google earth II

[protohistorian]

is this the correct one?

Following GM's guidance, I have selected this one, is this correct? Dave

[The Grave Maurice]

Yep, that's the one.

[protohistorian]

revised E. Smith path

While waiting for confirmation, I have assumed this plot correct and ran the path. The line is 614 feet long, at 2 mph it is covered in less than a minute. Dave

[protohistorian]

mortuaries and victims

The mortuaries are the green pins, the red circles are the victims. Dave P.S. as my convention, where the pin intersects the map is the place,

[protohistorian]

errs

Since it has been several pages since I have said it, if you see an error in one of my plots, please inform me. Otherwise I shall remain ignorant. Dave

[protohistorian]

It has occurred to me

On the torso plots I did not give the range. The line is 14.90 miles. Dave

[protohistorian]

revised method of syncing

I have changed my method of jiving map to ge. Here is the result. Image 1 with, image two, same field without the overlay. It almost made the GIS prof poop himself. Dave

[protohistorian]

map notes

While a great deal can be done in the scaling of maps, there are limitations. Bear in mind, these maps were made by hand, in a time when a chain was the preferred distance measuring method. There will never be a 1 to 1 correlation. This revised method is as good as it gets. The images on geII are designed to get a feel for the geography and get rough measurements of distance and time. This revised fitting method is well within the margin of error for the original map makers. instead of 100 percent being perfect, think 70 percent. I am now well above 70% but how far is irrelevant, there will be no more revisions on fitting. Dave

[protohistorian]

and the times, they are a changin'

dorset street, 1681 and dorset street 2010. Dave

[protohistorian]

P.C. Neil in 1802

What? It could happen! Dave

[protohistorian]

Neil in 1868

Who knew the man had a time machine? With a larger section of the 1868 map I could fix that alignment problem. Dave

[protohistorian]

map fitting 101

When fitting maps to GE it is always a matter of which points you reference. In this image you see an 1873 detail of George yard that does not seem quite right. Yet this detail was fitted to an 1894 overlay that is with 10's of feet (16) to be exact. When you compare the 1873 alignment with the modern one, it seems screwy, I assure you it is not. Dave

[protohistorian]

the old and the new

Overlay is mitre square 1873. Kickass building to the left is the gherkin. Dave

[protohistorian]

3 in 1

The brown smear is modern London, the white overlay is the 1888 postal sirectory map, and the red field is the killing field. Dave

[Septic Blue]

I owe you an apology!

I shelved your request for help, with some Police-Station plots, and forgot about it. In the process, I inadvertently misplaced the map that you included, in your e-mail.

Here's something that I compiled a few years ago.


Known Murder/Disposal-Sites: 'Whitechapel Murders' (Less 'Rose' Mylett) 1888-1891 (Click to Enlarge in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2010

It includes the following police stations:

- Bishopsgate Police Station, City of London Police Force, Sixth Division; Bishopsgate Street Without, Parish of St. Botolph without Bishopsgate, City of London *

- Commercial Street Police Station, Metropolitan Police Force, H Division; Commercial Street, Parish of St. Leonard Shoreditch / Liberty of Norton Folgate / Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields, County of Middlesex **

- Leman Street Police Station, Metropolitan Police Force, H Division; Leman Street, Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel, County of Middlesex

* You have thus far, plotted this station incorrectly.

** The Commercial Street Police Station straddled the boundaries of the three named parochial entities

---------

A database of Google Earth plots, relevant to the mystery of 'Jack the Ripper', is a very worthwhile endeavor; and the level of enthusiasm that you have exhibited for this project is indeed admirable.

But, I would strongly urge you to strive for improvement of the accuracy of your plots, as well as the quality of your presentation.

And, rather than asking for this plot -or- that plot, from other posters; you should be doing your best to locate all of the relevant landmarks yourself. That is the means, by which you will learn the 'lay of the land'.

I wish you the best of luck, with this most worthwhile endeavor!