Trig Point Query

[calumphing_four]

Hi,
Couldn't find the answer by a search and wiki, so am wondering/assuming:
The trig points are sourced from Geoscience and imported in as waypoints, thus can I assume the coordinates are accurate from the geoscience database?
Then given that they are correct, if I look one up, say Point Ormond Trigand do a google map of the point and find that the satellite view shows it precisely then I could presume that other points in the area could have their lat/long read straight off google and assumed to be spot on?
Cheers

[caughtatwork]

Point Ormond is a manual listing not from Geoscience . I believe that where a TP exists the cords match on the site in Geoscience in your GPS and the Google map.

[pjmpjm]

Hi, Couldn't find the answer by a search and wiki, so am wondering/assuming: The trig points are sourced from Geoscience and imported in as waypoints

A high percentage of trigs in the greater Sydney area have now been discovered and published 'manually' -- largely by rogerw3 -- and are not sourced from Geoscience. This could well be the case in other areas of Australia as well.

It's always in order to correct the published coords if you find a TP wrongly listed.

Wishing you happy trig hunting!

[Yurt]

I've found the originally uploaded trigpoint coords to be pretty good. Can't say I've ever wandered aimlessly trying to find one unless it was actually gone. Rogerw3's coords for the unpublished trigs are usually spectacularly accurate, I write this as someone who has trekked through some pretty wild bush in order to 're-discover' a few of them.
Others that people find and then publish are going to be pretty accurate too as they will have taken an average with their GPSr sitting on top of the trig. You can't really miss most trigs anyway, unlike nanos.