Need help finding Azimuh mark.

[+VegasCacheHounds]

Well, I found a benchmark nearby, but now I'd like to find the azimuth mark that is refered to in the description. The problem is that the area has changed dramaticaly since the BM description was written.

Is tere any way to figure out where the azimuth mark is supposed to be?

This is the mark in question.

 

Thanks,

Shannon

 

VegasCacheHounds

[Z15]

According to the datasheet there is no distance from the station to the AZI so you will need to use the description. It would be approx. 1/4 to 1/3 mile from the station using the to reach to estimate the distance. The direction is S41°W (+-) from the station mark.

 

GR1923| PID Reference Object Distance Geod. Az |

GR1923| dddmmss.s |

GR1923| SNIPE RM 1 6.540 METERS 11407 |

GR1923| SNIPE RM 2 5.821 METERS 22112 |

GR1923| SNIPE AZ MK 2215354.5

[+Black Dog Trackers]

VegasCacheHounds -

 

Fortunately, the direction from the station toward the AZ mark is almost identical (off by less than a degree) to the direction from the station to RM 2. (This information is in the reference object box you see when you click on "view original datasheet" at the top of the benchmark page.)

 

I'm assuming that all the turns and the corral are gone. If so, you'll have to get a map, maybe a topo map printed from the computer, and attempt to use the driving directions and distances, in the description, backward from the station to find the former position of the corral. This should help establish a distance from the station to the AZ mark. From the station, get a sighting on a distant landmark from the station toward RM 2, and walk the distance to the AZ mark.

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

Original Data Sheet:

Azimuth 2215354.5 degrees or

221.5 degrees,using West as 270 degrees the Azimuth should be South and West 221.5 deg.

at .25,.50,or .75 mi.

They are usually at a convinent location from the bench mark itself.

Create a go to from the Station and the Bearing will be 221.5 + - deg.from the azimuth mark,when you find it.

Since we do not have the equiptment to break the angles down into their fractional elements we have to get as close to as possible.

 

WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS *GEOTRYAGAIN*

 

TAKE PRIDE IN AMERICA

 

http://www.doi.gov/news/front_current.html

 

**1803-2003** "LOUSIANA PURCHASE"

http://www.lapurchase.org

 

"LEWIS AND CLARK EXPADITION"

http://lewisclark.geog.missouri.edu/

Initial Points Page

http://www.True-Meridiansubscribe@yahoogroups.com

[+gnbrotz]

quote:

---

Originally posted by GEO*Trailblazer 1:

Original Data Sheet:

Azimuth 2215354.5 degrees or

221.5 degrees

---

 

Actually, the Azimuth is 221° 53' 54.5". If you round up to 221° 54' it converts to 221.9°. That's only about 35 feet difference at a mile, but depending on the type of terrain you're searching in, it may be far enough away that you won't spot the mark.

 

I'm not trying to nit-pick, but just wanted to clarify the format used on the original datasheets.

 

I have contacted VCH directly with my opinion of where it is. I hope it's there, as it will be my longest-distance "find" yet! To avoid the risk of embarrasing myself in front of the pros, I won't post my ramblings here, unless of course they turn out to be correct.

 

Greg

N 39 54.705'

W 77 33.137'

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

I may be wrong but there is no indication on the original data sheet that broke it down to ('feet and

"seconds) this is a whole degree and a decimal. again I might be wrong but have found many,(references and azimuths)this way,using the Datum that is printed on the map that you are using.

It works for me.(1)NOTE there may be a difference in what you find to be and what is marked down on paper.

(2)But use your readings as the new BASE for for your inquiry.

 

Also make sure your GPS is set to the same datum as the map.

There may be as much as 600 feet errors in some cases.

 

Projecting points:

By MAKING the STATION a GO TO you have a bearing in whole degrees and a distance to the point,much like following the reference arrows it gives you bearing and distance.

If you find and make all the reference marks and the Azimuth waypoints from the Station you will have the current control for that portion of the Quadrangle.I use them for my (Current Controls) in the area I am working.

Trying to explain all this in detail seems to be a challenge.

 

And I am sure the pro's will set the tone right where I fall short.

