Take a look at:
http://beta.ngs.noaa.gov/gtkweb/
I looked at it for about 3 minutes and went ballistic. Wrote a nasty letter to NGS. I do NOT like it at all. I think it's awful.
Cliff Mugnier
LSU
Okay.
I'll bite.
Why? It appears at the surface to be well laid out. Covers the basics without a lot of pre-setup and even provides multiple ways to download the data.
Check out X and Y labels. What's "Z?"
Cliff Mugnier, post: 326337, member: 505 wrote: Take a look at:
http://beta.ngs.noaa.gov/gtkweb/
I looked at it for about 3 minutes and went ballistic. Wrote a nasty letter to NGS. I do NOT like it at all. I think it's awful.
Cliff Mugnier
LSU
Did you read the statement at the DOWNLOAD button? It states that the software for offline use is Java based. That would make it usable on operating systems supported by Java.
EDIT: Just saw the X,Y,Z comment, X North? and Y East? reversed from prior software? Also took a close look at the text file format notes.
[INDENT]Sample file with height
_______________________
datum,lat,lon,height
nad83,N372335.880000,W0922732.544000,10.25
nad83,40,-80,100.0[/INDENT]
Seeing "height" in that leads me to believe it is not requesting elevation. Need to remember there is a difference (h,H,elevation) when dealing with this type of calculation.
Cliff Mugnier, post: 326339, member: 505 wrote: Check out X and Y labels. What's "Z?"
Geocentric Cartesian XYZ (aka ECEF)...looks okay to me (and agrees with my own software in the quick test that I just did).
Loyal
OK, Cliff, why don't you like it? I could live with the format.
It is almost comparable to my current software, Lat, Lon to SPC were nats on.
I would like other options for convergence than just DD.ddddddd
I think the elevation factor should be included prior to the combined factor. The combined factor does not agree with my current software and I would say the differences are too significant to indicate a minor change in the geoid.
Paul in PA
Cliff Mugnier, post: 326339, member: 505 wrote: Check out X and Y labels. What's "Z?"
I assume XYZ are ITRF or the NAD equivalent, that should be indicated in the header. My software does not output them and there are times I would like them.
Paul in PA
I feel like I'm about to fall off a "Cliff" :-O.
My results are a little weird I'll admit. I'd post an image but haven't figured that out yet.
"Z" appears to be the scale factors.
My test at first looked good, but the plot map has me out in the middle of the Pacific half-way to Hawaii. The latitude and longitude is quite a bit off too. Now I need to look closer.
It needs work, particularly in the output area, but it has potential. Interesting to see output in metric, int'l ft, and US feet all side by side but I think that novelty would wear off quick. The UTM and ECEF (which I'm guessing the XYZ column is for) output columns are probably just there to fill space right now.
I'd like to see support for Oregon's LDP zones as well.
