Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th

# DENSIFICATION OF THE WORLD by P83R4KN

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 30

• pg 1
```									6.    Data Application

a.     Method Used to Obtain Geodetic Results

If two cameras observed a satellite simultaneously, the basic geometric figure of

interest involved in this event is the plane triangle. One vertex of the triangle is

represented by the satellite with the other vertices being represented by the two

camera positions [32]. The chord direction between the two camera stations may

theoretically be determined if a second satellite position is observed

simultaneously by the two cameras. Two simultaneous observations produce two

plane triangles, which theoretically intersect along the chord between the two

camera stations. The geometric adjustments program (SATIN) was developed

using Zhongolovich’s work [33] which is based on the concept of intersecting planes

mentioned above. More details on the computer program are presented in ACIC

Technical Report 105 [34].

A pre-adjustment edit was described previously in Section 6. The SATIN

Program allows for additional editing through analysis of residuals. The

mathematical development of SATIN is based on the co-planar condition. This

condition states that the two simultaneous rays (observations) from two cameras

lie in the same plane as the chord between the two cameras. The residuals

(printed in meters) reflect how well this condition is satisfied for every pair of

simultaneous observations used in the solution. Theoretically, if observations and

1
stations coordinates are errorless, the residuals will equal zero. If only the station

coordinates are relatively errorless, the residuals represent the shortest distance

between the rays at the satellite (which do not intersect because of observational

errors). For a three station observation of a single satellite position, there would

be three “pairs” of simultaneous rays and thus three residuals computed.

Systematic errors not detected in the preadjustment edit, which may significantly

affect station positioning, usually appear in the residuals and the data affected is

removed manually. The SATIN Program also contains an automatic edit based on

the standard error of unit weight (one Sigma) computed from the residuals. The

rejection criterion is three sigma.

b.   Station Constraints and Chord Length Conditions

Data from nine PC-1000 stations and four BC-4 stations

in South America (Figure 1), plus data (Table 4) from the BC-4 stations at

Beltsville, were included in the SATIN Solution. The PC-1000 camera at Quito

occupied the exact same site as the BC-4 camera; therefore, only one geodetic

position was involved in the solution for that station. The camera position (NAD

27, 1900-1905 Mean Pole) of Beltsville was held fixed in the SATIN Solutions.

The solution presented in this report must be considered preliminary because it is

relative to the preliminary WN solution [35].

2
Two chord length conditions were imposed on the SATIN Solution -- the

survey chord lengths (Table1) between the PC-1000 and the BC-4 camera co-

located at Paramaribo and at Natal. The chord lengths computed from local survey

coordinates in Table 1 are:

Paramaribo (Station)              47.7m

Natal (Station)                  1291.8m

To insure that the scale of the WN adjustment (WGS 1) becomes an integral

part of the PC-1000 densification solution, the WGS 1 (NAD 27) station

coordinates (Table 6) were constrained by applying initially a priori sigma values of

10 meters to the BC-4 derived     X, Y, Z coordinates. The NAD 27 coordinates of

the PC-1000 co-located stations at Paramaribo and Natal could easily and

accurately be computed on the same system as the BC-4 stations. These ACIC

computed coordinates (identified as “WGS 1” in Table 6) also received 10 meter

sigmas. The NAD 27 positions previously determined for the PC-1000 stations at

Curacao and Trinidad (Table 6) were also initially constrained with a priori 10 meter

sigmas consistent with their published sigmas [34]. The constraint on Trinidad was

later relaxed to 100 meters, and those for the two Natal stations and Quito were

tightened to 5 meters. (Trinidad wanted to adjust beyond the 1—meter constraint.

3
The scarcity of data at Natal and Quito produced weak geometry at these

“anchoring” positions which prompted the tightening of their constraints.)

The initial 10 meter sigmas for the BC-4 WGS 1 positions in South America

where based on an overall root-mean-square (11 meters) of the sigmas (Table 7)

distributed with the WGS 1 adjustment results [35]. Since eight camera positions

were constrained and Beltsville was held fixed, this left only four stations to move

freely in the adjustment: Brasilia, Brazil; Asuncion, Paraguay; Bogotá, Colombia; and

Manaus, Brazil.

