I may have gotten the order of the standard parallels wrong in the attempt above:
"Albers Australian Conic (GDA2020)\p9473", 9, 1028, 7, 132, 0, -18, -36, 0, 0
and
"Albers Australian Conic (GDA2020) Bounded\p9473", 2009, 1028, 7, 132, 0, -18, -36, 0, 0, 112.85, -43.7, 153.69, -9.86
------------------------------
Peter Horsbøll Møller
Principal Presales Consultant | Distinguished Engineer
Precisely | Trust in Data
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 01-14-2026 04:02
From: Peter Møller
Subject: GDA2020 / Australian Albers EPSG:9473
I don't see why not.
I saw your idea on Precisely Ideas and added these comments to it:
*********************************
I had a look at the description of EPSG:9474 on EPSG.io.
It seems we can already describe this projection in MapInfo Pro like this:
"Albers Australian Conic (GDA2020)\p9473", 9, 1028, 7, 132, 0, -36, -18, 0, 0
or as the bounded projection:
"Albers Australian Conic (GDA2020) Bounded\p9473", 2009, 1028, 7, 132, 0, -36, -18, 0, 0, 112.85, -43.7, 153.69, -9.86
Would you be able to help verify if this looks and works correctly?
I have inserted an image below with a few coordinates in MGA2020 Zone 56 and Australian Albers GDA2020.
Also, would you prefer just to have the bounded version or both? It seems the EPSG 9473 refers to the bounded projection.
*********************************
I can't guarantee that we can get it into the localized builds of v23.2, but we can try.
------------------------------
Peter Horsbøll Møller
Principal Presales Consultant | Distinguished Engineer
Precisely | Trust in Data
Original Message:
Sent: 01-08-2026 18:58
From: Nick Lawrence
Subject: GDA2020 / Australian Albers EPSG:9473
Hello all,
GDA2020 / Australian Albers EPSG:9473
GDA2020 / Australian Albers - EPSG:9473
Please can this be included amongst the available CRS in MapInfo Pro
Thanks,
Nick
------------------------------
Nick Lawrence
Senior Spatial Science Officer
Department of Transport and Main Roads (QLD)
Brisbane QLD
------------------------------