Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE

Expand Messages
  • Jesper
    I only see in the case that line H-I is equal to IGN line, I don t see on point L. Jesper
    Message 1 of 10 , Dec 1, 2010
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      I only see in the case that line H-I is equal to IGN line, I don't see on point L.

      Jesper

      --- In boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com, aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...> wrote:
      >
      > of course the 10km & 3km figures are just very rough estimatesso dont get thrown off by taking them too literally
      >
      > the upper part of the line from point l to point m is said by the judgment to begin at an orographic pointwhich basically just means a hilltop
      > & that point can be identified as the elevation point & turnpoint labelled 408m on this topo http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d30-12.htmlwhich is the sheet just west of the sheet the tripoint is on & which is linked below
      > & then from there bfml just follows the existing purple line southeastward onto the next sheet & then doesnt stop or turn as shown there but continues straight til it hits the niger boundarywhich is by chance at the heights of ngouma
      > these 1981 soviet maps are just copying the 1960 ign map that the court used & that your swatch is cut fromso if you want to see the bigger picture the court saw you can do that by just looking at the soviets 
      > & just extend the purple line
      >
      >
      > --- On Tue, 11/30/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:
      >
      > From: Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
      > Subject: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
      > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 5:19 PM
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yes it’s 1960 IGN.
      >
      >  
      >
      > But I don’t have the
      > margins, and no other information of the datum at present.
      >
      >  
      >
      > 10 kms from the old tp
      > and 3 kms from the ford give a overlapped area of 650 meters , so it’s not
      > that precise.
      >
      >  
      >
      > I cannot se how the upper
      > part of the line L-M goes in line with the old bfml.
      >
      >  
      >
      > Jesper
      >
      >  
      >
      >  
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] PÃ¥ vegne af aletheia kallos
      >
      > Sendt: 28. november 2010 01:07
      >
      > Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > Emne: Re: [boundarypointpoint]
      > BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
      >
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > thanx & you are right that niger & its
      > limits didnt change
      >
      >
      > tho the northernmost 10km of old bfne became the
      > southernmost 10km of new mlne
      >
      >
      > as a result of the actual adjustment in the course
      > of bfml
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      > here is the operative icj text & maps
      >
      > http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/69/6449.pdf
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      > the coords i gave
      > are for icj point m 
      >
      >
      > aka new bfmlne
      >
      >
      > & you do have them right
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      > the problem is that the icj doesnt mention their
      > datum
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      > at first i thought perhaps wgs84 
      >
      >
      > but now i dont think so
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      > they do mention their map is ign 1960
      >
      >
      > & i believe that is your new topo attachment too
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      > so if you can just read the coords from your map
      > margins
      >
      >
      > you may be able to nail this exactly
      >
      >
      > no muss no fuss
      >
      >
      > assuming you have your margins
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      > alternatively you can measure 10km south from old
      > bfmlne & 3km north from gue de kabia
      >
      >
      > aka the ford of kabia
      >
      >
      > as indicated on your topo
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      > you can also just extend the bfml sector that is
      > entering from the left side here
      >
      >
      > http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d31-07.html
      >
      >
      > straight to the niger border
      >
      >
      > since that is really all the icj did to create the
      > new tripoint
      >
      >
      > & that line extension will hit the same spot
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      > & judging from all that 
      >
      >
      > & also from the land forms i can see both on
      > your topo & google earth
      >
      >
      > i believe you need to move your triangle south about
      > 800 meters
      >
      >
      > or down to roughly due east of the 280 elevation
      > spot on your topo
      >
      >
      > as shown on my attached guess
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      > & you can double or triple check this by
      > comparing all the above methods
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > --- On Sat, 11/27/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
      > wrote:
      >
      >
      > From: Jesper Nielsen
      > <jesper@...>
      >
      > Subject: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [2 Attachments]
      >
      > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > Date: Saturday, November 27, 2010, 4:38 PM
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      > Enclosed 200k IGN topo and new
      > pushpin guess.
      >  
      > I wasn’t able to open your
      > previously posted 1986 link on a new tripoint, but I found other long
      > documents, but not the cords you mentioned: n14d54m48s e0d14m39s.
      > But I have moved my pushing south
      > on the NE boundary until n14 d54 48s, hoping this is right. The coords is
      > inside NE and as I read it, NE territory is unchanged.
      >  
      > Pls correct me if I am wrong, and
      > also if you can find a document with the coords.
      >  
      > Jesper
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >  
      >
    • aletheia kallos
      well my system is down so i have to drive 12 miles to the library computer which for some reason doesnt work for poehali so this answer may not be as fast or
      Message 2 of 10 , Dec 2, 2010
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        well my system is down so i have to drive 12 miles to the library computer
        which for some reason doesnt work for poehali
        so this answer may not be as fast or clear as usual

        & i am subject to getting kicked off my computer just like in the good old days
        but in case we get disconnected
        the first thing you must read carefully is section ix chapters 6 & 7 of the icj judgment

        it mentions all 4 points i j k & l
        & then says j & k are yet to be determined
        so point l is also already known as the hilltop indicated on the soviet topo there
        tho perhaps the coords are not exact owing to datum shift
        but the point is locked in on the hilltop

        & both parties agree to the ign map
        it says there too

        so i conclude the court just extended the line segment from the point l hilltop southeast along the purple line the soviets got from the ign & continued it all the way to the niger boundary shown on the ign map
        in accordance with the text & or older map it was following in making the judgment


        --- On Wed, 12/1/10, Jesper <jesper@...> wrote:

        From: Jesper <jesper@...>
        Subject: Re: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
        To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Wednesday, December 1, 2010, 5:04 PM

         

        I only see in the case that line H-I is equal to IGN line, I don't see on point L.