4
Table 6

WGS 1 (NAD 27) Station Coordinates for the Constrained Stations
(1900-1905 Mean Pole)

Station         Camera       Latitude          Longitude     *Geodetic        Source
(West)       Height

Paramaribo
BC-4       5o26’49”.01N      55 12 22.43        31.4m     WGS 1 [36]
Paramaribo
PC-1000    5 26 48.33N          55 12 21.04      31.3     “WGS 1” [36]
Natal
BC-4       5 55 46.16S       35 09 59.74        102.7     WGS 1 [36]
Natal
PC-1000    5 55 05.00S       35 10 08.34         98.6     “WGS 1” [36]
Quito
BC-4       0 05 57.14S          78 25 13.51    2781.5     WGS 1 [36]
Villa Dolores
BC-4       31 56 44.52S      65 06 23.74        838.6     WGS 1 [36]
Curacao
PC-1000    12 05 22.24N      68 50 17.39         38.0     ETR    [35]
PC-1000    10 44.31.92N      61 36 37.63        283.1     ETR    [35]

*The Geodetic Heights includes the camera height: PC-1000 w 1.3m: BC-4 = 1.5m. The Clarke
1866 Ellipsoid is the reference ellipsoid.

5
Table 7

WGS 1 Standard Errors [36]

BC-4                      One Sigma, 68% Probability (All Values )
Stations
Latitude               Longitude     Geodetic Height
Seconds    Meters    Seconds   Meters         Meters
Paramaribo       0.39       11.9       0.25      7.6           10.2

Natal            0.40       12.3       0.34      10.3          12.3

Quito            0.40       12.3       0.26      8.0           11.2

Villa Dolores    0.45       14.0       0.31      8.0           14.6

6
c.     Geodetic Results for South America WN Densification

The adjusted geodetic coordinates of all the stations

obtained by ACIC using the SATIN Program are listed in Table 8.

Table 8

(Clarke 1866 Ellipsoid)*

Numbe           Station          Latitude         Longitude       **Geodetic Height
r

008         Paramaribo        05 26 48.91 N       55 12 22.54 W         35.5m

009         Quito             00 05 57.28 S       78 25 13.25 W        2782.2

019         Villa Dolores     31 56 44.35 S       65 06 23.66 W         841.3

067         Natal             05 55 46.12 S       35 09 59.70 W         103.6

3406        Curacao           12 05 22.48 N       68 50 17.31 W          39.4

3407        Trinidad          10 44 31.26 N       61 36 38.25 W         253.4

3413        Natal             05 55 04.93 S       35 10 08.18 W          92.1

3414        Brasilia          15 51 46.00 S       47 54 02.14 W         161.7

3431        Asuncion          25 19 07.05 S       57 34 49.44 W         362.4

3476        Paramaribo        05 26 48.48 N       55 12 20.86 W          30.1

7
3477       Bogotá         04 48 56.16 N       74 04 27.60 W         2640.4

3478       Manaus         03 08 51.36 S       59 59 07.43 W          146.6

*The adjusted coordinates for the PC-1000 camera stations must be considered
preliminary since they are referenced to the WGS 1 Solution which is preliminary.

**Includes camera heights.

The corresponding internal precision figures for these coordinates are shown in

Table 9.

8
In addition to the standard errors (one sigma) for latitude, longitude, and geodetic

height, Table 9 also gives the standard errors in terms of rectangular coordinates

(X, Y, Z).

Table 9

(Internal Precision)

One Sigma, 68% Probability (All values )
Numbe Station Name         Latitude          Longitude   *Height     X     Y     Z
r
Sec       m      Sec     m       m       m     m     m

9
008      Paramaribo        0.12   3.7     0.11   3.4        3.4   3.4   3.5      3.6

009      Quito             0.09   2.8     0.09   2.8        3.1   2.8      3.1   2.8

019      Villa Dolores     0.15   4.6     0.13   3.4        4.0   3.4   3.7      4.8

067      Natal             0.07   2.2     0.10   3.1        3.1   3.1      3.1   2.2

3406     Curacao           0.10    3.1    0.08   2.4        2.8   2.3   2.9      3.0

3407     Trinidad          0.11   3.4     0.09   2.7        3.0   2.8      3.1   3.4

3413     Natal             0.07   2.2     0.09   2.8        3.0   3.1   2.8      2.1

3414     Brasilia          0.10    3.1    0.11   3.3        3.2   3.3      3.1   3.1

3431     Asuncion          0.14   4.3     0.10   2.8        3.3   2.7      3.1   4.4

3476     Paramaribo        0.10    3.1    0.09   2.8        2.8   3.0   2.8      3.0

3477     Bogotá            0.12   3.7     0.10   3.1        4.4   3.0   4.5      3.8

3478     Manaus            0.30   9.3     0.21   6.4        8.4   5.2   9.2      9.3

*Geodetic Height

8.      Analysis of South America WN Densification Results

The accuracy figures for the WGS-1 Solution were given in Table 7 and the

internal precision of the PC-1000 densification adjustment in South America was

shown in Table 9. A combination of these values should provide horizontal

positioning and geodetic height accuracy statements for the eight PC-1000

stations relative to WGS 1. Proceeding, the circular standard errors (one sigma)

10
were determined for the four BC-4 stations in South America from the latitude

and longitude sigmas in Table 7. The circular standard errors for these stations

are: Paramaribo, 9.8 meters; Natal, 11.3 meters; Quito, 10.2 meters; and Villa

Dolores, 11.0 meters. The RMS (Root-Mean-Square) of these values is 12 meters.

