One More I Need Help With.

[WVski]

Since its winter and some of you guys cannot get out and hunt yourselves.

 

Maybe you can get your benchmarking jitters out by helping me out.

You all helped me out with JW0849. Now i have another one.

 

JX0218

 

Im having trouble finding out which switch in the track they are talking about.

The coords point me to a switch further down the track (I'll call this one Switch . But the description points towards a switch a little closer (Switch A). They are within a quarter mile of each other too.

 

If i go 200 feet north of Switch A, The railroad runs parallel with a huge rock cliff, that stretches for 500 feet or so. 200 feet north of Switch B, there are numerous boulders that could have been moved during the reconstruction of the RR.

 

The railroad has been moved from Switch B on down. The track now crosses the River right below Switch B. There is no longer a track there, just a one lane dirt road.

 

Any help would be great.

 

Thanks

Edited January 21, 2006 by WVski

[+GeckoGeek]

When dealing with SCALED coordinates, the description should be given preference. There are a number of errors that can creep in. First, the description it used to find a point on a map and that is translated into the coordinates. Who knows if the located themselves accurately on the paper or if that feature was accurately placed when the map was drawn. What's accurate about this mark is it's height.

 

From the description, I don't think this is set in just a "bolder" but in a rock face that would be a rather permanent mark. That rock cliff sounds like a possibility.

 

Note that it was set in the 30's and hasn't been recovered since. Personally I'd search both places. If it is on the cliff, it could be covered with erosion from above. Good luck.

[Photobuff]

My success with railroad related benchmarks is so dismal, I hesitate to say anything at all. Combining that with the fact that the UGS themselves couldn't find it in 1957, it doesn't look promising. My belief is that the mark on the map comes first, followed by scaling of the coordinates. Around here, the marks are always on the correct side of the road and about the right number of feet from other reference points. Thus, I trust the mark and it's relationship to other objects, more than the lat and long; problem is, the topo map I looked at doesn't show your mark at all. If you can find one that does, that might be a starting point- scale your own coordinates. Otherwise, maybe assume the rail bed hasn't changed much, and just cover the area at the stated height over the tracks. A metal detector might help to make quicker work of it, though they can be troublesome when used on dense rock. I also use the aerial photos from the net to measure distances and come up with probable coordinates. The problem with that approach is the distances were usually in tenths of a mile, and will only get you within 300' or so.

[Bill93]

Don't trust scaled coordinates.

 

When I look at the map I get a discrepancy in the distance along the RR from Philippi to Berryburg Junction, about 2.8 miles instead of 2.0+0.5 from the data sheet. You say the RR has been moved a little. Does it seem that the old route would have been shorter (not usually)?

 

Those distances give you some wiggle room in picking the location. Pick the switch that gets you to the rock cliff. Then ask yourself if that switch was where the switch was in 1933.

 

The overriding thing in the description is that it has to be on a rock ledge and that hasn't moved unless serious excavation was done. So go to where there is a ledge and if it isn't bare, use a metal detector. A metal detector is the one advantage you can have over the 1957 crew.

 

Also think about the elevation of the track. Is there anywhere it is on bedrock that would give you a reference level, or is it on old ballast, or has it been redone with a huge pile of new ballast? It could be the same elevation as 1933, raised, or lowered to suit their purposes, but more have been raised than lowered. This will guide your choice of which rock ledges to search.

Edited January 21, 2006 by Bill93

[mloser]

It is very obvious that that railroad has been changed significantly since 1933. Take a look at Philippi 1904 and you can see where the tracks used to run. However, there is no indication of the mark because it was set after the map was printed. On that map it appears that the new line splits off at about the "F" in GRAFTON, along the tracks. One thing that I notice is that there was always a road to the east of the tracks, so creating the road probably did not destroy the mark, as it already existed.

 

I agree with the others that your bet bet is to look along the rock face of the cliff. You are looking at a point about 2 feet higher than the old track level and there will be a shelf of rock sticking out somewhere that the mark is on. As GeckoGeek mentioned it might be covered with dirt and erosion from above.