        Jesper

        --- In boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com, aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...> wrote:
        >
        > of course the 10km & 3km figures are just very rough estimatesso dont get thrown off by taking them too literally
        >
        > the upper part of the line from point l to point m is said by the judgment to begin at an orographic pointwhich basically just means a hilltop
        > & that point can be identified as the elevation point & turnpoint labelled 408m on this topo http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d30-12.htmlwhich is the sheet just west of the sheet the tripoint is on & which is linked below
        > & then from there bfml just follows the existing purple line southeastward onto the next sheet & then doesnt stop or turn as shown there but continues straight til it hits the niger boundarywhich is by chance at the heights of ngouma
        > these 1981 soviet maps are just copying the 1960 ign map that the court used & that your swatch is cut fromso if you want to see the bigger picture the court saw you can do that by just looking at the soviets 
        > & just extend the purple line
        >
        >
        > --- On Tue, 11/30/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:
        >
        > From: Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
        > Subject: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
        > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
        > Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 5:19 PM
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yes it’s 1960 IGN.
        >
        >  
        >
        > But I don’t have the
        > margins, and no other information of the datum at present.
        >
        >  
        >
        > 10 kms from the old tp
        > and 3 kms from the ford give a overlapped area of 650 meters , so it’s not
        > that precise.
        >
        >  
        >
        > I cannot se how the upper
        > part of the line L-M goes in line with the old bfml.
        >
        >  
        >
        > Jesper
        >
        >  
        >
        >  
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] PÃ¥ vegne af aletheia kallos
        >
        > Sendt: 28. november 2010 01:07
        >
        > Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Emne: Re: [boundarypointpoint]
        > BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
        >
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > thanx & you are right that niger & its
        > limits didnt change
        >
        >
        > tho the northernmost 10km of old bfne became the
        > southernmost 10km of new mlne
        >
        >
        > as a result of the actual adjustment in the course
        > of bfml
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        > here is the operative icj text & maps
        >
        > http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/69/6449.pdf
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > the coords i gave
        > are for icj point m 
        >
        >
        > aka new bfmlne
        >
        >
        > & you do have them right
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > the problem is that the icj doesnt mention their
        > datum
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > at first i thought perhaps wgs84 
        >
        >
        > but now i dont think so
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > they do mention their map is ign 1960
        >
        >
        > & i believe that is your new topo attachment too
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > so if you can just read the coords from your map
        > margins
        >
        >
        > you may be able to nail this exactly
        >
        >
        > no muss no fuss
        >
        >
        > assuming you have your margins
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > alternatively you can measure 10km south from old
        > bfmlne & 3km north from gue de kabia
        >
        >
        > aka the ford of kabia
        >
        >
        > as indicated on your topo
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > you can also just extend the bfml sector that is
        > entering from the left side here
        >
        >
        > http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d31-07.html
        >
        >
        > straight to the niger border
        >
        >
        > since that is really all the icj did to create the
        > new tripoint
        >
        >
        > & that line extension will hit the same spot
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > & judging from all that 
        >
        >
        > & also from the land forms i can see both on
        > your topo & google earth
        >
        >
        > i believe you need to move your triangle south about
        > 800 meters
        >
        >
        > or down to roughly due east of the 280 elevation
        > spot on your topo
        >
        >
        > as shown on my attached guess
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > & you can double or triple check this by
        > comparing all the above methods
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > --- On Sat, 11/27/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
        > wrote:
        >
        >
        > From: Jesper Nielsen
        > <jesper@...>
        >
        > Subject: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [2 Attachments]
        >
        > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Date: Saturday, November 27, 2010, 4:38 PM
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > Enclosed 200k IGN topo and new
        > pushpin guess.
        >  
        > I wasn’t able to open your
        > previously posted 1986 link on a new tripoint, but I found other long
        > documents, but not the cords you mentioned: n14d54m48s e0d14m39s.
        > But I have moved my pushing south
        > on the NE boundary until n14 d54 48s, hoping this is right. The coords is
        > inside NE and as I read it, NE territory is unchanged.
        >  
        > Pls correct me if I am wrong, and
        > also if you can find a document with the coords.
        >  
        > Jesper
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >  
        >


      • Jesper Nielsen
        I see what you mean, good found. Enclosed map extending the line on the IGN map. Jesper _____ Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
        Message 3 of 10 , Dec 5, 2010
        View Source
        • 1 Attachment
        • 56 KB

        I see what you mean, good found.

         

        Enclosed map extending the line on the IGN map.

         

        Jesper

         


        Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af aletheia kallos
        Sendt: 2. december 2010 17:57
        Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
        Emne: Re: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE

         

         

        well my system is down so i have to drive 12 miles to the library computer
        which for some reason doesnt work for poehali
        so this answer may not be as fast or clear as usual

        & i am subject to getting kicked off my computer just like in the good old days
        but in case we get disconnected
        the first thing you must read carefully is section ix chapters 6 & 7 of the icj judgment

        it mentions all 4 points i j k & l
        & then says j & k are yet to be determined
        so point l is also already known as the hilltop indicated on the soviet topo there
        tho perhaps the coords are not exact owing to datum shift
        but the point is locked in on the hilltop

        & both parties agree to the ign map
        it says there too

        so i conclude the court just extended the line segment from the point l hilltop southeast along the purple line the soviets got from the ign & continued it all the way to the niger boundary shown on the ign map
        in accordance with the text & or older map it was following in making the judgment


        --- On Wed, 12/1/10, Jesper <jesper@...> wrote:


        From: Jesper <jesper@...>
        Subject: Re: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
        To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Wednesday, December 1, 2010, 5:04 PM

         

        I only see in the case that line H-I is equal to IGN line, I don't see on point L.

