The recent article in Professional Surveyor noted that the cost of using an UAV
was about one fourth of using a regular plane with camera and GPS. On two
projects that I have seen, the cost was about one tenth if you leave out the GPS costs
on both types of data acquisition. If you wrote off the GPS to the boundary
survey, that cost would not factor in the aerial survey.
i was under the impression that photogrammetrists were using GPS in their
planes. They do, but my outside photogrammetrist said that one-foot
contours need ground control.
Using a UAV for commercial purposes in the States is illegal.. punishable by minimum fine of $10,000 (max $100k) and up to 10 years in prison. Wonder how they factor that into their costs? 😛
I think Trimble is selling a lot of empty promises right now.. it's going to get someone in trouble who isn't paying attention.
I would think that the client would buy the drone for his own non-commercial use.
Only a few qualified buyers would come to mind for Trimble's UAV. There are
several ways the land surveyor could enter the market -- ground control, flight
planning, feature analysis, and GIS for the people who have drones.
Some government agencies already have permits and need consulting --
they might need conventional surveying also.
I have never known land surveyors and civil engineers that were unimaginative.
One-foot contours need near-perfect VERTICAL control. Once two- and three-frequency GPS receivers are compact enough for a UAV ... maybe the RTK will be good 'enuf. The difficulty is finding an orientation to a level plane. Easier to do at higher altitudes with larger contour intervals; aircraft big enough for people can easily carry the high-precision multiple-frequency GPS receivers as well as the gyro-controlled mounts.
Thank you for the details, Dr. Cliff
A few random thoughts.
1 As pointed out you can't commerically fly this in USA at present.
2 Either UAV's need to be bigger OR sensors way smaller, right now pretty limited in payload.
3 We provide ground control at any scale of mapping, more critical for tighter vertical as was pointed out.
4 Government always seems to have money for toys but not contracting to private sector, if a goverment agency has money to obtain an UAV, in most cases they are going to do all the work in house. Many agencies have state of the art photogrammerty labs, they haven't as of yet been able to justify an aircraft, this in house capibilty is in spite of not really being able to justify the in house production. Once they have an UAV it will be 100% done in house. I can name a number of state and federal agencies right now that fir that mold.
5. Is there potential, yes, BUT not as much as the ads lead you to believe, at least not yet.
SHG
The AMA, or association of RC vehicles is trying to make the FAA set
a standard between remote control and UAV. I am a member of that
group because of insurance and liability.
A professor of surveying in the east, whose school has a CAA, thinks
we are falling way behind as far as technology.
Most of the people, that I have talked to, and are serious drone users,
have built their own. What is considered commercial and what is private,
I studied and got feedback and I am not sure. $10K fines will slow me
down quickly.
UAV users in the California real estate market are making megabucks.
Most take on projects only by referral. A few have said they will pay
the $10k fine. They find a partner. and return to the market.
You can do commercial work if you have a CAA permit. However,
the site must be reported. Any new site with the same permit has
to get a new permission for the new site -- not convenient for the
average land surveyor. If you are working with a CAA permittee,
everything is much easier. The FAA has given permits to land
surveyors.
Just like the GPS market 30 years ago, there are many dealers renting
drones and training new users. What the owner of the drone does
with his UAV is his business not the dealer or rental company.
I am retired from a photogrammetry company and I can tell you there aren't many of the large mapping companies who are too concerned about losing business to this new technology... Shelby explained it very well.
2X:
Have you ever heard of Woolpert and Surdex?
Sure thing, they are both well known aerial mapping companies. Surdex is located across the state in St Louis. Woolpert is a much larger and more diversified company.
They both have drones.
Woolpert wants you to think they have a drone, I can tell you they're not using it in production. It's just marketing for them.
Edit: Maybe it's better to keep my mouth shut.
You are probably correct. The University of Florida probably has the certificate of
authorization from the FAA. Woolpert somewhat owns the drone because they may
have given grant money to the U of F. It is a marketing ploy.
Yup...and they both have mapping scientists and what would be required to make these work if possible.... huge headstart on the surveying community. I don't dispute that maybe some maps will be made with these I just don't think it's much of an opportunity to compete with the big boys. Getting the imagery is just a part of the work, maybe the easiest. I may be wrong here.. It's just how I see it.
