Does anyone have any EXPERIENCE in how these two systems compare under tree canopy?
Also, does Carlson/BRx7 have anything live JAVAD's RTPK system?
I don't have personal experience running a BRX7 but I have received field data from some surveyors using them for boundary & site topo work as my responsibility was just the design/permitting portion. But these guys had excellent repeatability under heavy canopy (mainly longleaf pines) here in my part of the world. Personally I was astonished with the results, seeing as they were running off of NC's VRS network but getting multiple observations over various days and these shots being within 0.05' or so usually on the horizontal. The vertical was pretty impressive too against conventional topo. But again, I wasn't running any QA/QC on the data but rather just noting the points coordinates laying right on top of each other
?ÿ
Don't know much about Javad other than what people post here about their products. I rented a Trimble R12i recently (VRS network again) & was pretty impressed, even under comparable pine canopy. Took a while to get a RTK fix sometimes and I think mission planning had a lot to do with this but it was impressive to say the least. GPS is really advancing these days it seems. I can remember running older Topcon Hiper Lite + units back in the day when using them to grade retention ponds & if we were even 50' from some mid sized trees we'd just have to give up & use a slope meter with a level & some rough slope staking?ÿ
I know this might not be what you want to hear, but I??d suggest: Make calls. Find somebody to shadow for a day or two with both. ?ÿI'm a Javad user. But call and get some experienced users to show you.?ÿ
You are at a big crossroads now, but you have not enough info to pick a road.?ÿ
N
does Carlson/BRx7 have anything live JAVAD's RTPK system?
Not yet. But they are working on it, Csrlson is working on a similar feature for RTK adjustment in the field. Stay tuned.
Planning on demo'ing the Javad soon (LS+/Triumph 3).?ÿ Got to thinking (uh-oh) that maybe I would want to compare it to something else?ÿ - or even a couple things.?ÿ Rave reviews about the Carlson.?ÿ Spoke with sales rep that didn't know anything about Javad's RTPK system or a real time static type Carlson service/routine.?ÿ
where did you here this??ÿ reliable source??ÿ time frame?
Yes, very reliable source. No word on time frame. What I understand is this is software solution, not hardware.?ÿ
I've demoed both. I went with the Hemisphere S631 (Carlson BRx7)... and before it is implied, I do not work for Hemisphere.
I was going to tag my JAVAD comments I made in another thread that Nate started, but it appears that thread was deleted. ?????ÿ
?ÿ
Did the Hemisphere work with Carlson data collector??ÿ Beware that where Carlson markets their receivers, they do not support hemisphere boards (which are found in more than one receiver).
@dmyhill?ÿ
I use FieldGenius on a Windows 10 Tablet. It was a short learning curve and I was never a big Carlson fan after running it 10 years or so. For me, the best combo would be SurveyPro or Magnet with my Hemispheres. Sadly, that will never happen.
I currently run a brx7 pair with Carlson SurvPC, and have used Javad LS rover with Triumph base in the past on a more limited basis. If you're just comparing ability to survey under canopy, Javad still has the edge over any receiver I've used or demo'd... but not by all that much anymore. For me the choice was over ease of software use with a classic data collection package (Carlson) vs Javad's clunky (but powerful) proprietary/ built in software. If you do all of your own work in the field, or if you've actually got someone bright enough that you'd trust to learn how to actually implement and use some of their more complicated abilities without pestering you all the time, by all means go with the Javad. The brx7 will get maybe 95%+ of what the Javad will do without having to rewrite the rule book. Also, if anyone's using Carlson SurvPC/ SurvCE, make sure to check out the GNSS analysis point averaging, it's really changed how I view GNSS data collection in general.
For me the choice was over ease of software use with a classic data collection package (Carlson) vs Javad's clunky (but powerful) proprietary/ built in software.
That's a huge thing.?ÿ The Carlson dc will run your TS as well. The Javad would have to vastly out-perform the BRX7 to overcome that.
But if you have a Javad you don't need a total station according to feedback from some users on here...
if you have a Javad you don't need a total station according to feedback from some users on here...
OH! Right. What was I thinking?
For the Javad system, I am curious about point description coding.?ÿ For example, if I pick up a curb and 18" gutter, it would code as: BOC H0.5 H0.5 V-0.5 H2.0 V-0.44?ÿ (and don't forget B-begin, BC-begin curve, EC-end curve, E-end, etc.).?ÿ ?ÿI haven't tried Javad yet, but I think not having a traditional keyboard could get cumbersome.
And I agree about a unified DC for GPS and total station.?ÿ I don't think GPS as it exists today will ever get rid of the need for a gun.?ÿ There will always be that one shot you can't get.
have used Javad LS rover with Triumph base
Did you use the Triumph-LS or the LS plus??ÿ Which Triumph base? 1, 1M, 2, or 3? There are significant differences.?ÿ I'm curious to hear from someone who has made a comparison.
For the Javad system, I am curious about point description coding.?ÿ For example, if I pick up a curb and 18" gutter, it would code as: BOC H0.5 H0.5 V-0.5 H2.0 V-0.44?ÿ (and don't forget B-begin, BC-begin curve, EC-end curve, E-end, etc.).?ÿ ?ÿI haven't tried Javad yet, but I think not having a traditional keyboard could get cumbersome.
The Javad point description coding is pretty customizable, and I have a feeling that no two users use it the same way.?ÿ You could set it up so that it's much more picking from a grid of "favorites" buttons than typing individual entries.?ÿ You can also set defaults, and it has the option of remembering the attributes from the last time you used a particular code.?ÿ I find it saves time, prevents blunders, and reminds me to record all the data that I'm supposed to record.
The bottom line is:
The proof is in the pudding.
I have NOT yet gotten an erroneous shot, when I have let the LS do it's thing. I have gotten a bad shot, when I overrode the VERIFICATION system.
There are times when I override it. Like, shooting shots of bldg roof corners. IF it is a 10x30 storage bldg. And, I take?ÿ fast shots, in the trees, I occasionally get a bad shot. But, I can immediately find it. Because it gives me a "Distance to Last Shot" on the collect screen. And, I have box taped the building. Such things as this.
I really don't have a COMPARISON, because I am in my own world. But, I like my little world.
Nate
It appears Javad is good for locating a few boundary points per hour. Not sure it works well for a few hundred topo shots per hour, then quickly going to TS for those shots the reciever can't get. And yes there are shots Javad will never get.
Also I'm not sure how efficient the Javad would be for construction layout of surfaces, roads, structures?ÿ etc.
?ÿ
?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿAs to the screen face being cumbersome, the Javad screen is by far the fastest thing besides a computer that I have entered any data on and of course there are customizable codings and descriptions.
?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ I had a discussion recently with another surveyor that has two Javad pairs running which he loves dearly and also has a Brx 7 I think, could be six.?ÿ The main surveying tool remains the Javad.?ÿ?ÿ
?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿWith the latest and greatest Javad (LS+ and T-3)?ÿ I get way more than a few boundary points per hour.?ÿ Even in rough country, it is unusual to spend more than 5 minutes to get several shots.?ÿ Back before the LS+ came out and I was using a standard LS, I took 3000 topo shots in a few hours on a four wheeler, driving over dozens of manholes that were shot with an S-6 and the shots checked.
?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ?ÿ