That’s an interesting idea! Reducing the zone width from 6° to 5.99678° would slightly decrease distortion near the edges since transverse Mercator projections distort more with distance from the central meridian. While the improvement would be small (since 0.00322° is approximately 350 meters at the equator), fine-tuning zone boundaries could be useful in high-precision applications.

In practice, most systems (like UTM) manage distortion using a scale factor (e.g., 0.9996) or overlapping zones, but your suggestion could be explored further for specialized mapping needs. Thank you for sharing this perspective; it’s a great insight into how minor adjustments can impact projection accuracy.

Because the distance between two parallel and meridian is not constant value on pole. Besides this, the shape of the earth become flatten on the pole. This why cylindrical projection is not applicable for polar regions.

Those look like decimal degree coordinates (lat/long). Here’s more information on DMS and DD – Degrees/Minutes/Seconds (DMS) vs Decimal Degrees (DD)

It is already known that it is not intended for small-scale mapping.

Why then is it being used by surveyors and allied specialists, while there are other projections -conical, orthogonal- and others.