Is there a Universal Position Format?

[+A.T.Hiker]

Hello folks. I was curious if anyone with police, fire, EMS, or any kind of rescue operations experience knows if there is a universal position format. Yesterday, I came upon a serious back country injury while hiking a pretty remote park in New York State, and rescue was needed. Fortunately, 911 was available via cellular network, but describing the location in situations like this can be challenging and they initially weren't even sure which county we were in. I provided the GPS coordinates and that seemed to be helpful for them to forward the call on to local personnel, who arrived surprisingly quick given our remote location, thankfully. But I know there are several position formats available, and it got me to thinking how it could lead to unneeded confusion and delay during a crisis.

 

For example, you can do:

 

DD MM.MMM

DD.MMMMM

DD MM SS.S

There is also UTM and many others available to select on Garmin units. I provided DD MM.MMM for dispactch because that's what the Oregon defaults to.

 

Here's an example:

 

The north coordinate N41 07.250 is vastly different from N 41.07250 which is also different from N41 07' 25.0" yet I've seen them all used and they contain the same string of seven numeric characters. If I give dispatch N 41 07.250, and it gets entered as N 41.07250, that could be a big problem as one is base 60 and the other base 10. Any one of those could be mis-interpreted or mis-entered by rescue personnel leading to potentially serious location errors.

 

I'm really curious based on my experience yesterday and would love to have this information handy for any future outdoor adventures. Hope I'm not drumming up redundant discussion points, but feedback is much appreciated on this issue. Thanks.

[+coggins]

In the US, USNG is the standard:

http://www.esri.com/news/arcuser/0705/usng1of2.html

 

Your Garmin will convert for you.

Edited July 27, 2013 by coggins

[7rxc]

...snip

 

But I know there are several position formats available, and it got me to thinking how it could lead to unneeded confusion and delay during a crisis.

 

For example, you can do:

 

DD MM.MMM

DD.MMMMM

DD MM SS.S

There is also UTM and many others available to select on Garmin units. I provided DD MM.MMM for dispactch because that's what the Oregon defaults to.

 

... snip

 

Any one of those could be mis-interpreted or mis-entered by rescue personnel leading to potentially serious location errors.

 

I'm really curious based on my experience yesterday and would love to have this information handy for any future outdoor adventures. Hope I'm not drumming up redundant discussion points, but feedback is much appreciated on this issue. Thanks.

 

This can and has been a problem in the past. Not so much with the SAR and other groups, but sometimes between callers and call takers. Best solution is for people to be aware of the possibilities that you have outlined.

Since various groups use different systems for coordinates, the best solution is for everyone to know those 4 listed and how to properly express the one you use most, and recognize the others. That US national standard is really just the UTM/MGRS with some rules for 'how to', so it isn't a separate system per se, but is a standard approach. GPS units of course don't really care about the display format, the accuracy is the same, but they can be quite fussy about the datum used. During search ops, the command team usually specifies what is in use for all across the board for the operation, including local declination for compass work. Often the format is in UTM format to better interlink with map use, but even that is questionable sometimes depending on the age of the map. Locally here there can be significant differences between the map and GPS readings during plotting. One has to be aware of that, but even then it can be up to 2 to 3 hundred metres. This comes from drawing maps based on old survey data and aerial photo work. New generation maps are much better, but old base maps still exist way back. Be clear I'm not talking about datum errors either, just in drawing. Of course that only affects plotting data onto or from maps. The map is skewed, so the conversions don't work. It isn't so bad with going from NAD27 to WGS84 within the GPS, but working from map to GPS and vice versa can be significant since the calculators cannot handle the drawing faults. You can still work with what you see though. I try to get people to always be descriptive of what they see as well as what they read from map or GPS.

 

I will say that on a similar tack, radio operations have a standard rule. Once you start interagency communications, all the 'codes' and jargon are supposed to go out the window and plain language take over.

In aviation, the presence of a foreign language on the radio should trigger a switch to English as a standard.

Failure to do so can and has had serious results. Same idea. I'm thinking that there should be a world standard for position, since every nation having one that is different can be confusing. That US HSA edict could work, since it is likely tied to the WGS84 and GPS standard approach. But it will take time to implement World Wide. And there were always people who like to do it their own way regardless.

