Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
PFF

Reporting Aerial Intersection Points to NGS

Recommended Posts

I found it interesting that the U.S. Power Squadron has directed its people to discontinue reporting "landmark" stations. Click Here to read the directive.

 

Another directive says that if the last report is POOR or NOT FOUND, additional reports for this mark should not be submitted unless something changes. I was happy to see this, since there are stations where a NOT FOUND is entered, year after year.

 

Since many in our Forums have asked how a sailing organization got involved in benchmark recovery, I'm posting THIS LINK to a history of their program. Read the entire history, first. Then explore specific info about geodetic marks, which can be accessed via the sidebar on the left side of the page.

 

-Paul-

Share this post


Link to post
Another directive says that if the last report is POOR or NOT FOUND, additional reports for this mark should not be submitted unless something changes. I was happy to see this, since there are stations where a NOT FOUND is entered, year after year.

 

I glad to see this too..lets hope the rank and fille pay attention to it.

 

There is one guy in my area who does this. I even went and found many of his not founds only to have him come and report them as not found again. There is no way he is looking for them, as many I found within minutes of arriving at the location from the very visible witness post.

Edited by Z15

Share this post


Link to post

Watch for an immediate improvement in the quality of USPSQD reports. Casey has been working behind the scenes to address these concerns, and I've noticed a big difference in what has been reported during January in North Carolina.

 

Instead of the "visit the same old stations" reports, January entries in NC are for marks which have not been reported by anyone in the past 20 to 30 years. Also, there is more "text" in the reports--beyond the usual RECOVERED AS DESCRIBED.

 

The PWR SQD website directs members to go beyond the basic "Not Found" entry, by reporting what they thought might have changed. There is a delegation of authority for submission review, to make sure reports are relevant and are not just "points builders".

 

It is the responsibility of the District Chairman and the Area Representative to monitor the frequency of these recoveries and attempt to control the submission of multiple reports on the same marks.

 

These changes are a move in the right direction, and our group should take note. For reports dated 2007 and later, we hopefully will not have to speculate on whether the observer even got out of his/her vehicle. For reports from 2006 and earlier, I recommend that we accept the possibility that these may be a lesser quality; and that instead of grumbling about the pre-2007 reports, we work quietly to help clean up the database--while being glad that there has been a improvement in the PWR SQD's reporting.

 

-Paul-

Edited by PFF

Share this post


Link to post

The request for not reporting landmark stations seems to jibe (that is a nautical term in honor of the USPS) with what Deb has told me repeatedly--these marks simply don't get used any more. She has told me she marks them as destroyed when applicable just to keep the database neat.

Share this post


Link to post

The request for not reporting landmark stations seems to jibe......

 

Nautical term noted, and appreciated! B)

 

Paul,

Radioman First Class

U.S. Coast Guard

1964-1968

 

Commercial Radio Telegraph Operator

Ship-to-Shore Station KLC

1969-1976

Share this post


Link to post

The request for not reporting landmark stations seems to jibe......

 

Nautical term noted, and appreciated! B)

 

Paul,

Radioman First Class

U.S. Coast Guard

1964-1968

 

Commercial Radio Telegraph Operator

Ship-to-Shore Station KLC

1969-1976

Gosh - I hope GEOCAC doesn't lose you to USPSQD! B)

Share this post


Link to post

One of my favorite movie quotes has a nautical theme - "Front, bow. Back, stern. If ya don't get it right, squirt, I throw your a** out the little round window on the side." (Can you name that movie?)

 

Paul,

My brother was in the Navy at about the same time. Did you know him? Name was Tom. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Gosh - I hope GEOCAC doesn't lose you to USPSQD!

----Ernmark

LOL! No chance of that happening. Not only can I not afford one of their fancy yachts--I could not even afford to put fuel in it! I overhead one fellow saying that it cost him over $10,000 for a trip down the Inland Waterway.

 

My brother was in the Navy at about the same time. Did you know him? Name was Tom.

---mloser

I sure did. Please tell Tom I said hello! ;)

 

-Paul-

Share this post


Link to post

Not only can I not afford one of their fancy yachts--I could not even afford to put fuel in it! I overhead one fellow saying that it cost him over $10,000 for a trip down the Inland Waterway.

 

-Paul-

Hey - you should've gotten to know him...he'd come in quite handy when you look for EX0170 ..watch out for the shoals, tho'!

 

Movie answer - would that be Jaws? ("I'm not going to waste my time arguing with a man who's lining up to be a hot lunch.")

Share this post


Link to post
Hey - you should've gotten to know him...he'd come in quite handy when you look for EX0170 ..watch out for the shoals, tho'!

Actually, I already know a benchmark hunter to whom I can delegate EX0170:

US COAST GUARD, Manteo NC

 

PFF

Share this post


Link to post

Paul,

 

Well, $10,000 for a BOAT would be pretty expensive, at least to me, but I can't even imagine $10,000 for FUEL! Was it a cruiser class or only destroyer?

 

Tom said he doesn't remember you. He was the one in the white hat though, so he wasn't surprised you remembered him.

 

Ernmark, you got it!

Share this post


Link to post

Tom said he doesn't remember you. He was the one in the white hat though, so he wasn't surprised you remembered him.

 

 

Yeah! Tom! Wore the white hat and blue chambray shirt. Pants with the button fly and square patch pockets. He was one of the good guys. We knew that because only the good guys wear white hats. ;)

 

Glen FTG2

1964 - 1968

USS Newport News CA148

USS Perry DD844

USS Harwood DD861

Share this post


Link to post

Hey - you should've gotten to know him...he'd come in quite handy when you look for EX0170 ..watch out for the shoals, tho'!