 

WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS *GEOTRYAGAIN*

 

TAKE PRIDE IN AMERICA

 

http://www.doi.gov/news/front_current.html

 

**1803-2003** "LOUSIANA PURCHASE"

http://www.lapurchase.org

 

"LEWIS AND CLARK EXPADITION"

http://lewisclark.geog.missouri.edu/

Initial Points Page

http://www.True-Meridiansubscribe@yahoogroups.com

[+gnbrotz]

quote:

---

Originally posted by GEO*Trailblazer 1:

I may be wrong but there is no indication on the original data sheet that broke it down to ('feet and

"seconds) this is a whole degree and a decimal.

---

 

GR1923|---------------------------------------------------------------------|

GR1923| PID Reference Object Distance Geod. Az |

GR1923| dddmmss.s |

GR1923| SNIPE RM 1 6.540 METERS 11407 |

GR1923| SNIPE RM 2 5.821 METERS 22112 |

GR1923| SNIPE AZ MK 2215354.5 |

GR1923|---------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

The exact formatting was lost in the copy/paste, but if you go to the original datasheet, the DMS indicators appear directly above the numbers

 

Greg

N 39 54.705'

W 77 33.137'

 

[This message was edited by gnbrotz on August 24, 2003 at 09:18 AM.]

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

I knew I was missing that some where thanks for pointing it out.

But my system still works for me.

I have no way of breaking down the angles with a GPS.Only refering to present oservations.

Never ending learning experience.

And the GEOID differs from the ellipsoid and and........

WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS *GEOTRYAGAIN*

 

TAKE PRIDE IN AMERICA

 

http://www.doi.gov/news/front_current.html

 

**1803-2003** "LOUSIANA PURCHASE"

http://www.lapurchase.org

 

"LEWIS AND CLARK EXPADITION"

http://lewisclark.geog.missouri.edu/

Initial Points Page

http://www.True-Meridiansubscribe@yahoogroups.com

[+FourHighlandsRats]

That station name looked familiar

 

I found that mark a few weekends ago but haven't entered it yet. I am thinking of returning to redo my photos and to get a better description figured out once I get my better compass. I found the orange witness post on the ground nearby and reset it where a temporary wooden post was set.

 

I drove around in circles quite a few times trying to zero in on the azimuth mark. Having the five year old with me didn't let me have a chance to get a good search. The azimuth may be slightly buried in the dirt and bushes. The description puts it at ground level.

 

This mark is very likely to be destroyed in the near future. There is already some preliminary grading performed by the hill for a future housing tract. Only two of the hills that the datasheet refers to as "several" are left in this area.

 

--- J

[+VegasCacheHounds]

Found it!

Thanks to all who helped, expecially Grbrotz. He basically found it without even being there! In an e-mail he sent to me he broke down the entire description with aerial photos and offered a guess at the coordinats. Turns out that he was only off by 53 feet.

Pics of the BM, RMS and AZ will be posted to the BM's page soon.

 

Thanks again,

Shannon

 

VegasCacheHounds

[+gnbrotz]

WOW, I wonder if I can count this as a "find"?

 

I was so excited when I heard back from Shannon that he found the mark. It was equal to actually uncovering the disk itself.

 

Originally posted by gnbrotz:

To avoid the risk of embarrasing myself in front of the pros, I won't post my ramblings here, unless of course they turn out to be correct.

 

In case anyone is curious, and since my theorizing was close to correct, I'll post here exactly what I sent to Shannon (and Four Summerlin Rats too when they expressed interest):

 

Shannon,

I've include a couple of photos for you to refer to. I'll try to explain things as just as I did them. If you need more clarification on anything just let me know.

I started by reading the "To reach" directions, and as you mentioned things have changed quite a bit since then. In this case, the original description takes you past the AZ mark on the way to the station. In my area, this doesn't usually happen.

 

The first thing I did was establish a bearing line that the AZ mark would be on, using info from the original datasheet. I created a waypoint about a mile from the station, at the proper bearing. This gives us a line that the mark should fall on. This is the black line in the aerial photo. I then marked waypoints at .25 miles and .50 miles from the station. I believed that the actual location would fall somewhere between these two marks.

