SPECIAL GEODETIC ASSIGNMENT: LVII. MAGNETIC AND ASTRONOMICAL DETERMINATIONS ALONG THE OB'-YENISEY CONNECTING SYSTEM AND ALONG THE SIBERIAN RAILROAD FROM CHELYABINSK TO KRASNOYARSK (T)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 111
• Document Creation Date: December 23, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 7, 2014
• Sequence Number: 4
• Publication Date: February 10, 1960
• Content Type: REPORT

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
AIR INFORMATION DIVISION
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
DATE: 10 February 1960
SI-AT
TITLE: Special Geodetic Assignment: LVII. Magnetic and Astronomical Determina-
tions Along the Obl-Yenisey Connecting System and Along the Siberian
Railroad From Chelyabinsk to Krasnoyarsk (T)
SOURCE: P: Akademiya Nauk SSSR. Otdeleniye Fiziko-Matematicheskikh Nauk,
Zapiski, seriya 8, Tom XVII, No. 7, 1906, pp. 1-104
MAGNETIC AND ASTRONOMICAL DETERMINATIONS ALONG THE OBI -YENISEY
CONNECTING SYSTEM AND ALONG THE SIBERIAN RAILROAD
FROM CHELYABINSK TO KRASNOYARSK (T)
by D. A. Smirnov
Studies of the Imperial Academy of Sciences of St. PetersburgiVIIIth Series
of the Physico-Mathematical Department, Volume XVII. No. 7 and Last
Magnetic and Astronomical Determinations Along the Ob'-Yenisey Connecting
System and Along the Siberian Railroad From Chelyabinsk to Krasnoyarsk, by
D. A. Smirnov. (Reported on at the 15 December 1904 Session of the Physico-
Mathematical Department).
Noted Errors:
Page
Line
Printed
Should Read
6
18 from the top
June 27th
July 27th
22
4 from the bottom
July 26th
June 26th
48
19 from the top
130? 3' 21"
1300 3/ 15"
59
4 II n it
95 15
95 16
60
23 li II 11
130 from north
30 from the north
n
24 n 11 II
21? 40'
11? 40'
il
10 ti " bottom
2h llm 493.3
4h 11m 498.3
67
In footnotes
Observ. on the 2nd
Observ., June 26th
on the 2nd
69
1 from the bottom
233.92
223.92
73
In footnotes
57? 16' 24'1.0
580 26' 24'1,0
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Cop Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
?
:ss
????
Introduction
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter I. The 1900 and 1901 trips
pagESTAT
1
3
Chapter II. Main and auxiliary instruments used during the trips. Their
constants and corrections 12
Chapter III.
Chapter IV.
Chapter
A few remarks on the Tomsk magnetic theodolite unit
Astronomical observations, field readings and calculations..
16
20
Magnetic observations and computations of the absoltte value
of the elements on the basis of the study of the theodolite
at the Irkutsk Observatory 26
a) Declination 27
b) Inclination 31
c) The horizontal component of intensity 36
V. Description of points of observation 46
a) Magnetic and astronomic points of 1900 48
b) The 1901 points 53
Chapter VI.
Chapter VII.
Results of astronomical observations 64
Tables -I - VI 67 - 74
Results of magnetic observations 76
Tables VII - X 80 - 94
General deductions in table XI 97
Chapter VIII. Remarks on the secular variation of magnetic elements... 98
During the spring of 1900, the Council of the Tomsk Imperial University,
detailed me to take magnetic and astronomic measurements during summer va-
cations, in the Tomq and Yeniseyek provinces.
F. Ya. Kapustin, professor at the Tomsk University, made numerous de-
terminations of the magnetic elements in Tomsk during the summer of 1899.
It was on his initiative that I undertook the magnetic research in Siberia.
Under his guidance, I had the opportunity, that same summer, to get myself
acquainted 'with the equipment available at the physical laboratory of the
University and study methods for accurate magnetic measurements.
The universal magnetic field theodolite (designed by the academician
H. I. Wild), was acquired by the office in 1897 for field work. It was not
meant for detailed magnetic surveys of any one region because of the accuracy
specifications for which it had been designed and because of difficulties and
lack of transportation safety over poor roads. The main goal of a detailed
surveying of a region would have been an increase in frequency of observation
ri
- 2 -
Dmri ? niti7Pri CODV Approved for Release_@_AO-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
??
points and not the accuracy of measurements, especially when the portability and
stability of the instrument under various conditions of locomotion, might have SI-AT
played a predominant role. Due to these considerations, and also lacking as yet
a general work plan for this little known and huge expanse of Siberia, I decided,
on the advice of professor Kapustin, to use for the first trip, the continuous
waterway of the Ob'-Yenisey Joint System. Baron B. A. Aminov, chief of the
Tomsk Waterways Region, and S. S. Zhbikovskiy, chief of the Ob'-Yenisey Sector,
both courteously promised cooperation thus increasing the advantages of water
transport for complicated instruments. Thanks to this cooperation, I was able
to take advantage of trips made by government steamers up the Ketl River and
over the Joint Waterways System.
The Tomsk observations made by professor Kapustin were processed by the
summer of 1901, when the University Council again detailed me to continue
magnetic observations, and the analytical results of the Tomsk observations
mage :by Prof. Kapustin showed that the reduction of the elements observed'
in Tomsk to their megft annual Values in
relation to the two nearest magnetic observatories, the one in Irkutsk by lh 17m
to the east, and the one in Yekaterinburg [Sverdlovsk] by lh 37m to the west,
agreed satisfactorily. Consequently, in the present instance, i.e.) during the
work in Siberia, it might have been best to be satisfied by the two, although
very distant observatories, and devote one's efforts to determining the mean
annual values of the elements of the earth's magnetic field for a small number
of basic points spread out, if possible, over all of Siberia. In such an event,
all annual fragmentary or incidental observations in the region of Siberia,
could always be reduced to the one epoch, if after repeating the measurements,
at the same basic points, several years later, we obtained reliable information
on the secular motion of the magnetic elements at different places.
Several points along the Siberian Railroad partially answered this purpose.
The direction of this railroad from'Ast to the east, was favorable in this
A
respect because the secular motion of certain magnetic elements, differs
particularly in this direction. On the other hand, these points were close to
the latitude of Yekaterinburg [Sverdlovsk] and Irkuttk, which was of importance
because of smaller daily variations in the motion of the earth's magnetism.
However, having taken on the task of gathering uniform material which
would allow to judge of the contemporary secular motion of the-elements at
points of observation, it was necessary to strive-fa possible accuracy in
the final results of measurements, and in determining the points which could
have been easily located again in a few years time of observations, The analyti-
cal results of 1900 and 1901 data, published here, indicate how justified had
been the expectation of their accuracy: judging by the agreement of the magni-
tudes reduced to Irkutsk and Yekaterinburg [Sverdlovsk] observatories the mean
annual values of the declinations taken from 3 to 4 Observations at each point,
gave the satisfactory accuracy of up to 1/2 a minute of the arc. This accuracy
in reduction is probably explained by very calm condition of the earth's magnet-
ism during these years.
3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
The advantages of railroad travel became apparent during the 1900 and2
19%17VT
trips. In 1900 the travelling mostly by steamers and boats was rather slow at
times. At times also, a week or more was lost waiting for a steamer. But in
1900, quite independently from travel conditions, I had to abandon all observa-
tions after having completed only half of the route, and hurry back to Tomsk
due to the mobilization of the Siberian Military District. The number of
points at which observations had been made was 14, ten of these had been magnetic
points. Not always the same number of observations was made at all points and
in wopt instances, these observations were not complete.
In 1901, it was possible to determine 20 points along the railroad between
Chelyabinsk and Krasnoyarsk)and 5 more points down the Yenisey up to the 60th
degree of the northern latitude, during the same lapse of time, i.e.)two months,
due to the fact that two daily trains with a regular schedule were available.
Furthermore, the points of 1900 were distributed somewhat haphazardly and irregu-
larly, while in 1901, they were separated from each other by about 100 versts'.
While travelling by steamer or rail, it was difficult to adhere to the goal
of visiting primarily points where magnetic observations had been made at some
time or other. Steamers stopped only 4:definite locations and did not stay very
long, moreover their runs on Siberian rivers were rare and the time of a steamers'
arrival was not known in advance. On the other hand, the numerous observations
made by Hansteen and his companions in the late twenties of the last century, and
the observations made by Dr. Fritshe, had been made along the mail stage route.
The Siberian railroad approached the old Siberian mail stage route only in some
locations, but even in those instances, at times one would have had to travel quite
a distance to reach these points, for example, over 10 versts separated the Kainsk
railroad station from the town.
The desire to revisit, if possible, the old magnetic points was, in most
instances further weakened by the absence of definite indications as to their
locations. This being the case, the calculation of secular changes in terrestrial
magnetism, would not have been completely reliable.
In general, these were the reasons') why determinations made by me could
be compared to preceeding determinations only in rare instances, as we will see
further.
1) Furthermore, in Tomsk, I could not obtain the original of the well known
book by Chr. Hansteen, otherwise I would have probably visited several more
Hansteen's points on the Yenisey River. I also by;passed the city of Omsk,
as at the time I had been planning to make a separate trip up the Irtysh River
in the near future.
4
nca-inccifipri in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
I. The 1900 and 1901 Trips.
SI-AT
It was proposed that in 1900 the sparsely populated and magnegcally little
known region of the Ob,-Yenisey Joint Waterways region be visited. 4)
2) It is known that this waterway starts on the Ob' side with the deep and winding
Ket' River, right tributary of the Ob', the "Togurskaya channel" serving as the
mouth of the Ket' near the Togura and Kolpashevo villages. The waterway reaches
the water divide of the Yenisey and Ob' River through the Ozernayal Lomovataya and
Yazevaya, tributaries of the Kett Rilier. Not far from the water divide, between
the Ob' and Yenisey Rivers is lake Bollshoye. A canal, 7 1/2 verst long, connects
this Lake with the system of the Yenisey tributaries, the Malyy Kas and the Bollshoy
Kas. Starting from the mouth of the Lomovataya River and up to the mouth of the
Malyy Kas, i.e., an extent of about 130 versts, part of the system has already
been provided with locks and straightenedout (for ships drawing five quarters
[of a fathom]). However, the main part of the system over a length of about
600 versts along the Ket' River and for about 200 versts along the Bol'shoy Kas
River, has hardly had any improvements. Only the lower reaches of the Kett
River are inhabited. There is one village, the Maksimoyarovskoye, in its middle
course and several native yurts further on. The Bol'shoy Kas is inhabited even
less.
The history of the preliminary surveys of ways for joining the Ob' and
Yenisey River basins, and the history of operations in the chosen direction
over the Ket' and Kas Rivers, surveys of economic potentialities of this water-
way and its present status, may be found in the works by Lt. Capt. A. K. Sindens-
ner, entitled: "Expedition of the Ministry of Transport to the Ob,-Yenisey water
shed-in 1875" (Izvest. Imp. R. Geogr. Obshch.-Bulletin of the Russian Imperial
Geographic Society; vol. XIV, 1878). Also the work by S. A. Zhbikovskiy: "Ob-
-Yenitiley waterway and its economic potential" (published in the Materialy dlya
opisaniya russkikh rek i istorii uluchsheniya ikh sudokhodnykh usloviy - Materials
for Description of Russian Rivers and for the History of Their Navigational,Im-
provements, Fascicle II. St.-Petersburg, 1903). A map of the waterw4y fro4-ETie
mouth of the Ozernaya River to the Yenisey River and a schematic profile is
appended to the last article.
The first detailed description of the Ket, River, was made in the well known
study by Nikolay Spafariy, of Moldavian origin, who in 1675, was sent as tsar's
envoy from Moskva to China. The most convenient route from TobVp.'sk to China,
was found to be along rivers and portages to Yeniseyskl 'namely along the Kett
River to its upper reaches. This choice of route points to the historic importance
of the Ket' River in settling Siberia. This importance was lost at a later date,
when other means of commtlnications were opened up. Description of Spafariy's trip
through Siberia from Tobollsk to the Chinese border, was published by Yu. Arsen'yev
in the Zapiski Imp. R. Geogr. Obsith. po otd. etnografii (Studies of the Russian
Imperial Geographic Society, Ethnographic Department, vol. X, 1882.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Geographically, this region had been studied because of the proposed hydro-
technical projects. Already in 1875, Lt. Capt. A. K. Sidensner made a route STAT
survey of this waterway. He determined many points astronomically with a small
Pistor circle and 3 pocket chronometers. The basis for determining longitudes
were: the accurate longitude of Tomsk and the longitude of Yeniseysk according
to lunar observations by Fedorov.)
Although astronomical determinations were not my main goal, and although
the lack of a second chronometer did not allow for great accuracy in calculated
longitudes, it seemed to me thiAt astronomical observations during the impending
trip, may have a certain value as such. The existing maps of the Ket' River,
in some instances, carry considerable errors in geographical positions of points
in latitude.
Preparations for the trip consisted mostly of a preliminary checking of
instruments, adapting them to transportation and arranging a tent for magnetic
observations. The following instruments, described below, were taken: an
astronomical Hildebrand theodolite, a magnetic Wild theodolite, an Erickson
table chronometer, aneroids, thermometers, a Richthofen compass and other equip-
ment for topographic surveying.
The Wild theodolite gives horizontal magnetic intensity only to a relative
degree. Its comparison with absolute:iihstruments had been made by prof.
Kapustin yet in 1897. For a new comparison, I was sent by the University to
Irkutsk during the Easter of 1900, where for 5 days I was able to study the
theodolite at the magnetic observatory with the kind cooperation of A. V.
Voznesenskiy, director of the observatory.
The problem of protecting the instruments from the direct heat of the sun
and the action of the wind during magnetic observations in the field, especially
for observations pretending to any degree of accuracy is of great importance.
It was almost necessary to use a tent for certain instruments. This same tent
could also be conveniently used while travelling in a sparsely populated region
and could serve as quarters for personnel in case of necessity, providing a
shelter from rain and cold. A tent, which was made of tarpaulin for this very
purpose, and which of course had no iron parts, proved to be very prabtical
during the long time it was used. For this reason, I am stopping to describe
it. The requirements for its arrangement were as follows: 1) The walls of
the tent could slide as curtains along an upper rope, thus, all four sides of
the tent could be opened. This meant that one was not confined to the choice
of mire towards any part of the horizon, and one had protection from the sun
and wind from any direction. 2) The roof could be moved in sections from every
3) Sidensner and Vagner: "Astronomic determinations of points on the Ob'-Yenisey
Rivers watershed, made in-1875". Izv. Imp. R. Geogr. Obshch. (Bulletin of the
Russian Imper.iill Geographic Society), vol. XIII, 1877, p 66, with an appended map.
The article indicates that route maps (1/2 a verst and 1 verst to the inch scale)
are on file at the Ministry of Transportation. Telegraphic determination of the
Yeniseysk longitude made by colonel Vil'kitskiy in 1895, will allow to make the
necessary corrections in Sidensner's longitudes (see further).
- 6 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
corner, or completely removed, without disrupting the whole and the stability
(17VT
the tent. 3) The tent could withstand gusts of thunder storms and allowed to
make observations during rain. The bad feature of ttie tent was the fact that it
was heavy and occupied considerable space when folded up.4) This was due to the
fact that the material used for making the tent was cheap and rough. 1But the
size of the tent allowed to walk freelyaround the theodolite on the tripod. All
steps were taken so that the tent could be rapidly pitched.
The departure was somewhat delayed due to the late arrival of our chronometer,
which had been sent to St. Petersburg for cleaning during the winter. It was
received and set up only on the 18th of June. On the 20th and 21st, its correc-
tion from the stars was found and referred to a post in the University garden,
the coordinates of which had been determined accurately by Prof. Kapustin and
to which I always referred my Tomsk timepiece. The run of the chronometer could
not be established prior to departure, due to the lack of time. The Waltham working
watch was not very reliable. These conditions so unfavorable to the determination
of longitudes during the impending trip, were corrected to some extent later on.
It was discovered that during the same summer, only at a slightly later date, the
precise astronomical determinations made by the geodesist Yu. Schmidt along the
Ob' River were being organized. I was able to connect two of his points, the
town of Narym and the Kolpashevo village, with my determinations, which gave me
the daily run of our chronometer at the beginning of the trip.
Vladimir Vladimirovich Vinogradov, 4th year student of the Tomsk University
medical Faculty, came with me as a companion and collaborator. He had already
acquainted himself with the methods of observations and even could perform them
himself. One of his observations, that of a declination and also of the longitude
of Narym, became part of the results published here. The main responsibility
undertaken by V. V. Vinogradov and carried out very conscientiously, was recording
the moments by the working Waltham watch, writing down all the readings dictated
by me, and finally, the observation of the Rosenthal galvanometer while determin-
ing the inclination by an induction inclinometer. It should be stated unreservedly
that such a distribution of work was very effective.
We left Tomsk, early in the morning of the 23rd of June (new style) 1900,
on the steamer of the Associated Steamship Lines for West Siberian Rivers. The
route was to follow Ob' and Tom Rivers far as the town of Narym, where magnetic
observations had been made some years back by Hansteen and Fritshe. On the way,
during an hour and a half stopover, at the "Krasnyy Yar" landing (for loading wood),
we attempted, not quite successfully, due to the shortage of time, to determine
the declination and the horizontal intensity with the Wild instrument. From Narym,
we backtracked on another steamer up the Ob' River, to Kolpashevo village located
at the Togurskaya channel of the Kett River. We did not consider it feasible to wait
here for a state steamer to sail to the upper reaches of the Ket', due to unforseen
changes in the steamer's schedule. Therefore, after having finished our work at
Kolpashevo, we decided to buy a rowboat and go up the river, stopping for observa-
4) Five poles (two of them higher than others, over 1 sazhen' high, with a cross
bar for the ridge of the roof2 were installed in diametrically opposite angles of
the square) used to be wrapped in the tarpaulin of the tent, when the tent was
folded up. Two side sections and the roof section were used for this purpose.
- 7 -
in Part qPiliti7Pd Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
tions at villages along the banks of the Ket1 River, for a stretch of about
100 versts from its mouth. Travelling this way, we reached the last of these
villages, Bol'shoye Panovi From there, we had the choice of either continuing 1STAT
the river in the boat, but without being able to get the shelter of housing, as
only rare "summer" Ostyak yurt as could be encountered between the Bol'shoye
Panovo and Maksimoyarovsk, or backtrack and await a state steamer. The first
choice would have added the difficulties of a fairly swift current, and therefore,
moving up the river would have been very slow and expensive, and furthermore we
would risk missing the state steamer in one of the numerous branches of the river,
if and when the steamer caught up with us. Backtracking would have been useful
for determining the run of the chronometer, of which, so far, we had only a faint
idea, based on observations at Kolpashevo. Having turned back, we began awaiting
the steamer at Maloye Panovo village. In this village, the determination of time
by means of a rough topographic survey, could be connected to observations made
during the first trip to the Kalmakovo settlement (otherwise called Rodionovo),
1 verst from Maloye Panoy1 We spent only 10 days in Maloye Panovo, awaiting the
steamer which finally arrived on the 27th of July, new style. On the steamer, we
met Stanislaw Antonovich Zbikovski, engineer in charge of the work on the canal.
I consider it my duty to express my deep gratitude to Mr. Zbikovski for his co-
operation in our work and for the facilities extended to us for comfortable travel
along all of the joint waterway system.
The trip up the Ket' River on the steamer "Tomsk", was interrupted rather
seldom. In day time, we made observations only twige: in Yurty Muleshkiny and
at the landing near Maksimoyarovsk village, where we determined the latitude from
the sun only. The steamer stopped more frequently at night, for several hours at
a time, because of darkness and the danger to navigation from tree trunks, and in
places, shallows in the river. We took advantage of thwe stops to make observations
from the stars with the Hildebrand theodolite. In Yurty Shirokovy2 we made complete
astronomical-determinations. In Yurty Berkunovy (or Pyrgynovy) only brief determi-
nations were made due to the appearance of clouds.
In Yurty Shirokovy, where we arrived fairly early, while it was still daylight,
we attempted to make magnetic determinations with the Wild theodolite using a
copper hand lantern with a stearin candle for lighting. A great number of mos-
quitoes and gnats, the so called "gnus" presented a serious obstacle. It was very
J;Ificult to focus the light of the hand lantern on the mirror which was lighting
the crosshair of the tube's eyepiece and to focus it on the magnet. However, we
had to give up magnetic observations altogether when it came to reading off verniers
of the horizontal circle. It was impossible to light them up sufficiently, even
after completely removing the case with the magnet. This experience made us give
up completely night observations with the Wild theodolite, whenever it was necessary
to read off the verniers of the horizontal circle.
In Yurty Muleshkiny, after assembling the surveying parts of the Wild theodolite,
an accident occured which deprived us of further possibility of measuring angles of
inclination. The movable leg of the stand had not been fastened securely enough and
folded up under the weight of the instrument. The theodolite fell and hit with the
side which housed the vertical circle. However, by a lucky chance, there was no
great' damage done. The plane of the vertical cLrcle and its alidades were bent,
so that the rotation of one relative to the other became impossible. Removing the
alidade of the vertical and after having unscrewed the circle itself, I became Con-
-g -
WI*"
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Cop Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
vinced,that other basic parts had not suffered in the fall. Neither the moveme]sTAT
around the vertical axis, nor the horizontal limb, nor the horizontal axis of the
theodolite had suffered, thanks to springs which had reduced the shock. This was
attested not only by a meticulous examination of the instrument, but also by the
fact that the accuracy of astronomic observations made with this theodolite during
the following year, was not impaired. The instrument was used again the
following year, after the-vertical circle and the alidade, which had been
sent to the shop of Dr. Edelman in l'iunioh, had been replaced by new ones.
After having adjusted all the parts of the instrument, there was no reason
to to consider the observations of the horizontal intensity and of declination
as having changed in any way. However, astronomical determinations were made
only with the Hildebrand theodolite from that time on.
On the 2nd of August, the steamer "Tomsk", reached the terminal point of
its 1900 trip) that is the mouth of the Ozernaya River. From there, after making
astronomical and magnetic observations, we rode on horseback for about 30 versts over
a fairly good road to the Main Field Headquarters.("Glavnyy Stan") residence of
the commander of the Ob'-Yenisey sector. During this trip, I held the chronometer
in my hands and the instruments were carriecl on horseback at a walking pace, so
that they would not be damaged by jolting.)) Together with Stanislaw Antonovich,
we travelled further from Main Field Headquarters by the "Ozernyy" steamer, and
then by boat. The evening of the 7th of August, at the "Georgiyevsktr camp,
where work was in progress on the construction of a new lock, I was informed that
there was a note for me at the next, the Alexandrovskiy camp. The note was from
the rector of the Tomsk University, to the effect that, as an ensign in reserve,
I was to report for active duty bebause of the mobilization orders from the
Siberian Military District. The very next day, I received the rector's paper
and had to leave immediately to join the unit I was assigned to in Tomsk. The
paper had been sent to me through the county administration of the Yeniseyskaya
guberniya. It was brought to me after many detours by four peasants of the
Antsyferovskaya volost of the Yeniseyskiy county, from the villages on the
Yenisey, near the mouth of the Kas River.
Thus, the observations were dropped, and, using the above mentioned peasants
as travelling companions, we left immediately and travelled down the Bol'shoy
Kas River in two boats. We entered this river from the-last lock of the Ob'-Yenisey
system. Without losing time for lengthy stops and taking advantage of the river's
current to move along, we made astronomical determinations only once, at the mouth
of the "Kasovskaya" Stream. After 3 days travel on the Bollshoy Kas, we reached
the Yenisey and having sailed several versts upstream, we arrived at the Nizhne-
Shadrino village (also called "Sukovatka") late in the evening on the 11th of
August. Here we stayed up all night, awaiting in vain the appearance of stars.
At dawn, we determined only the horizontal magnetic intensity. We did not remain
to await suitable condition for determining the local time and the ground target
azimuth from the sun. We left for Yeniseysk by postal boat, towed up the Yenisey
River by horses. On the 14th, we were in Yeniseysk? from where we left on a
5) It should be noted that transporting the Wild theodolite in poor carriages
was not always safe. Thus in Tomsk, during one of the changes of location, cer-
tain regulating screws lossened up, and one of them even fell out completely.
- 9 -
nprlaccifiPri in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Ap roved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
steamer for Krasnoyarsk and on the night of the 19th of August, we reached Tomsk. STAT
We had been unable to find time for observations either in Yeniseysk or Krasnoyarsk,
where we should have taken advantage of precise longitudes to check our chronometer.
Observations were made in Tomsk on the 20th and 21st of August.
_- The 1901travels had the advantages of railroad service as stated above. I
-- tried, as much as possible, to lighten my baggage and therefore decided to take
e only one theodolite. It was the magnetic universal Wild instrument. The vertical
circle and its alidade had been replaced by new ones of high quality, during the
winter. Furthermore, taking advantage of the experience gained during the preceed-
ing t5ip;"certain modifications were made in the equipment and some parts of the
instftment. The theodolite had to be checked again at the magnetic observatory,
"due to the fact that the constant multiplier for obtaining absolute intensity
with our theodolite, as determined by MB in Irkutsk, differed rather considerably
from the one found by prof. Kapustin in Pavlovsk in 1897. I went to Irkutsk again
and between the 30th of May and the 2nd of June (new style), determined the tem-
perature coefficient of the magnet and found the constants and the corrections for
the instrument. It was while in Irkutsk, that I decided to limit the area of
surveys to the region along the Siberian railroad. This was due to the fact that
the director of the observatory was himself planning to make magnetic determinations
along that same railroad from Irkutsk to Krasnoyarsk.
After returning to Tomsk, and the final preparations,the departure took
place on the evening of the 11th of June (new style) in the direction of
Chelyabinsk. The first observation point was the railroad station Polomoshnaya,
located on the Tom' River. This time I was accompanied by Dmitriy Tatarinov,
employee of the physical laboratory. During the first part of the trip, as far
as Chelyabinsk, I was accompanied by Vladimir Nikolayev, a pupil of the Tomsk
gymnasium [high school] who helped me by writing down most of the observations,
which saved a considerable amount of our time.
The selection of points was done so that the distance between them would be
about 100 versts.. Usually about 5 - 6 hours were spent in transit. Each time, we
got railroad tickets and checked some of our effects into the. bagage car. In
anticipation of complications or misunderstandings which might arise while working
along the line, the chief of the Siberian Railroad at my request, gave me an open
letter requesting full cooperation of the railroad's administrative personnel.
It is true that no instance necessitating such cooperation, ever arose.
We tried to remain a day and a half or two days at each point. This allowed
to increase the number of observations on which, to a great extent, depends the
reliability of the final results, due to periodic and occasional changes in the
earth's magnetism. Astronomical work this year, had been greatly facilitated
by the fact that many of the points along the Siberian railroad from Omsk to
Bogotol and partially even west of Omsk, had been precisely determined by the
geodesist Yu. Shmidt in 1896 and 1897. Thus, time observations and the roughest
surveys with an angle prism gave accurate coordinates of points and in addition
an accurate daily run of the chronometer.
-10-
npriaccifipn in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Magnetic elements had been determined at 15 stations during these short
trips, before we reached Chelyabinsk. It had required about a month's time. SI-AT
On the 14th of July, we left Chelyabinsk back for Krasnoyarsk. Having finishea
observations in Krasnoyarsk, and still having a lot of time, I decided on the
22nd of July to go as far as possible down the Yenisey River, in order to complete
the work left unfinished the preceeding year. We took the steamer as far as
the Kazachinskoye village. Without waiting for the next steamer, we hired a boat
on which we went down as far as Yeniseysk. We did not stop there at the time,
but continued on postal boats. We made observations at the Kolmogorovo village.
