Tom time I'm away from my computer right now and I'm just answering with my cell phone I won't be back at my computer till later.
I don't think it's Francis, if it was you would see fresh dirt two feet from the scribed stone in his avatar.
Let me get this, you stood 45 minutes under canopy to get ppk data... I could have run 10 traverse stations in a loop in that time.
Forgot your common sense at home?
FrancisH, post: 400334, member: 10211 wrote: Let me get this, you stood 45 minutes under canopy to get ppk data... I could have run 10 traverse stations in a loop in that time.
Forgot your common sense at home?
I thought they 86'd TEDD?
That poster: RADAR, sure is a swell guy
Francis, I like you more the more you post. In fact, I think I know what you are. You are going through puberty. It's ok, you'll settle down when it's done!
Back on topic, I use a bipod. I LEAVE the GPS working, and go corner searching, and do other things, while it works.
Works quite well. Lets me do all kinds of things, that would not happen if I were traversing. IF you look at the USGS, of this area, lots of relief here.
N
douglascasementl, post: 400338, member: 11341 wrote: I thought they 86'd TEDD?
That poster: RADAR, sure is a swell guy
Don't bruise yer back there, Dougie! 🙂
As for FrancisH, has he said anything akin to, "I can toss 12 Singapore cents on the ground and set up over each of them in under 2 minutes"?
As for FrancisH, has he said anything akin to, "I can toss 12 Singapore cents on the ground and set up over each of them in under 2 minutes"?
We don't have 1c coins anymore.
But the picture of Nate with his Javad next to a tree is something I would post under "Surveyors Who Just Got Their New Toy And Had Not Yet Opened The User's Manual"
I am holding the C&T survey points, because they were SET at the time there was ONE owner on ALL sides of that line/corner. Therefore, they are the markers people SAW when the signed the contract for 75 down, and 75 a month. And, they have been there a long time.
In all the story telling part, not once did you say by how much were the pins from the 2 surveys were off. You went and used the CT pins because, wait for it....wait for it....BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN THERE A LONG TIME...
Funny because last time I checked, land surveyor courses had no Archaeology 101 as minor subjects right? Not in my University anyway.
My studies did include forensic surveying. We are, after all, following in the footsteps of our predecessors and, more importantly, the shoes of the landowners' predecessors.
My studies did include forensic surveying. We are, after all, following in the footsteps of our predecessors and, more importantly, the shoes of the landowners' predecessors.
Oh yeah right. I wonder then why did Nate bring in his top of the line Javad receiver then. Could have submitted his findings based on his forensic skills.
There are actually times we retrace using period instruments. I was at a corner monument yesterday representing the common corner of four Counties. The three other County Surveyors were with me tying out the position with GNSS equipment.
But we still proved out its location with a steel tape and brass plumb bob from witness corners.
The resulting coordinates will anchor four separate GIS databases. As we stood atop a prominent knoll, we contemplated the means by which our predecessors chained up and down the surrounding canyons, guided by a compass heading. However that corner was established, it still controls the extends of an enormous cattle.ranch today.
My studies did include forensic surveying. We are, after all, following in the footsteps of our predecessors and, more importantly, the shoes of the landowners' predecessors.
So what's the story behind the other pin 5' away?It's part of your so called forensic history of previous land owners right? I am sure the surveyor saw the other pin just 5' away when he monumented the 'newer' pin. So what's the history why he disregarded the older pin then?
You just jumped to the conclusion the older was correct because more people saw it? Really? How many people do you think walk through those parts of the woods to see that pin everyday?No roads, no trails, only paths that morning equally lay In leaves no step had trodden black.......
So where are the forensic clues?
Every survey brings its own set of circumstances. An early mentor of mine dispensed sage advice - "treat each survey as if it will end up in court." That is, evaluate all the evidence and be prepared to defend your conclusion.
Every survey brings its own set of circumstances. An early mentor of mine dispensed sage advice - "treat each survey as if it will end up in court." That is, evaluate all the evidence and be prepared to defend your conclusion.
So I guess the other surveyor too is using that same concept from your mentor right? Since the other 2 surveyors are no longer around, defending in court is now moot.
Still why disregard the 2nd set of pins without any story behind why it was placed there? No research work? No comparison of plats from the 2 previous surveys?
Just outright, 'I will use the older pins because....well it's older...."
Pretty light case of forensic study into the survey history if you ask me. But then who am I to question the long and grand surveying tradition of US Surveyors right?
Precisely, Francis.