        Jesper

        --- In boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com, aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...> wrote:

        >
        > of course the 10km & 3km figures are just very rough estimatesso
        dont get thrown off by taking them too literally
        >
        > the upper part of the line from point l to point m is said by the
        judgment to begin at an orographic pointwhich basically just means a hilltop
        > & that point can be identified as the elevation point &
        turnpoint labelled 408m on this topo http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d30-12.htmlwhich is the sheet just west of the sheet the tripoint is on & which is linked below
        > & then from there bfml just follows the existing purple line
        southeastward onto the next sheet & then doesnt stop or turn as shown there but continues straight til it hits the niger boundarywhich is by chance at the heights of ngouma
        > these 1981 soviet maps are just copying the 1960 ign map that the court
        used & that your swatch is cut fromso if you want to see the bigger picture the court saw you can do that by just looking at the soviets 
        > & just extend the purple line
        >
        >
        > --- On Tue, 11/30/10, Jesper
        Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:
        >
        > From: Jesper
        Nielsen <jesper@...>
        > Subject: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
        > To:
        target="_blank" ymailto="mailto:boundarypointpoint%40yahoogroups.com">boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
        > Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 5:19 PM
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yes it’s 1960 IGN.
        >
        >  
        >
        > But I don’t have the
        > margins, and no other information of the datum at present.
        >
        >  
        >
        > 10 kms from the old tp
        > and 3 kms from the ford give a overlapped area of
        ProductID="650 meters" w:st="on">650 meters , so it’s not
        > that precise.
        >
        >  
        >
        > I cannot se how the upper
        > part of the line L-M goes in line with the old bfml.
        >
        >  
        >
        > Jesper
        >
        >  
        >
        >  
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Fra:
        target="_blank" ymailto="mailto:boundarypointpoint%40yahoogroups.com">boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] PÃ¥ vegne af aletheia kallos
        >
        > Sendt: 28. november 2010 01:07
        >
        > Til:
        target="_blank" ymailto="mailto:boundarypointpoint%40yahoogroups.com">boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Emne: Re: [boundarypointpoint]
        > BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
        >
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > thanx & you are right that niger & its
        > limits didnt change
        >
        >
        > tho the northernmost 10km of old bfne became the
        > southernmost 10km of new mlne
        >
        >
        > as a result of the actual adjustment in the course
        > of bfml
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        > here is the operative icj text & maps
        >
        > http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/69/6449.pdf
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > the coords i gave
        > are for icj point m 
        >
        >
        > aka new bfmlne
        >
        >
        > & you do have them right
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > the problem is that the icj doesnt mention their
        > datum
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > at first i thought perhaps wgs84 
        >
        >
        > but now i dont think so
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > they do mention their map is ign 1960
        >
        >
        > & i believe that is your new topo attachment too
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > so if you can just read the coords from your map
        > margins
        >
        >
        > you may be able to nail this exactly
        >
        >
        > no muss no fuss
        >
        >
        > assuming you have your margins
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > alternatively you can measure 10km south from old
        > bfmlne & 3km north from gue de kabia
        >
        >
        > aka the ford of kabia
        >
        >
        > as indicated on your topo
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > you can also just extend the bfml sector that is
        > entering from the left side here
        >
        >
        > http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d31-07.html
        >
        >
        > straight to the niger border
        >
        >
        > since that is really all the icj did to create the
        > new tripoint
        >
        >
        > & that line extension will hit the same spot
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > & judging from all that 
        >
        >
        > & also from the land forms i can see both on
        > your topo & google earth
        >
        >
        > i believe you need to move your triangle south about
        > 800 meters
        >
        >
        > or down to roughly due east of the 280 elevation
        > spot on your topo
        >
        >
        > as shown on my attached guess
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > & you can double or triple check this by
        > comparing all the above methods
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > --- On Sat, 11/27/10, Jesper
        Nielsen <jesper@...>
        > wrote:
        >
        >
        > From: Jesper
        Nielsen
        > <jesper@...>
        >
        > Subject: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [2 Attachments]
        >
        > To:
        target="_blank" ymailto="mailto:boundarypointpoint%40yahoogroups.com">boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Date: Saturday, November 27, 2010, 4:38 PM
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        > Enclosed 200k IGN topo and new
        > pushpin guess.
        >  
        > I wasn’t able to open your
        > previously posted 1986 link on a new tripoint, but I found other long
        > documents, but not the cords you mentioned: n14d54m48s e0d14m39s.
        > But I have moved my pushing south
        > on the NE boundary until n14 d54 48s, hoping this is right. The coords
        is
        > inside NE and as I read it, NE territory is unchanged.
        >  
        > Pls correct me if I am wrong, and
        > also if you can find a document with the coords.
        >  
        > Jesper
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >  
        >

         

      • aletheia kallos
        thanx i just got back to the internet again at the library after a snowstorm & found poehali still not working here yikes i hope it is only my library computer
        Message 4 of 10 , Dec 7, 2010
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          thanx
          i just got back to the internet again at the library after a snowstorm
          & found poehali still not working here
          yikes
          i hope it is only my library computer

          but anyway
          if poehali is still working for you
          you can read from the margins the exact degminsecs it gives for the hilltop at point l
          & then compare them with the degminsecs the icj stipulates for the same point l
          & you will have the datum shift displacement between the ign map & the soviet map

          voila

          i believe this amounts to about 20 or 40 seconds or so in both lat & long

          then apply that shift backwards to recompute & reread point m on the soviet topo

          then visually comparing physical features find the same point m on the ign map
          & that will be the best available read on this tripoint for the moment

          i wish i could just blurt it out for you
          but i think you can now nail it for yourself from what i have just said

          for now let me just add i believe your latest try is even more too far north than your previous one was

          but hopefully we shall now actually see & know


          --- On Sun, 12/5/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:

          From: Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
          Subject: SV: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
          To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Sunday, December 5, 2010, 3:37 PM

           

          I see what you mean, good found.

           

          Enclosed map extending the line on the IGN map.