To my knowledge, astronomical and magnetic measurements had been taken there by
Col. Vil'kitskiy in 1894; and astroakr4pal measurements had also been made by the
Irkutsk Department of the GeneraVirillt99. In Nizhne-Shadrino village, i.e., '-
where I had been the preceeding year, I met L. A. Yachevskiy, mining engineer,
surveying the northern Yenisey gold bearing region and intending shortly to move
northward on the Vorogovka River, going upcstream into the tayga woods. The
fact that our theodolite was not adapted to rapid, even though inacurate, recon-
naissance measurements, end especially to being transported by pack animals,
which would have been the case in the woods, forced me to decline to participate
in the trip. I limited myself to taking abbreviated observations at the mouth -
of the Garevka River, right tributary of the Yenisey (some 12 versts south of
N. Shadrino), where L. Yachevskiy was campel.'. We reached there close to sunset.
I determined the azimuth of the ground target from the sun. The chronometric
correction for the local time was made several hours later, from the star. This
point, is the only one of my points located on the right bank of the Yenisey,
which magnetically was slightly different from the neighboring point. On the
return trip, we stopped in Yeniseysk. Finally, on our way from Krasnoyarsk to
Tomsk, we made observations at 4 more points. At one of them, namely in Bogotol,
we had to stop for several days, awaiting the sun, and even so, we were forced
to leave without having seen either the sun or the stars and had to give up
determining the magnetic declination.
We arrived in Tomsk, the evening of 13 August. Altogether the trip took
almost two months and resulted in 25 magnetic points. Somewhat later, I made ?
observations twice more at Prof. KapustEn16 point near Tomsk, on the other
side of the Tom' River.
As detailed a description as possible of all the 1900 and 1901 points of
observation will be found below. The method to set-up the instruments and methods
used during magnetic and astronomical measurements, will be found in an appropriate
chapter. Here I will only indicate the considerations which guided us in the -
choice of location for observations and the way the time was allocated for work.
The predominant factor of the choice of a location was the abscence near it of
any kind of iron mass. The slightest doubt to that effect made us change the
location. For example in 1900, we made observations at two locations in Narym,-
Maloye Panovo, and at the mouth of the Ozernaya River. In Narym, an iron pile,
the mark of the water gauge, appeared quite close to the initial position of the
instrument. These fears, however were not fully justified, after comparing the. -
magnetic elements at both locations (see list of points). In M. Panovo, we moved
our tent because some lumbering work was begun near it. At the mouth of the
Ozernaya River, where we began our astronomical observations at night, we had to
-11-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
move because we saw in the morning a considerable mass of iron was piled up on a
cape, not 'very far from us.
SI-AT
In 1901, we moved away from the railroad tracks, usually for 200 meters or more,
avoiding also railroad buildings and water pipes. The presence of water pipes could
easily be determined at once by external signs. According to an approximate theo,
retical calculation the influence of the water pipe magnetism, induced by the
earth's magnetic field, on the measured elements is insignificant for the stated
distance,-even wOn not taking into account the fact that pipes do not constitute
an uninterruptee) and solid iron core.
Insofar as the arrival and departure of trains, maneuvering at the same distance
from the instrument, it was impossible to prove their direct influence on the instru-
ment, although I have the appropriate material. If there was any influence, it was
insignificant, This is apparent from the fact that points which previously were ?
located very far from the rail tracks, such as Chik, Kozhurla, Mariyanovkal Makushino
and others, give no greater agreement in reduction of magnetic elements than other ?
stations, located near the railroad tracks (Polomoshnaya, Tebis, Tatarskaya,
Kull, Chelyabinsk and others; see table X below). Therefore, one may suppose that
the influence of incidental earth's currents circulating through the rails, was
not noticeable.
In chbsing the location for observation, we were also frequently guided by
considerations of conveniences of spending the night in the tent, because it
was very-difficult to find lodgings in small station settlements. Lodging in
the tent was inconvenient only in one respect: the chronometer was then subjected
to high.daily variations in temperature. However, at times it had been possible to
turn it over for the night to the RR station's postal telegraph office for safekeep-
ing-in a locked trunk, and at other times in the hut of some reliable inhabitant.- -
When we were to stay in the tent the clock around, we installed the stand with the'
instrument the first thing in the morning, which saved us considerable time. Thus/
except for?brief intervals for rest, the whole time was devoted to observations. In
towns, we had to stop at liotels? and use hacks for driving-beyond the city limits. -
This-required that the instruments and tent be installed anew in each instance.
Magnetic observations seldom were made without a tent - only in instances of/
brief stops, while travelling by steamer or by boat, when the observations were also
incomplete'. Only once, at the mouth of the Garevka River, in 1901, the whole series
of magnetic observations was performed without the tent, due to complete calm in
the "evening; it was possible to make a very good determination of the inclination
even' with the galvanometer without any protection. Astronomical observations
require less protection, but even then, our tent fully replaced an umbrella. We
could, protect the instrument and its levels well from the heat of the sun while
observing it, by stretching out or partially rolling away the removable roof of
the tent. During night observations, the same arrangement protected the lens and
other parts of the theodolite from too heavy deposits of dew. Finally, closing
the tent completely, we were able, in many instances to continue making magnetic''
observations in the tent while it was raining. Only the vBrniers then were dark.
6) As a rule, pipes are joined by lead packing.
-12-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
C
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Weather conditions in 1900 and 1901 had been rather favorable, but observatjsTAT
by the stars were still fairly rare. In 1900, stellar observations could have been
easily made with the Hildebrand theodolite, but smoke from large forest fires, ex-
tending over huge areas, frequently interfered. This handicap has also 'bei men-
tioned by Yu. Shmidt7) who worked that summer on the Ob' Rivar. In addition,
there were fires along the Kett and the Bol'shoy Kas Rivers. In 1901, observa-
tions from the stars with the Wild theodolite were rather difficult but possible,
if the vernirs of the horizontal circle were not used. They gave good results
at Mar'yanovka and Chelyabinsk stations and at the mouth of the Garevka River.
In 1901, observations were made much more intensively than during the pre-
ceeding trip. However, it was seldom that one succeeded to make in one day all
the desired observations, despite certain abbreviation in the measuring methods,
made to improve the final results. These desired observations were: 2 deter-
minations of the time and azimuth from the sun; three determinations of the de-
clination; three determinations of the horizontal intensity, and at least one
determination of the inclination. It was necessary also to make a rough survey
of the locality from the sun at noon. Especially, a great deal of time was spent
to determine the inclinations, even when all parts of the instrument proved to
be in good order right from the start. This latter factor of course depended on
how complicated was the process of assembling the component parts of the instrument,
mainly of the control parts and the difficulty ot installing the galvanometer.
Usually all the above mentioned observations, could be made without too much dif-
ficulty, even in a large number, within one and a half working days. .
II. MAIN AND AUXILIARY INSTRUMENTS USED DURING THE TRIPS, THEIR CONSTANTS AND
CORRECTIONS
First of all, let us enumerate the instruments which were used for various
auxiliary measurements.
Gerl. aneroid No. 12262 belonging to prof. Kapustin, and a Boelau aneroid
were compared with the barometer in the physical laboratory prior to the trips.
The temperature coefficient was studied also. The Gerl. aneroid was found to
have no temperature error. It was not taken along during the 1901 trip. The
following were obtained:
For the spring of 1900:
Correction to Gerl. 1226
It
" Boelau
MM
-0.03 to
7) "Opredeleniye astronomicheskikh punktov parokhodnymi reysami v basseyne rek
Obi i Irtysha v 1900 godu. "Zap. Voyenno-Topogr. Otd. Gl. Shtaba ("Determination
of Astronomical Points by Steamer Trips in the Ob' and Irtysh River Basin in 1900."
Transactions of the Military Topographical Department of the General Staff), vol. 59,
p. 173.
8) The four peasants who delivered to me the document from the rector of the Tomsk
University were caaght by a forest fire according to their statements. At that
point they left their boat prefering a shorter and more rapid way on foot leading
directly to the mouth of the Malyy Kas River and Aleksandrovskiy stan. While de-
touring the fire they got lost and reached the destination tired and hungry. We
also saw the fire during our travel.
- 13 -
fr
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
For the spring of 1901:
Correction to the Boelau
+3.9 -0.03 to
STAT
F. Muller No. 98 sling thermometer, which I used exclusively to determine the
temperature of the air, had corrections of less than 00.1.
The thermometer of the Wild theodolite (W) was once checked aginst the No. 98
and the difference between them was:
No. 98 - W = 0?.15.
As all observations were made with the same W thermometer, there was no neces-
sity to use corrections. This thermometer was graduated up to 36? C only. In 1901,
during a heat wave the thermometer burst as the crate containing it had been left
standing out in the sun9). The broken thermometer was replaced by a spare thermometer
P taken from one of the instruments belonging to the physical laboratory. The check-
ing of this thermometer gave the following:
At 16? P - No. 98 = 0?.85
At 24? P - No. 98 = 0?.80
At 26? P - No. 98 = 00.95
P - No. 98 = 0?.87
Therefore, in order to reduce the temperature of the magnet to the old W thermo-
meter for the observations made in 1901 and beginning on 29 June (new style) at
Marsyanovka station, a correction of - 10.02 was made in the readings of P thermo-
meter.
In 1900, a Richthofen compass of excellent Hildebrand make, graduated to
degrees, was taken along for topographic work. This compass could have been used
also for determining the declination of the magnetic needle from the sun. According
to tests made by me in Tomsk, the accuracy for determining the declination by the
known azimuth of the ground target, reached up to + 41, and the constant error of
the compass remained within these limits also. However, it was not used to determine
the declinations en route. in.. 1901, I just did not take it along, having taken for
surveying a small angle prism with two verniers on a special stand for readings to 21.
Only one Erickson table chronometer No. 851 with the run to mean time was
taken on both trips. At home, its rate as insignificant and very constant. In
the field, its daily run was also very satisfactory as shall be seen from observa-
tions in table III, and this despite the fact that it had not been possible to really
protect it from jolting and from temperature variations. A Waltham watch, belong-
ing to prof. Kapustin, and used by me in 1900 as a work chronometer, became un-
reliable in the course of time (see Table Ix) and needed to be checked frequently
with a chronometer. This was the reason why in 1901, I used the Erickson chronometer
exclusively to work with.
9) Frequently a temperature of + 330 was registered in the tent, later at Makushino
station it was + 38?.
- 14 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
A field Hildebrand theodolite (universal) No. 2601, was used for astronomical
observations. It had a lens of about 35 mm in diameter; the vertical circle had
a diameter of 14 cm with verniers giving readings up to 10"; the horizontal circ?'
had a diameter of 12 cm with verniers up to 30". Six vertical threads, and two317?-
horizontal threads were arranged close to each other (one of them was especially
marked to help differentiate them) in the diaphragm of the eyepiece. Among the
vertical, the central ones were also placed close together. The angular distance
between threads equalled 50".
The value of the division of levels according to the previous measurements
taken by prof. Kapustin, gave the following on the level testing standbrd:
for the vertical circle level 10"
for the horizontal axis level 27".
Consequently, a correction to the mean readings of the verniers of the verti-
cal circle was:
n1 + n2
(10
2
) lon,
where nl and n2 are the readings of tile ends of the level's bubble. The inclina-
tion of the horizontal axis cf the striding level in magnittde and egh was a6-
termanql.4 bY the'rollowing formula:
i = m? to right - mo to left
27"
2
where mo to right and mo to left stand for arithmetical means of the readings of
the bubble ends,when the zero division of the level is to the right and to the left
of the observer standing in front of the instrument and looking at the light.
The theodolite was used for observations in Tomsk and for the field observe-
tions in 1900.
The Wild magnetic universal field theodolite, belonging to the Tomsk Univer-
sity, was made by the firm of Dr. Edelman in Munich. By its mechanism, this
theodolite resembled closest the theodolite type of H. I. Wild, described by him
in 1894101 and again later in 189611). Therefore I will give only the main features
of this theodolite and its certain peculiarities differentiating it from others:
The lens of the astronomic . telescope has a 28 mm diameter; the graduation
of verniers of the vertical circle equals 20". At first, the horizontal circle's
verniers were also graduated to 20", the diaraete:o af the horizontal circle, was
about 17 cm. The gtaauation value of tne vertical circle as
10) H. Wild. "Beitrage zur Entwicklung der erdmagnetischen Beobachtungsinstrumente,"
("Contributions to the Development of Instruments for Observation of Terrestrial Mag-
netism,"), p 17. E21,Em_nit2-111D022git, vol. 17.
11) H. Wild. "Theodolith fur magnetische Landesaufnahmen." Vierteliahrsschrift
der Naturforschenden Gesellschaft in Zurich. ("A Theodolite for Topographic
Surveys." Quarterly of the Natural Science Assoc. in Zurich). 1896: Jubille
Volume. Vol II, p 139.
- 15 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
34
?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
determined by prof. Kapustin, corresponds to about 15" in its center.12)
Therefore,
instead of taking the mean readings N of the verniers one should take:
N + ( nl + n2 10) 15".
2
The division value of the applied level equals.20", and the inclination of the
axis determined by reversing this level, is computed according to the formual 13).
STAT
mo to left - mo to right 20".
2
Finally, the level inside the inductor had 20" division values (not quite uni-
form throughout).
The thodolite had the following features: the astronomical telescope was
placed eccentrically; the horizontal axis was elongated with extensions at both
ends used as supports for the device holding the deflecting magnet. Furthermore,
the center of the horizontal axis was replaced by a large,ring, so that the pivots
were on the extensions of one of the ring's diameters. The ring servesIlirst, to
eliminate difficulties in installing cases with magnets in the center of the theodo-
lite; second, to make it possible to screw to it the small tube with light reflected
by a mirror on the eyepice scale for aiming at the magnet and at the ground target;
and third, to provide a place within it for a copper ring with an induction coil
which serves for determining the magnetic inclination. Therefore, the same verti-
cal circle serves both for taking readings of the inclination angle of the inductor
and for astronomical observations.
The main magnet in a large box, placed in the center of the theodolite serves
to determine the declination and the time of oscillation of the magnet. In dister'.-
mining the angle of deflection, the main magnet is fixed
in the same box, without being taken out, perpendicularly to the original position
and the whole box is set 1 with different sides in turn, on the ends of the horizon-
tal axis of the theodolite. Simultaneously, another box with an auxiliary magnet
and a strong copper damper is placed in the center [of the theodolite]. The same
small tube with the eyepiece scale, is used for aiming at this magnet (according to
Lamont). Thus the deflection is made from one distance only and it is impossible
to obtain the horizontal intensity in absolute units, even if only because of the
difficultrin determining the distance between the magnets.
In order to observe currents in the inductor, while determining the inclinOion,
a galvanometer of the Rosent.tal system was used; initially with an air damper. '4i
The galvanometer is placed on a separate stand, with a ball level, the whole installed
on a separate stand.
One can see from this brief description of the theodolite, how different it
is from the earlier prototype of field instruments of the same make, e.g., from
the instrument sed by V. Kh. Dubinskiy for making magnetic observations in
Zapadnyy Kray-L)) (Western Region). Our theodolite differed from the latest type
instrument (described in our last work, mentioned above) by only the following
details: the main magnet of our theodolite was not suspended in a separate instru-
12) Whenever the bubble shifted too much to the side, the more accurate table was
used to center it:
The center of the level at 5. div. 6 8 10 12 14 15 div.
-68 " -52" -28" 0 +30" +55" +64 "
,
13) The numerals on the horizontal circle of this theodolite increased counterclockwise
looking at the circle from above.
14) Prof. Kapustin installed a copper damper replacing the bone coils by copper coils.
15) H. Wild. "Instrument ffir erdmagnetische Messungen und astronomische Ortsbestimun-
gen auf Reisen" ("An Instrument for Measuring Terrestrial Magnetism and for Mnking
Astronomical Determinations During Trips"). Rep. fiir Meteor. vol. 16, No. 2.
- 16 -
?/,t-:' Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
ment case i4 which it could revolve around its own axis16 , but by two pegs at
the top ar4be bottom of the magnet. Furthermore, both boxes (magnet housings)
in our theodolite are installed in a removable cone, the other end of which,
also conical, is inserted into a receptacle in tin center of the theodolite. Finally0STAT
Rosenthal galvonometer was replaced in later models by the more practical Weiss
galvanometer.
Due to the fact that despite a fairly long lapse of time since the H. Wild field
type of theodolite was described and that during this period very few apalytical
results of magnetic observations (made with instruments of such type)17) have been
published, I consider that it might not be superfluous to dwell in greater detail
on the two years' experience which demonstrated the practical qualities of these
field instruments. This in a way, would develop some of the ideas submitted by
prof. Kapustin.
The fact that the instrument is universalisdfcoursevery advantageous on
field trips18) tha the layout of parts by the academician Wild, is efficient in
this sense.
From the point of view of design, the instrument showed a defect whichiin
my opinion, limited the accuracy of most observations made with the theodolite,
so that in final results, this accuracy did not correspond to the measuring
(survcdring) potential of the theodolite. The defect consisted in the fact that
the cOnnection of supports for pivots with the vertical axis was not.strong
enough. The massive upper lid, at the edges of which the supports were fixed,
was subject to buckling, despite the weight and solidity of the lid. Consequently,
the necestity for alternate loading of the theodolite and 'moving of the whole
case with the magnet to different ends of the horizontal axis and in general the
use of counterweights19) cause difficultii.es.
Furthermore, the method of moving the whole box with the magnet to the ends
of the instrument's axis, had its fault's at least in the Tomsk model, although
in fact the temperature of the magnet was reliably registered. The fact was that
the complicated system of fixing the magnet within the box with a large number
of small screws, did not guarantee complete uniformity and invariable position
of the magnet for any length of time. Thus, there were times when the magnet
swayed a bit between the two clamping forks. At times, despite all precautions,
the upper fork itself wobbled noticeably and it was not possible to tighten it
hard enough. Even less expected had been the fact that the main regulating
screw, placed on the outside of the suspension cylinder and determining the height
of the upper fork and hence the height of the main magnet during deflections,
apparently losened up. We will describe this below.
16) This rotation was produced mechanically during the determination of declina-
tion in the models described and the magnet was not touched by hand.
17) I only know that a similar theodolite was used by prince B. Golitsyn on Novaya
Zemlya (Izv. Imp. Ak. N. - Bulletin of the Imperial Academy of Sciences - vol. 6,
No. 3, 1897) and in Vbrob'yevka village (1. c. vol. 5, No. 5, 1896), and by Col.
Drizhenko on Lake Baykal.
18) Only a small modification in the design would be needed in order to eliminate
the necessity of repeated complete adjustment of parts taking so much time in the
field. The Tomsk model se-Efuired an adjustment when the auxiliary telescope was
affixed so that the eyepiece scale would oe horizontal, and an adjustment of the
ring with the inductor so that the inductor rotation axis would remain perpendicu-
lar to the horizontal axis, etc.
19) Apparently, a considerable reduction in the size of all parts, and in the
weight of all those parts of the theodolite wherever possible, and also change
to the usual system of affixing the supports of the horizontal axis and to re-
setting of one magnet, without the housing, would facilitate the observations
without even reducing their precision.
- 17 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
4
There is another reason why putting on and removing the tightly set whole STAT
box, without.twaying the ground in ends of the horizontal axis, is convenient.
Without a doubt, thdse manipulations can cause a slight dipplacement of the whole
axis of the theodolite on its pivots, either to the left/%o the right, in the
course of the same observation, and therefore the mean distance between the mag-
nets will change. One should be aware of this very serious source of errors,
which might arise if in the process of the full circle of obserVations one
has to use the micrometric screw near the horizontal axis of either to 'raise or
lower the eyepiece image in the telescope. Such manipulation had to be performed
at times on the Tomsk model.
To conclude, I am going to enumerate those peculiarities of our model which
explain the choice of observation methods and different measures taken by me
during field work.
1) The weak point of the upper part of the Wild theodolite was apparent
when the micrometric screws of both axes of the theodolite were used at which
time the images of the objects on the ground were greatly and irregularly dis-
placed in the telescope eyepiece. Thus, under the action of the screw of the
vertical axis, objects were shifted in relation to the horizontal thread of
the telescope, etc. The same indication was given by levels, which displaced
noticeably under the action of the screw for the vertical axis.20) However,
astronomical methods of observation can eliminate, almost completely, errors
arising from defects of the instrument, if one does not touch at all the screws
at the moment of contact of the telescope's thread with the celestial body, and
if one reads off immediately the appropriate levels-. These were the reasons
why I used, only in extreme cases, the usual simplified method for sighting the
cross threads on the center of the sun, or even, in general, the simultaneous
aiming of the telescope by both tha vertical and the horizontal threads. I
prefered to make separate (and more accurate, considering our instrument) obser-
vations for the height and the azimuth of the celestial body.
changing
2) After/the "circle right" to'bircle left" while observing the azimuth of the
sun, the elevated lens end of the astronomical telescope hindered the reading of
the second vernier of the horizontal circle. It was necessary to losen the
axis and lower the telescope.
3) The striding level can not be safely left all the time on the horizontal
axis of the theodolite. At the time of very high sun, the inclination of this
axis can not be determined at all if the clamping screw is not loosened and the
telescope lowered down. However, it is especially important to determine the
inclination of the axis immediately after the sun passed over the eyepiece cross-
hair.
20) This circumstance and other, enumerated by me here, were mentioned by prof.
Kapustin; see his article "Opredeleniye magnitnykh elementov v g. Tomske," printed
as an appendix to Izv. Imperatorskago Tomskago Universiteta (Bulletin of the Im-
perial University of Tomsk), in the Sbornik trudov v pamyatl E. G. Salishcheva
(Collection of Works in Memory of E. G. Salishchev). Tomsk, 1904. See also
Protokol Obshchestva Yestestvois atele i Vrache, sri IMD. Tomsk. Universitete
za 1898 - 1899 gody (Protocols of the Association of Natural Scientists and
Physicians at the Imperial University of Tomsk ga_11.198-1899), p. 10.
-18-
neclassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Not measuring the inclination of the axis each time after contact (because of thi&IAT
necessity), and at times even after loosening the screw, we of course make an errZ-A.
However, one may suppose that the errorjs constant, if we terminate the motion
of micrometric screws always uniformly to the right. Fortunately, all astronbmic
operations for the purpose of magnetic measurements, especially in the field, do
not require extreme accuracy. The accuracy of astrohomic operations in 1901 with
the Wild theodolite, was in general adequate. But, it would have been desirable
that it could have been reached without a useless loss of time and labor, as for
instance would have been the case with a smaller size and better quality instrument.
II) The so called "optical noniuses" (verniers) were found not to be practical,
due to the 9.riabi1ity of values in their graduations. This was mentioned by
H. I. Wilda. Prof. Kapustin also noted their constant change (later it was
found to be due to the load of the theodolite) and instead of adjusting the micro-
scopes each time, he determined the value of vernier division. Later, he deliberately
reduced the sensitivity of verniers 1 1/2 times. In 1901, I reduced it even 2 times,
so that very frequently the verniers had not only one but two coinciding lines, and
both of them could be read. Their difference gave the value of the vernier. A
special table was then used to change the readings into minutes and seconds of the
arc. As the division of the horizontal limb = 10', I did not use the verniers for
some of the measurements, but took the readings by the eye to 1/10th of the divi-
sion, i.e. up to 1'. Another difficulty was the relative darkness of these verniers,
and at night, candle light was not adequate.
5) Traces of iron22) were found in certain parts of the theodolite: in the
fork of the locking device, which was always located directly under the magnet.
Also in the lens part of the frame of the small telescope through which the magnet
was sighted.
The influence of the locking device, at least the possibility of its alternate
influence on the magnet, was nullified by placing the locking device before each
sighting and while observing the oscillation period in the position perpendicular
to the magnet. The difference between the declination with the locking device
parallel to the magnet and perpendicular to it, was however less than 01.3. The
influence of the locking device manifested itself more clearly when observing the
time of the magnet's oscillation. Special observations made in the laboratory of
the Tomsk University gave the following T (period oscillation) with different posi-
tions of the locking device:
Locking device placed parallel
It 11 11 It
Locking device placed perpendicularly
It It H It
Locking device placed parallel
II H 11 11
Locking device placed perpendicularly
It 11 It
h50m
10
1 21
32
1 50
21
2 12
2 24
at 160.64
16 .61
16 .85
16 .75
16 .79
16 .79
16 .66
16 .60
3:94373
4374
34457
.4467
35'4386
4397
3.4465
.4463
21) "Theodolith Thr ...." 1. c., p. 165.
22) F. Ya. Kapustin: "Determination of magnetic elements in Tomsk". 1.c.
-19-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
4.
Observations were made with a special telescope, installed at a dietance. SI-AT
mean amplitude of oscillations was! .about 10.1, so that the correction to the infinite-
ly small amplitude would have been about - 08.0001. Average for
the' looking device placed parelltl
the locking device placed perpendicularly
for
16?.70 T = 38.4382
16?.71 T = 3 .4463
,- ?
The decrease of T when the locking device is parallel to the magnet in-
dicates an increased intensity of the magnetic field in this instance, as the
influence of a relatively large decrement in this position on the locking device
wouid in itself have influenced T in the opposite direction.
Immediately after these measurements were taken, the telescope of the Wild
theodolite was mounted and with a perpendicular position of the locking device,
the T for 16?64 = 35.4447, so it would appear that the small telescope of the
theodolite also has a certain influence on the magnetic field near the theodolite.
Later on we will come back to the influence that the presence of iron in the
instrtiment should have on the reliability of the results. Now we will point out
that we always lowered the locking device, as much as possible and placed it in
a position perpendicular to the magnet with the exception of those instances of
errors which were noted in the journal and therefore completely excluded, and
also instances of errors which were perhaps completely undetected.
6) The glass in the front lid of the main box, through which the magnet
was sighted was not polished planoparallel, therefore the sighting of the ground
target had to be done also through this glass. However, the difference between
sighting the ground target through the glass or without it, was very slight, about
0.13.
It ehould also be mentioned that due to the fact that even a slight wind
had an adverse influenceqhe Rosenthal galvonometer and on the results of the
work, with the inductor, i.e.fon the unknown inclination, the galvanometer
stand was shortened so much that one had to make observations sitting on the
ground. It also appeared more convenient to place all the parts of the Wild
theodolite into three boxes instead of one, this making it easier to assemble
the theodolite under the field observation conditions. Finally, I can recom-
mend, as a result of personal experience always to cover with something the
apperture drilled through along the whol,p length of the horizontal axis, from
the side of the astronomical telescope231. Not only dust penetrates through
213) It should becovered in such a way as to leave the end of the horizontal axis
completely free for an accurate rest against the glass of the case,when the hous-
ing is put on.
-20-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
this aperture into the telescope, but also insects, which is very annoying beckiuse
the crossthreads stretched in the telescope eyepiece were twice put indanger.241
SI-AT
24) In 1900, in the town of Narym, while V. V. Vinogradov was observing the sun,
tWW-Tmage of a huge insect appeared in the focal point of the telescope. Fearing
that the thread would be torn, I unscrewed the lens of the telescope and a small
horsefly flew out. The threads were not damaged. In 1901, several times during
night observations, a small prism was used as it should be for lighting the
telescope field. This prism was inserted in the aperture of the horizontal axis
described above. One time, I evidently forgot to cover the aperture with a piece
of paper. At the Chernorechanskaya railroad station, while fotusing the astro-
nomic telescope .on the target, I noticed that instead of the crossthread there
was a whole irregularly shaped net of threads. The crossthread to which the
cobweb was attached, was also deformed. A small spider had crawled into the tele-
scope. While cleaning the eyepiece the crossthread was weakened and one thread
was completely sagging. I tore it off, and having no suitable material other
than silk, I separated a fine strand and stretched it across the old space, having
secured the end with shellac. The new thread was somewhat thicker than the old
threads and the net was placed so that the new thread was used as the vertical
one. The sun rays did not burn the silk thread.