Next, using the appropriate latitude and longitude precision values from Table 9,

circular standard errors were determined for the eight PC-1000 stations. The

results of these computations for the PC-1000 stations are given in Table 10. A

separate RMS of the PC-1000 geodetic height and horizontal position sigmas give

four meters (Table 9 and 10, respectively).

Table 10

PC-1000 Stations (South America Densification)
Horizontal Positioning Precision Relative to the

PC-1000 Station                        Circular Standard Error
(39% Probability)

Curacao                                                      2.7m

11
Natal                                                        2.5
Brasilia                                                     3.2
Asuncion                                                     3.5
Paramaribo                                                   2.9
Bogotá                                                       3.4
Manaus                                                       7.8

An estimate of the overall accuracy with the South American PC-1000

stations are horizontally positioned with respect to the WGS 1 Solution is obtained

by taking the root-sum-squire (RSS) of the just determined PC-1000 and BC-4

RMS values of four and 11 meters. The RRS value is 12 meters. Proceeding

similarly, and overall one-sigma accuracy estimate for the PC-1000 geodetic height

values was found to be 13 meters. Since accuracy estimates for each station are

of greater practical value, the 11 meter BC-4 RMS accuracy value determined in

this section as the horizontal position error was combined in the RSS sense with

each of the errors in Table 10 rounded to the nearest meter. The results are

shown in Table 11. Analogously, the BC-4 geodetic height RMS accuracy value ( 12

meters) determined above was combined in an RSS sense with each of the PC-1000

geodetic height sigmas (rounded to the nearest meter) shown in Table 9. The

results are also recorded in Table 11. The horizontal position and geodetic height

12
accuracy estimates in Table 11 are the error estimates which are to be used with

the PC-1000 WN Densification station coordinates in Table 8.

For a check on how well the scale of the WGS 1 Solution was preserved in

the South American Densification Adjustment, “before” and “after” chord

distanced were computed between the four BC-4 stations in South America and

compared. The “before” chord distances were computed using the WGS 1

coordinates as given in Table 6. The “after” chord lengths were calculated from

the adjusted coordinates listed in Table 8. The results are compared in Table 12.

The largest chord difference (9.0 meters), when expressed in proportional part

form, yields the value 1:415,000. The other chord differences are equivalent to

proportional parts ranging from 1:815,000 (009-067) to 1:2,975,000 (019-067).

13
Table 11

Horizontal Position and Geodetic Height
Accuracy Estimates of the PC-1000 Stations
Relative to the WGS 1 (NAD 27) Solution

PC-1000 Stations          Horizontal Position              Geodetic Height
(Circular Standard Error)       (Linear Standard Error)

Curacao                            11m                           12m

Natal                              11                            12

*Brasilia                          11                            12

Asuncion                           12                            12

Paramaribo                         11                            13

Bogotá                             11                            14

*Manaus                            14

*The geodetic positions for Brasilia and Manaus were weakly over- determined as

data for them was rather scarce. The accuracy values are mathematically correct,

but those for Brasilia and Manaus are probably too optimistic.

