Unless we are “fully” prepared, we cannot have good and timely response. And, to be fully prepared with good coordinates is in the hands of geodesists, surveyors, map or chart makers, and all others, who generate data. In turn, correct and accurate “Good Coordinates” and quick and timely advice will strengthen the hands of the country’s leaders, civil and/or military. If anything is lacking in good coordinates, “We” would be failing with no room for any excuse(s).

In case of natural disasters, viz., earthquake, tsunami, and hurricanes or typhoons or cyclones, we may still be in need of more research to provide “Best Coordinates”, but that should not be taken as an excuse for lack of preparedness. The “present” good coordinates (which we already have) are still better than no coordinates and thus to be caught unprepared.

In case of Geo-Spatial Information (GSI), we have no excuse for nopreparedness. Here, we have all the researches, techniques, and technologies to be ready and fully prepared. We have the necessary capabilities to produce correct and accurate geodetic positions, maps, and charts. But, if we search why we are not getting optimum benefits from the “Good Coordinates”, which are already there or can be easily generated, we will fi nd ourselves denying them. Here are a few reasons, which impact adversely on our preparedness and thereof on our response(s):
1. Taking no advantage from or ignoring the new research,
2. Holding on to old, outdated, and obsolete algorithms and products,
3. Not correcting and improving geodetic definitions of critically important products, even when pointed, clarified, and duly explained,
4. Not taking immediate action(s) to correct the LARGE mistakes and/or blunders,
5. Allowing tampering of database by unauthorized persons, where nobody knows who did that and when was it done,
6. Continuing to use “bad” and/ or outdated software,
7. Getting software written or existing ones, which require “special” knowledge or expertise, updated by “outsiders” who do not even have basic understanding,
8. Designing and/or managing special scientific projects by those, who believe in the old routines and follow them with no innovation,
9. Assigning highly scientific projects to those who do not have the necessary and sufficient theoretical knowledge (Note: They also do not make any effort to “consult”).

Now, I will list a few specific examples, which show how we are “hurting” our “Good Coordinates”:
1. Aeronautical charts produced lacking the datum and ellipsoid information and have TWO grids in one color. Surprisingly, one or both the grids might be wrong. These non-usable charts, without being corrected, are openly available for use.
2. A blunder of 1 km, even when correction had been generated, was still there in the main database after 2 years.
3. In 1982, during the development of a 2 million dollar instrument, which required a gravitation model, the formula used was taken from a book entitled “Electricity and Magnetism”, 1919.
4. There are no nuclear physics or cardiology book(s) for a common person. But, there is one entitled “Geodesy for Laymen”.
5. In a hardbound “prestigious” volume, the geoid is defined as a “surface on which the gravity is constant”.
6. To enter government jobs, a candidate, who has not studied even one course of geodesy, can get hired as a GEODESIST, keep getting promoted, and then start making decisions on highly complex geodetic issue(s).
7. It is then not surprising that one can find: (1) standard deviation computed with “n = 1”, (2) “reobservation” made 3-5 meters from an already surveyed station, and (3) ZEROS added or deleted “freely” from constants or computed results, and surveyed positions. 8. Users are provided and/or algorithms are developed with zero longitude and “eastings and northings” coordinates at the Poles. 9. During 1992, in an international marine symposium, an Indonesian author stated in the morning session that his country has 13,000 islands. Later in the afternoon, another one raised the number by 35% to 17,000. There were a few lively questions and remarks, but it seems that such a critical issue, which can extend or decrease a country’s boundary, is still not “defined”. 10. In case of New Orleans, there was a mix up in supply of leveling data for construction of levees for flood control.

Here, a cautionary note is that the problems are deeply embedded in our products and production procedures. Strangely enough, there is also very stiff resistance to accept that the old procedures and specifi cations have outlived their time and then agree for change and improvement. Entering the 21st century, “patch up” updates, revisions, and/or routine solutions will only postpone our having the correct and accurate “Good Coordinates”. The only “remedy” is complete and thorough update(s) using latest research, techniques, and technologies. Let us remember that for smart defense, we need today’s “Smart Coordinates”, which cannot be generated from old and outdated GSI.

During my entire professional life as surveyor, mapmaker, and geodesists in the pursuit of providing good coordinates, I have witnessed the above reasons and examples, which are prevalent in almost all the countries around the world. If we keep using “Outdated Coordinates”, how can we be prepared to provide a good response, as and when need arises.

We need “Good Coordinates” to be ready and prepared for a good and timely response. There is no shortcut to this!