-21-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
III. ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS, FIELD READINGS AND CALCULATIONS
SI-AT
Astronomical observations, were not our purpose directly, but had mostly an
auxiliary character for the calculation of magnetic declination. These observa-
tions consisted of determining the local time, the latitude and the azimuth of
the mark (target) and were made from the sun for the most part.
A Waltham watch without the seconds' beat, was used in 1900 as a working chr6-
nometer and the time was noted by the assistant V. Vinogradov on a signal from the
observer. In 1901, the Erickson chrodpmeter was always used. It was placed on
the theodolite case, so that its beat could be well heard by the observer.
During field trips, theodolites were installed on their stands, at times
(especially the Hildebrand theodolite) stuck directly into the ground. More
frequently, however, wide stakes were first driT8n into the earth, flush with
the ground and hollows corresponding to the sharp edges of the shoes of the
support were pressed into the stakes. By varying the length of the stakes (from
1/2 to 1 arshin) depending on the type of ground, it was possible to set up the
instruments very solidly. Due to the fact that at times, the mark was quite close,
a fourth stake was also driven in flush with the ground each time in the exact
center for the setting-up of the theodolite (or two theodolites, as was the case
in 1900). One could use this stake for marking very accurately with a pencil the
center of t4odolffes by the plumb line suspended to the central stem of the stands
[tripods] ?25 The instrument was usually protected from the sun either by an
umbrella or the roof of the tent. In case of variable cloudiness when the sun had
to be sighted either through a red glass or without a glass, the prism of the
Hildebrand theodolite proved very convenient with its movable red glass. In
similar instances, when using the Wild theodolite, one had to remove the red glass
completely and use a hand glass. Conditions of sky transparency varied a great
deal in cloudy weather and when one had to interrupt observations and when the
edges of the sun were strongly washed out, the quality of observations was im-
paired. Such instances are mentioned in special notes in the general tables,
given later.
The determination of local time, to be more exact, the corrections of the
chronometer to the local time, were made by the stars as well as by the sun,
by measuring zenith distances of heavenly bodies near the first vertical. All
other methods of determining time during field trips, lose considerably their
advantage, if no great accuracy is required, as is the case during trips for the
special purpose of taking magnetic measurements. According to the alloted time,
weather conditions, and others, observations of zenith distances of the sun away
from the meridian, will always be less troublesome because our moderate require-
ments for accuracy, give a wide choice of time for such observations.
25) If a marked displacement of the theodolite from the required position was
noted, it was possible, after measuring the deflection of the plumb line, to
calculate the correction for "centering" the theodolite, if the correction was
important enough not to be disregarded.
-22-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release
50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
The Hildebrand theodolite gave completely satisfactory results in 1900 eves-rAth
the following method ob observation. Two hours or an hour and a half before the -urue
noon time, it was possible to begin measuring the zenith distances of the sun, then to
repeat the whole performance about noon, and, finally, once more after the noon hour,
symmetrically in relation to the meridian; determination of the azimuth of the tar-
get could be done during the same lapse of time of 3 to 4 hours, although condi-
tions for it, especially with the sun being high, are considered disadvantageous.
It is understood, that with such a method for determining time, the error in the
latitude calculated by the noon zenith distances of the sun, and the systematic
errors of the theodolite, and to SOMB extent, the refraction errors are excluded.
Bringing all the astronomical observations close to noon, is advantageous, because
it leaves the instrument free for the rest of the time exclusively for magnetic
measurements. This circumstance outweighs the decrease in accuracy in determining
the time and the meridian, sufficient for our purposes as shown by the results
(see tables for determining time in Kolpashevo and Maloye Panovo).
Although such set of observations of the Sun near the meridian requires a
greater number of sighting or the edges of the sun and a greater number of read-
ings, it appeared to me as more advantageous than the generally known method of
determining the time and azimuth at equal elevations.20 With this latter method
we are tied by the time element and risk to lose the observations completely if
the sun happen to be clouded after the noon hour at the time we need to make the
observation,27) while even a single observation with actual reading of both circles
of the theodolite would still give the time and the azimuth when we determine also
the latitude of the location with the same instrument by the sun. The number of
sightings would make up for the poor accuracy in this method of measuring zenith
distances.
However, the time was determined much more frequently without any precon-
ceived plan, as operations progressed, i.e., by taking advantage of intervals of
clear sky, making the instrument available for astronomical work, etc. In so far
as possible, the time was observed from the stars as well as from the sun at eachi
station on both sides of the meridian and symmetrically. When it was impossible
to make twosided observations, I tried at least to make another independent obse2-
vation.
Usually 8 sightings were made on a star or different edges of the sun, with
different positions of the circle - right and left. Four sightings were less
frequent. Their number and also information of the mean hourly angle and the
mean zenith distance of the celestial body are given in the table of observations.
This permits to judge of the relative quality of observations. In two instances,
specially mentioned in the tables (at the Tebis station and at the mouth of the
Garevka River in 1901), the time determination had to be limited to sighting the
sun and the star only in one position of the circle, due to the appearance of
clouds. In Tebis, the time determination was immediately followed by determin-
ing the location of the zenith on the circle, according to a ground object. This
26) The telescope is clamped in its vertical position and one of the ecIps of the
sun is allowed to cross several horizontal threads of the reticle dividing the sun
in halves by the vertical thread and reading each time the horizontal circle. The
same is repeated after the noon hour without loosening at all the horizontal axis
of the theodolite during all that time.
27) Furthermore, one should have several horizontal threadsrwhich was not the case
with our . theodolites. When working with a stand, furthermore, a checking tele-
scope is almost necessary, or the determination of the azimuth will be little reliable.
- 23 -
?
im,,,i,ecifinri in Part cnniti7ed CODV Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
location was fairly accurately known after the preceeding and the following 0b51STAT
vations of the sun had been calculated. By the same considerations it was deter-
mined at the mouth of the Garevka River that the possible (maximum + 10") error
in the changer of the location of the zenith would have influenced the results of
time determination according to 0: Lyrae but little.
The Chi.onometer correction was computed according to measured zenith distances
of the celestial body by a known formula giving its hour angle tt
Sin V + `P -6 Sin z + 6
in t 2 2
' 2
cos cos 6
Here z stands for the zenith distance, q - for the latitude of the location,
6 - the declination of the celestial body. The most accurate value of, 5' was
taken, i.e:, the mean of all determinations made at a given location128) if no
other mere,accurate data was available. Accurate latitudes determined by other
observers were taken after reducing them to the location of the theodolite.
I used 6 place logarithms of the so called "Navigation Tables", published
by the Main Hydrographic Administration, for computing. The main reason was
because it had a convenient table of logarithms of the square of the sine of
a half angle, applicable also to computing the hour angles from the formula writ-
ten .above; and to computing the azimuths of the z magnitude. _Epur place logarithms
were' used wherever necessary. I used the convenient Albrecht29) tables for com-
puting refraction and other corrections. These tables especially facilitated the
calculation of approximate coordinates of the Polar Star. The tables also have
data for precise reduction to the meridian of sourthern celestial bodies (up to
120 minutes of the hour angle), for the computation of precise latitude and azimuth
from observations of the Polar Star. The use of these tables eliminates almost
completely the use of multiple place logarithms.
Coordinates of the stars and sun were taken from the Nautical Almanac or from
Berliner Jahrbuch, and the declination of the sun was interpolated by the differences
of the second order, usually directly for the mean moment of observation, corrected
by the longitude of the location, either from Greenwich of Berlin. In instances
of strong change in the declination of the sun to consecutive differences z
and z -9 + 6 corrections were sometimes applied depending on the change in the
declinatioh of the sun during the whole time of observation. The lesser or
greater agreement of results of individual sightings, became more apparent at the
28) It should be noted that when computing the time from the sun close to the meridian,
it is more correct to take the valuO'obtain6d by 'he same theiffilifb,-the same day
from tfie sun, near the very meridian, and not the precise value of the latitude. The
results would then depend less on systewatic errors in measuring zenith distances.
This condition is important especially for large errors and for unilateral observa-
tion of the sun 1 or 2 hours before noon. Therefore, dm one instance in Narym, on
26 June 1900, time observation was computed with the latitude determined by the Blame
Wild theodolite, although it differs' significantly from the real value, namely by
12".
29) Albrecht: Formeln und Huelfstafeln fur eographische Ortsbestimmungen (Formulas
and Auxiliary Tables for Geographical Bearings'), Leipzig, 1894.
-24-
nca-inccifipri in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Ap roved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
end of a complete set of observations. It is for this purpose that the sight;---
of each edge of the sun, always computed separately, were corrected by the ma LAT
tude of the mean half diameter of the sun. In addition, the refraction (with con-
rections for atmospheric pressure and temperature) and the parallax of the sun
were added.
The determination of the latitude of a location was also mede exclusively
by measuring the zenith distances of the sun or southern stars near the meridian
and the Polar Star. As the degree of latitude accuracy required was not very
great and the places of observation were mostly alike, and fixing them to some -
standing out objects was not always possible (in 1900), I did nottry to attain -
the most accurate results which could have been obtained with theodolites. There-
fore I never took several pairs of stars, southern and northern, circumstances most-
ly forced me to limit myself to one star or to one solar observation. In 1901,
determinations of latitude in certain instances were made only for the sake of
comparison with the already known and more exact results. In 1900, near the
Maksimoyarov village, the latitude was determined by the approximately kpown.
local time. The accuracy suffered but little as the sun was near the very meri-
dian. On the Kasovskaya Stream, the sun had already passed the meridian when we
began the observations. A new measurement of zenith distances of the sun, an.
hour after the first, made it possible to calculate both coordinates of the loca-
tion by subsequent approximations, entailing of course less reliable results
than other observations made during the trip.
Computations of latitude were made with a known correction to the chro-
nometer using the auxiliary Albrecht tables. The expansion for computing the
latitude by the Polar Star looks as follows:
71 2 23
Cos t + Mo Sin2 t + N ?
o'
3
is the polar distance of the star taken from astronomic tables for the time
2 3
of observation, Mo, 2 ? and No are taken from Albrecht. The last
7 --3
No 0
member of the expansion is already insignificant and I took the last two for the
mean moment of observation.
;9 = 90 -
For southern celestial bodies the tables give the coefficient m and n in
the formula:
up to 120 minutes of the hour angle. For observation close to the noon hour,
I used to take an even simpler formula:
= ? + - Ct2
- 25 -
npriaccifipn in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
for which C and t2,are given in Albrecht for different latitudes, declinations
and hour angles.3?)
STAT
In some instances,when computing the latitude from the sun during strong
changes in its declinatiokil the Gauss set was used for simple exclusion of the
effect of these changes31) and for judging the agreement of results of individual
sightings of the sun.
Determinations of the azimuth of the target (mark) were done more frequently
from the sun, and in 1900 also from the Polar Star. If possible, a distant target
was chosen and such that the sightings of the target could not be exact and uni-
form. Objects servift as the target are enumerated further down in the descrip-
tion of stations.
As the installation of reliable signals, which could be used day and
night, appeared difficult during field trips, the observations of the Polar .
Star were done only as follows: either after a preliminary computation of the
location of the meridian from the sun and an estimated computation of the approx-
imate coordinates of the Polar Star the star wap located an hour or half an,
hour before sunset, when the object chosen as target was still clearly visible,
or by aiming the telescope on the star during the twilightand await the dawn, at
which time both the Polar Star and the target would be clearly distinguishable.
Whether the good qualities of the Hildebrand theodolite would permit to sight
the Polar Star even in day time, remained unknown to me. Evening determination of
the azimuth from the Polar Star were made in Bol'shoye Panovo, and in Maloye ?
Panovo at the second location. Morning determinations - in Kolpashevo, and in
Maloye Panovo at the first location.
The determination of the azimuth from the sun, I made almost exclusively
by aiming the vertical thread of the telescope on the edges of the sun and taking
the chronometer corrections known from special determinations. The 'Hildebrand
theodolite had only 6 vertical threads in the eyepiece (the central ones very
close together) and when using it for observations, it was possible to direct
the reticle in relation to the disk of the sun in such a way that its (the sun's)
edge first touched the last left thread of the reticle then moving further, the
disk would leave the last right thread through its back edge. The distance be-
tween the two lest threads Vas chosen in such a way that one did not have long
to wait from the moment of the first contact to the moment of the last contact
(about 1 minute). The mean moment would give the moment of the passage of the
sun through the mean arithmetic between the two threads. It is obvious that
ifitihicul,mtiAla thread, the time interval between the contacts would havebeen long,
/been useress, lthough such a method is usually recommended. In 1900, when there
was no need for it as it appeared later, I considered it necessary to increase
the number of vernier readings (as in the Hildebrand theodolite their value = 30")
and not the number of chronometer notations. Therefore, I aimed sOarately each
of the central close threads on different edges of the sun, in turn. I did it
30) Even with t = 15 minutes, the errors of this abbreviated formula are less than IP.
31) The zenith distances of the sun are reduced to the moment when the sun is at
its greatest height with the hour angle = 0s.255 (tan (p - tanti )A5) where A6
stands for the hour change in the declination of the sun expressed in seconds of
the arc and not to the moment when the sun's hour angle = O. The zenith distances
should not be taken at the moment when the hourly angle of the sun = O. See
Albrecht, page 54. It is understood that in this instance, the value of the decli-
nation of the sun should be considered precisely at that moment,. The declination
of the min fOr the mean moment for the whole set of observations should not be
taken instead.
-26-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
8 times in all, and read the verniers each time, consequently twice as many
readings were obtained as there were required for the above mentioned set. I
had to regret it very much when I made the calculations. Separate calculation
had to be made for each sighting, which was especially necessary to be able to
evaluate the absence of big errors in journal entries. Each sighting gave the
position of the meridian which had to be corrected by a reduction to the center of
the sun and to the center of the reticle, as one will see below.
In 19011 the Wild theodolite with a single vertical thread was used, but
it seemed to me still more advantageous not to await for the passage of both
edges of the sun over the thread, but to read each sighting separately. Less
time was used up and the calculation was simpler than with the Hildebrand theo-
dolite which I used in 1900.
When observing the azimuths of heavenly bodies, especially at their con-
siderable height, the determination of the inclination of the theodolite's-hori-
zontal axis, plays an important part. In this respect, observations made with
the Hildebrand theodolite could be considered as being without reproach. The
level usually held well and the data provided by the theodolite was accurater
without exception, despite the apparently rough verniers of the horizontal circle.
Things were worse with the Wild theodolite (see above, page 17, source, par. 1,
2 and 3), but still for the sake of simplicity, I made it a rule to measure the
inclination of the horizontal axis by moving the level before and after observing
the sun for each position of the circle: right and left. With the circle left,
it was first necessary to loosen the clamp and lower the' telescope to read the
second vernier, the same was necessary when applying the level when the sun was
high.32)
The calculations of the azimuth by observing the Polar Star was done with
the Albrecht table by the formula:
cot 5 sec to sin t
tan an -
1 - cot Stanp cos t
Only the numerator had to be computed precisely. The component fr9m table 33
is added to the log of the numerator, where the independent variable ika four-
place log second of the member of the denominator. The correction i cot was
applied to the readings from the star, for the inclination i of the horizontal
axis (see source pages 13 and 14).
The calculation of the azimuth from the sun with a known, accurate correction
of the chronometer for the true time, was made according to the formula with an
auxiliary angle which seemed to meniiVenient than others:
32) The results of azimuth measurements with the Wild theodolite in 1901, demon-
strated that adequate accuracy could be achieved with the said method tf measure-
ment. However, it seemed to me that the more important differences in the results
were usually due not only to the error in time, but also partly to the, less accurate
measurement of the inclination of the axis. Had it been necessary to increase the
accuracy in determining the meridian, it would have been imperative first of all
to improve the registration of the inclination of the Wild theodolite's horizontal
axis.
-27-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
t M tancos
tan 0:=where tan M = tan-3
sin (( - M) cost ?
STAT
The azimuth of the center of the sun was thus calculated for each moment of
sighting the edge of the sun. The reading of the horizontal circle corrected
for the inclination of the horizontal axis331 gave a reading of the circle slightly
different from the meridian, namely by a value of + R cosec z. Where R is the
Imaf.diameter of the sun.34) Usually themeanwas taken from two positions of the
meridian on the circle, obtained by sighting different edges of the sun, although
with a change of z, the correction of R cosec z also changes. With such method
of calculation the error is not big in most instances and is completely excluded
if the sightings of sun edges are made in reverse, i.e. at the right edge, at
the left, then again at the left and at the right. This error will always exist
with the method of passing the sun through one thread, when z changes. When
making observations with the Hildebrand theodolite in 1900, the sightings made
on two central threads in turn, could be reduced to the center of the eyepiece
net by still another correction, that is, + 25" cosec z. There were rare instances
when by mistake the edges of the sun were not observed symmetrically, or the sighting
on one of the threads was omitted, etc. The magnitudes R cosec z or 25" cosec z
still allowed to use all the readings which were part of the mean derivations.
At times, during short stops, simultaneous observations of time
the azimuth of the mark were made. The crosshair was sighted by the
approximately in the center of the sun, then both circles were read.
of the sun was calculated according to the observed zenith distances
formula:
coS 9 Z +5 sin
Sin2 a
2 2
2
cos 9 sin z
and of
eye,
The azimuth
from the
One could use again the special section of the "Navigation Tables". On
[source] page 171 above it is stated why I avoided to make such observations
with the Wild theodolite, requiring simulataneous sighting of the telescope
over two threads.
33) To avoid the calculation of z from the formula i cot z for the moment of
observation in most instances in 1901, special sightings of the sun were made,
also readings of the vertical circle and of the moment by the chronometer.
34) We are not mentioning here the magnitudes c cosec z, where c is the col-
limation error excluded on the average from the circle right and left.
-28-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
IV. MAGNETIC OBSERVATIONS AND CALCULATION OF THE ABSOLUTE VALUE
OF THE ELEMENTS ON THE BASIS OF THE STUDY OF THE THEODOLITE AT
THE IRKUTSK OBSERVATORY.
STAT
The magnetic Wild theodolite was checked against the absolute instruments
three times. The first time by prof. Kapustin in 1897 at the PavloOskaya
Observatory, the following constants were obtained:
Temperature coefficient of the magnet
Induction II It It
Conversion factor for the horizontal
intensity
0.000723 + 0.000079
0.000766
B = 4.0809 + 0.0004
I checked out the same theodolite at the Irkutsk Observatory twice. The
results are stated below while describing the measurements and calculations of
different magnetic elements separately.
a) Declination.
During the 1900 and 1901 trips, the determination of declination was done
in usual order, by aiming the telescope on the target prior to and after aiming
it on the mirror of the magnet. The last sightings were made four times for
detailed observations: with the magnet marker x upwards, then x downwards
twice, then x agaih upwards. For shortened observations, only 2 sightings
were made x upwards and x downwards.
Prior to setting the box with the magnet to observe declination, an
auxiliary telescope and its counterbalance were screwed on. At the final
tightening, the telescope had to be placed in such a way that the eyepiece
scale was in a horizontal position. The back cover of the box was removed
for sighting the mire, while the front cover was put on.35) After a sufficient
calming of the magnet, the locking device was removed, as stated above on
[source] p. 18 and the oscillations were reduced by a small magnet, removed to
the side, to the corner of the tent.
It has already been stated above how we used the verniers of the horizon-
tal circle in instances when more accurate readings were desirable. Let us
quote from the observations of declination:
10 Ju34. 1901, at the Shumikha railroad station
The thread unwound. The circle of winding 8.2div*
At the target (flagpole of the terminal)
DIV.
1610 50' 10.5 161? 56' 40"
10.5
35) See [source] p. 18 above. In several instances because of smoke or mist, the
"front cover was removed to allow seeing the target more clearly. Then --0'.3
was added to the readings of the circle.
-29-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
x upwards
9h241n a.
Div.
136?10' 13.5 ...
Div.
29.0
Double colimational
error of the magnet 27199Mean 27'2
136? 18' 34"
x downward
lot 13.5 ...
29.5
Mean on the target: 161?56'45"
Div.
Azimuth of the terget: 14? 0'12 from S
to E
9h29M
135c5.01 2.0
On South: 147056133"
135? 51' 25"
x downward
2.5
Mean on the magnet: 136 5 0
9h33M
135?50' 2.5
- 11051'33" or
135051' 25"
x upward
2.0
- 11?51.5
Correction - 0.5
Div.
5 = - 11?52'.0
9h3 8m
136?10' 13.5
136?18'34"
13.5
For 9h311 Ix, chron.
On the target
161050' 10'.5
161?56150"
11..0
For the readings of the 1st and 2nd verniers, corresponding to 9h24m,
two concurrent divisions were entered into the journal.
div. div. div. div.
For the 1st vernier 13.5 and 29.0. For the 2nd 13.5 and 29.5. From this, we
oompute one division of the limb, namely 10' equaling 15.5 div. of the 1st and
16.0 div. of the 2nd, mean of 15.7. With a special table computed for such
verniers, all the readings are changed into minutes and seconds of the arc.
The untwisting of the thread on which the magnet was suspended, was done
as often as possible, whenever one could take advantage of an extended and
secure position of the theodolite in closed premises.
- 30?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Cop Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
The effect of the thread on the magnitude of the declination was, however,
very small because when it was twisted 360? the magnet deviated only from 10' to
16'. An error of 0'.1 in the declination could occur only when the thread was
twisted for 4? to 2?, i.e.,by 1/2 of the division of the circle of rotation placed
in the upper part of the suspended cylinder. 360? were divided there into 60 parts.
In 1901, I had less frequently the possibility to use the rigid installation
of the instrument for twisting the thread. Furthermore, by mistake the spare thread
taken along was not of a very matching quality, too thin and not resistant enough.
It tore several times as it was unwinding gradually. Replacement of the threads by
new ones, had to be followed by their unwinding at night. I made such replacement
at three stations: at Oyash, Makushino and Bogotol. In addition, I made it :ft\
rule to unwind new threads almost every time prior to measuring declination.3?)
Once in Narym, in 1900, after determining the thread winding (to compute
the magnitude ofA in the corrective multiplier during the time of the magnet's
oscillation) the winding circle was set incorrectly by mistake, at the 49.1
division instead of 59.1. Further observations of declination were made while
the thread was in this position. When the error was discovered, I determined
several times the difference in declination, with the index coinciding with
49.1 and 59.1, corresponding to the unwound thread. The correction of 2'26"
+ 7" was obtained and applied. A similar error was made at the Kozhurla station
in 1901, and a correction of 1'48", was applied there for the two results of
declination.
On 27 July 1900, in M. Panovo village, frequent sightings of magnet were
made from the morning on, to obtain the 24 hour run of the declination.37) Such
varying observations with our theodolite3d) had to be accompanied by sighting the
target from time to time because experience has demonstrated that the instrument
stand could not have been considered sufficiently stable during a prolonged course
of time.
To conclude, I will mention that each sighting on the magnet, as demonstrated
by experience, can give a declination with a sufficient degree of accuracy. The
error, probably, never reached 0'.42 i.e., that limit in the accuracy of declina-
tion which was conditioned by an outside circumstance: by the reduction of dif-
ferent observations to the mean annual value.
36) To save time, one does not have to wait for the copper rod suspended from the
thread to stop oscillating completely. After careful caging, it [copper rod]
should be left to oscillate near the-place of equilibrium corresponding to a fully
unwound thread. Directing the eye along the length of the rod for the two or
three consecutive end positions of this direction, one can enter the division on
the upper circle of winding, passing directly opposite the eye. The man of
such readings for two- or three consecutive extreme positions of thaxis'of the -
rod, gives preciseIy7the'diVi'Sidne of thewitidin-d cifcle which.66rresponds fully
to the unwound thread-. The fact that this set is satisfactory (even on a stand
inside the tent) was confirmed by many repetitions. The cscillaticn. period of the
copper mass7 was of course very,.long and therefore 10 to 15 minutes were needed
even for this shortened methodbf.unwinding the thread.
37) They were interrtrpted-dt 21i-49m by the arrival of the long awaited steamer.
38) Prince B. B. Golitsyn made,iim-flar'bb'servations4on Novaya Zemlya during a
solar eclipse (1.c.). However, he Used the eyepiece scale of the telescope to
measure the variations.
-31-
nprlaccifiPci in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
One can not but agree that in order to in9reav the accuracy of the final
results, which greatly improve with an increasingRe(Mervations, one had to
use abbreviated methods of measurements, even to a greater extent than I did in
order to have the time to repeat them.
Corrections, found after checking the theodolite at the Irkutsk Observa-
tory, were applied to the results of all declinations, obtained in 1900 and
1901.
In 1900, I made there 4 determinations of declination and during the same
time on the 23rd and 24th of April, I made frequent readings of the single
thread variometer at the Observatory. Each observation, was made to 4 figures
giving corrections which should be added to the value of the magnetic declination
found with the theodolite, in order to obtain for the same moment, the absolute
values of the declination at the Observatory. The first and the fourth correc-
tions, pertain to the magnet's position x upward, the second and the third -
x downward. The following column has theJmn declination of each correction
derived from their agreement for identical positions x separately. The column
before last givesthe double collimational error of the magnet's mirror (at its
north end), and finally the last column gives the correction which should be
added to the mean value of declination derived from complete determination.
Observations were made on the monument in the Observatory's yard. The bell
tower of the Uspenskaya Church was used as the target)its azimuth was given to
me by the director and equalled 16047'22".2 from N to E.
- 32 -
norinccifipri in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Irkutsk. 1900
Mean time
23 April
Corection to the readings of
the Magnet
O I
O 0 44
o Ei o o rci
H F-i -P 0
04-4 HO 0 cd 0
rci 4 0 HF-I 0 tm rcl
to
to
rti tiO 0F4
C..) 0 ?
0 0 0 F-1
.,-1 p fri 0
lj
WH -1-(3) ig $1
-,.? '' H 03 r, 0 Readings on the target
P. 0 0. ro 0 F., P.O
0 rd rd 0 o bn 0 o F-1 0 0 rd
O.?-1 0 ?ri 0 .4
x >4 X X ?=4 to
From 11h9m - 11h 21m a.[.m.]
-14'.6
121.6
12'.8
-14'.8
+ 0'.0
27'.4
-1'.0 Until 11h9m a.[ .in.]
331055128"
11 31 - 11 50
-14'.6
12'.9
131.2
-14'.5
0 .1
27'.6
-0'.7
12 4 - 12 24 p.[.m.]
24 April
-13;.8
121.5
12'.6
-13'.8
0 .1
26'.4
-0'.6 After 12h24m p. [m.]
331 56 30
ceN
6 38 - 6 50 p.[.m.]
-14'.6
12'.7
12'.5
-14'.5
0 .1
27'.1
-1'.0 Prior to observ.
357 20 14
27'.l
-0' .8 +0'2 After "
357 20 43
Irkutsk. 1901.
1 June
From 1h10m - 1h25m p.[.m.]
-14'.1
13'.1
13'.1
-14'.1
+ 01.0
27'.2
-0'.5 Prior to observ.
49?21'27"
After " li
21 17
1 36 - 1 50
-14'.3
13'.4
12'.9
-141.0
0'.2
27'.3
-0'.5 Prior to observ.
49 21 4
After
21.5
20 -215
,-14'.1
121.8
13'.0
-13'.7
01.2
26'.8
-01.5 Prior to observ.
