3 ms·

you wouldn't plot a town where there isn't one It happens. About 12-13 years ago, a colleague and I were driving around Ohio to document landuse near a freight

you wouldn't plot a town where there isn't one It happens. About 12-13 years ago, a colleague and I were driving around Ohio to document landuse near a freight railroad line. The maps we had (USGS, AAA maps and local street maps) indicated a small town in one location, but when we drove there, there was nothing, no remnants, no anything. When we got back to the office, we looked into it- turns out the town had been wiped out by a flood a few years earlier and the decision was made to disincorporate the town instead of rebuild. That town appeared on maps that were printed after it was abandoned. Perhaps this doesn't happen anymore with more recent mapping techniques/technology, but it's not unheard of.

codeka 14y ago
But there's a difference between old/outdated data and putting towns in completely the wrong place.
- AYBABTME 14y ago
  I've used map in the military - of Afghanistan - that were relinquish of old soviet maps. The soviet would have never got in many places of the desert and had mapped villages and roads from aerial photography. Those features would remain on our (US) maps. As they rushed into the war, the geomatic guys responsible for making maps somehow reused the soviet maps and there was no way to assume those roads and villages didn't actually exist. So they persisted on our maps, up until 2010. Data around main areas would end up getting corrected (patrols would complain about the inaccuracy and the geo guys would update their database). Data in the desert would remain erroneous in many case. For instance, I could simply look at a village's location on satellite imagery, such as a casual Google Map, and clearly see there was nothing there but maybe some odd looking shapes and shadows due to rock formations. So even hand-crafted maps, in military operation, almost 10 years into the war, can remain inaccurate. Worst, maps of many military bases in North America are completely wrong as soon as you get off the few main roads listed on it. I came to rely on satellite imagery whenever you want to go on a somehow non-urban track. It's much more reliable than using a map.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
gkop 14y ago
Sometimes mapmakers add fake features deliberately: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street

codeka 14y ago

But there's a difference between old/outdated data and putting towns in completely the wrong place.

AYBABTME 14y ago
I've used map in the military - of Afghanistan - that were relinquish of old soviet maps. The soviet would have never got in many places of the desert and had mapped villages and roads from aerial photography. Those features would remain on our (US) maps. As they rushed into the war, the geomatic guys responsible for making maps somehow reused the soviet maps and there was no way to assume those roads and villages didn't actually exist. So they persisted on our maps, up until 2010. Data around main areas would end up getting corrected (patrols would complain about the inaccuracy and the geo guys would update their database). Data in the desert would remain erroneous in many case. For instance, I could simply look at a village's location on satellite imagery, such as a casual Google Map, and clearly see there was nothing there but maybe some odd looking shapes and shadows due to rock formations. So even hand-crafted maps, in military operation, almost 10 years into the war, can remain inaccurate. Worst, maps of many military bases in North America are completely wrong as soon as you get off the few main roads listed on it. I came to rely on satellite imagery whenever you want to go on a somehow non-urban track. It's much more reliable than using a map.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

gkop 14y ago

Sometimes mapmakers add fake features deliberately: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street