 

Since we couldn't retrace the directions and find the AZ mark "on the way" to the station, I took the directions from the AZ mark to the station, and worked backwards from the station. As I'm sure you know, tri-station coords are usually very accurate, so I felt comfortable doing this.

 

From the AZ mark, the description directs us to continue .4 miles in a NE direction, and then turn N for .3 miles to the station. Again, working backwards, I projected lines exactly S and SW for the proper distances in the indicated directions, to see if any discernable roads/trails/paths were similar. This is the blue line in the aerial photo. As you can see, this puts us a bit away from my projected location, but in the right general direction.

 

I found a pretty easily distinguishable path heading in a NE direction that actually crossed the projected (black) bearing line. I traced it from the area of the .5 mile waypoint up to the raw (blue) bearing/distance directions and found that it was .4 miles, the distance given in the directions. The path then became much less prominent, but by using some squinting and imagination, I continued to trace the path as it turned north towards the station. This is the pink line in the aerial photo. When I pulled it onto topos, this path also met the criteria of running along a gravel pit as it went north toward the station. When I checked the distance for this segment, it was .3 miles, again matching the description. Now I'm starting to believe that the .5 mile waypoint is pretty close to the spot we want. I had one more piece of info to incorporate.

 

The description also tells us the AZ mark is 50' SE of the centerline of the road. I drew another short line, 50' long and at 135 degrees (exactly SE). This is the green line in the aerial photo. I moved it around to where one end seemed to be at the center of the road, and the other just touching our known bearing (black) line. When I did this, it seemed to be indicating the spot right where the .5 mile waypoint was. I believe this is a very good spot to look. As already posted to your thread, AZ marks are mostly at a nice even distance from the station .25, .30, .50 miles, etc. I have yet to find one at a distance of .27, .43 miles, or something similar.

 

As I mentioned, I can't guarantee the results, but based on my experience, such as it is, I think it's a likely spot. I usually get to the area and actually walk the bearing line, if it's not at the "exact" spot, it should be very close. Also a metal detector may be helpful on this one. I don't know how it is in your area, but marks here are typically projecting 1"-3" less than mentioned in descriptions, because of the long time periods usually involved between recorded recoveries. It may be just under the surface, and not readily visible.

 

I'll be very anxious to hear about your next trip out. I'd also like to know what you think about my reasoning/estimation on this, regardless of the outcome of this particular hunt.

 

Now the photos:

 

General overview of site:

 

Closer view of working area:

 

Same photo without red and pink lines. Can you see the path?:

 

Close zoom of final location:

 

BTW, just in case you like my theory, the coords for the ".5 miles" waypoint are N 36° 15.967 W 115° 7.652. If you find the disk, I'd be curious to know how far away from my guess it actually was.

 

Again, please let me know if I can provide any further clarification of my methods

 

As always, any comments on my techniques are welcome.

Edited March 30, 2004 by Tennessee Geocacher

[+Rich in NEPA]

Nice going, Greg! That's a good piece of detective work. I'm impressed! I'm sure your technique will come in handy someday for me, as well. Thanks.

 

Cheers ...

 

~Rich in NEPA~

 

--- A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ---

[MOCKBA]

How exactly you are getting this to work? I tried using the coords in TerraServer

http://terraserver-usa.com/image.aspx?Lon=-115.12182&Lat=36.27124&w=1&ref=G|-115.12182,36.27124 and the image doesn't seem to show the same location. ( I get the actual BM site down at the bottom edge of this image). Any add'l settings I missed to get this to work?

[Z15]

Another thing with Terraserver. If you click on the PRINT link on top page of image, you get a new image suitable for printing. If you wane to see more detail, click on the 11x17 size and add the grid lines.

 

Here is an IMAGE I been playing with to find a BM

 

I only wish they had older images to be able to go back and see some of the landmarks that are long gone, RR station, spur lines etc.

 

Mike

Survey Tech (Retired)

[+gnbrotz]

MOCKBA - Although the images I use are identical to, and originate from Terraserver, I use ExpertGPS software. This alloww me to import, export, and manipulate my waypoints, routes, and tracks. It's a very handy tool when working out an excercise like the one above.

 

Greg

N 39 54.705'

W 77 33.137'