49 21 9
After observ
21 0
27'.l
-0 .5 +01.0
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
SI-AT
Unfortunately, observations made during the first day were not especiallyre:liable.
as the sightings on the target were made only at the beginning and at the end of all
observations, and the reading on the target changed considerably. All observations
gave the correction for the 1900 declination.
-0'.8 + 0'.2;
the mean deviation of -- 0'.2, was greater than the deviations of each sighting of the
magnet, probably due to a larger change in the reading on the target.
In 1901, the Uspenskaya (church) target which even the previous time had been
almost covered by the post of the new metereological booth, was completely covered
by buildings, therefore, I determined the azimuth of the new target twice with the
Mild theodolite by the sun, from the same post. The edge of a house gable to the
NNE was used as the target. Due to the closeness of this target, I took care to have
the theodolite installation completely identical for all these observations 39),
Both determinations of the azimuth of the target in Irkutsk were not witklout
fault. During the first one, the levels were not held very satisfactorily 404
During the second, the time for the observation of the chronometer correction was
not advantageous (for lh 451fl before noon).
The correction to the Wiren chronometer No. 73, was:
1 June - 3h.1 p.[.m.] equal to the mean time - 7h40 56s.0
2 June - 10.2 a.L.m.] - 7 40 58 .7
As the run of the Wiren No. 73 chronometer equaled - 2.0 by the Observatory
data, then the agreement of two time determinations on different sides of the meridian,
could be considered as satisfactory.
The azimuth of the target computed with these corrections to the chronometer
was obtained as:
1 June at 31.1 p.[.m.] mean time 156?37'12" from S to E
2 June 9h.8 a.[.m.] 156 37 23
Mean 156037'.3.
This value was used for computing declination observations on the 1st of June,
which gave the following correction for the theodolite:
- 0'.5 + 0'.0
39) One of the observations of declination (on 31 May), which gave a correction of
-01.7 to the theodolite, had to be rejected just because the set-up of the instru-
ment during this determination could not be duplicated the following day, div.to the
fact that the markings of the theodolite's legs on the stake had been lost.
40) -On the first of June, the time and the azimuth were determined simultaneously.
On the 2nd of June, they were determined separately.
- 34 -
nna-Inecifiarl in Part - Sanitized Com/ Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
From the table for 1901, cited above, it istepparent that the accuracy of
individual sightings of the magnet corresponded/the accuracy of the verniers. The
division of the verniers was set approximately at 37", instead of 28" and 2011, as
first proposed last year.
STAT
Due to certain changes in the theodolite by 1901, one can not consider that the
difference in corrections during the two comparions in Irkutsk indicates directly the
degree of reliability of each one separately. But even from this viewpoint, one can
agree that the correction to the theodolite was determined with an accuracy probably
exceeding 0'.3..
For all declinations of 1900 I used the correction of 0'.8 (to the eastern
declination of 0.8) and 0'.5 for 1901.
b) Inclination.
Determinations of inclination were made with an induction inclinometer installed
inside the same theodolite. Considering that this new method of the academician Wild
for measuring magnetic inclination has been used relatively little under field condi-
tions, I consider it permissible to dwell in some detail on the subject, all the more
so, as following prof., Kapustin, I departed in some instances from the methods of
procedure indicated by H. I. Wild.
The horizontal axis of the theodolite must be set perpendicularly to the magnetic
meridian. It is understood, that the magnetic meridian in its relation to the hori-
zontal axis of the theodolite will be known by the readings of the magnet during
the preceeding observations of declination, only if the collimating error of the
auxiliary telescope aimed on the magnet, is small enough.
Having placed the inductor into the ring of the theodolite's axis and having
set the inductor rotation axis almost vertiCally, one has to use the adjusting screw
almost every time. The purpose of this adjusting screw is to set the rotation axis
of the inductor perpendicularly to the horizontal axis of the theodolite. This
adjustment with the aid of the level inside the inductor is at times quite time con-
suming. After the adjustment is completed, the inductor has to be tightened in the
ring of the theodolite. Then one has to determine the readings of the vertical
circle completely corresponding to the vertical position of the rotating axis of
the inductor in relation to the meridian plane. FortNis purpose, the level inside
the inductor acts as guide. It is not necessary to velaiRve complete immobi4ity
for this level during the rotation of the coil. It is sufficient to note41) the
reading of the buble k for the two positions of the coil: 0, the position of
the level to the right of the observer looking on from the side of the vertical
circle, and then 0 to the left (after turning the coil 180?). Then one has to
read immediately the level of the vertical circle and its verniers.
Then, the "vertical position" of the coil will be calculated by the following
formula, where the signs are of course determined by the direction of divisions on
the circle on the levels and a given side from where one looks at them.
41) F. Ya. Kapustin, 1.c.
- 35 -
npnlassified in Part - Sanitized COPY Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
r?
N + (Th]. 4. n2 - 10)15" + to to right -ko to left 20u.
2
2
The described, apparently .complicated method for determining "the vertical
position", could have been perhaps superfluous with a more stable theodolite.
Using the Tomak instrument, this method expedited the work and increased its ac-
curacy,
STAT
It remained then to obtain the circle reading when an appropriataIyinclined
inductor gives no current during its rotation. Finding this position an be done
rapidly, but the main obstacle for obtaining accurate results seems to be a) the
presence of thermoelectric currents in the chain and b) a disturbance in the con-
stancy of the axis of rotation if it begins to wobble in the bearings, or if the
installation of the whole theodolite changes with the rotation of the coil. Oc-
curances of these latter instances could be observed directly. In order to mini-
mize their effect one has to follow attentively the precise regulattion of the
coil rotation axis, which at times is disturbed during observations. Secondly,
very energetic rotation should be avoided. It is best not to use the gears
attached to the instrument, and put the pliant shaft in motion simply by hand,
otherwise the whole instrument shakes noticeably.
The method indicated by H. I. Wild, excluding the influence of thermoelectric
currents on the galvanomoter.permits the observer to ascertain that the rotation
of the coil does.mt displace the mirror in the galvanometer in relation to its
position prior to and after the rotation.
It is possible that our Rosenthal field galvanometer, was not sensitive
enough42), but this method did not give good results even with a high rotation
velocity of the inductor. During observations in the field it was almost impos-
sible to wait long enough for the galvanometer mirror to become completely motion-
less. Furthermore, I noticed that the thermoelectric difference in potentials,
changed at times during the rotation of the coil, and therefore observations had
to be of short duration. These were the reasons why, in 1900, a key was inserted
in the galvanometer's chain. The use of this key allowed to achieve the best
results towards the end of 1901. Locking the key. at the moment the observer found
most convenient, it was possible to perceive even very small displacements of the
ellvanometer's mirror, and, what is more important, lose less time in instances,
almost constant> when the wind was interfering. On the other hand, the key
allowed to judge of the presence of thermoelectric difference of potentials within
the chain and rapidly estimate the magnitude of this difference. In, most cases,
a small, hardly noticeable thermoelectric influence was manifested, which when
disregarded introduced a noticeable error into the results. Therefore, as a
general,rtiel when determining the inclination, we did the following: the direc-
tion and approximate deflection (usually 0.1 - 0.2 of the scale division) were
noted. This deflection occured from locking the key during a moderate rotation
orthe-cdil.'Next, the-rotatibh wa stopplad ahd the key was iMMediately locked
again. If this time the deflection took place to the same side and was of the same
magnitude as before2 then the position of the rotation axis of the inductor, was
considered as coinciding fully with the lines of the forces of the earth's field.
The observations were apparenAy more accurate if no harmful currents were observed
in the galvanometer.
42) Its sensitivity, determined in Tomsk, approximately = 0.5 x 10-6amp per 1
?
division of the scale.
- 36 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 50-Yr 2014/05/08 ? CIA-RDP81-01043R00470n17nnna_a
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
SI-AT
After reading the level and the verniers of the vertical circle all these
observations were repeated with the inductor in a different position, and theo-
dolite turned 180? about the vertical axis.
It was necessary to install the galvanometer on a very low stand, less than
2 feet high to render it more stable. The stand was placed in a corner of the
tent, the best protected from the wind. The galvanometer was observed by my
collaborators, only in the middle of the 1901 tripkdid I sit to observe the
galvanometer while the rotation of the inductor was performed by my collaborator.
In 1900, observations suffered because the galvanometer's mirror did not give a
clear image. It, probably, became bent by the drying shellac with which it was
glued. For the 1901 trip, the mirror was glued anew.
Pausing somewhat to consider the large number of determinations of the in-
clination with a Wild inductor, let me state that the mean difference in the
readings of the "vertical position" found at Circle W and Circle E was
Circle W - Circle E = 4" + 12"
The mean error of a single determination of the "vertical position" thus
corresponds to the precision of the verniers.
In conclusion, an example of one observation of the inclination is given:
- 37 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Level inside the inductor
g g
o o
r1 a) eri 0
+) H r4 4'H
g 0 0
O 0
CD P4 0 Pi
.1-I Ft ?ri
40 +D
k PI 0
0
Or 0 0r
O'
tla 0
Pn-I 0 0 n-I
?r-I -P .0 .1-1 +3
Ri Pi +) rid Ps
O 0 Pa)
o P. es-I 0 p.
f:). o pi
0 a) a) 0 0
0 .0
cD A H i?I
Pi I> $4 P4
00 CD .1-1
00
Vert.. pos.
0 left 7.5 - 17.0 0"
5.4
0 right7.4 - 17.2 _
4.1
Current = 0
32h29m
a. Em.]
Vert. pos.
0 right 7.0 - 17.0 _4n
5.8
0 left 7.0 - 17.3
4.7
Current = 0
11 38
Circle t+73!he 148',04.64
? 16.2 +13" 45
?.
10"
0
? 15.1
-6-
72
27
50
26
30
Circle to the E
89
46
0
-16.6
+18
45
30
-15.5
2
107
5
10
4
20
89?45'48"
72 27 4
89 45 59
107 447
Inclination
17?18'44" Jw = 72?41'16" A
17 18 48 Je = 72?41'12"
Mean for L11134111 a. J = 72?41' 2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Neither in 1900 nor in 1901 during my stay at the Irkutsk Observatory had I
sufficient time to establish clearly the correction to the inclination shown by
our theodolite with respect to the instruments at the observatory: the number SI-AT
of observations was very small, and, moreover, the quality of each of them was
inferior to the observations made on the road, due to the fact that at the obser-
vatory.I had to conduct the observations alone.
On 23 April 1900 I obtained the following magnitudes:
Theodolite Variometer Correction
5h59111p.[m.] (mean/time) circle W 70?14.'2 70014.15 +0.3
70 16. 5 70 14. 5 -2.0
Mean J = 70015. 3 70014. 5
On 2 June 1901 I could make only two determinations at circle W, because the
pliable shaft for rotating the induction coil broke.
Theodolite Variometer Correction
3h 7mp.[m.] (mean/time) circle W 70014.19
3 15
70 15. 5
3h11m
Mean Jw = 70015.12 70016.10 0'.+8
The following should be added to the results of these comparisons: obser-
vations of the inclination in two positions of the theodolite with the circles
W and E have this significance that in case of an iron content in certain parts
of the theodolite the determination results at circle W and circle E will vary,
and in certain cases, e.g.1when there is an iron content in the vertical circle,
the mean of the results J. and Je will be free of the effects of this iron.
The following are the deductions obtained on the average from all obser-
vations during the trip; the difference between Jw and Je was:
For 1900 Jw - Je = 0.'9+ 1.'0
For 1901 Jw - Je = 0.10+ 0.'8
Obviously,
it can be concluded that there was either a systematic error (?)
in the graduations of the vertical circle used in 1900 and changed by 1901, or
it [the vertical circle] contained iron43).
Observations of 1901 do not give a systematic difference between Jw and
Je, and therefore the correction +0.'8 derived in Irkutsk for 1901 at one circle
should be considered to be the same for the mean from both W and E circles.
Thus, the following correction for the inclination given by our theodolite
was obtained in Irkutsk:
In 1900
In 1901
43) It should be noted that parts which expressly contained iron, of which we
? spoke on [source] p. 18 are not considered in the determination of the theodolite
inclination.
-39-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Although there were not many observations, it can be concluded that, in any
case, the error due to the theodolite was not large; this was established also
by prof. Kapustin in Pavlovsk. The effect of iron possibly contained in the STAT
theodolite, judging by all observations made in 1901)hardly showed up, otherwise
it would be reflected in the difference between J and J.; if in 1900 the exasper-
ating effect of iron was noticeable, it was probably excluded, to a great degree,
from the mean of Jw and J.; actually the entire error -0.'8 found in Irkutsk for
the mean of J, ahd Je: ofthe'sanie'order_as the difference betireen'them -
)
equal to. 0V/9.
On the basis of what has been said above and greatly due to the fact that
the observations in Irkutsk were little satisfactory, the difference in the errors
-0'.8+0.'8 for various years should be considered as due to errors in observations
and to the very small number of them [observations]. I find it, therefore, more
correct not to introduce any corrections to the inclination angles obtained by
our inductor.
The precision of the separate (complete) determination of the inclination
made during the trip is indicated by the magnitudes cited above if we assume that
Jw agrees with J :
For 1900 + 0.'5
For 1901 + O. 4
A comparison of several separate measurements at the same point gives a
still greater precision of each of them, i.e.)to + 0.'3, as we shall see below.
By taking Q.70 + 0.'8 as correction for our theodolite with respect to the instru-
ments at the Irkutsk Observatory, we characterize the reliability of the deter-
mination of the inclination by the magnitude of 0.'8. Probably, the errror in the
absolute inclination, derived from a large number of measurements with our theodolite,
is considerably smaller than 0.'8, but this opinion is difficult to prove due to
the too small number of my observations in Irkutsk.44)
c) The Horizontal Component of Intensity
In order to obtain the horizontal magnetic intensity with a Wild theodolite,
it was necessary to determine preliminarily the following constants: the tempera-
ture and induction coefficients of the magnet and the multiplier for converting the
intensity magnitudes, obtained from the measurement of the angular deflection and
from the period of oscillation, to absolute units.
44) We do not touch upon the possibility of a systematic error in all induction in-
clinators, which depends on the deflection of the axis of their [the inclinators']
rotation, or on the axis being loose in the bearings. Of course, the method of
observation from two positions of the theodolite does not eliminate this error,
and the necessity of checking whether the coil axis is loose, has already been
emphasized above; theoretically, when the axis is loose the inclination shown
is greater than the actual one.
In order to decrease errors of this type, it seems to me that it is desirable
to lighten, as far as possible, and even to decrease the size of the inductor coil,
if it is very heavy.
- 40 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
The temperature coefficient was determined by me in Irkutsk in 1901; the follow-
ing data were obtained from the observation of the vibillation period T of the magnet
in the yard of the observatory, then in a heated pavilion, and again in the yard:
Irkutsk Observatory, 1 June 1901.
Time T Temperature Horizontal
force accord.
to variometer
In the yard on the monument 7h37majm.] 38.2105 12?.73
49 3 .2104 1273
8 213 .21
3 .2110
In the pavilion 8 57 3 .2265 27 .76
9 7 3 .2273 28 .18
9 21 3 .2292 28 .62
In the yard on the monument 9 55 3 .2185
10 11 a.[m.] 3 .2189
19..62
19 .74
2.0117
2.0117
2.0117
2.0118
2.0117
2.0114
2.0107
2.0107
In view of the very good agreement of the figures in each group, the following
means were taken:
38.2106 at 12?.89 2.0117 38.2107
3 .2277 28 .19 2.0116 3 .2277
3 .2187 19 .68 2.0107 3 .2180
In the last column are the oscillation periods of the magnet reduced to the
same horizontal force, i.e.ito H = 2.0116. The figures in the column were reduced
according to the following differentiel formula:
2H
dH =
where for the mean values of H and T in Irkutsk dT = 0.8dH, dT and dH being expressed
in the same decimals. Finally, according tothe formula
2
TI T,2 45)
T12t1-T22t2
-where,_ is the temperature coefficient of the magnetic moment of the magnet, _ is
the steel expansion coefficient, end t is the temperature of the magnet, we obtain
for raising t from 12? to 28? P. + 2o= 0.0006809
for decreasing t from 28? to 19? ... + 2c= 0.0006930
Mean p 2 a= 0.000687 + 0.000006
45) M. Rykachev. Erdmagnetishche Beobachtungen am Kaspischen Meer im Sommer
1881 (Terrestrial Observations on the Caspian Sea in the Summer of 1881). Repert
f. Meteor (Renertorium fur Meteorologie). B. IX, No. 1, 1885, p. 28.
- 41 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
When 2 a= 0.000025, ? = 0.000662. I calculated all observations in 1900 and
in 1901 taking this value fort The coefficient proved to be considerably smaller
than the one (0.000723 + 0.000079) derived by prof. Kapustin in 1897.
I had neither time nor means to determine the induction coefficient of the
magnet during my stay in Irkutsk. In Tomsk, the usual method, i.e. the Lamont
method could be applied still less due to lack of variometers for terrestrial
magnetism. However, I was able to find a certain approximate value of the in-
duction coefficient by another method, ordinai.ily used for measvring the magnetic
susceptibility. I could follow partly the woi.k of H. I. Wild46). However, I had
no instruments of similar design of those used by the later [H. I. Wild], and I
made the determination in the following manner: the magnet was placed inside a
long (27.8 cm) cylindrical coil [solenoid] with 16.47 turas of vire to one cm of the
length, wound in one helix; the diameter of the coil was 4.5 cm. It could be
placed, together with the magnet, lengthwise from the E to the WI ma wooden
bar on both sides of the magnetometer made over from a galvanometer. The last had
a small magnet of a bell shape, suspended on a very fine silk thread. The measure-
ment was set up in January 1902, as follows: the reading telescope stood 239 cm
from the magnetometer mirror; the above described coil, and the corresponding com-
pensating one, which was shorter, were set up on both sides of the magnetometer in
such a way that the current which passed through these coils had no effect on the
magnetometer; then a magnet was inserted into the long coil with its center approx-
imately 264.9 mm distant from the center of the magnetymeter. The angle of deflec-
tion of the magnetometer was measured separately.47)
Then, the magnetometer was returned to the primary position of the mirror with
the aid of the compensating magnet having the form approximately the same as that
of the main magnet. Finally, a current4o) was passed through both coils, which
46) H. Wild. "Bestimmung der Inductioncoefficienten von Stahlmagneten." Mem. de
l'Ac. Imp. d. Sc. ("Determination of Induction Coefficients of Steel Magnets."
Memoirs of the Imperial Academy of Sciences 1 v. 34, No. 7, 1886, S.-Petersburg.
47) Because of the large magnitudes.of the angles 9 and q2 caused by the north
and south ends of the magnet, they could be measured only by the following compli-
cated method: two more telescopes were installed on the right and left of the
main reading telescope, by means of which it was possible to take readings while
the magnetometer mirror was deflected. Later, after all manipulations were com-
pleted, a Wild theodolite was set in the same center instead of the magnetometer,
and a mirror was fastened in the center of its alidade. The angles of the awing
of that mirror, read by means of the theodolite verniers (from the reading of the
middle telescope, corresponding to the magnetic meridian, to the readings of each
side telescopes), gave the deflection angles of the magnetometer quite accurately.
Thus the main reading telescope was designed only for rendering possible a suf-
ficiently accurate measurement of the small angle subtenalby the magnetic induc-
tion of the magnet under examination.
48) We moreover satisfied ourselves that no induction effect of the compensating
coil on the compensating magnet lying farther outside the coil was observable.
-42-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
was measured with an adjusted milliamperometer in one and then in the other direction.
The force of the induced magnetic field was + 0.388 absolute cgs units = + 3.88
gauss, i.e.05Ely twice as high as that usually encountered in measuring the terres-
trial magnetism.
The deflections of the magnetometer to one and to the other side were in
this case up to 6 - 7 mm of the scale from the previous position. Under the in-
Truence of such induction the increase and decrease of the magnetic moment of our
magnet proved to be the same in magnitude; when the N pole half of the magnet was
turned toward the magnetometer and its middle was at 264.9 mm the total deflection
01 of the magnetometer was 190351: after compensationithe deflection due to the
current was about 0.595 cm of the scale. When the S pole end of the magnet was
turned toward the magnetometer, from a distance of 250.8 m4 the full 92 angle
Vas 22053, and the induction of the artificial field gave a deflection of 0.700 cm.
Therefore, according to a simplified formula, from which the distance between
the magnets was altogether excluded, i.e. according to the formula
V =
2Dtan 94zni
where V is the induetion coefficient, S - deflection in cm due to induction,
D - distance of the telescope scale from the magnetometer mirror, 9 - angle of
deflection under the influence of the magnet, n - number of the coil turns per
cm, of its length and i - the strength of the current in absolute electromagnetic
units, in both cases the results obtained agreed sufficiently well, i.e.
V = 0.00902 and V = 0.00894.
Mean v = 0.00898 in cgs intensity units, or v= 0.000898 gauss.
The value obtained was considerably greater than the one obtained for our
magnet by V. Kh. Dubinski in 1897 by the Lamont method (0.000766), but first
the magnetic moment of the magnet became somewhat weaker by that time, second,
I could not consider the results of my measurements as completely reliable:
after leaving Tomsk University I had no possibility to study in detail the
method and my instrument, as well as, the effects of the simplifications intro-
duced into the formula. Considering the figure cited only as an approximate
one giving only the order of the magnitude of the coefficient, I used in all
my calculations the coefficient obtained in 1897; my determination is interest-
ing in this respect that for all values for the horizontal force, which I had
occasion to measure with the Wild theodolite, and which are in the narrow limits
of 2.01 to 1.47 gauss, the difference between the new and the old figures does
not show any effect on the final result, remaining beyond the limits of accuracy
of the determined force (less than 0.0002 - 0.0003 gauss).
In addition to the temperature and induction coefficients and to the B multi-
plier, other constants of the theodolite could not be determined, or there was
no sense of doing so, and I am giving only [their] approximate figures.
- 43 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
The distance between the magnet centers during the deflection is about 245 mm.
The measurements of the main magnet are 59.6 mm and (diameter) 10.0 mm, obviously
deflecting 25 to 28 mm and 10 mm (it was not taken out of the housing). STAT
During the work in Irkutsk a great deal of attention was devoted to determina-
tion of the conversion factor B in the formula given below by repeated successive
determination of the oscillation period T and of the defftection angle v, while
the horizontal force H was known from the observatory's variometers.
The generally accepted observation method of the T and of v is indicated in
the description of the H measurement on the road. The value for B wath calculated
from the formula in the form B = HT sin v [1 +( derived from the expression for
H given below; e is the sum of the correction members. The magnetic moment Mo
was calculated only relatively by its reduction to 00 according to the formula,
also given below.
On the 20 and 21 April 1900 I could avail myself only of hourly readings
of the two thread variometer, on the 24th and 25th the readings were more frequent,
i.e. every 15 minutes. Inasmuch as in addition to the above, the observations
on 20 April produced greatly differing results, I am excluding them altogether.
The chronometer used in the observations was Wiren No. 135 with a daily
[24-hour] run of 88.7: the thread torsion was determined daily and gave
16'.1, 15'.2, 17'.11 16'.41 i.e.1on the average 16'.2.
The magnitudes 8'.7 and 16'.2 were introduced into the formula. As it can
be seen from the tables given below usually only two adjacent values for T and
v were used in the calculation of each separate:value for By and the changes in
H during the observation time were taken into account in the following manner:
in cases when the horizontal component in the observation of the oscillation ,
was different then in the observation of the deflections, a correction was added
to T magnitude; e.g. in the first measurement at 12h40m p. [m] on 21 April the
variometer showed H = 2.0130, while the observation of the oscillations at about
12h4Om p. [m.] gave H = 2.0134; therefore the oscillation period T = 32015 was
reduced to that value which would be obtained with H = 2.0130 by the simple
formula derived above
dT = -0.8dH,
i.e.,06.0003 were added to the observed T = 38.2015, and thus, instead of the
observed, the following magnitudes were used in the formula for the final calcula-
tion of B:
H = 2.0130, T = 36.20189 v = 2?31'49".
In 1901 the number of observations in Irkutsk was small due to the fact
that I had to reject those observations during which I had in my pocket iron
keys and a watch through an oversight. The daily run of the chronometer Wiren
No. 73 was 2s.0, the thread torsion gave the magnitude of 132.3 on 2 June.
44
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Nagneti3 and Astronomical
Irkutsk
Observa-
tory
Local
time
lOscilla-
Defirtction *tion.
ri
1
Year
1900
21 Apr
TI It
it It
It u
It It
24 Apr
25 Apr
Year
1901
31 May
2 June
h- m
12 19 p.
40
L2 56
1 22
1 39
1 22
2 27
45
59 23 28 12
1 30 p. Em.] 23
56
2 1.2
5
3 7
3
28
3 50
3 28
LO 30 a.(m.]
11 +3
37
11 5'7 a.t.r.i
12 22 tN.im.)
12 40
11
1 20
11
Em.]
23?31,49"
23 29 48
23 28 52
23 28 41?
4 6p. [7.2.1
4 21
1.2 27 p. [m.]
44
12 59
1 16
1 30
1 16
23
23
23
23
23
?23
23
34 29
7Z, 1Q
55 6
l'f9 12
38 28
38 2.+
37 48
36 54
23 18 -11
23 8 52
23 8 20
23 7 27
Determinaticns
Tam7iai7Lca
of 1.,h1:
net t in
7'
1983
3?2015 19.97
20.17
3.2016 2o.18
20.55
3.2016 20.18
21.12
3,2017 20.95
21.18
16.64
)12
.
-
7,.1968
-3.1 968
(47rgi
3.1978
3.2128
3.2288
3.2295
3.2295
5
1^
.1.
Ii
-fter
2.0134
2. r)13'71.
? -
2.
2.C:17.45
2
?
61.
L4
2
'
2.c..1181.
2. -4-1)
2.0
2.
2.r1';21.
r ?
STAT
RelattInThe
Lute
vale liconve
Of navslop
nvAlc .
0.
mmertM.,
19995 4.0790
1998 ::i
?
19989
PCO(Y;
- 45 -
do .1
.0779
liddiluarks
.0778 Previous adjacent
!period T taken
?.0765
.rt-98
4.0768
4.786
4.G785
,.0783
-78o
4.0788
1999:::. 4.0782
19.:86 4.r,761
L9761:7)
i.
:17;17=
?-:7,
Mean.
of two dell. ang3.es
Previous aljacte...:.t.: 0 C . -
iod T taav.:2
Previous a-ljaci.lt
period T taken
to.o006
4.0753
IL.0774
4.0770 Previous adjacent osciii,
period taken
4.07-65-
+0.0007
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Ap roved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
As can be seen from these tables, the accuracy in the determination of B in
1901 was somewhat smaller than before; this occurred, perhaps, because of the STAT
fact thnt I decided not to use the verniers of the horizontal circle for reading
the deflection angles in the observations on the road in 1901 and also during the
test in Irkutsk: each division of the ho4zontal limb was equalled to 10', and I
simply estimated whole minutes at sight.49)
Thus the comparison of the theodolite with the absolute instruments gave:
In 189750)
B = 4.0809
+ 0.0004
Mo = 20440
+ 6
In 1900
B = 4.0782
+ 0.0006
Mo = 19991
+ 4
In 1901
B = 4.0765
+ 0.0007
Mo 1768
9
The means of the deviations of the determined magnitudes B seemingly in-
dicate a high accuracy of each separate measurement of the horizontal component
with the Wild theodolite: from 0.0001 to 0.0002 of the whole magnitude, i.e.
for Irkutsk, e.g. to 0.0003 gauss. ;)
However, the shortcomings in our instrument, indicated by me above, in con-
nection,with several cases of unexpectedly strong fluctuations in the measured
angle51) render taking the given mean deviations as a measure of reliability of
the measurements made with the theodolite totally imp)ssible. One can assume
that the excellent agreement of the figures obtained each year/4asIdue only to
the fact that during its comparison the instrument did not undergo any changes,
ordinarily it even did not move from its place during the entire time.