 

So.. just make sure that whatever location information you provide is accurate and clear. It's when that communication of information takes place that errors creep in. Remember that game about whispering a message to

the person next to you around a table... well it's the same thing, check and confirm is the only way to get it right Speak clearly, enunciate, use proper terms and state the format... from our end, we try to plot all the common 4 formats, much of the time the right one will stand out. And be familiar with the other systems so you recognise them if taking information for relay.

 

Too early for me I guess.

Doug 7rxc

[+coggins]

...snip

 

But I know there are several position formats available, and it got me to thinking how it could lead to unneeded confusion and delay during a crisis.

 

For example, you can do:

 

DD MM.MMM

DD.MMMMM

DD MM SS.S

There is also UTM and many others available to select on Garmin units. I provided DD MM.MMM for dispactch because that's what the Oregon defaults to.

 

... snip

 

Any one of those could be mis-interpreted or mis-entered by rescue personnel leading to potentially serious location errors.

 

Case in point highlighted above in red.

[+T.D.M.22]

Nothing in life is universal. Except maybe death and taxes.

 

If you communicate properly it really shouldn't make a difference. For example when saying

 

N 50° 04.719 W 110° 48.916

 

Saying "North fifty degrees zero four point seven one nine minutes", or even "fifty degrees, Oh four point seven one nine" will get it across, as DD MM.MMM

But if you say

"fifty, oh, four, seven one nine" it won't be clear what format it is in, and it will leave the SAR techs to guess, or rely on other info such as landmarks or just plain tracking, by which time you might end up spending another couple hours or days lost instead of waiting a half hour for a helicopter ride.

[+Viajero Perdido]

I don't have a definitive answer either.

 

But I think it's important to be clear, whatever format you use. They can convert.

 

N 5 0 space 0 4 point 7 1 9

W 1 1 0 space 4 8 point 9 1 6

W G S 84

 

Don't forget the datum!

 

An emergency is no time to be fussing with format conversions, when you might be distracted and prone to making mistakes. (And re the link above, why should I use a format that's requested for DHS grant submissions, of all things?)

 

PS:

Edited July 27, 2013 by Viajero Perdido

[7rxc]

Nothing in life is universal. Except maybe death and taxes.

 

If you communicate properly it really shouldn't make a difference. For example when saying

 

N 50° 04.719 W 110° 48.916

 

Saying "North fifty degrees zero four point seven one nine minutes", or even "fifty degrees, Oh four point seven one nine" will get it across, as DD MM.MMM

But if you say

"fifty, oh, four, seven one nine" it won't be clear what format it is in, and it will leave the SAR techs to guess, or rely on other info such as landmarks or just plain tracking, by which time you might end up spending another couple hours or days lost instead of waiting a half hour for a helicopter ride.

 

If one wants to get 'techy', then the correct way would be to use international phonetics.

There really isn't a 'point' character, it's a decimal. Also digits are spoken individually, no combined numbers.

 

Your example would be ""North five zero degrees zero four decimal seven one nine minutes" and then the longitude similarly. Of course that is radio procedure, and is designed to make poor contact more reliable. The norm would be to use international pronunciation formats as well, each word has a unique variation to reduce mistakes. I myself would not be as concerned with form IF comm was very clear and the check readback was correct. Still the process is widely understood by emergency communications personel and it does make a difference when you get as close as possible. Getting that decimal in the right place helps ID which format you are into, as does things like degrees, minutes, seconds and other details like Hemispheres N / S E / W, even that pesky - sign when using that convention for west or south.

 

Doug 7rxc

[+Panda Inc]

Nothing in life is universal. Except maybe death and taxes.

 

If you communicate properly it really shouldn't make a difference. For example when saying

 

N 50° 04.719 W 110° 48.916

 

Saying "North fifty degrees zero four point seven one nine minutes", or even "fifty degrees, Oh four point seven one nine" will get it across, as DD MM.MMM

But if you say

"fifty, oh, four, seven one nine" it won't be clear what format it is in, and it will leave the SAR techs to guess, or rely on other info such as landmarks or just plain tracking, by which time you might end up spending another couple hours or days lost instead of waiting a half hour for a helicopter ride.

