State of the Drones 2017

When I went into business my selling point was I could have the work completed and in the client's hands in days, even for topos, because I was willing to work hard trudging back and forth taking shots. That put what would have been the photogrammetry fee in my pocket, and saved the clients weeks sometimes. But, oh, was it wearying and boring, back and forth. Now it is time for the next generation - drones.

If I were not nearing retirement I'd certainly buy something like the Leica drone airplane I saw demonstrated. Pretty amazing and it could save days on a large topo survey. Very high tech, and equally pricey. It is going to give someone a jump on the competition.

Bow Tie Surveyor, post: 415762, member: 6939 wrote: Right now I'm thinking it may just be another tool in the survey tool box, maybe give some short term wow factor with marketing presentations

That's how I see it. A necessary tool.

The thing is - the drone is simply a measurement tool carrier - a moveable tripod that can't really carry much weight (unless you spend a lot of money) - the real innovation is in the sensors and the software.

Additionally, currently you can't rely on drone based sensors for topo work where there are high winds, dense vegetation, airspace restrictions, snowcover, crazy people with shotguns, etc. So I don't think the drone only option is going to be a viable business model for surveying for quite some time - you have to be able to augment the aerial acquired measurements with ground based survey on many (maybe most) jobs.

I found it interesting when he commented on Trimble pulling out of the drone market surmising that there wasn't lot of money to be made there.

I also found it funny when he was talking about people buying a drone and thinking that they can just go out and map anything. "Excuse me are you a licensed surveyor? No, I'm just a chucklehead with a thousand dollar drone. ":laughing:

Bow Tie Surveyor, post: 415794, member: 6939 wrote: I found it interesting when he commented on Trimble pulling out of the drone market surmising that there wasn't lot of money to be made there.

I also found it funny when he was talking about people buying a drone and thinking that they can just go out and map anything. "Excuse me are you a licensed surveyor (or engineer depending on the State)? No, I'm just a chucklehead with a thousand dollar drone. ":laughing:

Fixed it for you ;):)

I do some volume checking for a local farmer who happens to also own some property with a large rock quarry on it. He gets paid royalty on whatever limestone comes out of the pit on his property. The company that owns the quarry has aerial photography done at the end of every year, and they provide me the surfaces so I can verify the numbers they come up with. Over the course of the past 12 or so years they have used various aerial firms and engineering companies, with varied results. Some wouldn't get all the breaklines in and you might see a high wall show up on a 1:1 slope. I set the control at the site before there was ever a quarry there, but they have used their own people lately. First of this year the farmer called and said they were changing aerial firms again and he wanted me to meet them to be sure they could provide what I would need for verification. When I got there they took me into the meeting room and brought out a slick looking drone and said they were signed up with some firm in California who provided the drone (which they said was actually made with a 3D printer)), and would program the drone for the correct flight lines each time, and then would provide the maps and volumes. They showed me a map they had done with contours and elevations, and a stitched together photo projected up on the big screen. After watching all that, I asked what kind of control they were using to tie into the previous mapping. "We don't need any control, every time it's mapped all the elevations are relative to each other".

Hmmm, how are you going to tie it to last year's photography? "We don't need to"

Oh yes you do. Finally got them to understand that they needed to send last years data to California to make sure they were comparing apples to apples.

Didn't hear any more from them until a few days ago. I guess maybe California got their drone back, as the new mapping was done by a local guy with a drone that has been doing this for awhile, and he had gotten the control that was used last year to tie into.

Maybe what they were doing would get them some reasonable numbers for stockpiles, but not a yearly pit inventory.

I've had my hands on a few drone surveys recently. They are a great tool. However, one must always know how that tool works and what data can be reliably used from that tool.

We will sometimes use a drone flight to provide orthophotos of the site. These are great to have. Since they are georeferenced from our ground control, when I drop them in to CAD, they land right where the topography shots are and I have a nice underlaid photo that supplements my topography. It is great. And I've even used the point cloud that comes along with the report to fill in a few sparse areas of ground shots (dirt, not pavement or concrete) where the crew maybe didn't get enough to my liking. And so far, this information has matched in with the stuff actually shot with the instrument within a satisfactory margin of error.

So overall, I think that drones are a great tool, and with the right implementation, they can be a solid addition to the services that a surveyor provides. But, as with everything, in the wrong hands, they're just another expensive playtoy for rich chuckleheads.