Table 12

Comparison of Chord Distances Between

14
South American BC-4 Stations

BC-4                        Chord Lengths
Stations                                                              Chord

008-009             2633745.6m                2633742.4m               3.2m

008-019             4189264.5                 4189259.5                5.0

008-067             2540702.4                 2540700.2                2.2

009-019             3737916.9                 3737907.9                9.0

009-067             4734147.2                 4734141.4                5.8

019-067             4162786.2                 4162784.8                 1.4

The differences could be reduced by lowering the a priori BC-4 stations coordinate

sigmas at Paramaribo and Villa Dolores from ten to five meters. However, due to

the preliminary nature of the WGS 1 Solution this would be placing too much

confidence in the present BC-4 derived coordinates. In any event, it is concluded

that the scale of the WGS 1 Solution has been sufficiently preserved in the ACIC

In the final phase of this analysis, differences between coordinates (X, Y, Z)

referenced to the Provisional South American Datum of 1956 (PSAD 56),

15
International Ellipsoid, and coordinates from the ACIC adjustments (Table 8

referenced to WGS 1 NAD 27) were investigated. Complete PSAD 56 coordinate

information was available for eight stations (Table 1). The NAD 27 minus PSAD 56

coordinate difference are tabulated in Table 13. The origin of PSAD 56 is La

Canoa, Venezuela, (latitude, 8o 34’ 17.17”N; longitude, 63o 51’ 34.88”W [36]. To

present a more meaningful view, the eight NAD 27 minus PSAD 56 coordinates

were transferred to La Canoa and the changes to the PSAD 56 coordinates

(latitude, longitude, geodetic height) of La Canoa determined. The results are

given in Table 14. Of the stations in Tables 13 and 14, Natal is almost twice as far

from the origin of DSAD 56 as any other stations (Figure 5). Assuming a rotation

is involved between NAD 27 and PSAD 56, the greatest effect of the rotation

would be at Natal. There may also be a scale problem in the Hiran network along

the northeast coast of South America. The differences shown for Natal also

indicate that a rotation or scale problem probably exists.

16
Table 13

Coordinate Differences

Station
Number           Name         X(m)                Y(m)         Z(m)

008     Paramaribo            -279                 -49          -535

009     Quito                 -263                 -49          -531

067     Natal                 -218                  -5          -564

3406    Curacao               -267                 -44          -541

3413    Natal                 -221                  2           -564

3476    Paramaribo            -280                 -43          -528

3477    Bogotá                -279                 -42          -543

Table 14

Coordinate Differences

Station

17
Number           Name    ”        ”     H(m)

008      Paramaribo     -15.44      -8.90   27.1

009      Quito          -15.34      -8.43   34.6

067      Natal          -16.31      -6.47   10.3

3406     Curacao        -15.63      -8.47   27.0

3413     Natal          -16.27      -6.46    2.7

3476     Paramaribo     -15.18      -8.84   22.3

3477     Bogotá         -15.66      -8.80   19.7

18
19
The US Army Engineer Topographic Production Center furnished ACIC with

South American Datum 1969, (SAD 1969) coordinates [37] [38] for the camera

sites at Paramaribo, Quito, Trinidad, Curacao, Asuncion, Natal, Brasilia, and Bogotá

(Table 15). Coordinate differences similar transferred to the SAD 1969 origin,

Chua (Brazil): latitude = 19o 45’ 41.653S; longitude = 48o 06’ 04.064” W [37]. The

results, after the transfer, are given in Table 17 as changes to the latitude,

longitude, and geodetic height at Chua. Table 16 and 17 conclude this phase of the

analysis of the WN densification results in South America.

One other point should be made. As we previously stated in Section 4, a

large percentage of the data used in the ACIC Solution was observations of the

PAGEOS satellite. Also, the BC-4 WGS 1 adjustment coordinates for Paramaribo,

Quito, Natal and Villa Dolores were derived entirely with PAGEOS data. Since

PAGEOS was a high inclination (I = 85o), latitude determinations are affected the

most by

any along-track errors in PAGEOS observations. Therefore, for the most part, the

latitudes in Table 8 are probably less reliable than the adjusted longitudes and

geodetic heights.

