Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
kayakbird

New Arrowhead Hi-point?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
Blunder?  Bus-man's Holiday?  Personnel exchange?
East coast fellow I met near Yuma this winter told me about a cache he found near the Medicine Wheel.  
Snooping around in that area because he did not divulge the name.

MEL
PW0560* NAD 83(1993) POSITION- 44 43 39.53217(N) 107 45 26.27614(W)   ADJUSTED  
 PW0560* NAVD 88 ORTHO HEIGHT -  3099.5   (meters)    10169.    (feet) VERTCON    
PW0560                          STATION RECOVERY (2003)
 PW0560
 PW0560'RECOVERY NOTE BY MN DEPT OF TRANSP 2003 (JWS)
 PW0560'RECOVERED IN GOOD CONDITION.
Edited by kayakbird
to hi-light Minn DOT

Share this post


Link to post

Someone undoubtedly got the abbreviation for Montana wrong, as it isn't far from that state, and it is common to check a little way into adjacent states.

Share this post


Link to post

According to the contributor's list:

Quote

MNDNR    MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES                                       
MNDT     MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION                                          
MNGS     MINNESOTA GEODETIC SURVEY             

 

So, maybe he was just helping out? :D

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for the sharp-eyed posting.  Since this mark is less than a km from Montana I'm sure it was just a typo when someone entered the recovery.  I've sent a note to one of my colleagues still at NGS to review and mark the appropriate correction.  The MN DoT surveyors are a great hyper-active bunch but I'm pretty sure they didn't recovery this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I have recovered a few marks into Wisconsin when I was working at Michigan DOT.  Once was assigned to occupy this  BM along a railroad West if Pembine, Wis.  I had to get permission to cross private property to reach the mark.   Another time I was on a Station along US 141 Wausaukee Wis when a local property owner walked by and looked at my state truck and come over and asked me if I was aware I was lost?  Drew some attention sitting there for 6 hrs.

 

QM0023_MAGNETIC: N = NO MAGNETIC MATERIAL
 QM0023_STABILITY: B = PROBABLY HOLD POSITION/ELEVATION WELL
 QM0023_SATELLITE: THE SITE LOCATION WAS REPORTED AS SUITABLE FOR
 QM0023+SATELLITE: SATELLITE OBSERVATIONS - April 15, 1992
 QM0023
 QM0023  HISTORY     - Date     Condition        Report By
 QM0023  HISTORY     - 1934     MONUMENTED       CGS
 QM0023  HISTORY     - 19920415 GOOD             MIDT
 QM0023  HISTORY     - 20010331 MARK NOT FOUND   NGS
 QM0023  HISTORY     - 20051115 MARK NOT FOUND   WIDT
 QM0023

 

 QL0664  CBN         -  This is a Cooperative Base Network Control Station.
 QL0664  DESIGNATION -  WAUSAUKEE GPS
QL0664  HISTORY     - Date     Condition        Report By
 QL0664  HISTORY     - 1989     MONUMENTED       WIHD
 QL0664  HISTORY     - 19900719 GOOD
 QL0664  HISTORY     - 19971001 GOOD             WIHD
 QL0664  HISTORY     - 20010411 GOOD             MIDT
 QL0664  HISTORY     - 20040423 GOOD             GEOCAC
 QL0664  HISTORY     - 20051128 GOOD             WIDT
 QL0664  HISTORY     - 20080908 GOOD             WIDT
 QL0664  HISTORY     - 20140801 GOOD             WIDT
 QL0664  HISTORY     - 20150803 GOOD             WIDT

 

Edited by Z15

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Minnesota crew submitted quite a few GPS sessions on marks in northern Iowa as part of their very extensive height modernization. I found one mark that had two PIDs, one with data from each state"s agency: ON0828 AE2132

And they didn't agree by almost exactly 1 meter in one of the XYZ coordinates.

 

After I pestered NGS and the agencies for a while it got corrected. The incorrect redundant data sheet was deleted.

 

I learned from that exercise that PIDs are not really permanent, because the PID of the deleted data sheet got reassigned to a new point a long way from there. That left an incorrect cross reference in my recovery report for the good one.

 

Edited by Bill93

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/6/2020 at 7:58 AM, Bill93 said:

because the PID of the deleted data sheet got reassigned to a new point a long way from there.

 

THAT really worries me, because I too sometimes leave references to PIDs in my descriptions - not to mention what happens to the entries in the reference box of some stations that point to others.

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...