 

You probably should also ignore the references to the switch. Since the track layout was changed significantly there is little hope that the sidetrack is in the same place. Bear in mind that you are looking for a sidetrack, not a siding or a branch. A sidetrack is a parallel track used for one train to pass another.

 

Also note the measurement of 10 yards from the track centerline. That is enough distance to put the mark across a road, although it seems odd that there is no mention of a road.

 

Finally, though the coords put the mark along the tracks just north of where it splits away from the road, I am pretty sure that isn't likely, since my guess is that the railroad at that location is newer than 1933. Maybe that is why the NGS didn't find it in 1957. I would look both along the newer track, especially if that is where the rock face is, and south of there along the road if the rock face is there. Your key is the rocks. You are NOT looking for a boulder. You are looking for a shelf that sticks out from the bottom of the face. The mark will be mounted horizontally also.

[+GeckoGeek]

Someone once talked about "thinking like a surveyor". I'd like to know how the height of the mark is determined. I thought it was by sighting to other benchmarks in the area. If so, and one could guess what marks were used, then it would help to guess where this mark might be located so as to have a view of a pole placed on top of the other mark.

 

Also, am I reading the datasheet right in that this mark could be as far as 180 meters away from the coordinates?

[mloser]

It definitely helps to think like a surveyor, although sometimes that is easier said than done. I am going to let a surveyor explain how they use the marks, but for the most part it isn't important that they be similar in elevation. It is more important that they be usable, which means first of all findable. I have found some common threads among a lot of the marks I find... they are in the center of a curve, at a highpoint of a hill, at a low point of a cut, near a telephone pole, in an obvious rock or rock outcrop, etc. It was obvious that the team who set the mark wanted it to be found at some point and were attempting to apply a method to the setting of the marks. On railroad the marks are on bridges, on obvious rock outcrops, at mile markers, at telegraph poles or mid-way between telegraph poles, and near roads if possible.

 

Here are a couple of rock out crop marks I have found

 

KW0819 is on a very noticable rock near the tracks. It is a distinct outcrop.

 

KW0829 was not as easy. It was under a few inches of dirt, but I was able to guess with good accuracy what outcrop it was on and actually dug it out with a handy stick (I hadn't brought a shovel).

[GH55]

JX0218"

 

"DESCRIBED BY NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY 1957

 

How was it that NGS both wrote the description and did not find the mark in 1957?

 

It seems to me that either the description was written in 1933, or NGS actually found the mark in 1957.

 

Maybe there is a clue to be found, or an approach, based on that apparent error.

[+GeckoGeek]

they are in the center of a curve,

I assume you mean it's at the center of the arc rather then the center point of the circle the arc defines.

 

Would I be wrong in guessing that it tends to be on the outside of the curve so it would have a better sight-line down the roadway in both directions?

[Bill93]

Straight line visibility usually isn't a problem on a RR since the curves are pretty gentle and the sights are not long.

 

The leveling crew made as many setups as needed to get from one BM to the next, with each sight distance (in 1934) not exceeding 150 meters. Later that distance was reduced when it was found that it helped accuracy.

 

The procedure (simplified) is to put a rod on the first mark, set up the level about 300 ft away and read the rod through the telescope, then turn and take a reading on a rod set on something solid about 600 ft from the start. Then you move the level to 900 ft, and take readings on the rod at 600 and at 1200 ft. Repeat until you reach the next BM. Then you add all the backsight readings and subtract all the foresight readings and that tells you how much difference in elevation there is.

 

There are endless precautions they took to reduce random and systematic errors in order to get the best results possible. It makes interesting reading in my old surveying textbook (Davis, Foote, & Kelly 1966).