20
Table 15

South American Datum 1969 Coordinates

Station                                                               Height
Location           Number     Latitude            Longitude             Msl             *Geoid   Data Source
Paramaribo,            008     05o26’55.33”N       55o12’17.17”W       16.9m               -9.7m       [37]
Surinam
Quito,                 009     00 05 50.47 S       78 25 10.79 W      2680.6                24.6       [37]
Curacao,               406     12 05 26.84 N       68 50 14.20 W           5.6             -10.8       [37]
N. A.
Trinidad,              407     10 44 35.84 N       61 36 34.35 W       253.5                18.1       [37]
B. W. I.
Asuncion,              431     25 18 56.19 S       57 34 44.62 W       148.1                11.8       [37]
Paraguay
Paramaribo,            476     05 26 54.65 N       55 12 15.77 W           17.0             -9.7       [37]
Surinam
Bogotá,                477     04 49 02.38N        74 04 24.52 W      2556.6                28.3       [37]
Colombia

21
Natal,             067         05 55 37.41 S         35 09 53.80 W       39.2     26.1   [38]
Brazil
Natal,             413         05 54 56.25 S         35 10 02.40 W       35.2     26.1   [38]
Brazil
Brasilia,          414         15 51 35.54 S         47 53 57.32 W       1057.1   0.5    [38]
Brazil
*Astrogeodetic (Reference Ellipsoid 1967: a = 6378 160m, f = 1/298.25)

22
Table 16

Coordinate Difference

Station
Number             Name           X(m)           Y(m)    Z(m)

008         Paramaribo            -77              -168   -234
009         Quito                 -50              -134   -209
067         Natal                 -57              -182   -225
3406        Curacao               -42              -152      -210
3413        Natal                 -61              -175   -225
3414        Brasilia              -58              -150   -225
3431        Asuncion              -49              -173   -224
3476        Paramaribo            -79              -162   -227
3477        Bogotá                -60              -139   -222

Table 17

Coordinate Difference

23
Station
Number             Name    ”     ”     H(m)

008         Paramaribo   -11.25   -5.82   129.1
009         Quito        -10.57   -4.35   113.8
067         Natal        -10.71   -5.63   148.4
3406        Curacao      -10.39   -4.56   131.7
3413        Natal        -10.80   -5.57   141.0
3414        Brasilia     -10.98   -4.92   125.3
3431        Asuncion     -10.70   -5.22   146.8
3476        Paramaribo   -11.10   -5.74   121.2
3477        Bogotá       -11.00   -4.72   115.4

24
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The analysis in the previous section provides rationale for the overall

reliability of the South American WN Densification results. The PC-1000

camera stations have been tied to the World Network with geodetic

accuracy. The NAD 27 positions, even though preliminary, represent a

useful contribution to geodetic work in South America. Although the

overdetermined, it is probable that the coordinates are more reliable than

others currently available for those areas. Additional observational data is

needed for each. Perhaps the forthcoming SAGA (short arc method)

solution through the use of more data will eliminate existing data gaps and

produce improved positions for the PC-1000 South American stations. For

example, there are several nom-simultaneous events from Brasilia which

could not be used in the present geometric solution, but are useful for SAGA

because they were exposed during passes observed by other stations. This

is also true for the other PC-1000 stations except Manaus. As a result,

Manaus will not be improved by the in-progress SAGA solution.

Since the PC-1000 camera systems have been stored, there are no

recommendations for conducting further optical satellite observations in

25
South America. However, the Geoceiver is now operational and, depending on

future requirements and priorities, could be deployed to South America for

a few months of data acquisition.

The geodetic coordinates and accuracy statements for the South

American PC-1000 camera stations (Table 8 and 11) will be revised and

published when results from the new World Network solutions become

available.

26
REFERENCES

1.    Schmid, H.H.; “Applications of Photogrammetry to Three – Dimensional
Geodesy;” Transactions, American Geophysical Union: Vol 50, No. 1;
Jan 69

2.    MAC Operation Plan 149; World Geodetic Stellar Camera Programs; 15
Aug 67.

3.    Brown, D. C. and J. E. Trotter; SAGA, A Computer Program for Short
Arc Geodetic Adjustment of Satellite Observations; DBA Systems,
Inc.; Melbourne, Florida; 17 Feb 69

4.    Geodetic Summary Sheet (Beltsville); AMS Form 14410-1; 17 May 67.

5.    Geodetic Summary Sheet (Paramaribo); AMS Form 14410-1; Nov 68.

6.    Geodetic Summary Sheet (Quito); AMS Form 14410-1; Nov 68.

7.    NASA Directory of Observation Station Locations; Vol 2; Goddard
Space Flight Center; Greenbelt, Maryland; Nov70.

