List of GPS Coordinates of ........

A restricted area for registered users to describe their own research, request assistance or organise group/shared research projects and digs.

Moderator: Jo

Re: List of GPS Coordinates of ........

Postby JodyLane3 on Mon Jul 11, 2011 5:22 pm

D'Arcy,

I am looking at Dunfield's field sketch of the Money Pit area from this site showing the Hedden and Chappell shafts. If he did indeed end up digging a crater 100 feet wide by 134 feet deep where did it begin and end surface wise in relation to those two shafts?

jody
JodyLane3
Digging for Gold
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 8:57 pm
Location: Terre Haute, IN

Re: List of GPS Coordinates of ........

Postby D'Arcy on Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:21 am

Jody:

Back in 1977 Dunfield and Blankenship both told me that their "MP" open-pit hole, dug in November/December 1965 with a huge dragline bucket, was just west-northwest of the 1947 Hedden shaft (the only surface cribwork that's visible today). In other words, they were excavating in the same spot that the Chappells had sunk their 1931 shaft. Dunfield later refilled the open hole in order to carry out core drilling in the same location.

D'Arcy
User avatar
D'Arcy
Future Tour Guide
 
Posts: 2682
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 7:55 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada

Re: List of GPS Coordinates of ........

Postby wayward on Tue Jul 12, 2011 2:04 am

wayward wrote:
n4n224ccw wrote:TheSwede,



I've placed the red square at 1 second of arc from the NAD83 location. The northern line is 44 30 48.00, the southern line is 44 30 46.00, west line is 64 17 31.00, and the east line is 64 17 29.00. I added this box to show the extant of possibilities when coordinates are not given in more accurate decimal form. At this latitude, 1Sec of longitude is about 122.5ft and 1 sec of latitude is about 101ft.


Yes my numbers were wrong :oops: A more correct figure would be 101 feet of latitude and 72 feet of longitude at 44 degrees N.

You mixed up latitude and longitude. at 44 degrees N., longitude would be less than latitude.
As you go further North longitude becomes less until at 90 degrees N. it becomes 0.---Bill

n4n224ccw, you should update your photo to show the correct figures



n4n224ccw, are you going to update your figures? just asking is all!---Bill
on the trail of the grail
wayward
Digging for Diamonds
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:31 pm
Location: traverse city,michigan

Re: List of GPS Coordinates of ........

Postby n4n224ccw on Tue Jul 12, 2011 2:32 am

101 and 72 is correct the correct measurements. The image itself does not need updating as those lines are fixed to their respective lat/long lines. The 122.5ft was my error coming from an area measurment.
The post Revolutionary history of Oak Island is a complex web of lies and partial truths to sort through.

http://www.oakislandtheories.com
User avatar
n4n224ccw
Digging for Diamonds
 
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 3:12 pm
Location: Halifax Nova Scotia

Re: List of GPS Coordinates of ........

Postby wayward on Wed Jul 13, 2011 1:42 am

n4n224ccw wrote:101 and 72 is correct the correct measurements. The image itself does not need updating as those lines are fixed to their respective lat/long lines. The 122.5ft was my error coming from an area measurment.


Sorry if I seemed a little testy n4n, I can now see you are only looking for some truth in all of this, which of course is hard to find.---Bill
on the trail of the grail
wayward
Digging for Diamonds
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:31 pm
Location: traverse city,michigan

Re: List of GPS Coordinates of ........

Postby n4n224ccw on Wed Jul 13, 2011 4:19 am

wayward wrote:Sorry if I seemed a little testy n4n, I can now see you are only looking for some truth in all of this, which of course is hard to find.---Bill



Thanks Bill. Finding the truth through documents has been a challenge; however, progress is always being made.
The post Revolutionary history of Oak Island is a complex web of lies and partial truths to sort through.

http://www.oakislandtheories.com
User avatar
n4n224ccw
Digging for Diamonds
 
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 3:12 pm
Location: Halifax Nova Scotia

Re: List of GPS Coordinates of ........