           

          Jesper

           


          Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af aletheia kallos
          Sendt: 2. december 2010 17:57
          Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          Emne: Re: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE

           

           

          well my system is down so i have to drive 12 miles to the library computer
          which for some reason doesnt work for poehali
          so this answer may not be as fast or clear as usual

          & i am subject to getting kicked off my computer just like in the good old days
          but in case we get disconnected
          the first thing you must read carefully is section ix chapters 6 & 7 of the icj judgment

          it mentions all 4 points i j k & l
          & then says j & k are yet to be determined
          so point l is also already known as the hilltop indicated on the soviet topo there
          tho perhaps the coords are not exact owing to datum shift
          but the point is locked in on the hilltop

          & both parties agree to the ign map
          it says there too

          so i conclude the court just extended the line segment from the point l hilltop southeast along the purple line the soviets got from the ign & continued it all the way to the niger boundary shown on the ign map
          in accordance with the text & or older map it was following in making the judgment


          --- On Wed, 12/1/10, Jesper <jesper@...> wrote:


          From: Jesper <jesper@...>
          Subject: Re: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
          To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Wednesday, December 1, 2010, 5:04 PM

           

          I only see in the case that line H-I is equal to IGN line, I don't see on point L.

          Jesper

          --- In boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com, aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...> wrote:
          >
          > of course the 10km & 3km figures are just very rough estimatesso dont get thrown off by taking them too literally
          >
          > the upper part of the line from point l to point m is said by the judgment to begin at an orographic pointwhich basically just means a hilltop
          > & that point can be identified as the elevation point & turnpoint labelled 408m on this topo http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d30-12.htmlwhich is the sheet just west of the sheet the tripoint is on & which is linked below
          > & then from there bfml just follows the existing purple line southeastward onto the next sheet & then doesnt stop or turn as shown there but continues straight til it hits the niger boundarywhich is by chance at the heights of ngouma
          > these 1981 soviet maps are just copying the 1960 ign map that the court used & that your swatch is cut fromso if you want to see the bigger picture the court saw you can do that by just looking at the soviets 
          > & just extend the purple line
          >
          >
          > --- On Tue, 11/30/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:
          >
          > From: Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
          > Subject: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
          > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          > Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 5:19 PM
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yes it’s 1960 IGN.
          >
          >  
          >
          > But I don’t have the
          > margins, and no other information of the datum at present.
          >
          >  
          >
          > 10 kms from the old tp
          > and 3 kms from the ford give a overlapped area of 650 meters , so it’s not
          > that precise.
          >
          >  
          >
          > I cannot se how the upper
          > part of the line L-M goes in line with the old bfml.
          >
          >  
          >
          > Jesper
          >
          >  
          >
          >  
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] PÃ¥ vegne af aletheia kallos
          >
          > Sendt: 28. november 2010 01:07
          >
          > Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > Emne: Re: [boundarypointpoint]
          > BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
          >
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > thanx & you are right that niger & its
          > limits didnt change
          >
          >
          > tho the northernmost 10km of old bfne became the
          > southernmost 10km of new mlne
          >
          >
          > as a result of the actual adjustment in the course
          > of bfml
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          > here is the operative icj text & maps
          >
          > http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/69/6449.pdf
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > the coords i gave
          > are for icj point m 
          >
          >
          > aka new bfmlne
          >
          >
          > & you do have them right
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > the problem is that the icj doesnt mention their
          > datum
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > at first i thought perhaps wgs84 
          >
          >
          > but now i dont think so
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > they do mention their map is ign 1960
          >
          >
          > & i believe that is your new topo attachment too
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > so if you can just read the coords from your map
          > margins
          >
          >
          > you may be able to nail this exactly
          >
          >
          > no muss no fuss
          >
          >
          > assuming you have your margins
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > alternatively you can measure 10km south from old
          > bfmlne & 3km north from gue de kabia
          >
          >
          > aka the ford of kabia
          >
          >
          > as indicated on your topo
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > you can also just extend the bfml sector that is
          > entering from the left side here
          >
          >
          > http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d31-07.html
          >
          >
          > straight to the niger border
          >
          >
          > since that is really all the icj did to create the
          > new tripoint
          >
          >
          > & that line extension will hit the same spot
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > & judging from all that 
          >
          >
          > & also from the land forms i can see both on
          > your topo & google earth
          >
          >
          > i believe you need to move your triangle south about
          > 800 meters
          >
          >
          > or down to roughly due east of the 280 elevation
          > spot on your topo
          >
          >
          > as shown on my attached guess
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > & you can double or triple check this by
          > comparing all the above methods
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > --- On Sat, 11/27/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
          > wrote:
          >
          >
          > From: Jesper Nielsen
          > <jesper@...>
          >
          > Subject: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [2 Attachments]
          >
          > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > Date: Saturday, November 27, 2010, 4:38 PM
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > Enclosed 200k IGN topo and new
          > pushpin guess.
          >  
          > I wasn’t able to open your
          > previously posted 1986 link on a new tripoint, but I found other long
          > documents, but not the cords you mentioned: n14d54m48s e0d14m39s.
          > But I have moved my pushing south
          > on the NE boundary until n14 d54 48s, hoping this is right. The coords is
          > inside NE and as I read it, NE territory is unchanged.
          >  
          > Pls correct me if I am wrong, and
          > also if you can find a document with the coords.
          >  
          > Jesper
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >  
          >

           


        • Jesper Nielsen
          Poehali was down for a while, but now up again. Russian topo, places hill top at 15 04 56.8016, -0 14 41.7146. And ICJ 15 04 42, -0 14 44 A difference of 480
          Message 5 of 10 , Dec 7, 2010
          View Source
          • 1 Attachment
          • 16 KB

          Poehali was down for a while, but now up again.

           

          Russian topo, places hill top at 15 04 56.8016, -0 14 41.7146.

           

          And ICJ 15 04 42, -0 14 44

           

          A difference of 480 meters .

           

          So if point M is 14 54 48, - 0 14 39, it should be ?