At each new comparison of the theodolite the value B changed comparatively
a great deal while both the magnetic moment and the constant multiplier B
decreased with time: the magnetic moment decreased more than 3 per cent during
the entire time, and multiplier B - about 0.1 per cent, i.e.,was about 30 times
less.
If these changes in B are not considered accidental, then their causes may
be as follows:
49) I limited the accuracy of the readings because, theoretically, such accuracy
is sufficient for the usual magnitudes of v, and because there were important
circumstances which, anyway, rendered the results to be little reliable. The
presumed causes for the large accidental errors in the measurement of the hori-
zontal intensity are listed below.
50) It should be noted that the comparisons were made by prof. Kapustin in Pavlovsk
who made three observations for each value of B9 and not two as it was done by me,
and, moreover, the values for the horizontal component were actually taken completely
simultaneously from a self-recording variometer. Reduction of M to 00, if it were
made with the same temperature coefficient, as in the succeeding years, would give
a somewhat smaller magnitude for Mo in 1897.
51) Insufficiently stable fastening of the magnet in the housing and, particularly
a possibility of a shift of the horizontal axis during the observations. The
measurements of 20 April 1900, which gave poor results and, therefore, were partly
excluded by me, showed in addition the rizessity for a careful levelling of the
instrument at each use in the future, i.e.lBefore each observation of the deflection
angle, what I ti"ied to do also during observations on the road.
- 46 -
npriacsifipn in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
First, it is possible that the magnitude B actually depends on the magnetic
moment of the magnet. Second, that due to gradual loosening and unscrewing of
the regulating screw (see above, source p. 16) the deflecting magnet gradually STAT
changed its height with respect to the deflected (namely, it rose; unfortunately,
it is impossible to establish the eXact initial position of the magnet). Finally,
the difference between the Pavlovsk and Irkutsk comparisons can be attributed to
the difference of induction in the theodolite parts, undoubtedly containing some
iron, or to the inexact induntion coefficient of the magnet. The difference in
the two comparisons in Irkutsk was, perhaps, due to replacement of certain parts
in the theodolite with new ones.
In any case, the following conclusion can be drawn from the above: our
theodolite was quite sensitive and could register small changes in the horizontal
force up to 0.0003 gauss, what, it is true, corresponds to the theoretical precision
of the measurements both of the oscillation periods and of the angles with this
theodolite.
But, the greater the sensitivity the smaller the confidence in the results
of the measurements if we recall that sometimes the errors in determination in-
creased a great deal and that the values for B differed considerably from one to
another comparison with absolute instruments.
Therefore, I consider it more correct to give up the claim to precision up
to 0.0002 or 0,0003 gauss, and to confine myself to the following measure of
reliability of the Wild theodolite, as an instrument registering absolute in-
tensity, without predetermining the causes of the changes in B in various corn-
prions: the mean value of B for 1897, 1900, and 1901 is thus 3
4.0785 + 0.0016,
which corresponds to the mean deviation in the intensity up to 0.0004 of its
magnitude (+ 0.0008 gauss for Irkutsk). Such deviation is considerably greater
than the mean deviation of each separate measurement, cited above, and even
almost equal to the higher limit of the error in a separate measurement under
the observatiOn conditions as existed at the observatory. In the field, acciden-
tal errors of each measurement will be, perhaps, greater, but we have no right
to take an error in the mean of several measurements of absolute intensity which
would be greater than 0.0004 of its magnitude if we take B = 4.0785 for all
measurements.
A reservation should be made yet with respect to those cases in which we
shall use our theodolite for measuring such intensities which by far exceed the
range of 1.6 - 2.0 gausses. In those cases the reliability of the results will
decrease considerably due chiefly to the iron content in the theodolite and to ,
its consequently varying induction and differeLng force of the magnetic field.52)
52) In order to obtain reliable results with theodolite containing iron, it would
be necessary as a rule, to find the induction coefficient for the whole instrument.
Such requirement is reduced simply to a comparison of the theodolite at two obser-
vatories with the marked differences in the magnitudes of their horizontal intensities.
-47-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
The Tomsk theodolite was compared at two observatories with the horizontal
intensities of 1.65 and 2.01, and all magnitudes measured by Ma in Siberia fall
within this range, i.e.)1.47 to 2.01, which makes it possible to attribute the nSTAT
indicated reliability of intensity measurements to all my determinations in Siberia,
if we exclude for the time belyik-a possibility of large accidental errors in separate
measurements and of errors in'reduction to mean annual values.
All said above with respect to comparisons of our instrument with the absollute
instruments at the observatories does not hinder, all the same, to consider it more
correct to apply the constant multiplier B = 4.0782 in 1900, and B = 4.0765 in 1901
to the calculations of the observations in the field, which I did.
This, so to say, added a dominant significance to a possibility of gradual'
change in B according to the changes of the magnetic moment of the magnet, or'its
position in the housing, and also to the fact of replacing theodolite parts with
new ones. It did not add a greater significance to a probability ttaat changes in
B take place simultaneously with changes in the horizontal force.53)
Complete observation of the horizontal intensity in the determinations during
the trip consisted of measuring the angle of deflection of the principal magnet,
of measuring its oscillation period, and of measuring again the angle of deflection.
The angle of deflection v was measured in four positions of the housing in which
the magnet was mounted. I personally, saw to it that the position of the last
[magnet] remained the same, that the position of the horizontal axis was unchanged
during the observation (which, however, could not be ever guaranteed), and that
the entire theodolite was levelled. In 1901, the readings were made at sight to
l', as explained above. The suspension thread of the deflected magnet was un-
twisted, as indicated for [each] set by H. I. Wi1d54), although it was done very
seldom, in 1901 only once before departure for the field. It is true that the
thread was very old and not once was it noticed to be twisted.
In order to determine the oscillation period T of the principal magnet, the
oscillations were always regulated to the amplitude of 40'; the catch was dropped
down completely and moved to the perpendicular position (see source p. 19). The
moment [time] at which the magnet passed the zero position for each 7th time was
noted; about 10 - 12 of such moments [series] were noted, then after a pause
required for 100 oscillation, other 10 - 12 moments were noted. In 1900 when a
Waltham clock was used which did not strike seconds, we did the following: V.
Vinogradov my companion, equipped with a lense noted and recorded the moments
by the clock's hand indicating seconds according to the uniform signals given by
me. In 1901 a table chronometer, striking semiseconds, was used always in both,
the astronomical observations and in the work at the Irkutsk Observatory, which
enabled the observer to apply the Bradley method of "eye and ear".
53) Results of all measurements of this element on the road, given below, on the
other hand, provide a measure of precision up to + 0.000: gauss of a single obser-
vation with our instrument at each point, this magnitude containing also the error
in reduction of the observation to the annual mean. Consequently it proved to be
(contrary to what we saw with respect to the declination) that it did not interfere
with having a greater confidence in conversion of the intensity obtained by means
of our theodolite to the absolute instruments than that which we have to accept
in the meantime taking the precision of value B as + 0.0004 of its magnitude (up
to + 0.0008 gauss in Irkutsk).
54) Theodolith fur magnetische Landesaufnahmen (Theodolite for Magnetic Land
Surveying), 1. c., p. 155.
-48-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
The magnitude of the "twisting" of the thread, denoted by A in the formula,
i.e.Ithe average deflection of the magnet in minutes of the arc with 3600 twisting
clockwise and counterclockwise, was determined for the correcting multiplier. The
A was determined quite frequently, somewhat less frequently in 1901, namely almost
once at each station (see Table IX).
To save time and to increase the number of separate results for the horizontal
component, sometimes the angle v and the period T were observed only once; the
magnetic moment of the magnet, given in the tables for such cases, would indicate
the absence of large errors in the measurement of the horizontal force, although
variations of the last wereinot excluded. Sometimes I confined myself to the
observation of one oscillation, or to observation of a single deflection of the
angle. In that case the result was compared with the value of the same magnitude
but in the complete measurement, ordinarily made on the same day and at the same
point: thus only the-variation of the horizontal force with respect to the adjacent
measurement was calculated; of course, the precision of the result suffered, but
as I convinced myself repeatedly, [period] T was measured very accurately and the
error caused in H [horizontal force] by the indicated method of calculation, was
not greater than the error in the reduction to the mean annual magnitude, Lev
0.0005 gauss.
H was calculated from the observed magnitudes for T and v from the formula
given by H. I. Wild, in which I modified a little the members with the temperature
and induction coefficients for convenience in calculating.55)
H = 1 +
+ 2a
(t -"r) - 3m - 2? T
-Lii -0.03031
- 0.0000463.A_
T-11sin v
2
2
2
2
- 0.000023 }
2
Here $6, is the temperature of the magnet in oscillations, T,- in deflections,
m - coefficient of linear expansion for brassA- magnitude for "twisting",
s - daily run of the chronometer. No corrections for the amplitude were required
due to its insignificant and constant value. The meaning of the remaining letters
was indicated earlier.
The calculated values for coefficients taken were:
+ 2 g 3m - 2
- 0.000343, -.-_____ = 0.000014, = 0.000383.
2 2 2
55) See Theodolith fur . l.c., p 167. Instead of II+ 2v t _ 12+ 3mt
2 2
(t -I') - 3m - 2eT was taken while the products were taken from
2 2
computed tables. The member _Y_ (1 + sin v) H is equivalent to .I... H + H sin v
2 2 o o
because H sin v can be considered as a constant for the magnet even at varying
temperatures; the mean value:L
2 o
H sin vo = 0.00031.
+ 26
-49-
im,,,i,ecifinri in Pan. qnniti7ed Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
'
The magnitude proportional to the magnetic moment at CP, was calculated
from the formula
STAT
)
N? . 105 xl/ sin v
f_l + 0.00070
0.0000463 A - 0.000023s - ?
Z H + 0.0003],..1.
T 2 2
Here the correction for the temperature was obtained from the completely precise
expression
+ 2 tr (t +7) 4. 3m - 2 tr
er
2 2
disregarding the very small magnitude
namely
1 3m --.
(1 - t) = 0.000007 (cr ? t);
2 2
+ 2 6. 1
3m - 261(t +1r) = 0.00070 t
2 2 2
2 was taken.
Of the remaining correction multipliers, the member with the daily run of
the Waltham clock (which was carefully compared with the chronometer when it was
inaccurate) was of a considerable value occasionally in 1900.
To calculate these observations when oscillation period T2 only was determined,
the following formula was applied:
T
H 2
-2 = "1'1
2 1 - (11. + 2 0-) (t1 -
T2
where the letters with subscripts 1 refer to the nearest preceeding or subsequent
complete observations. When only the angle of deflection v2 was determined, H2
was obtained from the formula:
- 50 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
H2 Hsin v1 + (it+ 3m) ( -rr'2)
sin v2
where 14.. + 3m = 0.000716.
V. Description of the Observation Points.
STAT
A detailed topographical survey of the location where magnetic measurements
are being made, [although] extremely important for making it easier to find the
observation point in the future, is unfortunately, burdensome for the observer
because it requires too great an amount of time.
On the other hand, sometimes even a few-word description of the location of
the instrument, if it, besides, is just connected with any definite local objects
or buildings, is entirely sufficient. I am citing, as far as it is possible, all
data which may facilitate finding the described points, sometimes including angles
and distances from certain objects and buildings. However, these last figures
may not be of large practical advantage in a search for points and may not replace
a detailed plan. Not being able to include detailed plans of the locations, I
consider it almost useless to include here diagrams of the locations of the point
where the instrument stood with respect to 2 or 3 (less often) local points, which
I could do for the greater number of my stations. In order to make such a diagram
it is sufficient to draw the vectors given below, with their lengths and direc-
tions with respect to the astronomical meridian.
Should the descriptions given below be of no aid in finding the point,
then use of a compass is recommended: the direction of the unknown point from
the local object should be estimated according to the approximately known de-
clination, and, if it is possible in that location, by simply counting the needed
number of steps in the given direction; otherwise
it may be necesspry to use the compass alone, checking the directions of the
given objects.%)
In 1901, the topographical connection with local prominent objects was
determined by me more systematically by the following method which proved to be
the most convenient: a tripod with a angle prism was placed toward the side
several tens of sazhens from the stand with the magnetic instrument, and the
distance between the instruments was measured with a 5-sazhen tape. Then
both instruments interesected with each other and in addition with certain points,
i.e.)of the mark for determining the meridian, and, particularly, with those
objeeets whose precise cokordinates had been known from the work by the geodesist
Yu. Shmidt, or others.57)
56) The only correct means facilitating finding of points is their selection accord-
ing to their purpose. Therefore, it seems to me that special attention should be
paid to the advise given by the late P. T. Pasal'ski: "one selects points which
are easily found, i.e. road crossings, crossing of roads by rivers, by valleys,
city and village suburbs, mounds, etc., e.i.ipoints which are marked precisely on
large scale maps, e.g. on the 3-verst map of European Russia by the General Staff.
See: Pasallski. Ob" izuchenii raspredeleniya magnetizma na zemnoy poverkhnosti
.(Study of the Distribution of Magnetism on the Earth's Surface), Odessa, 1901, p. 49.
57) As it was inconvenient to take very long bases with the 10-m long tape, and
sometimes even difficult due to the local conditions, the precision in the distances
of our survey was in most cases up to 1 per cent, and sometimes even less.
-51-
?
npriassified in Part - Sanitized COPY Approved for Release
50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
In describing the points we give also their geographical coordinates, as SI-AT
finally accepted, which, moreover, are included also in the general tables given
below.
1) City of Tomsk. The principal astronomical point to which I refer the
"Tomsk time" was a brick monument in the University garden, located between
the south end of the main building of the University and the iron fence along
Sadovskaya St. The precise coordinates of the monument were determined by prof.
Kapustin oR?the basis of several points given by Col. Sharngorst and Capt.
Kullberg.5?)
9 = 56018' 6%
X Greenwich = 5h39m47q9
Pulkovo = 3h3e12933 = 54?37'195
The azimuth of the cross on the main dome of the new cathedral in Tomsk from
the monument = 15?16'28" from north to the east.
2) City of Tomsk, beyond the Tom' River. Prof. Kapustin's magnetic point
of 1899. It is located on the left bank of the Tom' River opposite the south
end of the city. In order to find the precise direction one should stand in
line with the bell tower shaft of the Uspenskaya Womenis Convent Cemetary Church,
and the two city border posts on the Moskva track [Nighliay]. The theodolite was
placed about 15 steps (or arshins) from the upper bank bluff, i.e.labout 50 steps
from the water (at the summer level of the river).
From the survey the reduction to the University monument was
d
dX = :08 9 thus
= 56027'32!8 [sic]
X Pulkovo = 3h38m22q3 = 54?35'34'15.
During the observations in the spring of 1900 the theodolite stood precisely
in the center [of the place] of 1899 from which the azimuth of the cross on the
new cathedral was determined by prof. Kapustin, and was
49?5222" from the north to the east, or
130? 7'38" from the south to the east.
58) ."Astronomicheskiya opredeleniya osnovnykh punktov v Sibiri posredstvom telegrafa
s 1873 to 1876 g", (Zap. V.-Top. Otd. Gl. Sht. ("Astronomical Determinationg_of the
Principal Points in Siberia by Telegraph During the Period of 1873 to 1876". Notes
of the Military Topographical Department of the General Staff), v. 37, 1880.
-52-
Dar!. qnniti7Pri CODV Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
1
During th observations in 1901 the position of the theodolite was somewhat dif-
ferent, t e azimuth of the same mark was determined by me and was 1300 3121" from
the south to the east.
a) Magnetic and Astronomical Points of 1900
3) Krasnyy Yar.
The steamer landing place of the Soyedinennoye Tovarishchestvo parokhodstva
po rekam Zapadnoy Sibiri (United Steamship Line on the Rivers of Western Siberia)
on the OW River, 18 versts above Nikollskoye village.
edge.
Approximate coordinates were taken from a map.
= 57051
X
Pulk 3h36111; . 540 lt.
The theodolite stood on the high bank, about 90 steps from the precipitous
STAT
Note: The magnetic observations were little reliable. The azimuth of the
mark was determined by the run of the chronometer and by the above described
approximate longitude (2m228 to the West of Tomsk) because the sun was very near
the meridian. Therefore the magnetic declination as found ? = _11?54' may be
incorrect to ? 5'. The horizontal intensity is also comparatively little reliable,
therefore it is given in tables only to four significant figures.
4) Narym City.
A settlement on the bank of the Ob' River, at the former city landing place,
which is located above the present landing place.
The observation points were around the water gauge post of the Ob' Section
of Tomsk okrug [District], with a mast, bench mark, and rain gauge, opposite the
Nesterov house.
At first the stand was placed 25 steps (arshins) south of the iron bench
mark. Then, fearing that this bench mark would affect magnetic elements, the
theodolite was transferred 105 steps (35 sazhens) south of it [bench mark], from
where Narym City and its cathedral could be seen.
The data of precise astronomical determinations made by Yu. Bhmidt in Narym
in 1900 is given, and the plan of the section near the ladning place Of Narym City
is included in table 3, in the Zap. V.-Top. Otd. Gl. Shtaba (Notes of the Eastern
Topographical 'Departmentof the General Staff), part 59, p. 188. My calculations
made on the basis of that plan gave the following reductions from the Yu. Shmidt's
post:
For Point I
= -8'17
dk = -1T3
- 53 -
For Point II d/ = _101:49
dA =-
rs nved for Release @ 50 -Yr 2014/05/08 CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Cop Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Using the coordinates derived by Shmidt, ve_obtain
STAT
For Point I 9 = 58055'31'15
Pulk = 3h241fl5484 = 51?13'36"
For Point II e= 584-'55'29?
X
Pulk = 3h24m5414 = 51?13'36".
At the first point the house gable to southeast served for the target, for
which the azimuth = 450 3'15" was taken from the south to the east, at the second
the cathedrftl bell tower in Narym City, its azimuth = 82?41'34" from the south to
the east.59)
Note: The fear that the iron bench mark would affect the magnetic elements
obtained at the first place, obviously, cannot be considered confirmed by thlilmea-
surement results; actually it was obtained:
At the first: 5 = -14?294 At the second: 5 = -14?307
J= 74 0:3 J= 74?2!6
H = 1.6038 H = 1.6049
V = 5.5950 V = 5.6130
T = 5.8203 T = 5.8379
Although the differences in the declination and inclination, obviously, indi-
cate an effect of the mouth [pole] magnetism which should have been apparent at
the upper end of the bench mark lying to thq6orth or NNW of the theodolite, however,
the difference in the values of the horizontal force contradicts an assumption of
such an effect. I tried to isolate, experimentally, the effect of the bench mark
for which I observed oscillations of the magnet at the following distances from
the bench mark:
25 June 7h18mp.[m.] 1. meters to the south
739 50
8 0 1.3
8 17 17.8
U It It II
It
It
It ft
It II
north
south
T = 35534
T = 3.5909
T = 3.6593
T = 3.5916: (at the 1st point).
59) The lines on the cathedral bell tower and on the old church, obviously, were
drawn incorrectly in the above mentioned plan of Yu. Shmidt; their directions from
his point do not correspond even to the azimuths given by the author.
-54-?
in Dmri niti7Pri Cony Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
The oscillation time of the magnet was reduced to e same temperature of 250
[C], and the variometer in Irkutsk did not show considerable changes in the horizon-
tal force for that time. The bench mark at the distance of 1.3 m produced a change
in the T amounting to 1.5 per cent of its normal magnitude, thus showing a change of
3 per cent in the horizontal force. Therefore at a distance of 17.8 m, considering
the strength of the pole inversely proportional to the square of the distance, the
change in the normal force was at least 100 times smaller, i.e.Ithe effect of the
bench mark should have become so small that it would be beyond the possibility of
being measured.
All the same, in conclusions for Narym, only the observations at point II were
taken: see Table XI.
5) Koloashevo Village on the Ob 'River, at the Tugurskaya Channel of the Ket'
River.
The observation point was at the ascent from the "lower landing place" to
the Ob' River bank cape farthest to the west. The tent was located about 70 steps
to the north of the precipice of the Ob's bank and approximately the same distance
to the east of the ascent from the landing place. The measurements of the azimuth
of the Kolpashevo church bell tower gave 970 1'17" from the south to the east,
and the distance to it was 953 m (447 eazhens3. The coordinates of the church were
determined, just as in Narym, by Yu. Shmidt60 , and the reduction to our point
according to my measurements was: d = -318, dA. = -319, hence
(p = 58?18'1517
Puik. = 3h30m16q2 = 52?34' 3.
The same latitude was obtained from the stars.
6) Kolmakovo (or Rodionovo) Village on the left bank of the Kett River. During
our brief stop, the instrument stood on the bank opposite the eastern end of the
village
The end of a log in one of the sheds to the west served for the target, its
azimuth = 100?54'18" from the south to the west.
Subsequently this point was referred to our point in Malo-Panovo Village (see
below); for this conversion we obtained d = +518; we take
= 58?6'31"
Pulk. = 3h32m49?5 = 53?32'22";
the longitude was calculated by transporting the chronometer from Kolpashevo.
Note. The magnetic observations made were not complete, and no tent was
used in making them.
60) Our point is located at the westenwit end of the village, and therefore
it is outside the borders of the plan attached to the article by Yu. Shmidt.
-55-
rs nved for Release @ 50 -Yr 2014/05/08 C1A-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
7) Bol'ahoye Panovo Village on the right bank of the Ket1 River,
STAT
During our short stay the instrument stood on the high bank directly opposite
the building in which the school met and where it was proposed to build also a church.
The observations gave
= 58?2851"
XPulk. = 3h3e 511 = 5303111577
A shaft of a large snag covered with sand on that bank of the river served as the
mark, its azimuth = 18020131" from the south to the west.
8) Malo-Panovo Village on the left bank of the Ket' River.
Both points were located near the house of Gr. St. Rodionov, which stood on
the edge of the river backwater southeast of the village close to its border.
The first point was located in the yard of the house on the very edge of
the backwater. When the damming work was begun, the tent was moved from the yard
to the 2nd place across the road about 80 steps southwest of the first; thus for
the 2nd place we have dt = -114, dX =
The following coordinates were taken (the longitude according to Kolmakovo:
the second point was located 46 east of Kolmakovo):
For the 1st = 58?2625116
Pu1k= 3h32m5453 = 53?13735"
For the 2nd t = 58?26'24'12
X Pulk= 3h32m501 = 53?13'31".
The house dormer to the east served as the target, its azimuth
From the 1st place = 81?62'19" from the south to the east
From the 2nd " = 84 46 58 "
'_Note. The difference in the results for the magnetic elements between the
two points was very small, and simply the mean magnitudes were taken for M. Panovo.
9) Yurty Shirokovy (summer resort), landing place for government steamers
on the left bank of the Kat,' River. Only astronomical determinations were made
from the stars.. The theodoaite stood at the very edge of the bank's precipice
beside the descent to the landing place.
= 58?2759"
4Pulk = 3h39m Os = 54045' OH.
-56-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Cop Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
10) Yurty Muleshkiny (summer resort), landing place for government steamers on
the left bank of the Kett River. The theodolite was taken to the southeast of the
landing place and put near the garden facing the small lake.
In order to calculate the time and the azimuth from the sun, the latitude of
the place was taken according to the map of the "Yuzhnaya pogranichnaya polosa
Sibiri" ("Southern border strip of Siberia") taking into account the systematic
error, obviously the error for the Kett River area (The effect of the inaccuracy
in the latitude did not play a large role, as the sun was near the first vertical;
see the tables).
= 58033115"
X Pulk = 3h4lm28s = 550227077.
11) Maksimoyarskoye village
The landing place for government steamers is located on the left bank of
the Ket' River, i.e.ion the other side of the river and about 1 to 1.5 versts
with the stream below the village. Only the latitude was determined from the sunpwith the
local time known approximately, on the high bank beside the landing place.
= 58?39'55"
XPulk
= 3h46T1 = 56?31'.
12) Yurty Berkunovy, Pyrgynovy on certain maps.
Astronomical stellar observations were made on the landing place for govern-
ment steamers on the left bank of the Ket' River, opposite the above named yourts
but below them down stream of the river. Obtained were:
= 58045721"
X Pulk = 3h47m21s = 56?50'15".
13) Ust'ye r. Ozernoy (Mouth of the Ozernaya 'River), right tributary of
the Ket' River.
The place of the astronomical stellar observations was located on the right
bank of the Ozernaya River, opposite the elevated cape of its opposite wooded
bank. The post indicating the distance in versts and standing on the cape could
be seen from the place where the instrument was located under an angle of 450
from the south to the east. Obtained were:
9 = 58?53'28"
Pulk = 3h49m395 = 57?24 ' 45" .
-57-
in Dmri niti7Pri rODV Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
In order to make the magnetic observations (see above, source p. 10) we we:".
SI-AT
40 sazhens upstream the Ozernaya River, in the directions N 16?36 W, and the
coordinates changed by d = d X = -0q2.
Therefore
= 58?53'32' [sic]
A'Pulk = 3h49m39s = 5024'42".
The trilnk of 9. tall pine tree, which could be seen high along the river,
served for the target. The azimuth determined for the target equalled 125?23'35"
from the south to the east.
jain Fie1d'HeadRuartere
14) Glavnyy stanRocated on the 'Ob'-Yenisey Connecting Waterway System.
The point of the magnetic and astronomical observations was located in the
open plain in the near northeast of the quarters of the director for the Ob' -Yenisey
River sector of the Tomsk Okrug RR.
The determinations gave
Pulk
= 590 3'25"
= 3h51M24S = 570511 0".
The figure 5 on the milepost in versts to the northeast of the instrument
served as the target (azimuth 140?45'12" from the south to the east).
15) Ust'ye "Kasovskoy" rechki (Mouth of the Kasovskaya Stream), right
tributary of the Bolishoy Kas River, about 25 verstsfi-om its confluence with
the Yenisey River.
The theodolite stood on the low and sandy right bank of the Bol'shoy Kas
River several sazhens below the mouth of the "Kasovskaya" Stream.
Only solar observations were made in the afternoon from which the follow-
ing were calculated through subsequent approximations
qt, = 59?53'28"
Pulk = 4h 0m205 = 60? 5' 0"
16) Nizhne-Shadrino Village, otherwise Sukovatkal on the left bank of
the Yenisey River.
Only the horizontal component was determined with the instrument standing
near the place where more detailed measurements were made in 1901 (see below).
-58-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
b) The points of 1901
17) Polomoshnaya station on the Siberian RR at the Tom' River.
The observation point was located south of the railroad bed, some 44 sazhens
south of the bell tower of the church of the Siberian RR Committee.
STAT
The direction toward the top of the water,t9wer, or pumped water tank, precise
coordinates for which were given by Yu. Shmidt?1), and the distances to it from
our point were:
To the water tower
Direction
11039' from N to W
To the church bell tower 3 28
" N" W
Distance
290 meters (136 sazhens)
94 meters (44 sazhens)
The reductions of the coordinates from the water tower to our point were
d = dX = 0T21 therefore
= 5504511110 [sic]
(I)
X
Pulk = 3h38m3e1 = 5403913111.
A distant stake in the fence to the northwest served as the target.
18) Ovash RR Station
Observations were made north of the RR and of the station buildings, beyond
the settlement, beyond the gardens, and to the east of the ravine with a small
stream. The flagpole of the RR terminal, determined astronomically by Yu. Shmidt,
served as the target.
