Latest Contributions by RobertReyes

I also prefer the editing method; however, I have tables with hundreds of rows that contain start points, line distance, and line bearing and was looking for an automatic way to draw those lines. I used ModelBuilder, and the only geoprocessing tool I could find to generate lines was the bearing distance to line tool; as far as I know, there is no geoprocessing tool that can generate lines in a planar geometry. If there is a geoprocessing tool that does generate planar data, please let me know. BTW, when ESRI says that both solutions are “accurate,” they may be technically correct, but if I use both methods in a project and the end points for those lines fall in different locations, then they cannot both be “correct” relative to ground truth, each other, or the other data in the project. ... View more

That is great, Kathy! My ESRI case number was 02153535. ... View more

Thanks, Kathy. It does seem incredulous to me too, that the angles diverged so widely from one another. I was working with distances of less than 300 feet and the lines still differed noticeably. ... View more

Until ESRI programmers fix the "problem," though, it doesn't seem like it's a good practice to mix lines drawn with the different tools. ... View more

Thank you, Dan. I used exactly the same parameters for each method and I agree that the angles appear to be more of a problem than the distances. I will give tech support a try. ... View more

Dan, I'm not sure what you meant when you suggested doing the "maths." However, I dropped all decimals, then again ran the "bearing distance to line" tool and compared the results with a line created using the editor. I drew "L-shaped" lines using the same input for both tools: Line 1 was an azimuth of 312 degrees for a distance of 150 ft followed by an azimuth of 42 degrees for 50 feet; Line 2 was on an azimuth of 312 degrees for a distance of 200 ft followed by an azimuth of 42 degrees for 80 feet. I used the same coordinate system (NAD 1983 StatePlane Virginia North FIPS 4501 Feet) for both feature classes, but the results were again different (see attached graphic), with a difference of 3.14 feet on the longest line and 2.31 feet on the shorter line. I did not use any decimals, so it can't be a rounding error. This is very frustrating to me because I don't know why they wouldn't be the same, nor do I know which output to trust. ... View more

I did follow your suggestion and used the "Bearing Distance to Line" from the data management toolbox, and that line drew the same as the one derived from the model. I'm still trying to figure out why the "sketch" method is different and which one is more accurate. I assume from your suggestion that you think the one from the data management toolbox is more accurate; my concern was whether it was rounding the azimuth value (which has four decimal points) before applying it, while the "sketchy" method was not. Thanks. ... View more

Thank you, Dan. Sorry that I wasn't more clear. When I said "manual" I meant using edit to create a new line feature, right-clicking as it is being drawn, selecting the direction/distance function, and then inputting the bearing in the "Horizontal/NAz" field, and the distance in the "Distance/ftUS" field. I left the "Pitch/dd" set at it's default value of 0. ... View more