           

          Jesper

           


          Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] På vegne af aletheia kallos
          Sendt: 7. december 2010 17:31
          Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          Emne: Re: SV: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE

           

           

          thanx
          i just got back to the internet again at the library after a snowstorm
          & found poehali still not working here
          yikes
          i hope it is only my library computer

          but anyway
          if poehali is still working for you
          you can read from the margins the exact degminsecs it gives for the hilltop at point l
          & then compare them with the degminsecs the icj stipulates for the same point l
          & you will have the datum shift displacement between the ign map & the soviet map

          voila

          i believe this amounts to about 20 or 40 seconds or so in both lat & long

          then apply that shift backwards to recompute & reread point m on the soviet topo

          then visually comparing physical features find the same point m on the ign map
          & that will be the best available read on this tripoint for the moment

          i wish i could just blurt it out for you
          but i think you can now nail it for yourself from what i have just said

          for now let me just add i believe your latest try is even more too far north than your previous one was

          but hopefully we shall now actually see & know


          --- On Sun, 12/5/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:


          From: Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
          Subject: SV: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
          To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Sunday, December 5, 2010, 3:37 PM

           

          I see what you mean, good found.

           

          Enclosed map extending the line on the IGN map.

           

          Jesper

           


          Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] På vegne af aletheia kallos
          Sendt: 2. december 2010 17:57
          Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          Emne: Re: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE

           

           

          well my system is down so i have to drive 12 miles to the library computer
          which for some reason doesnt work for poehali
          so this answer may not be as fast or clear as usual

          & i am subject to getting kicked off my computer just like in the good old days
          but in case we get disconnected
          the first thing you must read carefully is section ix chapters 6 & 7 of the icj judgment

          it mentions all 4 points i j k & l
          & then says j & k are yet to be determined
          so point l is also already known as the hilltop indicated on the soviet topo there
          tho perhaps the coords are not exact owing to datum shift
          but the point is locked in on the hilltop

          & both parties agree to the ign map
          it says there too

          so i conclude the court just extended the line segment from the point l hilltop southeast along the purple line the soviets got from the ign & continued it all the way to the niger boundary shown on the ign map
          in accordance with the text & or older map it was following in making the judgment


          --- On Wed, 12/1/10, Jesper <jesper@...> wrote:


          From: Jesper <jesper@...>
          Subject: Re: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
          To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Wednesday, December 1, 2010, 5:04 PM

           

          I only see in the case that line H-I is equal to IGN line, I don't see on point L.

          Jesper

          --- In boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com , aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...> wrote:

          >
          > of course the 10km & 3km figures are just very rough estimatesso
          dont get thrown off by taking them too literally
          >
          > the upper part of the line from point l to point m is said by the
          judgment to begin at an orographic pointwhich basically just means a hilltop
          > & that point can be identified as the elevation point &
          turnpoint labelled 408m on this topo http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d30-12.htmlwhich is the sheet just west of the sheet the tripoint is on & which is linked below
          > & then from there bfml just follows the existing purple line
          southeastward onto the next sheet & then doesnt stop or turn as shown there but continues straight til it hits the niger boundarywhich is by chance at the heights of ngouma
          > these 1981 soviet maps are just copying the 1960 ign map that the
          court used & that your swatch is cut fromso if you want to see the bigger picture the court saw you can do that by just looking at the soviets 
          > & just extend the purple line
          >
          >
          > --- On Tue, 11/30/10,
          w:st="on">Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:
          >
          > From: Jesper
          Nielsen <jesper@...>
          > Subject: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
          > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          > Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 5:19 PM
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yes it’s 1960 IGN.
          >
          >  
          >
          > But I don’t have the
          > margins, and no other information of the datum at present.
          >
          >  
          >
          > 10 kms from the old tp
          > and 3 kms from the ford give a overlapped area of
          ProductID="650 meters" w:st="on">650 meters , so it’s not
          > that precise.
          >
          >  
          >
          > I cannot se how the upper
          > part of the line L-M goes in line with the old bfml.
          >
          >  
          >
          > Jesper
          >
          >  
          >
          >  
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] PÃ¥ vegne af aletheia kallos
          >
          > Sendt: 28. november 2010 01:07
          >
          > Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > Emne: Re: [boundarypointpoint]
          > BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
          >
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > thanx & you are right that niger & its
          > limits didnt change
          >
          >
          > tho the northernmost 10km of old bfne became the
          > southernmost 10km of new mlne
          >
          >
          > as a result of the actual adjustment in the course
          > of bfml
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          > here is the operative icj text & maps
          >
          >
          target="_blank">http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/69/6449.pdf
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > the coords i gave
          > are for icj point m 
          >
          >
          > aka new bfmlne
          >
          >
          > & you do have them right
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > the problem is that the icj doesnt mention their
          > datum
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > at first i thought perhaps wgs84 
          >
          >
          > but now i dont think so
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > they do mention their map is ign 1960
          >
          >
          > & i believe that is your new topo attachment too
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > so if you can just read the coords from your map
          > margins
          >
          >
          > you may be able to nail this exactly
          >
          >
          > no muss no fuss
          >
          >
          > assuming you have your margins
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > alternatively you can measure 10km south from old
          > bfmlne & 3km north from gue de kabia
          >
          >
          > aka the ford of kabia
          >
          >
          > as indicated on your topo
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > you can also just extend the bfml sector that is
          > entering from the left side here
          >
          >
          > http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d31-07.html
          >
          >
          > straight to the niger border
          >
          >
          > since that is really all the icj did to create the
          > new tripoint
          >
          >
          > & that line extension will hit the same spot
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > & judging from all that 
          >
          >
          > & also from the land forms i can see both on
          > your topo & google earth
          >
          >
          > i believe you need to move your triangle south about
          > 800 meters
          >
          >
          > or down to roughly due east of the 280 elevation
          > spot on your topo
          >
          >
          > as shown on my attached guess
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > & you can double or triple check this by
          > comparing all the above methods
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > --- On Sat, 11/27/10,
          w:st="on">Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
          > wrote:
          >
          >
          > From: Jesper
          Nielsen
          > <jesper@...>
          >
          > Subject: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [2 Attachments]
          >
          > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > Date: Saturday, November 27, 2010, 4:38 PM
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          > Enclosed 200k IGN topo and new
          > pushpin guess.
          >  
          > I wasn’t able to open your
          > previously posted 1986 link on a new tripoint, but I found other long
          > documents, but not the cords you mentioned: n14d54m48s e0d14m39s.
          > But I have moved my pushing south
          > on the NE boundary until n14 d54 48s, hoping this is right. The coords
          is
          > inside NE and as I read it, NE territory is unchanged.
          >  
          > Pls correct me if I am wrong, and
          > also if you can find a document with the coords.
          >  
          > Jesper
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >  
          >