8.    Geodetic Summary Sheet (Natal); AMS Form 14410-1; Dec 69.

9.    Geodetic Summary Sheet (Curacao); AMS Form 14410-1; 13 Jul 70.

10.   Geodetic Summary Sheet (Trinidad); AMS Form 14410-1; Jan 69.

11.   Geodetic Summary Sheet (Natal); AMS Form 14410-1; Dec 69.

12.   Geodetic Summary Sheet (Brasilia); AMS Form 14410-1; 23 Jan 70.

27
13.   Geodetic Summary Sheet (Asuncion); AMS Form 14410-1; Mar 70.

14.   Geodetic Summary Sheet (Paramaribo); AMS Form 14410-1; Nov 68.

15.   Geodetic Summary Sheet (Bogotá); AMS Form 14410-1; Dec 69.

16.   Geodetic Summary Sheet (Manaus); AMS Form 14410-1; Mar 70.

17.   Soli, 1st Lt S.D.; South American Satellite Triangulation Network
Densification with Air Force PC-1000 Cameras (1967-1970; 1st
Geodetic Survey Squadron; FE Warren AFB, Wyoming; Oct 70.

18.   1370th Photo Mapping Wing Manual, No. 96-1; Stellar Camera
Operations Manual; Forbes AFB, Kansas; Jul 67.

19.   White, M.G.; “Comparison of Stellar Camera Plate Quality Before and
After Camera Refurbishment”; ACIC (PDEGM) Memorandum; St.
Louis, Missouri; 13 Aug 70.

20.   Mink, A.W.; The Semi-Automatic Stellar Camera Comparator; The
Aeronautical Chart and Information Center; St. Louis, Missouri; Oct
67

21.   Herring, J.C.; Abby, D.C. and J.A. Cook; “Time Synchronization of
Primary Geodetic Sites Through Use of Artificial Satellites”; Air
Force Survey in Geophysics, No. 220; Air Force Cambridge Research
Laboratories; Bedford, Massachusetts; Jun 70.

22.   Preuss, H.D.; The Determination and Distribution of the Precise Time;
Department of Geodetic Science Report No. 70; The Ohio State
University; Columbus, Ohio; Apr 66.

23.   NASA Satellite Report; 15 Aug 67.

28
24.   NASA Satellite Report; 15 Mar 69.

25.   Brown, D.C.; A Treatment of Analytical Photogrammetry with
Emphasis on Ballistic Camera Applications; RCA Data Reduction
Technical Report No. 39; Aug 67.

26.   Brown, D.C.; An Advanced Reduction and Calibration for
Photogrammertric Cameras; AFCRL Report 64-40; Bedford,
Massachusetts; Jan 64.

27.   Harp, B.F.; Documentation for Analytical Calibration of Geodetic
Stellar Camera; DBA Systems, Inc.; Melbourne, Florida; 30 Jun 66.

Calibration Projects; ACIC Technical Report No. 106; The
Aeronautical Chart and Information Center; St. Louis, Missouri; Jan
68.

29.   Kahler, H.R.; Trotter, J.E.; Turner, H.L.; Wells, W.T. and M.S.
Willoughby; Results of Varying Investigations Into Approaches to
Geodetic Parameter Estimation; Wolf Research and Development
Corp; Bladensburg, Maryland; AFCRL-66-766; Nov 66.

30.   Hotter, F.D.; Preprocessing Optical Satellite Observations;
Department of Geodetic Science Report No. 82; The Ohio State
University, Columbus, Ohio; Apr 67.

31.   Time Service Announcement, Series 14, No. 4.1; US Naval
Observatory; Washington, D.C.; 16 Dec 69.

32.   US Coast and Geodetic Survey Technical Bulletin No. 24; Satellite
Triangulation in the Coast and Geodetic Survey; US Government
Printing Office; Washington, D.C.; Feb 65.

29
33.   Zhongolovich, I.D.’ “Earth Satellites and Geodesy”; Soviet Astronomy,
Vol 8; No. 1; Jul-Aug 64.

34.   ACIC Technical Report No. 105; Geodetic Positioning with the PC-1000
Camera System; The Aeronautical Chart and Information Center; St.
Louis, Missouri; Nov 68.

35.   Schmid, H.H.; Computer Printout of World Network Solution WGS 1;
National Ocean Survey, National Oceanic and Atmospheric

36.   NASA Directory of Observation Station Locations, Vol. 1; Goddard
Space Flight Center; Greenbelt, Maryland; Nov 70.

37.   US Army Engineer Topographic Production Center Material
Transaction, No. TPCTP(14422); Army Topographic Station;
Washington, D.C.; Aug 71.

38.   US Army Engineer Topographic Production Center Material
Transaction, No. TPCTP(14422); Army Topographic Station;
Washington, D.C.; Sep 71.

30

```
To top