Postby JodyLane3 on Wed Jul 13, 2011 1:15 pm

D'Arcy wrote:Jody:

Back in 1977 Dunfield and Blankenship both told me that their "MP" open-pit hole, dug in November/December 1965 with a huge dragline bucket, was just west-northwest of the 1947 Hedden shaft (the only surface cribwork that's visible today). In other words, they were excavating in the same spot that the Chappells had sunk their 1931 shaft. Dunfield later refilled the open hole in order to carry out core drilling in the same location.

D'Arcy

D'Arcy,

Thank you very much. I had been asking that question for so long I was beginning to think no one had an answer. As I have had a project of trying to coordinate all the major shafts dug in the Money Pit area and make a map of them as where those shafts would be today (and possibly using photographs of the area to superimpose the map to show where they would be or were). Obviously going by how big the open pit became many of these shafts were wiped out but it still is kind of an historical interest I have. Not sure if you have been reading my back and forth with Paul as to which shaft the Hedden's and Chappells ended up excavating different parts of (obviously not the Money Pit itself as both shafts wouldn't have reached virgin soil at the bottom without at least finding something that was thought to be within reach in 1802-04 even with the collapse of the original Money Pit). I have the opinion that they ended up digging in the area of Shaft #2, Paul seems to think it is an unrecorded shaft of some kind. Any thoughts?

Thanks again. I am indebted to your willingness to share your knowledge with amateurs like myself here at the site.

Jody
JodyLane3
Digging for Gold
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 8:57 pm
Location: Terre Haute, IN

Re: List of GPS Coordinates of ........

Postby . . . on Fri Aug 05, 2011 4:30 pm

In all seriousness, may I ask what might be the point of this exercise? I'm not criticising, merely trying to clarify. :| This follows from similar work I've conducted over the years and questions recently put to me.

Were a survey conducted of the island it's likely that only one point would be chosen for a more or less precise determination of location on the earth's surface and this would then be tied to the datum for the region. For the UK, this would be the Ordnance Survey but in the US and Canada one of a number, NAD83, NAD27 etc.

I have to wonder if it's at all desirable, or particularly useful, to have a vast number of sexagesimal LatLong coordinates guessed at for the island. Would it not be far better to have one spot only with a precise determination of location?

In the past, I obtained the coordinates of several points on both the island and the mainland in order to align aerial images before the advent of Google Earth. However, even though this tool is likely to be precise the image permits only a guide to actual points on the ground.

To illustrate, let's assume that we're given the sexagesimal LatLong of two points on the island, for example:

Cone C, Joudrey's Cove: 44 30 54.75 N 64 17 33.20 W
Boulder, Smith's Cove: 44 30 46.50 N 64 17 11.10 W

These sites have been chosen because they're both visible on some aerial photographs: Cone C is the more obvious but the boulder at Smith's Cove can be tied to the Roper Survey. The coordinates above are not necessarily correct, or even precise, as it will be noted that they've obviously been truncated / rounded. What purpose does this serve? I can obtain a more or less accurate (but nowhere near precise) determination of distance and bearing between the two points expressed in nautical miles - which would be acceptable for short distance coastal navigation. However, when applied to the island, I would then have to convert to metres or yards. This means I have to adjust for latitude and apply the result to a 'unit' of 1852 metres (or, even, thereabouts), or use software to do so.

Would it not be far better to have the co-ordinates expressed in metres, or yards, in the first place in order to permit a straightforward application of trigonometry? If you have one point determined with a high degree of accuracy then other locations might be similarly referenced but, perhaps, better expressed as either Cartesian co-ordinates from the base point or by polar co-ordinates by application of a simple trigonometric function provided by most scientific calculators.

So, my suggestion? Treat the mapping of points on the island as a survey. Use the sexagesimal notation only as a convenience. Select a regional datum, and stick to it, spot one or two known locations as base points, or to achieve a baseline (even the corners of buildings might suit), and the rest follows.

The 1937 location of the boulder at Smith's Cove (see my avatar) would be extremely useful as a base point because this can be tied to attempts to determine the location of the original Money Pit and to the drilled rocks and the Welling triangle. But bear in mind that had the island been surveyed before 1795 then the unit employed would not have been the metre.
User avatar
. . .
Digging for Diamonds
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:58 pm
Location: West Midlands, UK

PreviousNext

Return to Research Projects

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron

Fatal error: ./cache/ is NOT writable. in /home/oakislan/public_html/forum/includes/acm/acm_file.php on line 103