TO REFERENCE MARK. THE TREES IN WHICH HV7066'THE MARKS WERE SET HAVE BEEN REMOVED. HV7066' HV7066'(2) 525 FEET N OF PALM GARDEN REFRESHMENT PARLOR, INSTEAD OF A FEW HV7066'HUNDRED FEET ABOVE DANCING PAVILION. HV7066' HV7066'THE STATION IS LOCATED ON THE S SHORE OF THE POTOMAC RIVER AT HV7066'COLONIAL BEACH, VIRGINIA, 525 FEET N OF THE PALM GARDEN HV7066'REFRESHMENT PARLOR ON THE CONCRETE SEAWALK, ABOUT 50 FEET W OF THE HV7066'MEAN HIGH-WATER LINE, AND 3 FEET E OF THE W EDGE OF THE WALK. HV7066' HV7066'THE STATION IS A BRONZE TRIANGULATION DISK OF THE BUREAU OF HV7066'ORDNANCE, NOT STAMPED, SET FLUSH WITH THE CONCRETE SEAWALK. THE HV7066'STATION IS IN GOOD CONDITION. HV7066' HV7066'BOTH REFERENCE MARKS HAVE BEEN DESTROYED. THE REFERENCE TREES HV7066'HAVE BEEN REMOVED. Rob