           

           

        • aletheia kallos
          whew what a relief & i have double checked all your transcriptions etc but the soviet hilltop longitude looks to me rather more like w0d14m44s so assuming that
          Message 6 of 10 , Dec 8, 2010
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            whew what a relief

            &
            i have double checked all your transcriptions etc
            but the soviet hilltop longitude looks to me rather more like w0d14m44s
            so
            assuming that
            & rounding off the soviet hilltop latitude to n15d4m57s
            it simply means
            the soviet position for point m will also appear 15 secs due north of the icj ign position
            just as the soviet position for point l did

            therefore
            & just to simplify since i am running out of time
            but you can check it too
            on the adjacent soviet topo sheet we are looking for the point where the niger boundary crosses n14d55m3s

            & this point appears to me to fall again exactly due east of the 280m elevation point
            which is coincidentally exactly due east of the same 280m elev point on the ign map
            i am pretty sure
            tho i am going from recollection only at this point

            may the farce be with us tho

            i am being given the boot

            --- On Tue, 12/7/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:

            From: Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
            Subject: SV: SV: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
            To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 6:13 PM

             

            Poehali was down for a while, but now up again.

             

            Russian topo, places hill top at 15 04 56.8016, -0 14 41.7146.

             

            And ICJ 15 04 42, -0 14 44

             

            A difference of 480 meters .

             

            So if point M is 14 54 48, - 0 14 39, it should be ?

             

            Jesper

             


            Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] På vegne af aletheia kallos
            Sendt: 7. december 2010 17:31
            Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            Emne: Re: SV: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE

             

             

            thanx
            i just got back to the internet again at the library after a snowstorm
            & found poehali still not working here
            yikes
            i hope it is only my library computer

            but anyway
            if poehali is still working for you
            you can read from the margins the exact degminsecs it gives for the hilltop at point l
            & then compare them with the degminsecs the icj stipulates for the same point l
            & you will have the datum shift displacement between the ign map & the soviet map

            voila

            i believe this amounts to about 20 or 40 seconds or so in both lat & long

            then apply that shift backwards to recompute & reread point m on the soviet topo

            then visually comparing physical features find the same point m on the ign map
            & that will be the best available read on this tripoint for the moment

            i wish i could just blurt it out for you
            but i think you can now nail it for yourself from what i have just said

            for now let me just add i believe your latest try is even more too far north than your previous one was

            but hopefully we shall now actually see & know


            --- On Sun, 12/5/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:


            From: Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
            Subject: SV: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
            To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Sunday, December 5, 2010, 3:37 PM

             

            I see what you mean, good found.

             

            Enclosed map extending the line on the IGN map.

             

            Jesper

             


            Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] På vegne af aletheia kallos
            Sendt: 2. december 2010 17:57
            Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            Emne: Re: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE

             

             

            well my system is down so i have to drive 12 miles to the library computer
            which for some reason doesnt work for poehali
            so this answer may not be as fast or clear as usual

            & i am subject to getting kicked off my computer just like in the good old days
            but in case we get disconnected
            the first thing you must read carefully is section ix chapters 6 & 7 of the icj judgment

            it mentions all 4 points i j k & l
            & then says j & k are yet to be determined
            so point l is also already known as the hilltop indicated on the soviet topo there
            tho perhaps the coords are not exact owing to datum shift
            but the point is locked in on the hilltop

            & both parties agree to the ign map
            it says there too

            so i conclude the court just extended the line segment from the point l hilltop southeast along the purple line the soviets got from the ign & continued it all the way to the niger boundary shown on the ign map
            in accordance with the text & or older map it was following in making the judgment


            --- On Wed, 12/1/10, Jesper <jesper@...> wrote:


            From: Jesper <jesper@...>
            Subject: Re: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
            To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Wednesday, December 1, 2010, 5:04 PM

             

            I only see in the case that line H-I is equal to IGN line, I don't see on point L.

