Newbie Benchmark question

[+2MilBrats]

Hi all,

 

I am new to benchmarking and have a question (or two). I went out today and thought I found PU2295. I went back, logged it and then took a look on google maps to see where PU2293 was. I originally thought the tower shown in the link below was PU225 and the coordinates were just off a bit. Now I'm not sure. Thoughts?

 

Google map of two sites

 

Mike from 2MilBrats

Edited September 7, 2006 by 2MilBrats

[+Ernmark]

from Google, it doesn't look like there are any 4 or 6 legged structures nearby. Looks like a newer "1 legged" structure in between, however... Appears to be disturbed ground in both of your marked locations...I wonder if they've been torn down.....

 

..it's always good to double check your descriptions - these towers are often replaced w/ more modern structures..

Edited September 7, 2006 by Ernmark

[Bill93]

The horizontal coordinates for that tower are ADJUSTED, so besides looking like the right object it should lie within your handheld accuracy of 10 feet (on a good day) of the advertised position.

 

This is opposed to SCALED coordinates that somebody read off a map and are routinely off by 100, 200, or x00 feet.

[+2MilBrats]

OK then, would I change it to a DNF, a Mark Destroyed or just write a note? I guess I would also mark PU2293 as the same.

 

2MilBrats

[mloser]

To me they are both definitely destroyed. I would do a field check though. If your GPSr does not point to them, t hen they are gone.

[+2MilBrats]

I'll spin over tommorow at lunch and verify both.

 

2MilBrats

[+Ernmark]

I'll spin over tommorow at lunch and verify both.

 

2MilBrats

... when you're out hunting for marks, don't forget the camera to post in the logs for the gallery - we benchmark hunters live vicariously thru each other's exploits !

[+2MilBrats]

... when you're out hunting for marks, don't forget the camera to post in the logs for the gallery - we benchmark hunters live vicariously thru each other's exploits !

 

In this case, should I post a picture of the ground where the mark should be?

 

2MilBrats

Edited September 8, 2006 by 2MilBrats

[+Ernmark]

In this case, should I post a picture of the ground where the mark should be?

 

2MilBrats

 

..actually, if it looks like there is "evidence" of the former towers, grabbing a pic is not a bad idea (assuming they are not in a "sensitive" area) - if you get hooked on the benchmarking part of GC [i find hunting for the disks more fun than towers, etc (intersection stations)], you may actually want to eventually submit the pics to the National Geodetic Survey & they may remove them from their database as "destroyed"(although it's a good idea to wait awhile to do that - that's the "real" database that CG pulled the info in from). If you browse thru the forums, you'll find a lot of info on logging, etc (check the pinned threads @ the top first) + if you haven't already, check out the FAQ's on Geoaching's Benchmarking home page...

[Bill93]

Actually, quite often there are foundations left after a water tank or radio tower has been taken down. A picture of that with the statement that the coordinates were there is sufficient evidence for an official NGS destroyed report on an "intersection station" like towers. Without that picture, it is harder to get an official "destroyed".

 

On the geocaching site, a careful search for a tall object, with negative results, is sufficent for a destroyed report.

[+2MilBrats]

Well, I marked both PU2295 and PU2293 as destroyed based on nothing being anywhere near where they should be. I still may try to check with the base engineers and see when they may have been torn down.

 

2MilBrats

[mloser]

KW3042 is one that was gone. I took a couple of pics, one with my GPSr showing the GOTO pointing at the location, another farther back to show there is nothing there at all. I submitted this to the NGS and the station was marked destroyed. The pic with my GPSr is a bit too shady. I prefer to get a clearer image, but Deb Brown at the NGS has pretty much started taking my word when I say a mark is destroyed.

[StripeMark]

OK.... as long as we are talking water tanks..... check out the text for PU2290

 

PU2290'THE STATION IS OF STANDARD TANK CONSTRUCTION SUPPORTED BY FOUR

PU2290'STRUCTURAL STEEL LEGS. IT IS PAINTED IN ALTERNATE SQUARES OF

PU2290'RED AND WHITE. THERE IS A REVOLVING AIRWAY BEACON AT THE CENTER

PU2290'AND APEX OF THE TANK PROPER. THE POINT OBSERVED WAS THE BEACON

PU2290'AT THE APEX OF THE STRUCTURE.

PU2290

PU2290 STATION RECOVERY (1961)

PU2290

PU2290'RECOVERY NOTE BY COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY 1961 (NES)

PU2290'THE STATION IS THE WATER TANK, CENTRALLY LOCATED IN THE BASE,

PU2290'270 FEET NORTH OF AVENUE E EAST, 160 FEET WEST OF EIGHTH

PU2290'STREET AND 150 FEET EAST OF SEVENTH STREET. IT IS SUPPORTED

PU2290'BY A 10-LEGGED STEEL STRUCTURE. HAVING AN OVER-ALL HEIGHT OF

PU2290'135 FEET AND THE TOP AND CENTER WAS THE POINT OBSERVED UPON.

 

....and on the geocaching site http://www.geocaching.com/mark/details.aspx?PID=pu2290

there is now an even newer tank there. This can't be the same original water tank.

 

So what's the deal with the 1961 text changing the benchmark?