Bill93, post: 455237, member: 87 wrote: Collimator?
Spell Checker Police! Good job.
This thread has turned into a trip for sure. I was waiting with anticipation for Loyal's description of LDP's as they apply to measurements in the Rockies but that never unfolded. Then it took a spur into LSA's and how they relate to boundary resolution. I waited to see how that would unfold as the example provided for their usefulness seemed relevant but again I was disappointed as that topic degraded to construction staking and steel/building layout. Further to my dismay it has eroded into daily equipment calibration and the correct use of spelling and vernacular. How far we have come as "professionals"!!!!
Skeeter, the original phrase as I heard it is "measure it with a micrometer, mark it with a crayon, chop it with an axe!"
g'night gents
Cameron Watson PLS, post: 455242, member: 11407 wrote: This thread has turned into a trip for sure. I was waiting with anticipation for Loyal's description of LDP's as they apply to measurements in the Rockies but that never unfolded. Then it took a spur into LSA's and how they relate to boundary resolution. I waited to see how that would unfold as the example provided for their usefulness seemed relevant but again I was disappointed as that topic degraded to construction staking and steel/building layout. Further to my dismay it has eroded into daily equipment calibration and the correct use of spelling and vernacular. How far we have come as "professionals"!!!!
Skeeter, the original phrase as I heard it is "measure it with a micrometer, mark it with a crayon, chop it with an axe!"
g'night gents
You could use the "way back" machine to review the old POB posts about LDP's. There was always quite a debate going on there and Loyal put out a LOT of good info there. It's probably tough to keep trying to explain it.
Skeeter, this is quite the thread, I can see you are really into calibrating to old data, I do think it burned you a bit this time. But as long as you can find the bad data, carry on. 😎
Cameron Watson PLS, post: 455242, member: 11407 wrote: This thread has turned into a trip for sure. I was waiting with anticipation for Loyal's description of LDP's as they apply to measurements in the Rockies but that never unfolded. Then it took a spur into LSA's and how they relate to boundary resolution. I waited to see how that would unfold as the example provided for their usefulness seemed relevant but again I was disappointed as that topic degraded to construction staking and steel/building layout. Further to my dismay it has eroded into daily equipment calibration and the correct use of spelling and vernacular. How far we have come as "professionals"!!!!
Skeeter, the original phrase as I heard it is "measure it with a micrometer, mark it with a crayon, chop it with an axe!"
g'night gents
Yes, for sure. I feel like I'm chasing my tail.Yours is for building structures, mine was a road builders axiom. There's one about it's hard to remember our initial goal was to drain the swamp, when we're knee deep in snakes. Or something like that..
MightyMoe, post: 455267, member: 700 wrote: Skeeter, this is quite the thread, I can see you are really into calibrating to old data, I do think it burned you a bit this time. But as long as you can find the bad data, carry on. 😎
Old data puts you into the footsteps of the previous Surveyor. Unfortunately I do find an awful lot of bad data. I wonder how many of them we're LSA their data. What bit me this time was my memory. A couple of posters steered me right quite early, but then the anti site calibration group jumped on me and then the LDP group came after me, and the the LSA group came after me and here we end up chopping with an axe. I kind of get the feel of what Trump is going through on a much smaller field of course. Now the Democrats will be after me.
I was a little disappointed Loyal faded off before we got to the meat of LDP. He had my attention there for awhile.
Skeeter1996, post: 455289, member: 9224 wrote: Old data puts you into the footsteps of the previous Surveyor. Unfortunately I do find an awful lot of bad data. I wonder how many of them we're LSA their data. What bit me this time was my memory. A couple of posters steered me right quite early, but then the anti site calibration group jumped on me and then the LDP group came after me, and the the LSA group came after me and here we end up chopping with an axe. I kind of get the feel of what Trump is going through on a much smaller field of course. Now the Democrats will be after me.
I was a little disappointed Loyal faded off before we got to the meat of LDP. He had my attention there for awhile.
If you are using TBC, then LDP creation is right there under project settings/Coordinate System/Change/Default projection (Tranverse Mercator). Click on it and it will basically give you a slide that allows you to set-up your LDP. It's easy, a couple of minutes, all you really need to know is where your site (lat, long) is, and then play with the scale factor to get your PPM's down for the elevation of your site (hint 1 will not work). In Montana, I highly recommend it. Montana SP is a PITA.
I imagine Loyal is busy, and teaching LDP's isn't all that simple over a site like this one.
Bill93, post: 455237, member: 87 wrote: Collimator?
Damn spell auto complete
Skeeter1996, post: 455289, member: 9224 wrote: Old data puts you into the footsteps of the previous Surveyor. Unfortunately I do find an awful lot of bad data. I wonder how many of them we're LSA their data. What bit me this time was my memory. A couple of posters steered me right quite early, but then the anti site calibration group jumped on me and then the LDP group came after me, and the the LSA group came after me and here we end up chopping with an axe. I kind of get the feel of what Trump is going through on a much smaller field of course. Now the Democrats will be after me.
I was a little disappointed Loyal faded off before we got to the meat of LDP. He had my attention there for awhile.
Skeeter,
Sorry for "dropping out" on the LDP issue. I am swamped with work right now, and have been for most of this year. To "properly" outline [even] the basics of LDPs, requires a lot of work, and really needs examples and exhibits that also require significant time.
I would suggest that you take a look at Shawn Billing's articles in American Surveyor a couple of years back:
http://www.amerisurv.com/PDF/TheAmericanSurveyor_Billings-GroundVersusGrid-LDPpart1_Vol10No9.pdf
http://www.amerisurv.com/PDF/TheAmericanSurveyor_Billings-GroundVersusGrid-LDPpart2_Vol10No10.pdf
You will no doubt have some specific questions once you digest the above articles, and a new tread will be the best way for you to get good answers to those questions.