            Jesper

            --- In boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com , aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...> wrote:
            >
            > of course the 10km & 3km figures are just very rough estimatesso dont get thrown off by taking them too literally
            >
            > the upper part of the line from point l to point m is said by the judgment to begin at an orographic pointwhich basically just means a hilltop
            > & that point can be identified as the elevation point & turnpoint labelled 408m on this topo http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d30-12.htmlwhich is the sheet just west of the sheet the tripoint is on & which is linked below
            > & then from there bfml just follows the existing purple line southeastward onto the next sheet & then doesnt stop or turn as shown there but continues straight til it hits the niger boundarywhich is by chance at the heights of ngouma
            > these 1981 soviet maps are just copying the 1960 ign map that the court used & that your swatch is cut fromso if you want to see the bigger picture the court saw you can do that by just looking at the soviets 
            > & just extend the purple line
            >
            >
            > --- On Tue, 11/30/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:
            >
            > From: Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
            > Subject: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
            > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            > Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 5:19 PM
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yes it’s 1960 IGN.
            >
            >  
            >
            > But I don’t have the
            > margins, and no other information of the datum at present.
            >
            >  
            >
            > 10 kms from the old tp
            > and 3 kms from the ford give a overlapped area of 650 meters , so it’s not
            > that precise.
            >
            >  
            >
            > I cannot se how the upper
            > part of the line L-M goes in line with the old bfml.
            >
            >  
            >
            > Jesper
            >
            >  
            >
            >  
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] PÃ¥ vegne af aletheia kallos
            >
            > Sendt: 28. november 2010 01:07
            >
            > Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > Emne: Re: [boundarypointpoint]
            > BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
            >
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > thanx & you are right that niger & its
            > limits didnt change
            >
            >
            > tho the northernmost 10km of old bfne became the
            > southernmost 10km of new mlne
            >
            >
            > as a result of the actual adjustment in the course
            > of bfml
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            > here is the operative icj text & maps
            >
            > http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/69/6449.pdf
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > the coords i gave
            > are for icj point m 
            >
            >
            > aka new bfmlne
            >
            >
            > & you do have them right
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > the problem is that the icj doesnt mention their
            > datum
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > at first i thought perhaps wgs84 
            >
            >
            > but now i dont think so
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > they do mention their map is ign 1960
            >
            >
            > & i believe that is your new topo attachment too
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > so if you can just read the coords from your map
            > margins
            >
            >
            > you may be able to nail this exactly
            >
            >
            > no muss no fuss
            >
            >
            > assuming you have your margins
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > alternatively you can measure 10km south from old
            > bfmlne & 3km north from gue de kabia
            >
            >
            > aka the ford of kabia
            >
            >
            > as indicated on your topo
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > you can also just extend the bfml sector that is
            > entering from the left side here
            >
            >
            > http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d31-07.html
            >
            >
            > straight to the niger border
            >
            >
            > since that is really all the icj did to create the
            > new tripoint
            >
            >
            > & that line extension will hit the same spot
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > & judging from all that 
            >
            >
            > & also from the land forms i can see both on
            > your topo & google earth
            >
            >
            > i believe you need to move your triangle south about
            > 800 meters
            >
            >
            > or down to roughly due east of the 280 elevation
            > spot on your topo
            >
            >
            > as shown on my attached guess
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > & you can double or triple check this by
            > comparing all the above methods
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > --- On Sat, 11/27/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
            > wrote:
            >
            >
            > From: Jesper Nielsen
            > <jesper@...>
            >
            > Subject: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [2 Attachments]
            >
            > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > Date: Saturday, November 27, 2010, 4:38 PM
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > Enclosed 200k IGN topo and new
            > pushpin guess.
            >  
            > I wasn’t able to open your
            > previously posted 1986 link on a new tripoint, but I found other long
            > documents, but not the cords you mentioned: n14d54m48s e0d14m39s.
            > But I have moved my pushing south
            > on the NE boundary until n14 d54 48s, hoping this is right. The coords is
            > inside NE and as I read it, NE territory is unchanged.
            >  
            > Pls correct me if I am wrong, and
            > also if you can find a document with the coords.
            >  
            > Jesper
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >  
            >

             

             


          • Jesper Nielsen
            The difference in your and my datum is 85m. I used professional mapping software, where the four corners of the RU map have been georectified (and I have done
            Message 7 of 10 , Dec 12, 2010
            View Source
            • 1 Attachment
            • 785 Bytes

            The difference in your and my datum is 85m.

            I used professional mapping software, where the four corners of the RU map have been georectified (and I have done it againI and so I have measured the hill.

            But perhaps we have different opinions of the hilltop.

             

            I have used the + shaped mark on the map where it looks like the border is turning. 0 14 44 is more of less the center of the upper part of the hill.

             

            Anyway, I think we have made this unnecessary complicated.

             

            Using same method as above I have also georectified the RU map with the tripoint and measured point M, and it’s on the Niger boundary. Point M is placed on the 15th boundary bar (including those hidden by letters). It’s the far which has a mountain-ish icon next to it (what does that represent anyway). I overlaid with the IGN map, and it’s just over 2 km from the gue (I am not sure where gue is anyway, I only see the text).

             

            Attached new pushin.

             

            Jesper  

             

             

             


            Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] På vegne af aletheia kallos
            Sendt: 8. december 2010 18:27
            Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            Emne: Re: SV: SV: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE

             

             

            whew what a relief

            &
            i have double checked all your transcriptions etc
            but the soviet hilltop longitude looks to me rather more like w0d14m44s
            so
            assuming that
            & rounding off the soviet hilltop latitude to n15d4m57s
            it simply means
            the soviet position for point m will also appear 15 secs due north of the icj ign position
            just as the soviet position for point l did

            therefore
            & just to simplify since i am running out of time
            but you can check it too
            on the adjacent soviet topo sheet we are looking for the point where the niger boundary crosses n14d55m3s

            & this point appears to me to fall again exactly due east of the 280m elevation point
            which is coincidentally exactly due east of the same 280m elev point on the ign map
            i am pretty sure
            tho i am going from recollection only at this point

            may the farce be with us tho

            i am being given the boot

            --- On Tue, 12/7/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:


            From: Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
            Subject: SV: SV: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
            To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 6:13 PM

             

            Poehali was down for a while, but now up again.

             

            Russian topo, places hill top at 15 04 56.8016, -0 14 41.7146.

             

            And ICJ 15 04 42, -0 14 44

             

            A difference of 480 meters .

             

            So if point M is 14 54 48, - 0 14 39, it should be ?

             

            Jesper

             


            Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] På vegne af aletheia kallos
            Sendt: 7. december 2010 17:31
            Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            Emne: Re: SV: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE

             

             

            thanx
            i just got back to the internet again at the library after a snowstorm
            & found poehali still not working here
            yikes
            i hope it is only my library computer

            but anyway
            if poehali is still working for you
            you can read from the margins the exact degminsecs it gives for the hilltop at point l
            & then compare them with the degminsecs the icj stipulates for the same point l
            & you will have the datum shift displacement between the ign map & the soviet map

            voila

            i believe this amounts to about 20 or 40 seconds or so in both lat & long

            then apply that shift backwards to recompute & reread point m on the soviet topo

            then visually comparing physical features find the same point m on the ign map
            & that will be the best available read on this tripoint for the moment

            i wish i could just blurt it out for you
            but i think you can now nail it for yourself from what i have just said

            for now let me just add i believe your latest try is even more too far north than your previous one was

            but hopefully we shall now actually see & know


            --- On Sun, 12/5/10, Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:


            From: Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
            Subject: SV: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
            To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Sunday, December 5, 2010, 3:37 PM

             

            I see what you mean, good found.