+1

[mlbpc]

UTM, Degree. decimal, D,M,S. It will vary from agency to agency. Our team uses UTM and D,M,S. UTM for the simplicity of plotting on a map and it provides a "Grid" for searches. Other components, specifically the helo pilots use D,M,S. It's all trivial as long as the correct DATUM is given. MOST of our maps still utilize NAD 27 and as pointed out it can be a few hundred meters off. Depending on the terrain and brush cover will determine how critical that is.

[+gelfling6]

The local Police usually give info in DD MM SS.S , as they had with a recent accident where the driver left the vehicle, and the closest cell tower ping showed their rough location, and as well when we had a private plane crash on a nearby mountain, and the cell phone ping was given for the rescue workers. There are ways to re-calculate to the other formats, but I haven't figured them all.. I gave the police a DD MM.MMM format once, and they couldn't recompute between decimal minutes to minutes/seconds, so the D-M-S format which fairly universal.

 

I never figured why Geocaching was just as degree-minutes, but then again, we are supposed to be using our own eyes to look as well.

[7rxc]

The local Police usually give info in DD MM SS.S , as they had with a recent accident where the driver left the vehicle, and the closest cell tower ping showed their rough location, and as well when we had a private plane crash on a nearby mountain, and the cell phone ping was given for the rescue workers. There are ways to re-calculate to the other formats, but I haven't figured them all.. I gave the police a DD MM.MMM format once, and they couldn't recompute between decimal minutes to minutes/seconds, so the D-M-S format which fairly universal.

 

I never figured why Geocaching was just as degree-minutes, but then again, we are supposed to be using our own eyes to look as well.

As a cacher you can use the format you want to, as it suits you. Geocaching uses DD MM.mmm because it is the most common default setting on GPS's out of the box. If you look at a cache page listing you get DD MM.mmm and UTM coordinates on the page top, with 'other conversions' link for others. So you do have options.

I've found caches that require working with many coordinate formats the last few years. Mostly puzzles of course... so I'm already prepared for that.

 

As for outside of Geocaching, usually we learn to use what the callout agency is using at command level.

Sometimes that is a problem as has been mentioned, where there are some serious differences in datum or equipment. I've been leaning to always using WGS84 for a datum since it avoids a lot of the problems there and is the native datum for GPS. We too have a lot of NAD27 maps in this area, but they are disappearing. My take is that any conversions are best done at the base where people are not fighting the elements and may likely have computers... field conversions often go wanting due to field conditions, training level etc. How is taught, but not well remembered due to lack of use / practice and distraction. Just an opinion. I can function in many of the common forms equally well, just like my GPS. FizzyCalc is a handy tool for this, but for some conversions to map use, I found the map is often the problem in some areas / age of maps creation etc. That is why the conversions should be done consistently and under good working conditions. Hard to convince people that their maps are not what they could be... thankfully new mapping is helping, if it gets to this area... or yours.

Search groups should try calibrating their conversion factors during training over their normal operating area.

Sometimes it is quite surprising how 'off' they are, and it isn't just the different datum either.

Also a good idea to use training to map communication 'sweet spots' and recording them, since they can take time to locate otherwise.

 

Doug 7rxc

[+paulmc]

Recognizing and converting between the formats is pretty basic stuff for people who work with maps, so just get your decimals in the right places, know what half of the planet you're on, and use WGS84, which is a worldwide system. NAD27 is only for North America. Not that there aren't reasons to use other coordinate systems, you just need to know what you're doing.

[39_Steps]

Recognizing and converting between the formats is pretty basic stuff for people who work with maps, so just get your decimals in the right places, know what half of the planet you're on, and use WGS84, which is a worldwide system. NAD27 is only for North America. Not that there aren't reasons to use other coordinate systems, you just need to know what you're doing.

Basic it may be, but getting decimals in the right places may not be all that easy for either the person in need of help or the typical person who answers an emergency call. Neither person may be a frequent reader and contributor to gps "technology" forums.

 

In reviewing the comments on this thread yesterday, I followed one of the links to an explanation of the advantages of the USNG coordinate system. I had my favorite USA Topo map open on the computer while reading, and did try to walk through the necessary conversion steps with an open mind.

 

The conversion process worked almost well enough for an experienced user with a little bit of mathematical background dabbling at leisure, but a nine one one operator could definitely use a more user friendly interface that contained separate windows, with examples, for inputting each of the different coordinate system possibilities.

 

I did come away with an appreciation of the USNG alpha-numeric system vs the original UTM decimal system or vs. degree systems for ground level incident response. (Edited two user typos within first five minutes.)