Edited January 22, 2006 by Bill93

[mloser]

GH55,

 

My thinking about these odd descriptions that have a mark monumented but not described is that they were in some non-standard format until they were described later by the NGS. So this mark existed but only got into the NGS database (it could have been computerized but may only have been a paper database in 1957) only when the NGS party went to look for it, taking the original description along, and then could not find it. After the recovery the mark's description was entered, along with the not found status. This means it is quite possible that the NGS was not even the party that failed to recover the mark. It may only reflect the initial entry into the database. I have seen marks that have the reporting agency as NGS but in the description it says "report submitted by US Power Squadron" or some other agency.

 

GeckoGeek,

 

Yes, they have been on the outside of curves... the arcs of curves, although they are simply described as being on the outside of the curve. More often they are on the top of a rise, again to provide visibility. The ones located on the top of a rise are rarely described as being such. That is just something I have found to be the case.

[+GeckoGeek]

The leveling crew made as many setups as needed to get from one BM to the next, with each sight distance (in 1934) not exceeding 150 meters.  Later that distance was reduced when it was found that it helped accuracy.

Thanks. I thought they used sightings, but wasn't sure of the details. But the point is the mark is going to be somewhere "line-of-sight friendly". One does have to account for new structures or vegetation that might have grown too high since the mark was set, but the guys aren't going to make this more difficult then they have to. That too is a clue.

Edited January 22, 2006 by GeckoGeek

[GH55]

It may only reflect the initial entry into the database. I have seen marks that have the reporting agency as NGS but in the description it says "report submitted by US Power Squadron" or some other agency.

 

I have seen similar reports, but I do not recall seeing another agency credited with the first Station Description while NGS is credited with the recovery report. In fact, I don't believe I have seen a description with the same date as a "Mark Not Found" report. That is why it looks suspiciously like a transcription error to me. One of many plausible explanations would be that the "Mark Not Found" is an erroneous entry.

 

That would still only be a clue.

[Z15]

It was standard operating procedures (SOP) to repeat original description even if the mark was not found and often it was just repeated from the original field description. Just a way they did it for a period of years.

 

Remember these were entered into a database within the last 20 yrs. The people entering the data were just stenographers and were not proofreaders. I think someone said it was project done by a federal correctional facility.

 

No need to think like a surveyor as most of this work was done in those days by persons who were not surveyors. The supervisors were engineers and many of the workers were not skilled, learned on the job.

Edited January 22, 2006 by Z15

[WVski]

The switch A i am talking about is right across from the word MERIDEN, directly even with the 10' line on that map that Mloser provided. The rock cliff is due north of that switch between the switch and the R in Grafton.

 

The track has been raised a little bit. And the old track that ran up to the mine is no longer there...

 

The other switch isnt shown on this map. It starts about the F in grafton and runs back towards MERIDEN. But it only runs for about 100 feet or so.

 

So you all still think it is in the Rock Cliff? A big piece of the cliff has fallen off. Its about the size of a full size truck. And it is real difficult to determine exactly where the switch was located to get an acutal measurement from it. But it looks like that piece of rock is real close to being 200' past the switch.

 

Also, the track was raised, it looks like maybe 4 or 5 feet high. The old rail bed is still very visible where the switch ran back to the mine, but like i said, it looks like about 5 feet lower than the existing track. So the BM is probably covered up by a couple feet of dirt and gravel.

 

Thanks for the help though.

[holograph]

My recommendation is to look near (N 39 10 25.8 W 80 01 41.5) or (N 39 10 18.4 W 80 01 40.3). Notice that the easternmost track is the former mainline, and the mark should be located 10 yards east of it.

 

 

edit: revised the suggested coordinates due to misregistration of the original aerial photo. The aerial photo was also updated.

Edited January 22, 2006 by holograph

[+GeckoGeek]

No need to think like a surveyor as most of this work was done in those days by persons who were not surveyors. The supervisors were engineers and many of the workers were not skilled, learned on the job.

OK maybe not the surveyor, but at least think like the guys doing the work. They have a job to do but they are not going to make it harder on themselves then necissary. Just another data point to help determine the most probable placement.