There is a youtube video I watched on carlson survey rtk least squares and conventional. It was supposed to be more on least squares but was using that software. I have never used it but from watching it i would think it is right up there with tbc and starnet. Now another option is opus project’s management. It will take the gvx rtk data and you can do it through that. I have not tested it for rtk yet. It’s truly all about the field procedures. I am a spoke hub type of guy for gnss I usually almost always move my base and re tie everything again sometimes 3 times with a move of base depending on project requirements and time on job allowed. Here i don’t get many jobs i can rtk only so I usually have conventional ties as well and always try to get those tied to some rtk points as well to build a good network figure. We have a lot of trees. Now i will have the crews as they search for corners go ahead and ti the corners in th worst conditions. I will decide if they fit or not. To other conventional ties. What i have found is that with 24 sats and able to collect 180 epochs without loosing a fixed solution and at-least two observations with 4 hrs separation most of that rtk data proves to be good. When it drops fixed solution during the 180 epochs it’s suspicious and not as reliable. This all so far has been meeting alta specs 95% of the time . I have built some great confidence over time and have ran some very good traverses independently over time to prove this. Now this is with full Gnss equipment r10 and r12s. I have followed a Javad system and carlson brx7 and we all had a great agreement. The brx6 it was hit or miss. I developed my field procedures using a roughly 1 acre lot in middle of wide open. Close distances between points i could easily tie and cross tie traverse and even tape between many points for independent cks . I also did larger aeras that i ran static on so 100 acres using minimal two 4 hr sessions. Then did a rtk base rover design independent to ck. Now I run the numbers on a job and most of the time rtk base and rover meets the requirements and saves a lot of time. Always multiple observations at different times and base in different locations. Its not necessary as you can do a least squares from the same base point radially with multiple observations. But i like triangles lol. And so does most surveyors.
a little off point, but an Opinion of ALTAs by an old pundit I found interesting
https://www.xyht.com/surveying/title-insurance-and-boundary-surveys/
Nothing about least squares in that article. As it should be.
Adjustment reports would be about #50 on the list of important items for an ALTA.
It's like my tax forms at year's end, gets thrown in a file and is there in case it's ever asked for; cross my fingers I haven't had to produce my Taxes,,,,,,,,,, or an adjustment report ever.
I wouldn't expect there to be anything about LSA in that article either...
I don't need to cross my fingers when it comes to the ALTA accuracy specs, because while they might be pretty far down on the list, it's still an item on the list that will absolutely get verified before we deliver. I'm certifying to it, so you better believe I'm going to confirm it.
Yeah, the LS report doesn't concern me,,,,,,,,,Taxes, whole nuther ballgame.
Calls from a Title officer are often very welcome, calls from the IRS, that could ruin your day.
There may be a little confusion here...
When you certify an ALTA, you are certifying, in part, that your positional accuracy meets the ALTA specification. The question has been asked, "how do I know that I'm meeting the positional accuracy?". The answer is by subjecting your data to an LS adjustment. Nobody is asking you to regurgitate that adjustment report in your ALTA submissions. Nevertheless, if you are going to certify to something mathematically provable shouldn't you have some objective basis to base your statements on?
With practice it takes mere minutes to run that adjustment. Certainly no more time than compass rule. You get a lot more out of it - blunder detection wise- than just this report. If you are combining GPS vectors and TS data, forget about it- there is no slicker, faster way.
I really don't get the stubborn, hard headed resistance to doing LS. Then again, I guess maybe I do.