Edited September 29, 2013 by 39_Steps

[+ecanderson]

The USNG and British Ordnance Grid and all of the other country/region specific systems really need to be set aside when 'inoperability' is important, no matter how convenient some find them to be for mapping. Yes, very strong statement. It's as bad, though, as radios that refuse to interoperate, and we've had plenty of experience with just how well that plays out in field practice (BADLY!) UTM requires either familiarity with the region involved or a map to sort where the grid reference is. A coordinate system produced from WGS data must be mapped to any grid system with knowledge of the grid system. I am unaware of GPS receiver chips that natively produce grid datum results. They produce a least common denominator that is accurate and universally available, requiring NO knowledge of a particular system of interpretation - in particular, some regional grid system. It shouldn't require some 7 parameter Helmert transformation to get from one to the other with accuracy, but that's how it is. Yes, there's a certain convenience factor in working with a grid system, though for the life of me, I don't understand why any agency can't apply WGS coordinates to operate a grid-based system. It's done all the time.

 

As long as we're all playing by different rules, the problems of miscommunication and inability to communicate location will continue. For that reason, I'm still amazed that for emergency location purposes, EVERY agency isn't prepared to handle WGS84 (the best universal datum we have at the moment), no matter their local preferences. Fine -- if you're in the U.S., no reason an agency can't work with USNG, but they should all also be prepared to deal with WGS datum information. To the Brits, that applies to your agencies operating off the Ordnance Survey as well. All well and good to have your 'proprietary' system, but your agencies need to be prepared to manage when someone doesn't happen to have a device or map that will do your conversion for you.

 

And that's just TWO of a whole host of datum situations out there that one must contend with.

 

In an emergency, how many users of GPS receivers are even aware of which datum conversion options their device can perform? How many know how to do it? How many have time to make the adjustment in a pinch? Yes, your nifty Garmin handheld trail GPS can do these conversions. Can your dashboard GPS do it? Can your sports watch do it? Not everyone gets their location data from a purpose built Garmin device ... in fact, on the whole, they're in the minority. What do all of the other devices display? WGS.

Edited September 29, 2013 by ecanderson

[+fizzymagic]

The USNG and British Ordnance Grid and all of the other country/region specific systems really need to be set aside when 'inoperability' is important, no matter how convenient some find them to be for mapping.

...

 

Yes, there's a certain convenience factor in working with a grid system, though for the life of me, I don't understand why any agency can't apply WGS coordinates to operate a grid-based system.

 

Amen. You have hit on the fundamental problem here.

 

Grid systems treat the world as flat. Unfortunately, the real world is not flat. The ONLY universal efficient way to describe all the points on the world's surface in a consistent coordinate system is to use angles. Latitude and longitude.

 

Grid systems introduce unnecessary complexity and many new variables (which zone am I in? What is the difference between grid north and true north? etc.) in order to try to make the world look flat. As a result, grid systems will never be universal and never interoperate nicely.

 

On the other hand, the decimal degree latitude and longitude angles are understood everywhere, provide a compact representation of every location on the surface of the Earth, and interoperate perfectly. They are becoming the new standard; in 20 years nobody will remember the archaic UTM system.

[+ecanderson]

I often hear that systems like the OG and UTM systems are 'convenient' for grid searches for search and rescue. I've never really understood the argument, especially having seen these performed locally with coordinate data with perfectly good results. You can search a grid of lat/long using WGS84.

 

"OK, Joe, you cover everything between 40.10000 and 40.20000 and 105.10000 and 105.20000"

 

or whatever. We draw boxes all the time to define our caching 'search areas' for GSAK. Nothing particularly complicated about it, and you can define your grid granularity any way you like.

 

My only concern is your comment that these are "understood everywhere". I'd like to think you're right, but I suspect that there are a few agencies out there that still haven't adapted to a 'round earth' model.

[7rxc]

I often hear that systems like the OG and UTM systems are 'convenient' for grid searches for search and rescue. I've never really understood the argument, especially having seen these performed locally with coordinate data with perfectly good results. You can search a grid of lat/long using WGS84.

 

"OK, Joe, you cover everything between 40.10000 and 40.20000 and 105.10000 and 105.20000"

 

or whatever. We draw boxes all the time to define our caching 'search areas' for GSAK. Nothing particularly complicated about it, and you can define your grid granularity any way you like.