Direction Distance
To the RR terminal flagpole 8? 31 from south to east 391 meters (183 sazhes)
To the water tower 5013' from south to east
Reductions from the RR terminal flagpole to the place of the instrument
gave d, = 12'15, dX = -OT2, hence
= 55027158111
XPulk = 3h33m57q4 = 5302912111.
61) Among the stations given below, the fol4Wpg,teEREld eEigned by Yu. Shmidt
in 1896 and published in the Zap. V.-Top. OtT.-7rillIary opographical Dept.
[Op. cit.]), vol. 55: Polomoshnaya, Oyash, Kargat, Kozhurla, Tebis, Tatarskaya,
Kormilovka, Bogotol, Marlinsk, and Sudzhenka. Later, Kurgan and Shumikha were
also determined by Shmidt, and their coordinates were given in vol. 56 of the
Transactions.
-59-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
19) Chik RR Station.
The observations were made in Prokudna village located on the old Siberian
trunk highway north, of the station. The point was located on the very edge of
the left bank of the Chik Stream, approximately in the center of the village.
The distance from it to the RR station water tower (the target) was 980 meters
(459 sazhens) according to the survey, the direction on it [the target] was
19?47 from the south to the west (about a verst on the road from the station
through the village, then turn left into the lane leading to the river).
The coordinates were determined from the sun:
= 550 0126"
XiPulk = 3h28m277 = 52? 6'55.
20) iiargash Station
STAT
Observations were made on the east end of the settlement located on the
north bank" of the Kaztata Stream near the station. The tent stood about 109
steps (arshins) from the right bank of the stream near the trunk highway from
Kolyvant to Kainsk [now Kuybyshev, Novosibirskaya o.]
To the south stack of the terminal 31?66' from S to W 561 meters 63 sazhens)
To the water tower (the target) 42 53 from S to W 540 m (253 sazhens)
Reductions of the Yu. Shmidt's coordinates for the top of the water tower to
those of the observation place gave dco = +12'18 and d A = +14, and hence
9 = 55?12' 2'11
APulk = 3h19m508 = 4905714211.
21) Kozhurla RR Station.
Observations were made in Svyato-Aleksandrovskiy settlement, located south
of the railroad bed.
The tent stood in the south row of houses of the east end of the village
street. In addition to the line of the street, the point was determined also
by the fact that the direction on the church was deflected by 35?44.9 from the
north to the west.
The direction of the target, i.e./the railroad water tower was deflected
by 20035' from the north to the west, and the distance to it was 699 meters
(328 sazhens). Taking the coordinates according to Yu. Shmidt and correcting
them by d = -2112 and dX = +0q9, we obtain for our point
= 55019156116
0
X
Pulk = 3h14m490 = 48?42'15".
- 60 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
22) Tebis RR Station. The tent stood at the east end of the small se'.11er
(north of the station) on the bank of the Perkul' (2) Lake, about 100 sazhont,, fi
the railroad bed. The following directions and distances were determined fr m
observation place.
To the west stack of the terminal 17049' from S to W
To the water tower (the target) 31 3 from S to W
On the semaphore to the east 74 19 from S to E.
The reductions from the (west?) stack of the terminal62), according t
:Yu. Shmidt, with the magnitudes (I, = 8'14 and dX = cm, gave
274 m (128 swinens
334 m (157 6a2,herv
= 55021130112
Fulk = 3h 8m3/46 = 470 a' 3911.
23) Tatarskaya RR Station
Observations were made in the settlement near the station, about 132 othfr
north of the railroad bed. The church and the school could be seen to the 'veil
water tower to the left, and theirront of the engine house and the weather vane
of the meteorological station still further to left; the steeple of the 111TIT.gl
barracks could be seen to the east.
The directions and distances were as follows.
To the front of the school 101043 from S to W 414 meters (194 Si
li church bell tower
ti water tower
it depo
It weather vane of the
meteorol. station
Reductions from the water tower: dco = 11U6 and dX= 2Tl gave accordilg
to Yu. Shmidt
96 49
it
480
It
(,
57 2
it
661
II
(310
48 20
37 52
316
"
(148
= 5501215711.3
h m s
XPulk = 3 2 31.6 = 45037154"
62) After the fire the terminal was rebuilt on the same foundation and,
obviously, was expanded by additions.
?61?
S TAT
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
24) Kormilovka RR Station.
STAT
The observation place was located north of the railroad bed beyond the shacks
of the station settlement and 80 sazhens (measuredloy steps with a perpendicular)
east from the water conduit running from the Omi RiVer to the water tower for a
distance of.3 versts.
Directions and distances were measured to the following points:
To the south stack of the terminal 11033' from S to W 292 meters (137 sazhens)
" the semaphore to Omsk, serving
for the target 62 49
To the water tower 25 46
It
291
11
( 13 6
17
For the distance from the Yu. Shmidt's point to the south stack of the terminal
we have (IT = 9U3, and d A.= 0q2, therefore
(Fs = 54059'587t9
m s
Pulk. = 2h 55 5.2 = 43046118".
25) Marlyanovka RR Station
Observations Were made at the farmstead of the Tambov Molokanes [exiled
--religious sect], located some distance north of the station. The tent stood in
the row of houses and sheds nearest to the station, beyond the row of wells. The
location of the point in that row was designated by the direction on the target,
i.e. the station water tower; this direction deflected 12019' from the south to
the east. The distance to the tower was about 2.5 versts, more exactly 2,560
meters (1,200 sazhens).
Astronomical observations from the sun and the stars gave the following
magnitudes:
= 54058155"
X = 2h49m128 = 42018' 0".
Pulk.
26) Isil' Kul' RR Station
Observations were made to the northeast of the railroad bed at the exit
from Pavlovskiy settlement located near the terminal along the road to
Pavlovskoye village.
The tent stood at the edge of the woods, north of the above mentioned
road to the village, opposite the new log cabin on the very edge of the settle-
ment. Forges and a wind-drivbn 'tlour mill could be seen to the side toward
the station. The shortest distance to the railroad bed was = 145 sazhens
(measured by steps).
-62-
in Darf qnniti7Pd Coov APoroved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08 CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Here are the directions and distances:
STAT
To the church bell tower at
the station (the target) 50?39 from S to W 1,137 meters (533 sazhehq)
water tower
64 9
It
The coordinates according to observations from the sun:
= 54?54'40"
X Pulk = 2h43m47s = 40?5645".
27) Petropavlovsk RR Station.
629 " (295
The observation place was beyond the settlement located south of the termi-
nal and populated by railroad workers.
The instrument stood in the back of the Semenov's house (34 sector) in front
of the open steppe. Here are the directions and distances of the following
points:
To the water tower 58? 71 from N to W 682 meters (320 sazhensp
n
the middle stack of the terminal 49
31
il
580
(272
t1
)
It
the church bell tower (the target)27
3
II
787
(369
ti
)
It
the east front of the engine house 5
1
from N to E
405
(190
li
)
It
the semaphore to Omsk 55
49
from N to E
The coordinates according to solar observations:
. 5405111177
XPulk = 2h351228 = 38050'30".
28) Makushino RR Station.
We moved far south of the station to Makushino village for making the obser-
vations. The tent stood in the garden of one of the holaqes-on the shore of the
lake. The point was tied first with the trunk of the water pump standing on the
north end of the same lake and feeding the railroad conduit, and then with the
church bell tower, located between the terminal and the village.
- 63 -
npnlassified in Part - Sanitized COPY Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Co .y Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
To the water pump trunk 980 6' from S to
To the church bell tower 132 10 II
Determinations obtained from the sun were as follows:
STAT
1249
29) niutakt
= 55012'27"
= 2h2711398 = 36?54'45"
meters 473 sazhens)
(585
We made the observations in the station settlement south of the terminal.
The tent stood in the row of houses facing a large open area; the cemetery could
be seen to the right and Kurgan City-to the Ieftjin the back was the lake, and
beyond it were the station structures, terminal, etc.
The place was determined by the following directions and distances:
To the water tower 28025 from N to W 461 meters (216 sazhens)
To the flag pole of the terminal 21 56 515 1t (241 " )
To the bell tower of the
cathedral of Kurgan 112?371 from N to E 1534 (719 " )
Using the determinations made by Yu. Shmidt in 1897, published in Zap. V.'-Top.
Otd. Gl. Sht. (Transaction of the Military Topographical Department of the General
Staff), vol. 56, (the coordinates for the Shumikha Station are published there
also, see below), and the reductions from the water tower equal deo = %3V11
dA = OU, we obtgined for our observation point:
(p
Bulk
30) Shumikha RR Station.
= 55026113%
= 2h19m58.8 = 34?59'42".
Observations were made in the yard of a house in the extreme north of the
station settlement,-at the end of a lane running perpendicularly to the railroad
line, north of the terminal. The flag pole in the north face of the terminal
served for the target, exactly 389 meters (182 sazhens) distant, with its azimuth
being = 14? 0' from the south to the east.
Reductions from this target, determined astronomically by Yu. Shmidt (see
Kurgan Station) were: de, = 121:2, and dA =-0q3, giving for our observation point:
Pulk
= 55013'38U
= 2h11m49T3 = 32?5720".
?64?
mr-1T rl r.rnv Aooroved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08 CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
31) Chelyabinsk RR Station
STAT
Observations were made beyond the settlement located east of the terminal
(west of it is the large Novo-Nikolayevskiy settlement, where the church bell
tower served us for the target).
The tent stood beyond the last row of houses and earth shacks beside the
road running in the rear of the settlement. The following directions and dis-
tances were determined.
To the east front of the terminal 87?43' from S to W, 671 meters (314 sazhens)
To the church bell tower (the target)
95 15
1127
(528
To the south (left) stack of the
water tower
110 30
665
(312
H
To the front of the city abattoir
213 36
868
(407
It was obtained by solar and stellar observations:
(I) = 550 8'29"
X = 2h 4m24s = 31? 6' 0".
Pulk
32) Krasnoyarsk City.
Observations were made on the mountains between Zakachenskaya (beyond the
Kacha River) settlement and the cementery; farther on this mountain is an open
field where military training took place.
A topographical tie between the instrument and the cemetery church gave
the distance of 429 meters (201 sazhens) to its bell tower, and the direction
azimuth 810 6' from the south to the west.
In addition the following directions were taken:
On the bell tower of the oldlnathedral 2?16' from S to E
On the bell tower of the new cathedral
(the target) \ 68 14 from S to W
On the sole tower on the mountain 97 26 from S to W
The distance to the bell tower of the new cathedral, the coordinates for
which were determined accurately by Col. Miroshinichenko(03), was measured by
my survey and equalled 2626 meters (1231 sazhens); reductions to our point were
dp = 31U6, dA. = 914.
63) Zap. V.-Top. Otd. G1. Sht. (Transactions of the Military Topographical
Department of the General Staff), vol. 51, p. 184.
-65-
- Caniti7 ('nnv
Aooroved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08 CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
Therefore the following coordinates were taken for the point:
X
Pulk
=-564? 1'22%
= 4h10m1642 = 62?34' 3".
33) Kazachinskoye Village, or Kazach'yel on the Yenisey River.
The tent stood on the site beside the church and beside the quarters of
the Zemstvo (elective district council). The distance of the instrument from
the church bell tower was 51 sazhens, the direction to it being 49?25' from
the south to the west. The top of the watch tower bearing almost exactly on
the south (by 1056' from the south to the east) served for the target at a
distance of approximately 207 sazhens.
The latitude and longitude according to our determinations64):
= 57041:581,
X pulk. = 4h11m49s = 62057'15".
34) Kolmogorovo Village, on the left bank of the Yenisey River.
The observations were made southeast of the church, i.e. somewhat higher
[of the church] upstream and closer to the bank.
North of the church was a monument with the inscription: "Astronomical
chronometer point 1899" (which I also used for determining the latitude by
the sun). The place of ourWlibdolite during magnetic and other astronomical
observations was about 26 sazhens from this monument and about 17.3 sazhens
from the church bell tower; the directions to these points from our instrument
were:
To the post 24?51' from the north to the west
To the bell tower 43054! from the north to the west
The top of a quite distant tree standing on the high bank of the Yenisey
River in the direction of 280 from the north to the east served for the target.
64) The exact coordinates, i.e. c = 57049'598, = 2h11m49?3 of the Kazach'ye
church bell tower, determined by' Lt. Col. Osipov in 1902, are given in Zap,
V. T. Upr. Gl. Sht. (Transactions of the Military Topographical Administration
of the General Staff), v. 61, published recently. The declination of the mag-
netic needle found by the author (see pp. 253 and 232 of Section II of the in-
dicated volume with a Brauer azimuth compass for 5hp [.m.] on 14 June 1902 was
45 = -10?50', which differi considerably framthiar-found by me. Unfortunately
the author does not indicate whether his instrument was compared with the ab-
solute instruments in order to exclude a possibility of an error in the prism
of the eye diopter.
-66-
Dmri? niti pri Conv Amor? ed for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
As the exact coordinates determined by the Irkutsk or Siberian TopographicSJAT
Department, obviously, were not published65) I am using the results of my deter-
minations, having decreased the observed latitude of the monument by l'!6:
= 59015137"
'Pulk =4h3m55s = 600 58 4511
35) Nizhne-Shadrino Village, or Sukovatka, on the left bank of the Yenisey
River, near the mouth of the Bolt ahoyKas River.
The observations were made on the right bank of the Sukovatka Stream, opposite
the village, which is located on the high left bank of that stream. The tent stood
on the site opposite the Zemstvo (elected district council) quarters (the house
which belonged to the peasant Kirillov) about 10 sazhens from the bank of the
stream 220 sazhen upstream from the mouth located almost to the north (13? from
the north to the west). A distant birch tree trunk in the direction of 21040'
from the north to the west sdrved for the target.
The following coordinates were obtained:66)
Pulk
= 59054157"
= 4h 1m17s = 60019'15".
36) The mouth of the Garevka River (Gorevka on some maps), right
tributary of the Yenisey River. The theodolite stood on the sandy bank of the
Yenisey some 40 steps from the water and 100 steps below the mouth of the Garevka
River.
The latitude taken for the point was according to a map, based on the lati-
tude of N.-Shadrino Village.
= 59?21.0
Pulk = 4h 111149s = 6002711511.
Note:
Magnetic observations were shortened and made without a tent.
65) According to the information received by the V. T. Upr. Gl. Sht. (Military
Topographical Administration of the General taff) the coordinates of the monu-
ment were as follows: T = 59015136110, X = 43m55T2.
66) The Atlas r. Yeniseya (Atlas of the Yenisey River), compiled by a hydro-
graphic expedition headed by Lt. Col. Viltkitskiy, published in 1900 by the Gl.
Gid. Upr. Morsk. Min. (Main Hydrographic Adrinistra4on of the Navy) gives the
following coordinates for this 'village: = 59053,, A' Greenwich = 90042'. The
quite large difference betweenithose-coordinates and my determinations is in-
comprehensible because, obviously, there is no large error in my measurements or
in calculations. This difference exists also with respect to the next point No. 36.
-67-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
37) Yeniseysk City.
STAT
The observation place was located et the exit from the east end of the city
onto the Krasnoyarsk postal road; having passed the bridge across the Lazarevka
Stream, turn left before reaching the Abalakskaya cemetery church. The theodolite
stood some 38 sazhens from the bell tower of that church; the direction to it
deflected about 25?42' from the south to the east67).
The following directions and distances were obtained by a survey:
To the bell tower of the monastery 87058' from S to W 1940 meters (909 sazhens)
To the bell tower of the convent 92 34
It
912 (427 " )
The reductions calculated from the monastery were: do = 2112, dk = 8?0.
The longitude of the monastery vas determined telegraphically by Lt. Col.
Vil'kitskiy and Lt. Ivanov in 189508), and the coordinates obtained for our
point by reduction from the monastery were
58027154
X
Pulk = 4h7T11291 = 6105211611.
38) Chernorechenskaya Station. Siberian RR.
Observations were made in the rear of the settlement near the station,
south of the terminal. A survey produced directions and distances to the
following objects.
To the water tower (the target) 53?541 from N to E 513 meters (240 sazhens)
To the western face of the engine
house 47 26
To the terminal flag pole 11 12
It
501
ti
(235 sazhens)
401 II (188 It
A monument with the inscription: "Astronomical and chronometer point 1900"
stood in the direction of 16? from the north to the east, some 182 sazhens from
our point.
As the results of the determinations for this monument, obviously, have
not yet been published, and as I have had no time to determine the latitude of
my point, I took its approximate value according to the map of the "southern
border belt of Siberia" ,-- of 56?16'11", which corresponds to the value of
56016123" for the monument. An error in the latitude will have almost no effect
on the longitude of the place calculated by me, but on the azimuth of the target
and _on the magnetic declination the effect will.be such that if we edam= l' to
- _
61)- The plan of Yeniseysk City can be found in the-Atlas reki Yeniseya (Atlas
of the Yenisey RiveT);:cited_above.
68) Zap. po Gidrografii (Hydrographic Transactions), 1895, Fascicle 18, p 92.
-68-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
the magnitude of 56?16123" for the post, then 41" = 0:7 should be added to the
eastern declination given later by me for Chernorechenskaya Station (i.e.t.to 69)
the negative declination should be added - 41'') according to the formulaA6= .
The longitude was calculated from our chronometer:
XPulk
39) Bogotol Station.
= 56?16'11"
= 4h 3m 23 = 60?45'30"
The observation place was beyond the eastern end of the settlement located
on a comparatively high ;site north of the railroad bed and left of the road
running perpendicularly to the line of the Siberian RR.
Here are distances and directions from the mean magnetic meridian to the
following objects:
To the flag pole of the terminal 4?37' from magn. S to El 834 meters (391 sazhens)
To the water tower 20 9 718 " (336 " )
To the church bell tower 7 17 985 " (462 " )
The directionsgiven are from the magnetic meridian because the prevailing weather
conditions made observations of the sun or stars impossible.
For the passage from the flag pole of the terminal and from the water tower,
cootdinates for which are given by Yu. Shmidt7?), po the place of observation, we
take the probable inclination value of6 = 1100 .We shall obtain
According to the flag pole (6023 from S to W) dT =;A-2618, dX = +0q36
According to the water tower (90 9' from S to E)(3.1 = +22'!9, cA. -0944
and using the coordinates for these points71), Le obtain for our point:
According to the flag pole = 56013'15'!86
of the terminal x Pulk 3h56m49n.5:
According to
water tower
= 56013'121:81
X _hms
Pulk- 3 56 49.14
69D Accardifig to information at the V.T.Upr.G1.Sht. (Military Topographical Ad-
ministration of the GeDeral Staff) the coordinates of the monument proved to be
= 56016120':5,X = 43" 392, therefore no changes of any kind in our results
will be made subsequently.
70) See station No. 17 on our list and the remarks
71) Of. course using these data on could calculate pproximately and roughly the
direction or the astronomical meridian on the theodolite and, cohsequent17, the
magnitude of the declination in Bogotol. Unfortunately, this proved to be im-
possible due to the fact that either there was an error in these data, or one of
the structures had been moved to another place since 1896. The precise declina-
tion in Bogotol could have been found had the Yu. Shmidt's monument near the RR
zterioinarbeen preserved, because the author gives precise azimuths from his
monument to both structures.
69 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Ap roved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
40) Mariinsk City.
STAT
Observations were made in the woods opposite Bol'shaya Street west of the
city from where there was a view on the barracks of the Mariinsk City Command,
'certain structures of the [RR] station, and on the prison under construction.
Distances and directions to the following objects were determined:
To the flag pole of the
terminal (the target) 180 47 from N to E, 925 meters (434 sazhens)
To the water tower
To the dome of the new prison
church
Therefore the reductions
From the (d, = -2813
flagpole (dk =-115;
1 4 from N to W,
33 5 from N to E.
732 " (343
of the coordinates, found by Yu. Shmidt, will
which gives the mean for the point
41)
From the
water tower
of our observations:
(d4P7 = -2317
(
(dk- = + 0505
= 56?12 I 191a
XFulk = 3493 h M 880 = 57?24'30".
?
Sudzhenka
be
The tent was placed beyond the terminal along the road to the Sudzhenka
coal fields, i.e./to the northwest of the terminal.
The point was detex'mined by the fact that it was 446 meters (209 sazhens)
distant from the water tower which served for the target, and whose azimuth
= 61017' from the south to the east. The direction to the terminal flagpole
was 49?561 from the south to the east, end to the brick stack of the water
pump (seen from the gully) 15 6' from thei north to the west.
The reductions from the water tower: d, = 811 and d X = -1?1 gave
according to Yu. Shmidt:
= 561? 6'4910
X h m
Pulk = 3 43 19s.1 = 5504974677.
npriaccifipn in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
VI. The Results of Astronomical Observations
STAT
Table I contains the results of the determined corrections for the chrono-
meter wittspect to the local time at various stations.
The mean moments of observations
i.e. ,approximately by the Tomsk time,
wereltaken - beginning from midnight,
The Tomsk time, as stated above,
garden.
are given according to the chronometer,
in which' civil days, and not astronomical,
and not from nom..
refers to the monument in the university
Certain corrections of the chronometer to the local time in Table I are
printed in bold face, i.e. in those instances when these corrections served for
calculating the differencds from the "Tomsk mean time - chronometer", i.e.)
when the known longitudes were used more or less accurately for the points( with
respect to Tomsk; these longitudes were taken, as a rule, from table II.
For such cases thillfound differences from the 'Tomsk mean time - chronometer"
are printed also in bold face, according to which the daily rate of the chrono-
meter was computed and is compared for various time intervals in Table III; the
data for the daily rate of the chronometer calculated from repeated observations
made, e.g. in Tomsk before and after the trip, and at certain other points,
especially for 1900, is given also in Table III.
The magnitudeio the differences from "Tomsk mean time - chronometer" for
other points are interpolated in Table I (using the daily rate from Table III),
and in the next column are given the longitudes of these points thus obtained
with respect to Tomsk.
The longitudes of Narym and Kolpsshevo village were known as reliable among
the points of 1900; the longitude of Kolmakovo (or Rodionovo) was also taken
as basic for all other [points] because it was determined by a chronometer
brought from Kolpashevo using the daily rate for only 4.9 days; then the longi-
tude of M. Panovo is almost just as reliable as that of Kolmakovo in absolute r.
magnitudes, because these points were later connected by a topographical survey
giving the mean daily rate of the chronometer for 20 days.
One can judge of the good quality of the chronometer by its daily rate
shown in Table II. The infrequent irregularities in the rate in 1901, probably,
can be explained by inaccuraties in the calculation with very small time inter-
vals between the moments when the correction determinations for the chronometer
were made.
This table shows partly also the reliability of the longitudes for the
points determined in 1900 and 1901, given separately in Table IV. The longi-
tudes of points determined on the way back from M. Panovo to Tomsk in 1900 are
less reliable as I could not take advantage of precise longitudes of the points
on the Yenisey River.
-71-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
A comparison of my figures with the determination results obtained by A. K.
Sidensner can serve as the criterion of precision of the longitudes along thesTAT
Ket' River if the latter are corrected according to the precise longitude of
Yeniseysk determined after the Sidensner's 'observations had been plotted by Wagner
and [corrected] for the obvious Watematietftor in' the latittde: The longitudes
-We-is compared by me'in Table' IV, Sidensner's longitude for Kolpashevo village was
cbmpared brie also with the precise value obtained by Yu. Shmidt, given in
Table II.
Errors in our longitudes depbnding on the precision in the determination
of time at each point, probably, almost do not play any role in epmparieon with
the errors resulting from changes in the daily rate of the chronometer. At
least, the repeated determinations of the correction to.it, even with unsuccessful
and incomplete observations, seldom differed more than by 2 - 3 seconds. Less
reliable were the determinations of time at Narym on 26 June, at Yurty Maleshkiny
where I had not determined the latitude, and particularly at the mouth of the
Kasovskaya:Stream, where both the time and latitude were determined by observa-
tions in the afternoon by subsequent approximations (See above p. 23, and Tables
I and V). In 1901 the time was in general, determined reliably enough, less
certain were those [determinations] for which the observations were made only on
one side of the meridian (Tatarskaya, Shumikha, Nizhne-Shadrino,
the mouth of the Garevka River, end Sudzhenka).
The determinations of latitudes are assembled in Table V where in addition
to separate measurement results also the mean latitudes for each point are
included as they were finally accepted and used for the calculation of time and
azimuth. Finally, the latitudes reduced to the places of our observations
according to topographical surveys from the points which had peen determined
accurately, chiefly, by the geodesist Yu. Shmidt and others72) are given also
for comparitibn.
Table VI contains all azimuth determinations of the mark, expressed in
degrees, minutes, and seconds of the arc from the south to the west or to the
east.
In order to evaluate the relative weight of each separate result the number
of sightings of the heavenly body and its mean azimuth during the observations
are given; it is stated sometimes in the remarks tbl,the correction of the chrono-
meter was derived, and when a result with 50 per cent weight was taken.
The results obtained in 1900 with a Hildebrand theodolite almost always
agreed together sufficiently well; thus, observations on the Polaris and from
the sun gave almost the same results.
In 1901 the observations of the sun on various sides of the meridian with
a Wild theodolite agreed well enough; on the average, the difference between the
azimuths determined from the sun from the east to the west equalled +9U31 thus
the arithmetic,- mean of the precision should be +5's
72) Theobservations made from the sun in 1901 with a new circle in
the Wild theodolite agreed well with the precise values obtained by Yu. Shmidt.
-'72-
/
nna-Inecifiarl in Part - Sanitized Com/ Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
This high precision was due, in the majority of cases, to the fact that the
correction of the chronometer was determined on both sides of the meridian argm
that the principal cause of the difference in the azimuths [determined] from '?.!2.""
sun from the east to the west was eliminated. If we take the agreement of
separate determinations of the azimuth at each point as the basis, and disregard
their weight and the fact whether the sun was on one or the other side of the
meridian, we obtain the same magnitude of +5" for the mean deviation of a
separate measurement.
The following arguments can be given in order to evaluate astronomical
qualities of our theodolite: according to our observations a systematic error
in measurements of the zenith distances cannot be observed with a Hildebrand
theodolite; evidently it [the error] is not greater than 2".
In 1901, the Wild theodolite with the new circle showed also an insig-
nificant systematic error of +2" in sighting the sun as can be judged by the
errors in the latitudes; moreover this error seems to be on the side as if
caused by a sagging of the eyepiece hairs, or by a flexure of the telescope.
In stellar observations this error increased to 5".
- 73 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
? Tf,...???
Table I.
Determination of the
Location 1
.
IChrononeter
time
,
Nei! style
civil day
Hildebrand. or
'Wild theok1itel
Sun or Star
0 a)
.0 .-1
ho
0 0
cd 0
X
1Mean zenith
distance
ca
g
042chronometer
.0=t
Mean local
time
Tomsk(Oniveriity)
.
After the Jour-
ney)
Narym
Kolpashevo
?
Kolmakovo (or
Rodionovo)
B. Panovo
M. Panovo (1st
location)
(2nd location)
Yurty Shirokovy
Yurty Mhleshkiny
1900
19 Jun
20 "
20 "
21 "
21 "
20 Aug
21 "
9 Sep
" "
24 Jun
25 "
26 "
29 "
30 "
2 Jul
" "
7 *
8 "
9 "
10 "
14 "
17 "
"
"
19 "
," "
22 "
26 1,
" "
28 "
W le
29 "
h
4.7p.
3.50
11.8p.
0.3a.
10.6p.
11.1p.
2.7p,
11.0p.
7.9p.
8.2p.
6.0p.
8.1a.
2
4.2p.
, 0.0a4
i 0.7a.
9.3a.,
2.1p,
8.8a.,
9.8a.
11.7p.,
1.0a.
2.3p.
3.3p.
