Old deed: 100'
Adjoining description 100.14'
Recent survey: 100.1'
Engineer: 100.1000'
Cad guy: 100.10000000000
Architect: "which one do we move?"
Farmer, "what's the problem?"
?ÿ
?ÿ
Are there original monuments on the ground?
Recent survey: 100.1'
Did you mean to type 100.10'?
Are there original monuments on the ground?
Yes.
Did you mean to type 100.10'?
Not really. Does it make any significant difference? Only the pedantic worry!
N
Ah.?ÿ I see now.?ÿ You're just relaying the initial comments from the architect and farmer.?ÿ Farmer's probably right, but I can imagine a brief blank stare from the surveyor 🙂
Does it make any significant difference?
No, not in the gist of your post.
Only the pedantic worry!
You indicated a recent measurement expressed in a precision not consistent with modern surveying techniques.
I like to see the actual measurements as apposed to to just rounding up or down to the record measurement.?ÿ I don't have any difficulty understanding that 100=100.10 in terms of holding the existing monuments.?ÿ When I go over the final survey with my clients, I explain things like that. I also tell them not to worry about numbers as much as preserving their boundary monuments, "You wouldn't let the power company rip down the corner post of your cedar fence wood you?"
Kinda confession time, combined with more details.
When you work with RTK gps, your 100% accuracy is not 0.01' any more. It is 0.05', for many shots. When you do this 2x or 3x on the same point, you can get down to 0.03'. But, without a good static observation, that's as good as it can do.
I was the very most pedantic surveyor, with transit and tape. Hard work, good discipline, and we did good work.?ÿ
Then with total station, and all, this got a whole lot easier.
Then, getting into long static,?ÿ (2 HR static observations) now that was THE MEOW! We could build huge, accurate networks, and then use total station to densify control. With good discipline, we had it going on. You don't need to adjust, when things are this good!
But, the family needed me. Nobody but me got a thrill from the knowledge that our several mile network, and survey was accurate to the 0.025' level, between most any 2 monuments, spread out over several miles. And, the time needed to keep this going, just did not pay enough.?ÿ
RTK was the solution.
Nobody but me cared enough to mess with real tight work.
My clients didn't.?ÿ
So, I SOLD a few hundredths accuracy, for more family time.
My foundation (ie, number of points shot, and considered in the overall analysis went up) improved alot, but individual shot quality went down. My overall liability went down, because nobody is going to sue over 0.10 feet. (This ain't Denver, with the rocky mountain high).
Production went up, family was happy. More family time.
So, instead of larger cumulative errors, (and smaller specific errors)?ÿ and adjustments to remove cumulative error, I now have larger specific error, and nearly no cumulative error.
The farmer is happy.
The title co is happy.
I had an internal funeral for my inner super pedantic surveyor. (He actually comes out of his grave occasionally, and tells me stuff (yells at me). And, I respond by reminding him that overall quality is way up. I try not to give him coffee.
If you go out to a lake, and look, the surface is always in motion.
If you look at the world, with larger quantities of time added in, it too is in MOTION. On its surface. That's where my survey pins are.?ÿ
I think I made a good choice. Lost a few hundredths accuracy. Gained much more overall controll.
I call it progress.?ÿ
But to do this, you will have to bury your internal super pedantic surveyor.?ÿ
My inner pedantic surveyor made me confess.
Nate
That is a swell story, Nate. ?ÿA smart friend told me long ago, we are either working for more time or for more money.
Kinda confession time, combined with more details.
When you work with RTK gps, your 100% accuracy is not 0.01' any more. It is 0.05', for many shots. When you do this 2x or 3x on the same point, you can get down to 0.03'. But, without a good static observation, that's as good as it can do.
I was the very most pedantic surveyor, with transit and tape. Hard work, good discipline, and we did good work.?ÿ
Then with total station, and all, this got a whole lot easier.
Then, getting into long static,?ÿ (2 HR static observations) now that was THE MEOW! We could build huge, accurate networks, and then use total station to densify control. With good discipline, we had it going on. You don't need to adjust, when things are this good!
But, the family needed me. Nobody but me got a thrill from the knowledge that our several mile network, and survey was accurate to the 0.025' level, between most any 2 monuments, spread out over several miles. And, the time needed to keep this going, just did not pay enough.?ÿ
RTK was the solution.
Nobody but me cared enough to mess with real tight work.
My clients didn't.?ÿ
So, I SOLD a few hundredths accuracy, for more family time.
My foundation (ie, number of points shot, and considered in the overall analysis went up) improved alot, but individual shot quality went down. My overall liability went down, because nobody is going to sue over 0.10 feet. (This ain't Denver, with the rocky mountain high).
Production went up, family was happy. More family time.
So, instead of larger cumulative errors, (and smaller specific errors)?ÿ and adjustments to remove cumulative error, I now have larger specific error, and nearly no cumulative error.
The farmer is happy.
The title co is happy.
I had an internal funeral for my inner super pedantic surveyor. (He actually comes out of his grave occasionally, and tells me stuff (yells at me). And, I respond by reminding him that overall quality is way up. I try not to give him coffee.
If you go out to a lake, and look, the surface is always in motion.
If you look at the world, with larger quantities of time added in, it too is in MOTION. On its surface. That's where my survey pins are.?ÿ
I think I made a good choice. Lost a few hundredths accuracy. Gained much more overall controll.
I call it progress.?ÿ
But to do this, you will have to bury your internal super pedantic surveyor.?ÿ
My inner pedantic surveyor made me confess.
Nate
Nate: Thanks for taking a bit of time away from your family to compose this essay.
being a realist (and focusing on Family) is pretty darn important.
?ÿ
@peter-ehlert was just thinking of you last night watching Baja CA burning on the news. ?ÿI hope that you and yours are doing well.
@nate-the-surveyor But wouldn't it have easier just to say buy a JAVAD!!!
@brad-ott thanks for the good thoughts, we are all fine.
everything has returned to normal and we will resume our normal activities today.
this has been an unprecedented event, in all of my decades in Baja, this is a first.
as to be expected, the reports in the media are greatly exaggerated... probably bu a factor of 4.
In all of the old Westerns the land conditions in Mexico were normally shown to be little more than sand, dirt and rocks with a few scrubby bushes scattered around.?ÿ They had to work to find something to build a campfire.
Similar old Westerns also showed mountain ranges across Kansas.
Ever notice how the giant boulders would wiggle sometimes when a fellow bumped into it a bit too hard?
Saguaro cactus appeared to grow all over West Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Southern Colorado, Utah and Nevada.