 

The extreme North and extreme West benchmark for my county is DE5247 located at 28°23'37.52"N 178°17'38.14"W. It's not on the GC.com database. It doesn't even show up on the Google maps. Google Earth shows the location. That’s going to take more than a small boat to find. That’s 1558 miles from my house. It might be awhile before I go after that one.

Share this post


Link to post

Back to the question of reporting intersection (landmark) stations.

 

Does NGS not want reports at all?

 

If these stations are truly no longer used, maybe they should be demoted. Not purged from the database exactly, just retired to some legacy category where the location may be adjusted as part of an grand readjustment scheme, but that no new reports will be accepted and the textual reports will be archived as of a certain retirement date.

 

I, for one, would be sorry to see these venerable stations go. I think of landmarks like WASHINGTON MONUMENT 1913, CHRYSLER BUILDING, AND COIT MONUMENT.

 

-ArtMan-

Share this post


Link to post

..also by looking for these, we're doing a service by reporting destroyed tanks, etc. & cleaning up the database in the process..

 

Edit 1

 

..but in re-reading the directive apparantly given to USPSQD mentioned in the first post...sure looks like NGS doesn't want them..

 

Edit 2

 

..or was the request to drop intersection stations made to stave off recoveries being made every 12 months on the same stations over & over again?

Edited by Ernmark

Share this post


Link to post

I guess I have the same questions Ernmark does. I look for intersection stations for two reasons...If it's not there, I can have Deb destroy it and clean up the database. If it is there, then I can log it and it's not an "unfound" benchmark on my personal list.

 

I am also wondering now if the NGS would really prefer that these stations NOT be reported, unless it is to destroy them. Frankly, I've found more intersection stations to destroy than I do to log anyway.

Share this post


Link to post

I have emailed Deb asking her what we should do. It may be a few days but hopefully we will get the final word from her on this.

Share this post


Link to post

The problem I see with reporting on intersection stations is that its often hard to determine precisely if the station is the exact same one as was observed. Bldg's get remodeled, towers changed, flag poles replaced, beacon lights replaced, spires blow down, etc.

 

I know of several in my area that appear to be the originals but they are not. And only someone in the area would likely ever know that.

 

For instance, there is a water tower that has been reported as in good condition by the power sqd guys when in reality its not the original tank at all. It was built in circa 2000 to resemble the original and was built adjacent to the original which was demolished when the new one went on line. Its located in a Nat't Historic Park and the NPS forced the city spend lots of money to replicate the original.

Edited by Z15

Share this post


Link to post

Z15,

 

I agree! Some of these seem like no-brainer recoveries but many of them take knowledge or research that the casual observer might not have. I haven't had much trouble with water towers, although I recently got one marked destroyed that was similar to your situation--the new one was built beside the location of the old one. It was pretty obvious when standing 50 feet away from it, both from the GOTO on my GPSr and the description, but the tower had most recently been reported as Good.

 

To me antennas are the hardest. To be completely certain that it is the same one you pretty much have to go to the base of the antenna and verify that it is in the correct location, as well as trying to figure out how old it is. Only after visiting KW3128 did I realize that the tower was new, and had been placed either right where the old tower was or just beside the old one. Evidence of the old guy wires were one of the clues that I found when I was there. I visited KW3051 and KW3050 three different times until I talked to the engineer and he confirmed that two of the four towers were the original ones and the ones I wanted. Neither description fit the towers precisely, although the coords were close enough to make me wonder. I was afraid that new towers had been built beside the old bases however, until I confirmed with the station.

 

Deb gladly takes the "destroyed" statuses--she says she likes getting them because it helps clean up her database.

Share this post


Link to post

Being from the dark side, I checked my caching partner's ten-mile list, and found that there are three new caches in Liberty State Park in Jersey City. Where, nearby, I thought, would be a good place to go benchmarking? (Getting in practice for the upcoming contest.) We've already done some benchmarking in Jersey City. But, Lo and Behold! No one from gc.com has ever gone benchmarking in Bayonne! All the really good ones are long disappeared. :D Has anyone ever found a Harbor Lines disk?!? There seem to have been a number set along the Passaic, but none seems to have survived. There were at least 24 Reference Marks set for Harbor Line 1913. Of course, Newark Bay has changed considerably since 1913.

Perhaps, we should be searching for the tanks that are long gone, but we decided to have some fun. Church spires that have not been logged since 1934. No one has looked for the old Bayonne City Hall spire since 1934??? Okay, there are a few interesting disks to look for too.

Share this post


Link to post

I got an answer from Deb yesterday about intersection stations:

 

Hi again Matt,

 

Yep,...we don't need information on intersection stations or landmark stations any longer, but I haven't been enforcing it. If I had my druthers, I'd prefer folks not send them to me, however I won't turn away that data. Since the advent of GPS, the only purpose they serve is for historical reference.

 

deb

 

This explains the USPSQD memo...

 

I guess that as responsible NGS-reporting citizens we should stop reporting them to her, especially since she has the task of dealing with the submissions. I will continue to report destroyed stations though to keep the database cleaned up.

Share this post


Link to post

 

I guess that as responsible NGS-reporting citizens we should stop reporting them to her, especially since she has the task of dealing with the submissions. I will continue to report destroyed stations though to keep the database cleaned up.

 

Thanks for the update. That sounds like a reasonable approach--only report intersection stations that are destroyed.

Share this post


Link to post

HUA!

The (NGS-centric) benchmark hunters oath should start "First, do no report that Deb prefers you not do, ..."

Needless to say, "seventhings" is terribly depressed by this news (but he will comply).

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

×
×
  • Create New...