             

            Enclosed map extending the line on the IGN map.

             

            Jesper

             


            Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] På vegne af aletheia kallos
            Sendt: 2. december 2010 17:57
            Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            Emne: Re: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE

             

             

            well my system is down so i have to drive 12 miles to the library computer
            which for some reason doesnt work for poehali
            so this answer may not be as fast or clear as usual

            & i am subject to getting kicked off my computer just like in the good old days
            but in case we get disconnected
            the first thing you must read carefully is section ix chapters 6 & 7 of the icj judgment

            it mentions all 4 points i j k & l
            & then says j & k are yet to be determined
            so point l is also already known as the hilltop indicated on the soviet topo there
            tho perhaps the coords are not exact owing to datum shift
            but the point is locked in on the hilltop

            & both parties agree to the ign map
            it says there too

            so i conclude the court just extended the line segment from the point l hilltop southeast along the purple line the soviets got from the ign & continued it all the way to the niger boundary shown on the ign map
            in accordance with the text & or older map it was following in making the judgment


            --- On Wed, 12/1/10, Jesper <jesper@...> wrote:


            From: Jesper <jesper@...>
            Subject: Re: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
            To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Wednesday, December 1, 2010, 5:04 PM

             

            I only see in the case that line H-I is equal to IGN line, I don't see on point L.

            Jesper

            --- In boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com , aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...> wrote:

            >
            > of course the 10km & 3km figures are just very rough estimatesso
            dont get thrown off by taking them too literally
            >
            > the upper part of the line from point l to point m is said by the
            judgment to begin at an orographic pointwhich basically just means a hilltop
            > & that point can be identified as the elevation point &
            turnpoint labelled 408m on this topo http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d30-12.htmlwhich
            is the sheet just west of the sheet the tripoint is on & which is linked below
            > & then from there bfml just follows the existing purple line
            southeastward onto the next sheet & then doesnt stop or turn as shown there but continues straight til it hits the niger boundarywhich is by chance at the heights of ngouma
            > these 1981 soviet maps are just copying the 1960 ign map that the
            court used & that your swatch is cut fromso if you want to see the bigger picture the court saw you can do that by just looking at the soviets 
            > & just extend the purple line
            >
            >
            > --- On Tue, 11/30/10,
            w:st="on">Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...> wrote:
            >
            > From: Jesper
            Nielsen <jesper@...>
            > Subject: SV: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE
            > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            > Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 5:19 PM
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yes it’s 1960 IGN.
            >
            >  
            >
            > But I don’t have the
            > margins, and no other information of the datum at present.
            >
            >  
            >
            > 10 kms from the old tp
            > and 3 kms from the ford give a overlapped area of
            ProductID="650 meters" w:st="on">650 meters , so it’s not
            > that precise.
            >
            >  
            >
            > I cannot se how the upper
            > part of the line L-M goes in line with the old bfml.
            >
            >  
            >
            > Jesper
            >
            >  
            >
            >  
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] PÃ¥ vegne af aletheia kallos
            >
            > Sendt: 28. november 2010 01:07
            >
            > Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > Emne: Re: [boundarypointpoint]
            > BFMLNE [1 Attachment]
            >
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > thanx & you are right that
            w:st="on">niger & its
            > limits didnt change
            >
            >
            > tho the northernmost 10km of old bfne became the
            > southernmost 10km of new mlne
            >
            >
            > as a result of the actual adjustment in the course
            > of bfml
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            > here is the operative icj text & maps
            >
            >
            target="_blank">http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/69/6449.pdf
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > the coords i gave
            > are for icj point m 
            >
            >
            > aka new bfmlne
            >
            >
            > & you do have them right
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > the problem is that the icj doesnt mention their
            > datum
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > at first i thought perhaps wgs84 
            >
            >
            > but now i dont think so
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > they do mention their map is ign 1960
            >
            >
            > & i believe that is your new topo attachment too
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > so if you can just read the coords from your map
            > margins
            >
            >
            > you may be able to nail this exactly
            >
            >
            > no muss no fuss
            >
            >
            > assuming you have your margins
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > alternatively you can measure 10km south from old
            > bfmlne & 3km north from gue de kabia
            >
            >
            > aka the ford of kabia
            >
            >
            > as indicated on your topo
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > you can also just extend the bfml sector that is
            > entering from the left side here
            >
            >
            >
            target="_blank">http://en.poehali.org/maps/200k--d31-07.html
            >
            >
            > straight to the niger
            border
            >
            >
            > since that is really all the icj did to create the
            > new tripoint
            >
            >
            > & that line extension will hit the same spot
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > & judging from all that 
            >
            >
            > & also from the land forms i can see both on
            > your topo & google earth
            >
            >
            > i believe you need to move your triangle south about
            > 800 meters
            >
            >
            > or down to roughly due east of the 280 elevation
            > spot on your topo
            >
            >
            > as shown on my attached guess
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > & you can double or triple check this by
            > comparing all the above methods
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > --- On Sat, 11/27/10,
            w:st="on">Jesper Nielsen <jesper@...>
            > wrote:
            >
            >
            > From: Jesper
            Nielsen
            > <jesper@...>
            >
            > Subject: [boundarypointpoint] BFMLNE [2 Attachments]
            >
            > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > Date: Saturday, November 27, 2010, 4:38 PM
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            > Enclosed 200k IGN topo and new
            > pushpin guess.
            >  
            > I wasn’t able to open your
            > previously posted 1986 link on a new tripoint, but I found other
            long
            > documents, but not the cords you mentioned: n14d54m48s e0d14m39s.
            > But I have moved my pushing south
            > on the NE boundary until n14 d54 48s, hoping this is right. The
            coords is
            > inside NE and as I read it, NE territory is unchanged.
            >  
            > Pls correct me if I am wrong, and
            > also if you can find a document with the coords.
            >  
            > Jesper
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >  
            >

             

             

             

          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.