 

My only concern is your comment that these are "understood everywhere". I'd like to think you're right, but I suspect that there are a few agencies out there that still haven't adapted to a 'round earth' model.

 

I think that there is a bit of validity to the use of UTM/MGRS/ OS etc. grids for search, but not because of the GPS settings. Agreed the search is not dependent on any format settings system. Most maps have that nice premade grid (at least federal topo series (NTS in Canada)). It's just handy for plotting if you can relate it to what's on the maps. I use Google Earth images for plotting search tracks, but the old NAD27 maps have problems here as I've said before. GE is registered pretty good locally and is much closer. Luckily, I only recently found the new issue topos, but not for my area of interest, but that's a local sales thing I hope.

 

Still our maps only have lat/long on the edges of the map and only in DMS. UTM is gridded over the whole map.

Of course, the 1km squares don't render much detail, but one can quickly draw a square or series of squares on a blank piece of graph paper and you have a quick print out to work with.

 

I don't know if that is a big factor, but it is a bit handy for quick field references.

 

As for the GPS, if someone came up with a grid based on Fizzys one could work with it fine. And so I tell folks. However most of the search groups here were started by ex military I suspect, and old habits die slowly.

Sometimes it's a mess. We do teach lat/long and DMS in its various forms. But most people it goes in one ear and out the other I swear. I keep a copy of FizzyCalc on a thumbdrive with my document files and some scanned map sections. I don't find the NAD27 to WGS84 conversions work that well locally, but hope the new maps were drawn a bit better under NAD83 which is now the local standard. I don't know which version though, the first one, or the one corrected to agree with WGS84. The later one is almost identical here. the old one is only about a metre off. NAD 27 is only usable with NAD27 maps it's so skewed. Within a 5 km circle, the differences to obvious points varies between 50 and 300 metres in both axes. Result of stretching photos to fit survey spots. New ones show some promise, but I have yet to see 'our' maps.

 

Anyway, I'm all for going modern if it will work, and my Geocaching says that we can do much better.

 

Doug 7rxc

[Grasscatcher]

Not speaking of any one specifically, but pseudo-intellectuals like to theorize about "what is best", but that is all that it is.....opinion.

 

Really , what is "best" is what works for you, in whatever the current circumstance are.

 

Even NAD 27 has it's place where it is best. If you are plotting locations on a paper(NAD27)map, that's what you should use.

 

No one's mind (that I know of) "works" in DMS. Everyone's mind (that I know of) "works" in "distance" or at least perceived distance. That's why UTM works the best(IMHO) in the field. The last 3 numbers of the coordinates tell you where you are within the 1000 meter square, and each number roughly equals one pace per last digit (who cares if it's yds or meters). No mental calculations or conversions required.

 

....and there are only two directions to decipher. You either need to go more North or less North, or more East or less East to make the numbers match up.

 

In DMS, no one can tell you how far to travel to "equal" a "minute" or a "second" without knowing your current location. Yes, it can be calculated , but those values change with location changes.

....and whatever Lat/Lon coordinates you see, your brain has to convert to "distance" to comprehend how far you need to go, and what direction.

 

Now,..... for reporting a/your location for search and rescue. ASK, "How do you want the coordinates?". What format? You don't know the person's knowledge level on the receiving end. You only know YOUR knowledge level, so, become VERY familiar with YOUR unit and HOW TO CHANGE between formats on your unit.

 

.......and get the other person to read the coordinates back to you. You have only "communicated" if they "received" (correctly understood)the information that you "intended" to send. By having it read back, YOU can determine if THEY "got it right".

Edited October 9, 2013 by Grasscatcher

[+Team CowboyPapa]

As a pseudo-intellectual, I would like to contribute an analogy.

 

When surveyed, those 4 wheelers with winches on their 4WDs admit that the most infrequent use is to extricate themselves. The overwhelming use is to rescue those who do not have winches. The conclusion is that those smart and cautious enough to procure and install winches are smart and cautious enough not to get stuck in the first place.

 

So the analogy here is that all those smart enough to leave with the right GPS equipment and knowledgeable regarding how to convey location to SAR units, are not going to get lost in the first place.

 

10-4, Good buddy, what's your 10-20?