11.0p.
11.9p.
10.5a.
1.8p.
10.9a.
2.1p.
8.9a.
4.4p.
10.8p.
11 .3p.
4.2p.,
H
4
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
W
*
"
H
"
"
*
"
W
H
"
"
W
"
H
"
"
*
"
"
"
"
"
"
W
-
Sun to-W
Sun to W
a Cygni to E
n Urs. Mj. to W
a Cygni to E
a Can. Ven.to W
Sun to W
p Andr. to E
n Peg. to E
a Cor. Bor.to W
Sun to W
Sun to E
Sun to W
Sun to W
e Urs. Mj.to W
y Cass. to E
Sun to E
Sun to W
Sun to E
Sun to E
Urs. Nj.to W
0 Pegasi to E
Sun to W
Sun to W
Boot. to W
1Peg. to E
Sun to E
Sun to W
Sun to E
Sun to W
Sun to E
Sun to W
eBoot. to W
0: Andr. to E
Sun to W
h
4.7
3.5
-2.8
4.5
-4.0
4.3
2.7
-4.0
-3.3
4.0
5.7
-4.1
2.1
4.1
5.6
-5.7
-1.8
2.0
-*
-2.3
5.6
-2.8
2.2
2.8
4.2
-3.7
-1.7
1.7
-1.2
2.0
-3.2
4 .2
4.6
-4 .3
4.2
60
50
29
40
38
45
54
45
45
51
68
56
42
55
42
41
40
41
50
14.14.
44
43
44
48
14.14.
43
42
42
40
14.14.
52
60
56
53
60
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
4
8
8
8
8
8
8
4
8
10
8
8
8
6
8
8
6
3376
3 37.2
3 36.73. 5- ,,,i3. e_
08
3 37.0
3 35.73 3 35.5
3 35.4j
4 32.11 4 32.9
4 33.61
4 57.31 h ?, 0
4 58.6S ' I"'
-9 58.81 -9 58.1
-9 57.3
-9 59.8
-4 37.3
-4 36.7-4 37.0
-4 37.3
-4 35.
-4 34.9i I
-1 58.3
-0 42.5
-0 40.1_ 0 40.5
-0 41.0
-0 37.9
-1 45.7
-1 44-7-1 44.6
-1 44.4)
-1 43.6..3. 43.3
-1 42.9i
-1 41.41 -1 41.8
-1 42.2
-1 39.2f, 9.5
-1 39.9 '
A
4 30.21 4 30.1
4 29.9
6 58.6
?
-
-74-
d.
169.20
170.15
170.50,
171.45
231.79
.251.34
174.54
_179.51
1181.99
186.87
189.51
10.10
197.48
199.00
202.02
206.03
200_.14.6
209.17
3m35q5
4 32.9
336.8
4.,
in in
E m
O 0i
?f?-i
no E
? o 0
o
4-1 ?-?
Remarks
Cbserv. of 9 Sept.
by prof. Khpustin
13m31091,71 Observ. at 2nd location (dX 320).
1 The result unreliable
3 36.1 8 13.1W
3 37.8
3 41.5 5
343.7
350.4
355.7
359.2
14. 0.2
424.2W
5 35.0W
5 35.2W
O 30.9E
2 58.4E
Ole result unreliable
Reduction to the 2nd point
IS +102
Longitude by survey accord.
to KoImakovo
The azimuth of the mark de-
termined simultaneously by
sighting at the center of the sun
STAT
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Table I contd.
Location
Chronometer
time
New style,
civil day
S:1
0
'0
Sun or Star
? d
*8-1 t 4-I 0
O g 0 bo
41 4.:11 Mean local \
? *r.:01L
0+' chronometer time
\
YUrty Berkunovy
Mouth of Ozernaya
River ? ,
01. Stan
Mouth of Nasolasma
Stream
Tomsk (University)
(After the trip)
Tomsk beyond the
Tom' River
Polomoshnaya
Oyash
Chik
Kargat
Kozhurla
Tebisskaya
1900.
1 Aug
1
2
3
14,
5
6
13.
h
0.5a
11.2P.
1.3a.
9.9a.
11.0P.
0.8a.
11.0a.
1.8p.
1901
18 May 10.3p.
20 Apri 2.3p.
" 10.6p.
19 9.7p.
10.0p.
21 " 10.1p.
10.4p
26 " 10.1p
10.5p.
18 Aug 9.6p.
10.0p
3 Sep
I, 22
1
12 Jun
13 "
'13 "
14 "
16 "
18
19
20
20
21
22
23
H a lorrae to W
a Andr. to E
a Lyrae to W
Sun to E
it
It
p Peg. to E
illerc. to W
;Sun to E
Sun to W
Sun to W
Y Leonis
Lyrae
Y Leonis
,a Lyrae
4a 14Yrae.
Leonis
g Lyrae
0 Ieonis
10.08.
2.7P.
1.3pi
4.6p.
7.4a.
3.91?
8.6a
9.3a
2.8p
4.1p.
3.9p.
9.3a.
5.0p.
8.0a.
3.2p.
8.1a.
tt
It
at
a Cor. Bor.
a Andr.
Sun
Sun
Sun
Sun
Sun
Sun
Sun
Sun
Sun.
Sun
Sun
Sun
Sun
Sun
Sun
Sun
to E
to W
to W
to W'
to E
to W
to E
to E
to W
to W
to W
to E
to W
to E
to W
to E
2.7 33* 4 12m55!0
-4.4 50 8 15 14.5j m
15-15:0
3.6 40 8 15 15.5
-2.0 46 4 15 16.5
-2.9 43 8 17'A
?-?1 17 4.0
4
4.3 39 17 4.6
-0.5 43 8 17 5.5
2.1 50 8 26 9.9
2.4
3.8
-4 4
3.
-4.7
-4.5
4.1
-4.2
3.7
4.0
-4.2
-1.9
2.8
1.5
4.7
-4.6
3.8
-3.4
-2.7
2.7
3.8
3.6
-3.o
2.8
-4.3
53 a 4 21.2
55 8 4 7.5
49 8 4 7.0j
51 8 4 7.0z
49 8 4 7.03
46 8 4
58 8 4 7.2j
14.14. 8 4 4.9"c
54 8 4,, 5.5j
51 8 5 191
52 8 5 18.4
53 8 539.2
59 8 539.0
59 8 6 4.9
60
59
53
49
14.14.
14.14.
53
51
46
8 4 15.4
8 4 17.33
8 0214..k
8 023.14.
8
55l.9_
8 5 52.3
8 -14 28.4
4 -14 25.9 -14
8 -14 24.1
4 7.2
4 7.0
4 6.8
4 5.2
518.9
5
39.3.
1416.4
0 23.91
5 52.1
59
57 8
14.143
57 14
27.2
-19 29 -3.} -19 28.7
-19 28.2
-25
-25 40.
1,25 40.3
40.2
- 75 -
I 00-,
Po.ri 0
biD
0 0
M '0
0
4-44
0 Z:1
?
E-4 ,0 ?ri
211.52
212.51
213.91
215.50
216.96
222.07
to.*
+)
O CO ?ri
0
O 0 Ps
43E-1 0
eri
b5 .r4
O $.1 t0
Remarks STAT
109.10
137.44
Y.s6
4 5.0
4 9.4
4 18.7
145.43 4 5.2
229.41 5 18.9
245.01
264.05
162.50
163.51
166.00
5 46.1
6 11.9
4 7.6
4 8.0
4 9.5
169.03 4 11.3
170.52 4 11.6
172.49 4 14.4
82"53.!14E
11 10.0E
12 54.6E
21 51.2E
10 1.6w
At another place some 0t2 east
of the previous one
Observations on 20 April from
a window of the physics labo-
ratory
Observations by prof. Kapustin
The point is beyond the Tom'
River some 7?0 vest of the
University
On the 19th, sightings at the
'sun through the cloud
On 23rdpreadings at the circle
to the right only
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
,
Location
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Table I (contd.)
Chronometer
time
New stxle,
civil ;day
Sun or
Mean local
chronometer time
Tatarskaya
Kormilovka
Martyanovka
Petropavlovsk
"
Makushino
KUrgan
Shumikha
Chelyabifisk
Krasnoyarsk
Kazachinskbye
Kblmogorovo
N. Shadrino
Mouth of Garevka
Yeniseysk
Chernorechens-
kaya
Mariinsk
1907:, h
24 Jun' 3.5P.
25 " 3.1p.
26 " 8.7a.
26 5.1p.
27 8.7a.
29 10.7P-
29 11.2p.
29 3.5P.
30 9.9a,
2 Jul 8.1a.
4.2p.
9.5a.
:5
5
8
10
11.
13
13
14
14
20
20
21
23
24
24
27
28
30
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
10.2a.
4.8p.
9.7a.
4.8p.
4.4p.
5.1p.
9.5a
5.5p.
0.4a.
0.8a.
8.8a
2.1P.
3:0p.
3.0p.
7.5a.
1.2p.
.2.4P.
8.8a.
,
9.6a.
3 Aug 8.8a.
3 " 2.7p.
7 " 8.6a
7 " 2.8p.
11
11.
? 10.1a.
? 3.0p.
ft
ft
ft
ft
"
ft
ft
Sun to W
Sun to W
Sun to E
Sun to W
Sun to E
2.9
2.5
-4.0
4.6
-4.0
ac cygni -4.1
Arctur. 2.7
Sun to W 2.7
Sun to E -2.9
Sun to E
Sun to W
Sun to E
-4.7
3.2
-3.5
Sun to E -2.9
Flitin to W 3.6
Sun to
Sun to W 3.5
Sun to W 3.0
Sun to W 3.6
Sun to E -4.1
Sun to W 3.9
ArctlAr. 4.1
Andr. -5.3
Sun to E
Sun to W
Sun to W
-2.6
2.6
3.5
Sun to W 3.5
Sun to E
.Sun to W
Sun to .W
Sun to E
-Siin to E
Arctur!
Sun to B
Sun to W
Sun to E
Sun to W
Sun to E
Sun to W
-4.0
1.8
2.8
-2.8
.?2.0
45?
42
8 - 311245!31
8 - 31 43.8
54 8 -. 39 10.0)
57 8 - 39 8.8k
51i. 8 - !39 9.5J
39 4 45 0.2
46 8 - 141458.2J
43 8
45 8 : 45 0.0)
145
:::27j1
61 8 - 50 22.1
48 8 -
50 8 - 58143.9
46 8 -1h 6 26.0Z
52 8 -1 6 2n7.5
51 12 -1 14 4.32
50 8 -1 14 3.4i
47 8 -1 22 8.1i.
52 8 -1 22 7.8j
56 8 -1 29 31.7j
54 8 -1 29 30.7J
58 8 -1 29 30.1
61 4 -1 29 31.3
46 8 0 36 25.8Z
46 8 36 27.0
53 8 36 27.0
54 4 38 2.3
57 8 38 31,
4 4 4.12 38
50 8 30 15.1
50 8 30 14.1
47 8 2739.6
4 28 12.8
-2.7 50 8 33 58.31
3.1 53 8 3357.11.3
-2.9 52 8 2936.01
3.2 54 8 29 36.7
,
-1.6 45 8 16 16.4j.
3.2 54 8 16 17.8J
me
8
31 44.31
39 9.4
39 9.1
44 59.2
44 59.6
58 44.8
-1h 6 26.8
-1 14 3.9
-1 22 8.1
-1 29 31.2
-1 29 30.6
36 26.4
38 4.0
30 14.7
? bb
0 03,
O -0
410
CD
M
;FA sk
? l
d.
174.64
176.04
176.54
179.46
179.53
i81.86
183.53
V5.06
188.05
190.70
193.06
193.53
19948
203.93
207.48
209.90
210.42
33 57.8213.99
29 36., 217.99
16 17. 1222.03
233.92
4m132
4 15.0.
4 18.0 49'17!2W
4 20.4 54 42.5W
4 22.0 lh 3 6.8W
4 23.6 1 10 50.4W
426.6
431.9
14.33.7
439.5
4 114.
4 49.2
4 52.3
4 53.0
4 58,0
5 3.2 24 33.1E
5 8.4
1 34 4.9w
33 19.4
25 25.5K
22 47.3E
Remarks
STAT
On 23 July: sightings through
the clouds
23 19.8E Observations at the circle to
the right only
1011.1ftves'
5 12. 2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 : CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
STAT
Table II. Coordinates of Points According to a Mbre,
Authors Reduced to Mates of Our Obseivations (See D
Precise Datajw Various
escriptions of Points)
Location
Latitude
Longitude .
east of Pu].-'
ktirokillak
Longitude
from Tomsk
(University)
Tomsk, monument in the University
garden
56?28,
66
3h38029t3
Tbmek, point along the Tam' River
56 27
32.8
3 38
22.3
om7fo w
Narym
58 55
29.3
3 24
54.4
73)
13 34.9 ,
Kolpashevo
58 18
15.7
3 30
1.2
8 13.1
Polomoihnaya
55.45
11.0
3 38
38.1
o 8.8 E
Oyash
27
58.1
33
57.4
4 31.9 W
Kargat
3.2
'12.1
19
5o.8
18 38.5 W
Kothurla
19
56.6
14
14.9.0
23 40.5 W
Tebisskaya
21
30.2
8
34.6
29 54.7 w1
Tatarskaya
12
57.3
2
31.6
35,57.7 W,'
Kormilovka
54 59
58.9
255
5.2
43 24.1 w
Kurgan
55 26
13.6
19
58.8
18 30.5 W
Shumikha
13
38.1
11
49.3
26 40,0 W
Krasnoyarsk
56 1
22.4
4 10
16.2
? )61 46.9 E
Yeniseysk
58 27
5.4
4 7
29.1
28 -59.8 E
Bogot151
56 13
14.3
3 56
1-8 19.8 E
Mariinsk
56 12
19.1
3 49
38.0
11. a.7
Sudthetka
6
14.9.0
3 43
19.1
4. 49,8 E
73) 1 We sair t1ii-fo1l-617iing inscription on the post at the water gaie
station: "2 Otdeleniye O.U.T.O.P.S. [2nd Department, al Section, Tomsk
.0121.1g, of Railroads], 15 August 1898. Lat. = 58?45'17 (?), long. west .
of Tomsk = 2?45'45" (i.e.f11m35 (?)1.
74) According to Yu. Schmidt the latitude of the bell tower in KolnashevO
is It = 58?18'19:5 and the A.. 3h30m20f081 determined by Lt. Commander
Sidenaner (Sidensner and Vagner Izv. Imp. R. Geogr. Obshch. - Bulletin of
the Russian Imperial Geographic Pociety), vol. XIII, 1877, p. 73; the last
magnitude, however, as indicated by Vaguer, should be corrected for the
error in the longitude of Yeniseysk city according to the formula 0.22 AE.
We take the Vilikitskiy's correction of - 91:4 for the monastery in. Yeniseysk
city, therefore, according to Sidensner the longitude of Kolpashevo
= 3n3031913.
On the post hear the church in Kolpashevo we saw the inscription: "Start
of the work by a detachment of Department II. Latitude N 58018119",
longitude 2?515" west of Tomsk. 1898 July 25. O.U.T.O.P.S. (Obi Section,
Tomsk Okrug of Railroads)."
-77-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Table III. Dai:q? Rate of the Chronometer
Time
inter-
val
Daily
rate in
transit
Daily
rate
at
stops
1900
In Tomsk before departure
From Tomsk to Narym. ?
From Narym to Kolpashevo
In Kolpasb.evo
From Kolmakovo to M. Panovo.
Panovo
From M. Panovo to Tomsk .
d.
1 0
3.0
50
25
15
3.0
4.o
25.8
+oE.3 4
-0. 1
o.84
1.44
-1:5 3
+o. 7
1. -0
0.-S
o. 6
At mouth. of Ozernaya R.
4
o. 9
At a. Stan
15
1. 0
In Tomsk atter return
195
1. 3
1901 r.
In Tomsk before departures
,????)-t?
From 20 April to 18 May.
& ? ?
28.3
-0.49
From 18 May t 26 may --
80
-0.25
STAT
In calculating the
longitude /from Kol- ,
pashevo to Kolmakovo
for 4.9 days we took
+ 0:75.
This magnitude was.
used in calculating
the magnitude of ?
B. P.anovo.
This magrlitfie ? served.
for calculating all
remaining longitudes
in 1900.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
To Polomoshnaya
To Oyasha
TO Kargat
To Kothurla
To Tebisskaya
To Tatarskaya
To Kormilovka
To KUrgan
To Shumikha
To Krasnoyarsk
To Yeniseysl
To Mariinsk
To Sudthetka
To Tomsk-'
17.1
1.0
5.5
2.7
9.3
14.0
8.o
1.9
5.5
0.9
This magnitude was
taken for calcula-
ting the longitude
of Chik Station
1. 0 1.0 was taken for
calculating the longi-
tudes of Marlyanovka,
Isill-Kul, Petro-
pavlovsk, and
Makushino
2. 0
0.8
1. 3
1. 3
2. 0
1. 2
1T3 was taken for
calculating the lon-
gitudes of Kazachit-
skoyel Kolmogorovo,
Nizhne-Shadrin, Gar-
evka R. mouth, and
Chertorechenskaya RR
station
Obtained on the average for all d.
time of the trip , 84.0
In Tomsk after return:
To 3 September. . . . . . . . 15.6
From 3 to 22 September. ? ? . 19.0
7g
0E288
1.76 A The chronometer was
1.36 carried beyond. the
Tome River.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
.011????
Table N. Calculated Longitude of Points
STAT
Longitude
from Tomsk
(University)
. ?
Longitude
east of
Pulkovo
X pak
1900 ,
Kolmakovo ...
oh 5n1308 w
3h32m49!5
B..Panovo
4 24.2 w
3 34 ,5.1
Sidensner 's determination
with corrections gives
3h3410.7s 75)
14. Panovo (2nd location)
5 35.2 W
3 32 54.1
Yurty Shirokovy
0 30.9 E
3 39 0.2
Yurty Muleshkiny
2 58.4 E
3 41 27.7
Yurty Berkunovy
8 31.4 E
3 47 20.7
Ozernaya R. mouth
11 10,0 E
3 49 39.3
Sidensner's determination
with a cor;ection gives
3h0m4013 70)
?
Gl. Stan
12 54.6 E
3 51 23.9
Kasovskva R. mouth
21 51.2 E
4 020.5
1901 ,
Chik
010 1.6w
328.2(.7
Mar 'yanovka ,
49 17.2 W
2 49 12.1
Isil .
54 42.5 W
2 43 46.8
Petropavlovsk
1 3 6.8w
2 35 22,5
Malcushino
110 50.4 W
2 27 38.9
Chelyabinsk
1311. 4.9 W
2 4 24.4
Kazachinskoye
03319.kE
4 11 48.7
Kolmogorovo
25 25.5 E
4 3 54.8
Nithne-Shadri no
_
22 47.3 E
4 1 16.6
Garevka R. mouth
23 19.8 E
4 1 49.1
Chernorechenskaya
24 33.1 E
4 3 2.4
75) Taking the 58'27'0" (we obtained 58?28'51") for this village
according to his field survey, the author gives the longitude 53?28'9"
dependent on the error in the latitude (2.4 c1.1 ) and dependent on the error
in the longitude of Yeniseysk (0.32A E). Therefore we calculated the error
in the longitude from d, 412611: and the error from 4 X.:- equal -0.32 x 911.
- 45" (See the note to Table 115. And thus we obtain for the village Panovo
(on the landing place) 33?28'9" + 4'26" - 45" 53'31 10" =3h34m7s.
76) The authoE obtained the longitude for the mouth of the Ozernaya River.
a 5727'20" . 3."49m403 topegraPhicelly (according to adjacent points);
introducing the error in the longitude of Yeniskeysk city (-9!4) in full, as
indicated, by the author for the adjacent point (the article by Sidansner and
Vaggeri. Pp. 72-73, Table Sy No, 12), we obtain the longitude for the mouth
m 3A49m401.3
- 79 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
0 ;..c
cp'
From the
Sun, or
from '
Polaris
Location
Tima by chro-
nometer Nev
style, civil
days
Norm, 1st place
Narym, 2nd place
Kolpashevo
Kolmakovo (Rodionovo)
B. Panovo
,M. Panovo, 1st
location
M. Panovo, 2nd
location
Yurty Mule shkiny
Ozernaya R. mouth
Gl. Stan
Polomoshnaya
Oyash
1900
24 Jun
25 "
It
26
ItIt
29
30
2 Jul
7
ft
8
tt
11
TI
18
17
22
22
It
29
3 Aug
11 U
6 "
1901
12 Jun
13It
it 11
14ii
h
5.3p.
64.7a.
11.9a,
2.8p.
4.9p.
2.1a.
2.6p.
9.1a.
10.9a.
8.9p.
2.7a.
3.7P.
0.3p,
4. 2p?
10.2a.
10,2a.
0.6p,
5.5p,
7.0a.
3.4p.
8.2a.
If
11
TI
If
11
TI
TiII
it
Sun to W
If II
Tr TI
TI if It
Polaris
Sun to W
11
" E
II
" E
Polaris
Polaris
Sun to W
It n w
Polaris.
Sun to W
It .
It
" E
11 11 w
1 TI
II 11
It It
rt,
J.T1ab1Ift_I[I..e-ermination
l'V
a)
o A
aS,43
ID
Z 4-1
0
4
11.
8
8
8
6
6
8
8
4
8
8
lgh?
-8
.55
86
51+
-61
-26
69
56
103
-34
-33
16
98
-92
70
-.77
_
of the Azimuth of the Mark
oo
0 icDo
ASoo:p
,
?r-I Zal
-Ii.)ego
a) s-1
POO
1-31 ot 6
04-D gil$11Z
o
0
0 a
Azimuth
of the
mark cosTAT
tine from

S ZO WI or
The
, means.
i
+D
0 0
0
ri4
45?-3'18''
45?
3'15"
3 12,
-9
59.0
82
41
42
82
41 34
-9
59.0
41
25
-4
-4
-4
37.3
37.0
35.3
97
1 14
18
1,19
97
117
-1
58.3
100
54
18
100
54
18
-0
42.5
18
20
35
18
20
31
-0
39..0
20
27
-1
44.5
81
52
22
81
52
19
-1
44.8
52
12
-1
41.8
84
46
59
84
46,
58
-1
41.6
46
57
34
2
25
34
2
25
15
16.5
155
23
35
155
23
35
17
4.4
140
45
12
140
45
12
17
5.5
45
15
4
16.3
148
32
58
148
32
56
4
16.6
32
54
-0
24.1
8
2
44
8
244
-0
23.7
2
45
% ?
Remarks
Mean of all correction observations
at the let and 2nd place taken as
correction for the chronometer
Obs-v. by Polaris taken, with double weight. Correct4
to the chronam. taken accord, to stellar dbserv.
during the night from 17th to the 18th.
Correct, to the chron. taken for both azimuths accord,
to solar dbserv. of same day.
The azimuth calcul. accord, to zenith dist, from
the center of the sun neasured indirectly.
Correct, to the chron. taken accord. to ;previous
stellar observations.
Correct, to the chron. taken accord, to solar
observations.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ; 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
.Table
.
Time by chronometer
0
umper of
sightings
4Mean hour I
jangle
JMean zenith'
distance
....m ??????????????????????????S-
New style, civil
By-the'sun or
Observed
Location I;days.
?
stars ' . .
'Latitude
.
.
.-,
.. -
1900 ,
.
Nary&
h
.
m
(lit locatiam)
25 June
I2,5p;
W
Sun
6
17
3'5"
58?55'19
Kolpashavo
30 *
0.4a.
H
ocAquilae
4
-59
51
58 181,4
11 le
*Jay
1.0a.
"
Polaris
4
32
18'214
2
12.1p.
-"
Sun
8
- 1
35
1814,1
B. Panovo
10 "
0.5a.
Polaris
8
31
58 28 53.
8 "
12.1p.
"
Sun
12
2
36
28 45.
H. Panovo
(1st location)
17 "
12.1p.
if
Sun
4
3
37
58 26:10.
18 "
0.2a.
II
Polaris
4
31
2624.
" .1?
1,0a.
C CYgni
4
-20
29
262N
M. Panovo
(2nd loc*km.)
-22 "
12.1p.
Sun
12
4
38
26M
Yurty Sbil-okovy
29 ';
0.0a.
Polaris
8
32
58 28 1,
* "
' 0.7a
c Cygni
8
4
29
275'4
MAkAmaroviinre
31 "
12.1p.
Sun
8
10
40
58 39 55
YurtySerkunovy
1 Aug
0.8a.
Polaris
4
31
58 45 21.
,
Ozernaya R.mouth
1 ,,, .,
11.7P.
Polaris
8
31
58 53 28,
2 *-
0.3a.
"
C Cigal- ?
8
2
29
53 28,
Gl. 'Stan
6)+ ."
11.70.
Polaris- .-
8
30
59 323.
5 "
12.1D.
"
sun
8
12
42
3.
6 "
11.8a.
"
sun
8
1
42
3 ).'
Kasovskaya R.
mouth
U *
1.8P?
69
46
59 53 28
19,01 ,
Ob.ik
16 3U4A
12.1p.
W
Sun
16
4
32
55 026
Tatarskaya
24 "
1.2p.
w
Sun
12
40
33
55 1253
Mar,yanovka
29 "
11.6D.
"
Polaris
6
36
54 58 50..
30 ?"
30 le
8.i
.p.? "
6 Ophiuchi
ttun
8
10
16
- 1
4 2
32
0
59 .;
Isil,',..KU1'
2 July
12.9D,.
Sun
8,
1
52
.54 54 Wel
Petropavlovsk
NAkushino
KUrgAn
Shunikha
Chelyabinsk
Krasnoyarsk
Kazachinskoye
Kolmogorovo
Ni zhne- Shadrino
Mariinsk
4 July
5 ?
10
"
if
20
1.0p.
1.1p.
1.2p.
1.6p.
11.7a.
23 11.76.
24 " 1 11.5a.
1
27 se 11. 6a.
30
11
11 Aug
11.7a.
11.8a.
Sun
if
if
if
Polaris
ce Ophiuchi
Sun
if
if
if
if
if
1) For sources iee descrimtion of Sidensnerts po
but, probably, were not too far away from ours; see renArks
Mean
I [latitude]
AT
3
2
3
4.
- 532 54 5111.21
16 - 2 32 55 1227.1
12 - 4 33 55
8 10 33 55 13113.11,
8 35 55 8060
8 2714.3 83J..8)55 829.3
6 23 34 836.8)
8 15 35 56 1O
8 14 7 i8 5 4154.54
4 538 42 20.i
8 i140 5915.
8 5 41 59 5457.
.
58?18,15N,
58 23 50q,.
58 26 25.6
58 27 59.2
58 53 28.3
59 3 25.1
54 58 55.3
8 - 2 41 56 12:18
nts inB. ..-"OVO and
to Table II. '
-80-
57 41 580
at the Ozer
Latitude1)according to other data
reduced to those points
.58'55'31"
50 18 15.7
17 35
527 0
.According to Yu. Shnidt
Acc9rding to Yu. Shnidt
Accotding to Sidensner
According to Siaensner
58
52
51
According to Sidensner
55
12
570
According to Yu. Shnidt
--?
55
26
13.6
55
13
58.1
56
1
22.4
According to
Mirothnichenko
56
12
19.1
According to Yu. Shnidt
Remarks
Observations on 10 July
with double weight
Observ. of the 17th
not included in derivation
of the mean. Reduction
of dbserv. of 22 July
to the 1st place would
give 57?26'24"0.