Loyal
Larry Scott, post: 455293, member: 8766 wrote: Damn spell auto complete
Wasn't that the "encanabulator"?
Skeeter1996, post: 455289, member: 9224 wrote: Old data puts you into the footsteps of the previous Surveyor. Unfortunately I do find an awful lot of bad data. I wonder how many of them we're LSA their data. What bit me this time was my memory. A couple of posters steered me right quite early, but then the anti site calibration group jumped on me and then the LDP group came after me, and the the LSA group came after me and here we end up chopping with an axe. I kind of get the feel of what Trump is going through on a much smaller field of course. Now the Democrats will be after me.
I was a little disappointed Loyal faded off before we got to the meat of LDP. He had my attention there for awhile.
Skeeter- NO politics allowed on this forum. I think whining is also against the rules.
I ki
Loyal, post: 455295, member: 228 wrote: Skeeter,
Sorry for "dropping out" on the LDP issue. I am swamped with work right now, and have been for most of this year. To "properly" outline [even] the basics of LDPs, requires a lot of work, and really needs examples and exhibits that also require significant time.
I would suggest that you take a look at Shawn Billing's articles in American Surveyor a couple of years back:
http://www.amerisurv.com/PDF/TheAmericanSurveyor_Billings-GroundVersusGrid-LDPpart1_Vol10No9.pdf
http://www.amerisurv.com/PDF/TheAmericanSurveyor_Billings-GroundVersusGrid-LDPpart2_Vol10No10.pdfYou will no doubt have some specific questions once you digest the above articles, and a new tread will be the best way for you to get good answers to those questions.
Loyal
ND of understand the concept. I just can't figure out how you align an old survey without a translation and rotation to relate it to geographical positions. How do you physically do that? Or do you? I'm beginning to think what your doing is backwards from what I'm doing. I'm trying to adapt the geographical system to the specific survey and your adapting the geographical system to a more general ground system.
All that aside. How do you use it to search old mineral claims? What data is available from an old Mineral Survey that you can use to create a LDP of it's location? I can find nothing in a Mineral Survey that gives any clue to it's geographical location. Though I've long suspected it exists.
If you can more-or-less locate the mineral survey on Google Earth (or even a USGS quad) you have a geographical location that is more than adequate for setting up a low-distortion projection.
GB
Glenn Borkenhagen, post: 455312, member: 961 wrote: If you can more-or-less locate the mineral survey on Google Earth (or even a USGS quad) you have a geographical location that is more than adequate for setting up a low-distortion projection.
GB
The problem is I can't locate a for certain location of the claims. They were mislocated in the master title plats in the wrong township. After dilegent search by three nationally reknown corner searchers the USLM could not be located. A couple of more agile searchers even searched for old diggings and actual claim corners to no avail. Loyal baited me with the claim he could find Mineral Claims using information from the mineral survey and a LDP. He has danced around the question and has yet to reveal any clues on how he can do it.
I've slid around the claims configuration all around aerial photo and narrowed down about 6 possible locations. They are all located in brutal locations, maybe why they were abandoned and lost. Heraldo Rivera has offered to do a special if we find the claims and open them up. I'm sure the shovels, picks, and steels we're left inside. It was reported the shafts we're 1000 feet long, so you would think a sizeable waste pile would be visible. Careful study of GE images have not revealed any waste piles. The images by the way are amazingly clear. It beats climbing the slope. They aren't quite clear enough to spot markings on stones yet. So a field visit is required. I don't want to do that until I have a fairly confident search area defined. I don't believe Loyal has a method, but I'm all eyes and ears if he does. There may be some geographical information hidden on the old Mineral Records I'm not aware of. They had to at least do at least sunshots for basis of bearing.
Skeeter1996, post: 455321, member: 9224 wrote: The problem is I can't locate a for certain location of the claims. They were mislocated in the master title plats in the wrong township. After dilegent search by three nationally reknown corner searchers the USLM could not be located. A couple of more agile searchers even searched for old diggings and actual claim corners to no avail. Loyal baited me with the claim he could find Mineral Claims using information from the mineral survey and a LDP. He has danced around the question and has yet to reveal any clues on how he can do it.
I've slid around the claims configuration all around aerial photo and narrowed down about 6 possible locations. They are all located in brutal locations, maybe why they were abandoned and lost. Heraldo Rivera has offered to do a special if we find the claims and open them up. I'm sure the shovels, picks, and steels we're left inside. It was reported the shafts we're 1000 feet long, so you would think a sizeable waste pile would be visible. Careful study of GE images have not revealed any waste piles. The images by the way are amazingly clear. It beats climbing the slope. They aren't quite clear enough to spot markings on stones yet. So a field visit is required. I don't want to do that until I have a fairly confident search area defined. I don't believe Loyal has a method, but I'm all eyes and ears if he does. There may be some geographical information hidden on the old Mineral Records I'm not aware of. They had to at least do at least sunshots for basis of bearing.
Loyal isn't saying an LDP somehow leads you to Mineral Claim monuments. What we are all saying is that it creates a good retraceable basis for your survey.
If you want a true north system you can set your central meridian through the middle of the site and you will be within a few tens of seconds of true with your grid bearings. Like Glen says you can do that off google.
You will have GPS projected to the surface with small PPM's for your distances.
Finding evidence is like it always is, you search, once you find one you navigate from the found one to the next one and so on.
There is no magic program that finds corners for you.
After all you are creating a crude LDP with a calibration, an LDP where you are unaware of it's parameters.