Who are you or, rather, what standing do you have to critique the long standing methodology of our practice? Where is your deeply researched and corroborated independent analysis of what we are charged with performing.
More importantly, what are your recommendations for upgrading our futile attempts at maintaining our cadastre?
Who are you or, rather, what standing do you have to critique the long standing methodology of our practice? Where is your deeply researched and corroborated independent analysis of what we are charged with performing.
Well I am just following what you have been explaining regarding your surveying history and practices. So when I read Nate's story, I wondered why he disregarded the 2nd set of pins without any explanation except it was newer. Since you have been talking about your forensic science expertise in the field of surveying, I wondered why NOT A SINGLE ONE OF YOU asked what research was done into the 2nd set of pin before it was rejected?
The 2nd set of pins should have been part of the survey history of the land right?And it should have commanded more attention before outright rejection.
FrancisH, post: 400386, member: 10211 wrote: As for FrancisH, has he said anything akin to, "I can toss 12 Singapore cents on the ground and set up over each of them in under 2 minutes"?
We don't have 1c coins anymore.
Not according to this. After 40+ years in Singapore, I'm sure you have a few floating around.
Second Series - 1-cent
MAS [Monetary Authority of Singapore] stopped the issue of 1-cent coins since April 2002 i.e. 1-cent coins returned by the public are not reissued into circulation. However, they are still legal tender and the approximately 700 million pieces in circulation are sufficient to meet demand.
The filed map is the conclusion of that effort. It requires a careful review of the presented results to determine whether it is to be relied upon or not.
Subsequent resurveys, particularly of adjoiners will add to the mix. It is perfectly acceptable for you or anyone else to adopt a cynical outlook, but outright denigrating the map will not lead to a favorable result.
FrancisH, post: 400405, member: 10211 wrote: Every survey brings its own set of circumstances. An early mentor of mine dispensed sage advice - "treat each survey as if it will end up in court." That is, evaluate all the evidence and be prepared to defend your conclusion.
So I guess the other surveyor too is using that same concept from your mentor right? Since the other 2 surveyors are no longer around, defending in court is now moot.
Still why disregard the 2nd set of pins without any story behind why it was placed there? No research work? No comparison of plats from the 2 previous surveys?
Just outright, 'I will use the older pins because....well it's older...."Pretty light case of forensic study into the survey history if you ask me. But then who am I to question the long and grand surveying tradition of US Surveyors right?
I think its Nates second post he touches on or alludes to a position that common ownership may have relied on to execute a contract of sale. You could really learn a bit from looking into the Concept Franics.
Last night on Saturday Night Live there was a skit where the story line became stranger and stranger and stranger. Eventually the head of a member of the audience exploded into smithereens, leaving a headless body sitting in the seat.
Hee hee, here we go...........................................
About 20 years ago I was called upon to do a survey in a small town that in its glory days might have had a population of 400-500 serving a dependent population of maybe 1000 other people on a routine basis. Thanks to Henry Ford and the internal combustion engine the population had dwindled to less than 100 with maybe that many more nearby residents taking advantage of the few businesses left. A State Highway passed along the north edge of the town adding customers to the convenience store/grocery/drugstore/car wash/gas station alongside that route.
My job was in the old downtown area. The block had a plat dimension of 330 feet north to south. The east to west dimensions don't matter to this story. In that block, fronting on Main Street, were 15 platted lots of 22 feet width each. There were fifteen buildings fronting on Main Street. Limestone walls for all suggesting they were constructed shortly after the filing of the town plat. Some buildings appeared to have party walls. In some cases double walls existed. Research on the history of those 15 lots provided proof that there had never been a time when adjoining lots had come into common ownership. Each lot had always been independent of its neighbor(s). The distance we measured from the south edge of the south building to the north edge of the north building was 330.000000000000000 feet. Well, maybe a bit looser. Maybe 299.999995.
We made a best guess for where each building stopped and the next began. This was aided by a couple property owners who showed us precisely where they believed their individual buildings to start and stop. That matched with our best guess in every case.
Anyone want to guess the width of the lots?
No two had the same width. Out of 15 opportunities, not one measured 15.0 feet. The narrowest was about 17 feet. The widest around 25 feet. All 15 property owners were content with what they owned, whether or not it would conform precisely to what some anal retentive survey technician might try to claim. Each had purchased a building. The deed may have said Lot 10, but the actual location of the building was all that mattered.
My project was directly across Main Street where there was nothing but grass and a few trees. I simply needed the information from the other side of Main Street to guide me towards my tract.