50% of weight added to
the- obsez.,v. of 14th by
the sun
all. mouth were not reduced to our points due to lack of indications,
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Location
Time by chrono-
meter Nev
style, civil
days
0 re Tit-67272 tha
p 3C.:2:1 or
?,.;
P01 aris
Tab1e VL
0 a) ii
04 0 Ei gl 0 -ez
4si 8.1),P1 ? 24"
2A:g A?
0 w,
Pe
00 a) 0 ea C ri
C.)+D+, 0
Determitatione
Azimuth of
the mark
counting
from S to W
or E.
Chik
Kargat
Kozhurla
Tebis
Tatarskaya
Kormilovka
Nareyanovka
Isil,-KU1,
Petropavlovsk
M4knshino
Kurgan
Shumikha
Chelyabinsk
Krasnoyarsk
Kazachinskoye
Kolmogorovo
Nizhne-Shadrinc
Gar evka R.
mouth
Yeniseysk
chernore-
chenskaya
Mariinsk
Sudzhe,kp-
_Tomsk, beyond
the Tam' River
1901
16 Jun
It It
18
19
20
11
II
It
21
22
24
26
26
27
29 Vt
30 -"
1 Jul
2 "
5
5
8
8
10
11
20
?
21
24
24
27
28
CI
91
ft
Vt
se
tt
re
Vt
21
Ct.
se
Vt
se
6.9a.
3.2D.
h. gip
e?0,?
.10/..ro
5.3
7.
3.72.
44r.
8.1a.
11.
10.3a.
5.5P.
7.7a.
5.6r.
9.1a.
9.8a.
5.4p.
8.6a.
5.3r.
? 9-P?
704.
9.0a.
30
0
30 Jul 7.3a.
.3 Aug
3.,P.
9.3a.
11 10.7a.
It $ 5?2P0
13 " 10.5a.
Se
Sun to E
w
It
Se :V
ft St
Vt 71
re
71
21
11
21
Vi
:
Vt
tt
Vt
91
:
Vt
DI
t9
W
Vt
Vt
Vt
Vt
et
Vt
TV
re
Vt te
TV TV
ti CI
tl Vt
:C 2C
St t:
CI 11
t/ Vt
VI 7:
:1 11
VI sr
Vt te
21 21 .
CI te
Vt
Vt
VI
VI
St
TI
Vt St
tt 71
Vi 21
97 :1
I? te
Vt
n w
It
Vt
es
8
8
14.
8
8
14.
14.
14.
8
8
8
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
14.
8
8
8
8
11.
11.
8
8
4
8
8
-68
67
83
96
91
-90
68
Zg
73
-86
76
-72
69
-56
87
-95
86
-79
- (2)
-88
78
-86
90
-46
-82
32
77
-75
-78
113
-g2
9
-148
-27
90
-30
- 5111502
- 5 52.0
-14 28.0
-14 27.0
-19 29.0
-19 06.4
-25 40.5
11 14:8
-31 44.0
-39 9.5
-39 9.3
-39 9.2
-14 59.9
-44 59.6
-50 22.5
-50 22.1
-58 45.0
-58 44.6
-1h 6 27.0
-1 6 26.7
-1114. 4.Q
-1111. 3.d
-1 22 8.4
-1 22 7.6
-1 29 31.3
-1 29 31.0
0 36 26.3
36 26.
38 3.9
38 1i..0
30 14.4
30 14.9
27 39.6
28 12.7
33 g:kg
29 36.2
16 17.0
141.7.2
10 2.0
19?47' 41
47 17
42 52 48 1 11-252 45
52 425
159 24 411 155.'25 11
2526)
The means.
REwnarks
STAT
19047110"
31 2 32
57 1 4
1 42
1 281
62 48 30\48 36
48 38
12 18 411
18 35J
50 38
38
152 56
56
98 6
6
152 39
39
14 0
0
95 15
15
68 13
13
14
1 55
55
152
36)
293
21)
1.-1411
121
12 J
235'
1 55 39
281 45
31 232
57 1 38
62 48 35
12 18 38
50 38'33
152 56 30
98 611i.
152 39 12
14 0 14
95 15 14.14.
68 13 52
168 2) 14
2 13 15
87
152 0 36
68 20 li
2 13 15
87 57 50
126 551 126 551
161 13 27
13 3 _
161 13 30
.p
61 16 53 61 16 53
-82-
130 315
Daring the Observa*ons on June 20 the sun peripherie-
were not seen clearly 'through the clouds; a 50% weigh
was added to the aziTtinth.
Obsi!rvations on 25 June interrupted due-to clouds.
Correction to the chronometer was determined on
22 Sept only from the sun to the west. A 50% weight
was added to the result.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
.VII. Results of Magnetic Observations
Table VII contains the magnitudes of the declination east therefore the
minus signs have been omitted everywhere therein.
The moments, as in all subsequent tables, are given in the mean Tomsk time,
but the longitude is given in the time interval for each place with respect to
Tomsk. Te double collimating error of the magnet (mark X upper minus mark X lower)
was reduceaInr each observation of four sightings to the north pole [end] of the
magnet, and oncefor two sightings (shortened observation).
Reduction of the observed declination, or of another magnetic element, to
its mean apnual magnitude for a given place was made as indicated by M. A.
Rykaa;;71) according to the two observatories - in Irkutsk and in Yekaterinburg
[Sverdlovsk since 1924] longitudes of which differ by 2h54m445, and thus the Tomsk
time differs from that of Irkutsk by 1h17m, and from the Yekaterinburg time by
1h37m.
Correction a), found for the mean moment of each observation of an element
at point A, should be added to the simultaneous declination at the Owen obser-
vatory in order to obtain its mean annual value there. In addition, before
the found magnitude a) is added directly to the observed element at point A, cor-
rection b) should be found according to the mean daily rate in order to reduce
the element observed at point A to that daily time [hour] which corresponds to
the mentioned correction found at the observatory.
I did this and the other according to the data of the two observatories
while being able to avail myself only of an interpolation of4hourly magnetic
elements maintained at the archives of the Nikolayevsk [Pugachev since 1918]
Main Physical Observatory of which I had been graciously informed in part before
they had been placed in the archives by the directors of the Irkutsk and Yekaterin'r
burg [Sverdlovsk] Observatories. It should be observed that, judging by the selfre-
cording instruments in Pavlovsk, not once were any magnetic disturbances recorded
during my observations.
STAT
As far as the mean daily variations of magnetic elements are concerned; which
are necessary for the calculation of correction b), I drew two curyes of the 'mean
values for June, July, and August 1900, and separately for 1901,78) for Yekaterin-
burg [Sverdlovsk] and Irkutsk.
The sum of corrections a) and b) used for reducing observed elements to the
mean annual is given in the subsequent tables separately for Irkutsk and Yekaterin-
burg (Sverdlovsk). The difference between them, of course, gives in addition
-ready material for evaluating the reliability of the whole method for reducing the
magnetic observations to the mean annual in case of a greater distance between the
observation points and the observatory; certain deductions from this .,material are
- considered below.
'77) 1.c.lp. 39
78) A station farther north than Yekaterinburg [Sverdlovsk), and particularly
Irkutsk, should have been used for this purpose, but reductions according to
two stations east and west of the observatioffpointEhowed that the inaccuracy in
the daily variation should be excluded to a certain oxtent because the cdrrection
for the daily variation is usually used with various signs in, changing from the
west to the east.
- 83 -
STAT
10
Table VII) contains observations and reductions, as previously, of the magni-
tudes of angle f dip. The magnitudes found at circle W and circle E are given
separately; when at certain times in 1900 observations were made only at one
position of circle WI the result was corrected by +05, obtained as the mean of
all observations in 1900 (see above) [source p. 35].
In Table IX, are angles of deflection observed directly while measuring the
horizontal component of intensity and the oscillation time of the magnet, as well
as its temperatures, A- torsiox magnitude, and S - daily run of the Waltham clock,
or of the Erikson chronometer79); relative magnitudes of the magnetic moment of
the magnet at 00 were calculated and are given for checking purposes, then the
horizontal intensity values are given. Reductions according to the data of the
observatory were made in relation to the ;mean moment for the whole series of the
observations of intensity. Although the magnitudes of the intensity derived from
observations of only one angle of deflection or of one oscillation time are less
reliable in precision, they were introduced into the mean deductions for each
point with the same weight as theremaining ones (see source p. 45).
.
In table X, means of all element values for each point80) reduced to the
yearly mean are compared separately for Irkutsk and Yekaterinburg [Sverdlovsk].
As far as the reductions to yearly magnitudes are concerned it appears (from the
reference to Tables VII, VIII, and IX, but confined to 1901 only) that on the
average the difference for each reduction of the declination withJres ect to
Irkutsk and Yekaterinburg (Sverdloyah)_ig_NEEL_2_?_lia2 (disregarding the
sign), of the inclination to 0:44 and of the horizontal strength to 0.0007 gauss.
Therefore it is understandable that if the desired precision of the result is to
be above half of the reduced figures, e.g., if the precision of the yearly value
of the declination is desired to be above 0t6, then it remains to increase only
the number of separate determinations.
We can see from the data in Table 01) that the mean of declination reductions
with respect to one observatory for a single station differs from the mean of
reductions with respect to both observatories by the magnitude of + 0:4 in 1901
(obviously magnetically quieter than 1900 when the magnitude was up to + 0:6)p
In addition, it can be seen from Table X that the declination east reduced to
Irkutsk is on the average a little smaller than that reduced to Yekaterinburg
[Sverdlovsk], in 1900 by MI in 1901 by 05.
The reductions of the inclination and of the horizontal intensity agree
better so that when the results from two observatories are compared we obtain
a mean error of + 02 for the inclination reductions at the given station,
+ 0.0002 or 0.0003 gauss for the intensity.
It is interesting yet to consider the fluctuations of the yearly declination
magnitude itself at each point after comparing separate observations reduoed to
79) For the chronometer S = 0' wastaken everywhere.
80) Only a series of different declination observations in M. Panovo village was
set out.
81) See the figures in the parentheses denoting the mean difference "Irkutsk -
Yekaterinburg [Sverdlovsk]" disregarding the sign.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
- 84 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
any of the observatories. This time the fluctuation magnitude depends yet on
the precision in the determination of the actual declination at the given place,
and moreover on the peculiarity of this place with respect to its variations in
the terrestrial magnetism (e.g. on the latitude).
It was shown that separate determinations of the deflection adjusted with
respect to Irkutsk gave a mean deviation of + 11 in 1900, and + 09 in 1901,
but the reductions to Yekaterinburg [Sverdlovsk] were better, giving the same
precision to + 0.8 of each measurement for both years82).
For the inclination, the deviation of each yearly mean magnitude reduced
either to Irkutsk or Yekaterinburg [Sverdlovsk] was + 0:3, and for the hori-
zontal intensity + 0.0005 gauss.
Returning again to the determination of the declination, we repeat that
a separate measurement of the declination, reduced to the yearly mean with respect
to one observatory during the magnetically calmest year gave the accuracy to
+ 08 or +0:9; the precision of theideclination reduced with respect to two,,
observatories proved to be to + 0:6 [in this case we disregard the varying distance
of the observation point, and we speak of the position of the point as of the mean
position of all points].
With 3 to 4 observations at each point the agreement of reductions with
respect to both observations for the same year comes, on the average, to + 04.
In Table X, the mean quantities of the reductions made separately with
respect to Irkutsk and to Yekaterinburg [Sverdlovsk] were used for the declination.
These quantities were intended for deriving the general mean, while taking into
account the greater or smaller proximity of the point to one or the other ob-
servatory. However, it was clearly shown that this proximity had no particular
significance. Also, the mean reductions to Irkutsk or to Yekaterinburg were,
as a rule, quite close to each other. Therefore, only the stations from the
Irtysh River, i.e., from MarTyanovka to Ohel'yabinsk, were selected, and the
dogble weight was 'added to their reductions with respect to Yekaterinburg
[Sverdlovsk] in relation to the reduction with respect to Irkutsk. The stations
along the Yenisey River can be reduced equally well with respect to both obser-
vatories, therefore, simply the mean magnitudes were taken in all remaining cases.
82) Here we do not take into consideration the greater or smaller proximity of
the station to one or the other observatory, but in any case, it cannot be :said
that even in 1901 a greater number of stations was nearer in longitude to
Yekaterinburg [Sverdlovsk] than to Irkutsk. Regardless of the fact that the
YekaOrinburg [Sverdlvosk] observatory is situated in a local magnetic anomaly
it was not observed that even the points along the Yenisey River agreed better
in reduction to Irkutsk than they did to Yekaterinburg [Sverdlovsk]. At stations
located farther north it was clearly observed that reductions of declination
observations made in the morning produce too large figures for the yearly decli-
nation; this means that the mean daily amplitude taken for such stations is smaller
than that which should have been taken.
-85-
S TAT
STAT
Double weights were added also to the reductions with respect to Yekaterinburg
[Sverdlovsk] in deriving the final values of the horizontal intensity for the sta-
tions from the Irtysh River to Chelyabinsk; the inclination was taken everywhere
simply as the mean.
Table XI, finally, contains all results of the magnetic and astronomic
determinations.
Here the points are arranged in their geographical sequence, and not chrono-
logically, and this is why a number was placed at each point indicating the num-
ber under which the description of the given point can be found in Chapter 5 of
this study. In addition to the magnetic elements 5, J, and HI measured directly,
which, as it is Clear from the preceding, are given here in reductions to epochs
corresponding to 1900.5 and 1901.5; the yearly mean values of the vertical
component V, and of the entire [resultant] intensity T were also calculated.
It appears from the consideration of the declination in the stretch from
Chelyabinsk to the Yenisey River that we are almost all the time in the area
of easterly declination of 11? to 120; this result is due to the fact that the
Siberian RR runs here almost parallel to isogonic lines.
Then, regardless of the plain character of the Siberian lowland, there are
in the Baraba Steppe frequent deviations of the magnetic needle by about 1/2? in
comparison with the points in the nearest proximity. The distribution of the ter-
restrial magnetism is more irregular along the Yenisey River from Krasnoyarsk to.
Nizhne-Shadrino.
It has been shown clearly that the inclination increases with the longitude
of the places on the same parallel. The resultant intensity increases similarly
to the inclination (See Shumikha and Kargat stations). We found the greatest
resultant intensity in Kazachinskoye village on the Yenisey, perhaps partly due
to the local anomaly in the terrestrial magnetism and partly to the fact that
this point lies closer than others to the East piberian area of the highest
magnetic intensity (See the map by F. Muller)83).
The greatest vertical intensity was found on the right bank of the Yenisey
at the mouth of the Garevka River; it is true that the difference between it and
the value of the element in Nizhne-Shadrino village, the most northerly of all
my points, located 12 miles only north of the Garevka River, is not great and
perhaps is close to the precision lihit of the measurements as magnetic deter-
minations were made once only each time [for each element] in the Garevka River
mouth.
83) F. Muller. "Study of Terrestrial Magnetism in East Siberia. Results of the
Expeditions to Nizhnyaya Tunguzka and Olenek Rivers in 1873 and 1874. Zap. Imp.
Rus. Geogr. Obshch. po Obshch., geogr. (Probable English expansion: Studies of
the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, General Geography), Vol. 29,11. 1,
1895.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08 ? CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
- 86 -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Table VII. Declination (East)
Location, and its
longitude from
Tomsk
Mean Tomsk
time
X upper
minus
X lover
theyenrly
Observed acmz?311prIstol
declina- P1744 necardiaq
.___ to
tion InctskYeka-;
i tertt%;
Yearly mean valm'
of inclination
according to
Irkutsk Yeka-
teridb.
Tomsk, beyond Tom'
River
(0T1 W)
ifarym, 1st lccatian
(13% I?)
Narym, 2ad3ooadOn
(13% V)
Kolpashevo (82 w)
Ifamtliovo(Rodliczovo)
(5V7 W)
B. Panovo (411.a4 W)
1900
11 Jun 11h47111a.
or ft
24 "
25
tt
26 "
28
29 w
ft
30
1 Jul
3
7
8
9
11
14
M.Bacow,lstiocatiac 16
(%w)
17
Malmowl2bilpostiaa 19
(%w) 20
21
26
ft
ft
ft
tt
ft
rt
ft
or
yr
ft
ft
5 25 p.
7 21 p.
11 52 a.
3 27 P.
12 21 p.
3 47 P.
7 39 P.
10 45 h.
7 45 P.
5 1 p.
9 la.
8 22 a. 26: 27.0
27
9 32 a. 26.4
6 14 p. 27'1127.1
27.
4 8 p. 27'3327.0
26.6J
26.6326 7
12 51 p.
26.9?26.7J
26.r1"9
26. ?26.Q
27.113
28.0
26.?26 9
27.uv
26.9f27.0
27.1
9 40 a.
27.4
3 23 p. 27.0
10 55 a. 27.6
26!3
26.5,
27.3?
27.2127'3
26.9i27
27.2
j7.2
27.4707.6
27.9j"'
26.4
26.5
26.9
21.11.270
27.0)
28.1
27'5/27.1
26.7
27.2
26
0
3 18 p.
11 14.14. a.
4 55 p.
8 16 a.
6 16 p.
114'5317 016 0:4 ?11?5413 116541
11 49.7 2.2 4.4 51.9 54.1
14 26.8 0.5 1.0 14 27.3 27.8
14 30.1 4.1 0.5 34.2 30.6
14 23.6 4.9 4.7 28.5 28.3
14 28.1 2.1 2.2 14 30.2 14 30.3
14 26.7 3.4 5.4 30.1 32.1
13 38.4 -0.3 1.6 13 38.1 13 40.0
13 42.9 -5.4 0.4 37.5 43.3
13 38.7 0.6 1.4 39.3 40.1
13 32.9 2.8 5.7 35.7 38.6
13 45.0 -5.8 -4.4 39.2 40.6
13 44,7 -5.5 -3.4 39.2 40.0
14 3.6 -3.5 -2.7 14 0.1 14 0.9
13 40.1 1.0 2.1 13 41.1 13 42.2
13 39.3 4.4 5.0 43.7 44.3
13 42.0 1.7 4.4 43.7 46.4
13 37.5 4.1 4.7 41.6 42.2
13 52.5 1.4 1.3 13 53.9 13 53.8
13 49.7 3.1 3.8 52.8 53.5
114 1.1 -5.3 -5.2 55.8 55.9
13 52.9 0.9 1.9 13 53.8 13 54.8
14 9.5 -5.1 -2.9 55.4 57.
13 51.9 3.1 3.5 55.0 55.4
13 53.8 1.0 1.6 54.8 55.4
-87-
STAT
Table VU (contd,)
STAT
location and
its longitude
from Tomsk
Mean Tomsk
time
4Variable ob
servations)
1900
27. Jun
Yurty Wilesh-
kiny (3TO E) 29
It
7h52ma.
8 Oa.
33
41
54
58
95
14
20
26
32
49
54
10 11
20
27
37
44
11 32
40
47
58 a.
12 10 E..
15
46
54
1 4
17
26
37
48
55
20
10
17
30
41
46
55
3 23 P.
3 44 p.
Ozernaya R.
mouth (11T2 E) 3 Aug 7 47 a..
Glavnyy Stan
(1419 E)
Polomoshnaya
(0T1 E)
14.
6
It
tl
' 9 23 a.
5 15 p.
8 25 a.
9 52 a..
1901
12 Jun 8h350a?
0 23
2 25 p,
Mean
local
time
7h46ma
7 54 a;
827
35
48
52
8 59
98
14
20
26
43
48
10 5
14
21
31
38
11 26
34
41
52
12 4
' 9
'40
48
12 58
1 11
20
31
42
49
1 54
2k
11
24
,35
40
49
a.
X upper
minus
X lover
II 271
,
?431773"i
27.0 -16'
25.6
27.3327.1
26.9)
27,127,2
27.ai
27.4
27.)127.1
,27.0
127.1. 27:2
27.4
27.0
-88-
CammetiamsYear3ymehavabe
Observedtothe3me4r of inclination
declina-meanaccord-according to
tion ing to
vets.- Yeka-
ruilisttizdallrkutsk terinb
136588 -3:1
58.9 -3.4
59.14.53889.: 680-1-441442
...664
;54749 :3 I:4449
5..80
58.7 -4.4
58.3 -4.5
58.0
58.2
57.3
.57.2
56.9
56.5
56.1
53.9
53.3
53.2
?53.o
52.5
52.6
51.6
51.2
51.0
51.1
50.7
50.3
50.6
50.3
50,6
51.0
51.2
51.0
51.3
51.5
51.01 4.8
-3.8
-3.6
-3.0
-2.7
-2.3
-1.9
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.7
1.0
1.2
2.4
2.7
3.1
3.4
3.7
3.9
4.2
4.4
4.6
4.7
4.7
4.9
4.8
4.8
12 5):).6 4.7
12 52.1 4.1
3 27.2 0.6
0.3 28.1 -2.4
2 36.1 1.2
12 42.8 -2.5
12 40,6 0.1
lii 44.8 -2.5
:11 40.3 2.2
11 36.3 4.5
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
-319 3'55:7
-3.9 j 55.5
-3.8
-3.7
-3.4
-3.3
-3.2
-3.0
-2.9
-2.6
-2.5
-2.1
-1.9
-1.4
-1.2
-0.8
-0.5
-0.2
0.9
1.2
1.4
2.0
2.5
2.8
3.7
3.8
4.3
4.9
5.4
5.4
5.9
5.8
5.7
5.5
5.4
5.2
14,9
4.8
4.8
3.8
3.6
4.2
3.8
0,8
-1.1
-3.2
3.1
3.4
55.2
54.6
54.2
514.0
53.0
52.9
53.5
54.3
53.8
54.2
54.6
54.3
54.5
54.6
54.6
54.5
54.1
53.5
53.6
53,.7
53.5
53.8
54.0
53.9
54.1
54.5
54.4
54.2
54.8
54.7
55.2
55.7
55.9
55.9
,56.1
56;3
55.8
13?549
55.0
55.6
55.3
55.4
55.3
54.7
54.9
55.4
56.1
55:8
55.9
56.3
55.9
56.o
56.1
56.0
55.9
54.8
54.5
54.6
55.0
55.0
55.4
55.3
55.0
55.3
56.0
56.1
55.7
56.5
56.1
56.3
56.5
56.6
56.2
56.2
56.3
55.8
2 55.3 12 54.4
56.21 -55.7
13 27.8 13 23.0
25.7; 24.3
12 37.3112 36.9
40.3 38.8
40.7 39.5
11 42.3
u 41.6
42.5 43.4
42.8 41.7
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ? 50-Yr 2014/05/08: CIA-RDP81-01043R004700170004-4
Table VII C contd. )
Location and its
longitude from
Toisk
Mean Tomsk
time
?1,611.1M.IMilMOIN
X upper
minus
X lover
Correctials
Observed to the ytai.tt
declina- mean accord-
tion ! Ing to
Irleltskt
I terira
Yearly mean value
of inclination
according to
Irkutsk
Yeka-
terinb.
gash (4T5 W)
Chik (10TO W)
Kargat (186 W)
Kozhurla (23T7 W)
Tebis (29T9 W)
Tatarskaya (36TO W )
Kormilovka (43r:14 1.1)
1901
13 Jup.
14 *
17
18
19
20"
21 "
I
22 "
23 "
24 "
25
11
26"
it
27
it
ci
6h390p,
11 6 a.
528
8 39
8 26
11.2
5 32
11 48
8 44
7 53
9 55
2 55
276'
:77...3512713
p. 27.2j
27.3 27.2
a. 26?5326 6
26.8 ?
a. 27.4/
27.2 27.3
11"400 1.5
11 44.8 0.5
11 43.4 1.8
11 47.2 -2.9
11 55.1 -3.1
27.8
P. . 27.3
27.21:: 1 111 9
p 1141r
14.6ii
a. 2706__ ,
27.6 ?
P. 26.8 12 33.6
26.8
4. 27.0 12 37.0
27.
a. 27.3 12 33.8
P.
27?6 n,"7 -7
12 28.0
, 27.1 27.2 12 5.5
7 54 p. 27.3
10 18 a. . 26J27.0
27. 12 8.1
o 4 p. 26.4 12 4.3
10 2 a. 27'3/27.4 12 48.5
27.
11 31 a. 27.6 12 46.o
5 5o p. 27?4 27 3 12 43.8
27. e
10 37 a. 26.127.o
27. 12 47.6
11 42 a. 27.4 12 5.5
5 35 P. 26-8126 8
6 47 P. g:79 12 4.2
12 6.5
10 21 a. :27.2
91
275 12 10.5
269--
10 36 a. .1el
27.3j.1 12 36.0
6 52 p. 27127.3 12 33.6
27.4
10 57 a. :}27.6 I 12 36.6
280
2 59 p. 27127 5
,27.5
27.1127
26.9
27.3127.1
27.0)
27.3127.3
27.2j
27.7
26.7126.9
26.8
a. 27.0
mar 'yarovica (49T,11311) 29 Jai 5 58 p.
(54T7 w)
30 " 1111.14.
6 20
1 Jul 659
11
11
2
11
10 7
.11 29
a.
P.
P.
a.
89
12 30.5
12 3.2
12 4,8
'p 6.7
12 28.2
12 33.1
12 30.4
2.7
0.9
1.7
0.7
-6.1
-3.8
6.0
0.3
-3.6
1.0
-1.6
1.6
2.3
-2.0
0.2
1.8
-0.7
-3.7
-3.6
0.6
-1.4
3.5
-0.7
1.6
-3.1+
-4.01
5.5
3.8
1.8
1.0
-3.6
-2.6
4.5
2.2
-1.3
1.5
-1.9
-1.0
2.3
-0.6
0.4
3.3
2.1
11.11.3.!,5
45.3
-2.9
45.2
44.3
11 52.0
50.4
48.8
51.0
12 34.3
30.9
30.0
34.0
12 5.8
4.5
5.3
12 46.9
47.6
46.1
45.6
12 5.7
6.0
5.8
6.8
-1.5
4.8 5.5
2.7 3,1
0.2 1 1.3
1.2 1 1.3
0.3
-6.6 '-3.0
-2.6 -0.8
35.2
35.3
12 5.Q
7?9
12 28.5
26.5
1 27.8
1r4315
44.1
45.0-
43.8
11 51.1
52.2
51.7
51.1
12 34.6
33.4
31.2
32.5
12 7.7
6.8
5.8
12 46.6
45.0
46.1
47.0
12 '5.9
7.5
8.6
7.6
12 34.0
35.0
35.1 1
36.0
1? 6.3
6.11
8,0
12 27.9
30.1
29.6
STAT
Table VII (cont.)
Location and its
longitude from
Tomsk
Mean Tomsk
time
I
X upper Observed
minus declina-
X lover tion
STAT
Cizrections
to the yearly
mean accord-
ing toyeka_
Ir1QXt terinl'
Yearly mean value
of inclination
according to
Irkutsk Yeka-
terinb.
Petropavlovsk
(1h3T1 V)
Makushino (11110%
Kargan (1h185 W)
1901
3 Jun
et II
It
14.
5
6
it
It
11
11
0h28mp. 271:i,27!2
27.
27.6/27.4
27.2)
27.3/27.2
27.0j
27.0;27.5
27.7j
27.2
26.6
27.427.0
27.0)
26.9
27.027.2
27.)
27-3327.2
27.1j
27.027.0
27.]j
7 24 p.
8 31 p.
11 29 a,
0 1 p.
11 5 a.
5 21 P.
6 45 p.
10 44 a.
6 4p.
9 9
Shumikha (1h267 W 10 " 9 3: ap: 2277:T277::
4
27.5j
8 p.
11 o :
27.8 p.
12 " 7 56 p. 27?52p7.3
27.
13 o 2 p. 26.927.0
If II
36 39 p
42 ae,
,
10 lb a, 27??.Z27.1
21.3S
n