One thing I think is everyone desperately wants to justify buying a drone from the layman to surveyors to vendors pushing them.

Just read the article ( I think it was POB January issue?) about mapping hurricane damage, NOTHING in that article to me dictated a drone was the best or only tool, it seems all the author did was some aerial mapping the same as has been done for years, the site may of been borderline for size with a drone/full size aircraft, point is I think drones are being put out there as the savior when really all they are is a miniature version of what has been available for years.

At current capabilities and costs, the breakeven for when it is more advantageous to use a manned aircraft is really quite small project size wise and therefore I think a lot of drone projects are being flown where it isn't the right tool, BUT it is cool...

SHG

Shelby H. Griggs PLS, post: 416091, member: 335 wrote: One thing I think is everyone desperately wants to justify buying a drone from the layman to surveyors to vendors pushing them.

Just read the article ( I think it was POB January issue?) about mapping hurricane damage, NOTHING in that article to me dictated a drone was the best or only tool, it seems all the author did was some aerial mapping the same as has been done for years, the site may of been borderline for size with a drone/full size aircraft, point is I think drones are being put out there as the savior when really all they are is a miniature version of what has been available for years.

At current capabilities and costs, the breakeven for when it is more advantageous to use a manned aircraft is really quite small project size wise and therefore I think a lot of drone projects are being flown where it isn't the right tool, BUT it is cool...

SHG

I opine you are correct, but let let me spin it a different way, as GIS developed surveyors had similar takes (we are a stubborn bunch and I'd put myself on the top of that list), we have been axed out of that market, we really, as surveyors need to own the done mapping industry, who better than us to determine if it is the right tool for the job or not. I've already seen people investing in drones, software and offering product. If the control is set by a surveyor and the residuals are reviewed by a surveyor I cant necessarily say they are "practicing" land surveying, no different than setting control for a machine guidance construction project. Thoughts.

BK9196, post: 419025, member: 12217 wrote: I opine you are correct, but let let me spin it a different way, as GIS developed surveyors had similar takes (we are a stubborn bunch and I'd put myself on the top of that list), we have been axed out of that market, we really, as surveyors need to own the done mapping industry, who better than us to determine if it is the right tool for the job or not. I've already seen people investing in drones, software and offering product. If the control is set by a surveyor and the residuals are reviewed by a surveyor I cant necessarily say they are "practicing" land surveying, no different than setting control for a machine guidance construction project. Thoughts.

I can more or less agree with that, however, I guess as an owner/employee of a full on aerial mapping company, I might have a different perspective and that is using a drone is just a smaller version of what we do everyday, it really isn't a new technology (still photogrammetry) it is just the current hot buzz word. NOT every project folks are trying to use drones on are necessarily using the right project for the drone tool. When the time is right, I am sure we will add one to the tool box (should be easy to get a 107, two licensed pilots on staff), the thing is, as a long time aerial mapping company, we just aren't seeing customers banging on the door saying we want you to use a drone, they don't care, they just want a mapping product and if we can cost effectively do that with manned aircraft, we will. Are there projects a drone might be better suited for, sure, but they sure aren't any large area or maybe even fairly small projects. Bridge inspections, wind turbine inspections, powerline SPECIFIC pole inspections, repetitive stockpile volumes, very small topo sites, etc. Mapping large amounts of acres, certainly over a 1/2 section and probably quite a bit less is more cost effective in almost all instances with a manned aircraft rather than a drone, BUT if you have one, the tendency is to force a square peg in round hole.

SHG

BK9196, post: 419025, member: 12217 wrote: I opine you are correct, but let let me spin it a different way, as GIS developed surveyors had similar takes (we are a stubborn bunch and I'd put myself on the top of that list), we have been axed out of that market, we really, as surveyors need to own the done mapping industry, who better than us to determine if it is the right tool for the job or not. I've already seen people investing in drones, software and offering product. If the control is set by a surveyor and the residuals are reviewed by a surveyor I cant necessarily say they are "practicing" land surveying, no different than setting control for a machine guidance construction project. Thoughts.

" If the control is set by a surveyor and the residuals are reviewed by a surveyor I cant necessarily say they are "practicing" land surveying, no different than setting control for a machine guidance construction project."

Both of those tasks qualify as"land surveying" in my State and must be performed under the direct supervision of a Licensed Land Surveyor. Not so there...?