[Grasscatcher]

As a pseudo-intellectual, I would like to contribute an analogy.

 

When surveyed, those 4 wheelers with winches on their 4WDs admit that the most infrequent use is to extricate themselves. The overwhelming use is to rescue those who do not have winches. The conclusion is that those smart and cautious enough to procure and install winches are smart and cautious enough not to get stuck in the first place.

 

So the analogy here is that all those smart enough to leave with the right GPS equipment and knowledgeable regarding how to convey location to SAR units, are not going to get lost in the first place.

 

10-4, Good buddy, what's your 10-20?

 

Winches on the front of any vehicle are designed to pull the rider further into where "he" shouldn't have been in the first place.....

 

Your analogy is correct, but the instructions are also applicable for anyone that anyone that knows exactly where THEY are but runs across the poor "lost" (or injured) soul in the boonies that needs trained medical assistance or body recovery (alive or deceased).

Edited October 10, 2013 by Grasscatcher

[+fizzymagic]

No one's mind (that I know of) "works" in DMS. Everyone's mind (that I know of) "works" in "distance" or at least perceived distance. That's why UTM works the best(IMHO) in the field. The last 3 numbers of the coordinates tell you where you are within the 1000 meter square, and each number roughly equals one pace per last digit (who cares if it's yds or meters). No mental calculations or conversions required.

 

That's a training issue, not a coordinate system issue.

 

BTW, I don't think DMS is a particularly useful system, because of the whole base-60 thing.

 

Basically, all the arguments for not using lat/lon as a coordinate system come down to either training or obsolete maps. It's easy to print maps with lat/lon grids on them, and most people I know have access to printers, so that argument is not valid. The argument that people think in terms of a flat plane fails because the Earth is not a flat plane. Adding complexity to the coordinate system to shoehorn it into something else so it will be more intuitive is a false economy, IMO. All the additional complexity of the system requires more training than just using the natural coordinates in the first place!

 

Example: how many SAR people know the edges of where a UTM zone is valid? How many can explain the origin of the difference between grid north and true north? Between grid east and true east? how much training is required to make those concepts "intuitive?"

[Fangamon]

I use UTM/UPS because locations can be instantly referenced on all topo maps while in the field, simple.

 

[7rxc]

I use UTM/UPS because locations can be instantly referenced on all topo maps while in the field, simple.

 

 

It's a wee bit more tricky when you have topos with no UTM grids, just either DMS lat long or some in house grid!

Then there is the way some maps are drawn to older specs and only the surface features change... and not too well.

 

Still there isn't any real problem with that either if you 'have a bit of experience' finding things and accept certain limitations. For map to map it's a good system, at least both ends should have the same map version.

The big problem is the skills of the users.

 

Doug 7rxc

[robertlipe]

UTM, UPS and MGRS make great sense when your focal point is in the center of any part of the planet is solely in view and you can consider it to be mathematically flat. For your local park, that's fine. If you're computing the distance from Perth to Seattle, Pythoragean will beat you up and leave you for dead.

 

Pretending the world is flat works for small areas. It does not scale. Fizzymagic is right on this one: lying in the coordinate system to treat the planet as flat (hint: it's not) will ultimately byte you. It's not always convenient, but any solution treating the earth as flat instead of an oblate spheroid (or at least something spherical-ish) for any non-trivial representation just doesn't work.

 

We can still haggle DD.DDDD vs. DD.MM.MMM and such (which I admit is gross) but once you agree that the planet isn't flat and that distorting it pretend to be flat is silly, UTM, UPS, and MGRS are clearly not high fidelity. It's my hope they die the violent death they deserve. Do I expect a 911 operator to be able to parse the zillion possible representations of a GPS stuck in my dashboard while I'm upside down in broken glass waiting to be cut out? Frankly, no.

 

We, the computer people of the world, have some education to do (a tuple of phone-number sized numbers can identify your position...) but right now, it's a mess.

Edited October 14, 2013 by robertlipe

[+DonB]

I talked to a couple of our local cops about that at the restaurant awhile back and was told if you call 911 with a cell phone they don't need GPS coordinates. They triangulate your location using the cell towers. From what I've heard listening to the scanner when they have a 911 hangup it's very accurate, I've heard them pinpoint the location to a driveway between two addresses.

 

If I did have to furnish the coordinates I think I would favor the N42 21.292 format.