?ÿ
What would you do with this??ÿ I'm sure I'll figure it out, but haven't really seen this before.
They use azimuths in Canada, and it really works well for doing calcs. Bearings are good for visualizing, azimuths are better for computer entry. This? This is just somebody who doesn't really know what the heck they are doing.?ÿ
I didn't plot it or look all that close, but it appears to be azimuths from North (North being 0?ø). I have seen this a few (very few) times.
Back in the day, "some" folks carried azimuths like this in their instruments,?ÿas they traversed along (notes too).
Loyal
?ÿ
I does a few courses to the POB, then I think a rectangle.?ÿ The opposites sides of the rectangle have the same azimuth but are going opposite (I think) one goes Az East and the other goes Az West.?ÿ This is a new one for me.
All are typical clockwise azimuths, the East and West being redundant. Clockwise azimuths could be read directly on a full circle transit compass face that had the markings in a counterclockwise direction. Recall that East is to the left on a transit compass face. Some had full 360?ø clockwise and counterclockwise circle markings, some had 360 and 2 180s and some had a 360 and 4 90?ø markings.
Paul in PA
They use azimuths in Canada, and it really works well for doing calcs. Bearings are good for visualizing, azimuths are better for computer entry. This? This is just somebody who doesn't really know what the heck they are doing.?ÿ
Or maybe it's just that we dont know what the heck they are doing..
Paul is right, just ignore the east and west and treat them like regular azimuths.?ÿ
Some research will likely turn up the reason for the odd course from the point of commencement to the POB.
Azimuths, when used correctly, are much cleaner than bearings. I dont understand why the weren't adopted in the US. Probably the same reason the US didn't follow though with their promised transition to the metric system.?ÿ
?ÿ
Are they turned angles? Sorry, I don??t really have time to sit down and do the math, but 304 degrees is not an Azimuth East - coming from a Canadian where we typically use Azimuths. Maybe just a positive angle turned around the point, and the direction to give a hint as to where it ends up?
Are they turned angles? Sorry, I don??t really have time to sit down and do the math, but 304 degrees is not an Azimuth East - coming from a Canadian where we typically use Azimuths. Maybe just a positive angle turned around the point, and the direction to give a hint as to where it ends up?
You are right, I missed those last few. I have seen azimuths written like this with North and South, but those made sense.?ÿ
Putting this together with the adjoiners and what's on the ground will probably shed some light on what the intention was.
?ÿ
The direction of the road could be your best source of compairing direction to the description unless the surrounding property descriptions reveal other clues.
back in the day, when we traversed with a micrometer reading theodolite, we always carried azimuths.?ÿ Made computing angular misclosure very simple at the end of the loop.?ÿ ON stakeout- backsighted with azimuth and then turned az ahead to stake point.?ÿ Easier calcs in the field.
Went to a GTS-3 that displayed to 5 seconds and an hp41 w/ Sup-R-Rom, started turning angles right instead.
I missed that the second and third calls were different since I ignored the East -West. My first assumption for the description is that course 2 & 3 were not run on the ground. 222-1/2?ø East is a call to run parallel to the 3rd commencement course in a reverse direction, the 302?ø East is run parallel to the first course back to the tie course and then follow the tie course back to the POB. Using the azimuths that way makes sense of why the East - West calls were added.
Paul in PA
Doing a ton of research on this project.?ÿ Found the answer later in the records.?ÿ I sort of thought I knew where this was.?ÿ There is also another description written by the same landowner that's a complete mess (mostly not even on his property) and had to be resolved by a cross quit claim agreement.?ÿ This DIYr was a complete idiot.
?ÿ
One time we were doing a survey for an access easement when one of the residents came out with a paper in his hand. He was some type of Engineer (not civil). He was very proud of the "description" he wrote. It was like if you wrote a letter in "Greek" because you happened to own a English-Greek dictionary.
That's a stunning description. It would have been worthy of inclusion in Donald Wilson's book "Deed Descriptions I Have Known.....But Could Have Done Without".