We went ahead and got a drone not long ago, and while I am struggling with getting the software to cooperate giving us the topo kinds of details I was hoping for, Just having a good image to place under the topo shots my crew took while in the field has already proved to be worth the investment. I didn't have to have the images corrected to ground control points, or other stuff, to see I needed to connect certain powerlines a certain way, and that driveways ran the ways they did, saving me having to ask the crews that stuff when they came back in, or to try to read their sketches that were messed up in the Texas Wind. If I can get the silly thing to show contours, I'll consider myself ahead of the game.

Monte, post: 419361, member: 11913 wrote: We went ahead and got a drone not long ago, and while I am struggling with getting the software to cooperate giving us the topo kinds of details I was hoping for, Just having a good image to place under the topo shots my crew took while in the field has already proved to be worth the investment. I didn't have to have the images corrected to ground control points, or other stuff, to see I needed to connect certain powerlines a certain way, and that driveways ran the ways they did, saving me having to ask the crews that stuff when they came back in, or to try to read their sketches that were messed up in the Texas Wind. If I can get the silly thing to show contours, I'll consider myself ahead of the game.

And that is a very good use!

SHG

http://www.cbc.ca/news/kananaskis-ridge-3d-model-1.4030126

Jim in AZ, post: 419355, member: 249 wrote: " If the control is set by a surveyor and the residuals are reviewed by a surveyor I cant necessarily say they are "practicing" land surveying, no different than setting control for a machine guidance construction project."

Both of those tasks qualify as"land surveying" in my State and must be performed under the direct supervision of a Licensed Land Surveyor. Not so there...?

Its the same laws here Jim, insert the word drone technician here "I cant necessarily say they are "practicing" land surveying, no different than setting control for a machine guidance construction project."

I meant to make a distinction between the surveyor and drone operator but in re-reading, clearly failed.

Shelby H. Griggs PLS, post: 419328, member: 335 wrote: I can more or less agree with that, however, I guess as an owner/employee of a full on aerial mapping company, I might have a different perspective and that is using a drone is just a smaller version of what we do everyday, it really isn't a new technology (still photogrammetry) it is just the current hot buzz word. NOT every project folks are trying to use drones on are necessarily using the right project for the drone tool. When the time is right, I am sure we will add one to the tool box (should be easy to get a 107, two licensed pilots on staff), the thing is, as a long time aerial mapping company, we just aren't seeing customers banging on the door saying we want you to use a drone, they don't care, they just want a mapping product and if we can cost effectively do that with manned aircraft, we will. Are there projects a drone might be better suited for, sure, but they sure aren't any large area or maybe even fairly small projects. Bridge inspections, wind turbine inspections, powerline SPECIFIC pole inspections, repetitive stockpile volumes, very small topo sites, etc. Mapping large amounts of acres, certainly over a 1/2 section and probably quite a bit less is more cost effective in almost all instances with a manned aircraft rather than a drone, BUT if you have one, the tendency is to force a square peg in round hole.

SHG

You sir are far more well articulated than myself and presented the argument better than I ever could have, in my naivety I neglected that first and foremost an experienced photogrammetrist would be best suited to determine the best use of the tech.

I've been toying around with the idea of using a drone just to get orthophotos to add as another layer of data that could be provided. Don't know if I could make any money from it, but it would be cool. The drone itself sounds cheap enough but the software looks like more of investment in both time and money. Is there a relatively easy and cheap way to make orthophotos from drone imagery?

Pix4D is pretty easy to use and cheap is a relative term. Is $350/mo or $3,500/yr cheap for orthophotos? I think so.

Bow Tie Surveyor, post: 415794, member: 6939 wrote: I found it interesting when he commented on Trimble pulling out of the drone market surmising that there wasn't lot of money to be made there.

That may have played into it but the real reason Trimble pulled out of the UAS HARDWARE market was that they aren't agile enough to keep up with the rapidly developing technology and so decided to focus on software. At least that's what I was told.

Trimble has partnered with Microdrones, who make some of the best rotary hardware out there, and Delair-Tech, who purchased Gatewing from Trimble and also has two other long range fixed wing products. Supposedly the goal moving forward is to develop a single software package that can mission plan and operate all of these platforms. Trimble has also made their Inpho UAS Master software part of the TBC Photogrammetry license, which I'm assuming is a stopgap measure while they integrate the tools from UAS Master into TBC.

What I'm seeing right now is that Pix4D creates a far superior set of deliverables over TBC and/or UAS Master.

[MEDIA=youtube]eYsDcoS5Gt8[/MEDIA]