What is this distance? "2.42 1/2 chains"

2 chains, 42 1/2 links.
2.425 chains = 160.05 feet

Or....

1/2 chain (commonly used measuring tool) = 33 feet

2.42 * 33' = 79' +/-

or....

[sarcasm]completely disregard the ambiguous distance and search instead for monuments and lines of occupation.[/sarcasm]

That's a tough one.

if the unit is "½-chains" (half-chains), I am wary of what the .42 represents. Because 2-pole chains still have 0.66' links, so a half-chain, or 2-pole chain doesn't have 100 links. Only 50 links per chain. ie: they shouldn't have posted it as hundredths of a half-chain.

If it is 2chains, 42 and-a-half links, that is simply 2.425 chains.

If it is 2.425 "½-chains" that would simply be about 80 feet, but I would imagine if they were dragging a 2-pole chain, they would be measuring in "poles and links" and it would read as links in the survey notes and not decimal "half-chains".

My vote would go with 2.425 chains.

My vote would be to come up with all the different distances, converted to what ever you are measuring in, and go out and see which one best fits.....

I agree with:

2 chains 42.5 links (160.05 feet).

I think I've even seen it around here before.

Jack

Ditto 160.05 feet or .....................................

in that silly unit that cannot statistically be reproduced for a common cadastre to three places of decimals using other than highly sophisticated measuring distances ............

48.7832400000000000000000 metres !

Bah humbug on metric !

Rubber boot / second is a great measurement unit.

TNAI

It is 2.425 chains or 160.05'.

I have seen this many times in early Nebraska surveys. Example below showing a split at the right side of the drawing using 20.17 1/2 which is equal split between 20.20 and 20.15.

20.20
20.17 1/2
20.15

We're talking about 80 feet ... it's either 160+ or it's 80 feet.

I almost never advocate scaling old maps, but I'd make an exception here.

Also 100 links would account for the .42 of the 2.42, be it with a 50 link or 100 link chain.

one half link would be, in my mind about 1/2 of the distance from one link to the other ... non-graduated and therefore somewhat guessed at being halfway.

To me 2.42 & 1/2 chains means 2 full chains, 42 full links and about 1/2 of a non-graduated link.

You used International feet. I think the data was in US Survey feet and I get 48.78333757 meters +/- 0.05 😛

Funny we just ran into this yesterday. Context made it apparent we weren't talking about some obscure half-chain unit of measure. It was just a simple case of 'I can do better than a link'...

WRONG

Bill - you've got it wrong. It's +/- 0.04! 🙂 😉 😛 😀