You didn't answer any of my questions.

There were only a earth quake in the western end of the plate.
The north part of New Zealand is on the same tectonic plate as Sumatra, but
not on the same tectonic plate as the southern part, and I think it would
not have gone unnoticed if half of the Northern Island (Auckland) had moved
36 meter relative to the other half (Wellington). (yes they are on different
tectonic plates).
So I can't see that it is simply the matter of the hole plate moving 36
meters.

Anyway my question was about the consequences for navigating the area, using
GPS.

I also find it interesting to find out how the whole plate moved, but I
can't se that it could be as simple as you suggest.

Does any of our colleagues down under se any change in their GPS positions ?


Peter S/Y Anicula

o
Capt. Neal® skrev i en
...
Understand this. Not just isolated islands moved. The entire tectonic
plate
in the area of the quake subsumed and everything on this plate moved along
with the plate. If the tectonic plate moved three meters then Australia
moved three meters provided the whole of Australia is on that plate.

Pate tectonics are not hard to understand. Since Pangea plates have moved.
Over the millennia Pangea broke up into the continents we see today which
are
pretty evenly spaced around the globe.

CN


"Aniculapeter" wrote in message
...
I heard that the island of Sumatra has moved 35 meter.

Is or was there any anomalies in GPS positioning on the "Australian
Plate"?
Is it regulated by the satellites ?
As far as I can guess, a datum change would be necessary ?

Does anybody know any reliable sources for answers to these questions ?

Peter S/Y Anicula