Javad in 25 Minutes

More like 100 MB and I had to drop out around halfway.

The interference monitoring sounds like a great feature, the only problem is I think he is the only one who understands how to use it. 🙂

I didn't get to hear the end, hopefully the interference monitoring is mostly automatic?

They said it was being recorded and a link to will be sent to everyone who registered. I would guess it would be posted on the Javad website as well.

I was glad to hear the Triumph-1 is being upgraded to the new 800+ channel chip.

The photogrammetry features in the LS are being delayed. That was the main reason I would have considered the all in one receiver/controller in the first place. It made sense to be able to record an accurate location of the camera taking pictures. Other than that it is much more practical to have them separate.

I didn't like to hear that the LS would not work with external controllers. So much for a seamless transition between GNSS receiver and total station. You can download a point file and transfer it over, but I don't know if you can do that directly to another controller though Bluetooth or something, or if you have to go through a PC/laptop.

They spent a lot of time demonstrating things that seem interesting, but I don't know how often I would actually use. Icing on the cake kind of stuff, but I'd like to know about the cake too. I'd like to see how it does the basic things I do everyday, especially when I am being asked to replace my current software. I need to be reassured. I think it would be a good idea for them to demonstrate their FieldCAD software on some YouTube videos. The slideshow format didn't give you much of a feel. Maybe we'll get some from the US surveyor beta-testers. It would be nice to see this stuff out in the field. I was going to sign up but without any warning the door closed on me!

I actually don't like separate controllers/approaches, but if Javad can build in enough benefit I could go for it. For example, I don't think you get the interference monitoring capabilities without one of his controllers.

Also I think you'll need the VictorLS to run the Triumph 2. I am also glad to hear that the Triumph 1 is getting the upgrade. But that's exactly the kind of marketing silliness I expected. He should have "re-introduced" the Triumph 1 in the smaller form-factor with the less capable chip, and called the upgraded version the Triumph-2 with the Triumph 2 chip. Just makes the most sense to me.

Also, and I hate to say this, but as smart as he is I think it would help his corporate image if he didn't appear in public much at all. He has sort of a Dr. Evil vibe. 😛

"One Million Channels" *pinky at mouth

I was kind of shocked that my question about workflow for post-processing RTK vectors seemed to stump everyone there, at least at first. My reference to TBC was met with "What's TBC?"

In any case, it's still not clear to me how to go about that, but maybe the help files will cover it.

Triumph 2 L5

One thing that I feel is lacking for the Triumph LS & Triumph 2 Base/Rover is L5 tracking for the Triumph 2. I would like to have L5 available for canopy environments. It doesn't make much sense to offer the Triumph LS that supports L5 with a base station that doesn't. I had asked a question about this but they didn't get to it.

I know Javad said the Triumph 2 doesn't track L5 to keep cost down but I would think that L5 tracking should be just a software option that they could offer for an additional fee.

Triumph 2 L5

It keeps his cost down in a round-about way. When it's available you'll want to buy a replacement 😉

According to his sales rep (I know, I know) L2C affords roughly half of the benefit of L5. If this bears out to be true that's a good deal for the receiver.

My question is if you see the benefit of 864 channels if it's not at base and rover? I can see the possibility of the magic all happening at the rover end.

Triumph 2 L5

I wondered about that too. I am signed for the 2 week Triumph LS trial. I was thinking about asking them if I can get it with one of the new Triumph 1's for the base station.

Triumph 2 L5

Not knocking the Triumph-1, but I think Javad's point was that a local RTK base station doesn't need L5. As long as you put your base out in the open -- who's going to set up a base under canopy? -- the L1 solution derived from a local base is going be as solid as it gets, so the finesse derived from L5 isn't going to contribute much to the solution.

Triumph 2 L5

Yes of course the base station will get set up in the open but the problem is when using the rover under canopy. The Triumph LS can't make use L5 signal if it is not receiving L5 corrections from the base station. I had previously confirmed this from a Javad sales rep.

Jim,
I apologize for not really understanding the depth of your question. It made sense as I rolled it around in my mind more. As I mentioned, according to Javad, et al, the latest version of jps2rinex will convert the triumph 2 files from jps format to rinex. I didn't respond to your vector question but to give some additional information, I have advocated for storage of RTK vectors. I will mention it again. Is there particular data and formatting they should implement?

Triumph 2 L5

Just a thought. The new triumph 1 will receive L5 so if it's important to use L5 this may be an option as well as omega and triumph nt.

> I have advocated for storage of RTK vectors. I will mention it again. Is there particular data and formatting they should implement?

My RTK experience is limited in general, and is further limited to the Trimble family of hardware and software. Below is an excerpt from a Trimble document:

"QUALITY CONTROL RECORDS

"Even though measured points have built in quality control set through the observation parameters (horizontal and vertical precision specifications), the quality control records QC1, QC2, and QC3 are also available to document various position qualities as follows:

"QC1 logs the minimum number of satellites used in the observation, the PDOP/HDOP/VDOP values, the total number of measurements, and the beginning and ending time of the observation. This record is required.

"QC2 records the covariance matrix so the RTK vectors may be used in TBC network adjustments.

"QC3 stores standard error and error ellipse values as well as unit variance."

The reason I specifically asked about workflow is that using Trimble hardware and software has meant that the data goes from the data collector to the processing software (TBC) and gets incorporated without me seeing the intermediate translations. I'm not certain how to make that happen when going from Javad hardware to Trimble software, though I'm sure it's possible and desirable.

I'm hopeful that you guys can get this figured out!

I've had conversations with some of the software engineers directly who are also geodesists. We discussed what to do with redundant positions (whether repeat vectors or networked positions). They suggested storing the variance covariance matrix in the database offering a least squares approach in the field. I don't expect all of that in the first release but I'll find out.

> "QC2 records the covariance matrix so the RTK vectors may be used in TBC network adjustments.

I approach the whole problem from the standpoint of how to get the vectors into some third-party survey adjustment software such as Star*Net. It's just so much more permanent and practical to be able to keep projects alive outside of some manufacturer's evaporating software.

Being able to download RTK vectors in a variety of formats, including Star*Net's covariance weighted format, would make me reconsider my plans for a next purchase. Naturally, the typical RTK user who just wants coordinates at the press of a button, won't care.