The article: https://surveyorconnect.com/news/land-surveying/unlicensed-uavs-threat-surveying-profession/
There's no question in my mind that unlicensed operators using UAV irresponsibly pose a threat to surveyors, if the FAA and Congress have a knee-jerk reaction to some fool who brings down an airplane or something and causes them to regulate UAVs to the point where it's next to impossible to fly them legally.
UAVs, period, are a threat to the survey profession. The conversation should include the many issues and pitfalls as they pertain the survey profession and not be locked into the easy nonsense discussions that can be readily championed by the industries front people.
Not railing at you Wendell, it's this weird drone phenomena and the aspects of what is sure to come from this.
I have been told fear causing things all my life. Acid rain, nuclear winter, Y2K, electromagnetic null zones, global warming, climate change and that my profession is doomed.
I am sick up and fed.
The drone won't destroy the profession. Some surveyors will do well with these toys. Good for them and let's actually accept a new technology without claiming that the sky is falling.
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
I think they should just regulate all drones. Even recreational right now. Until new regulations are in place.
Why should the booger pickers be allowed to fly them around right now, sometimes irresponsibly, and I can't invest to use one for good use without jumping through hoops and needing a pilot license of all things! Some of these kids don't even have a driver's license and they are flying these things!
The issue isn't unlicensed UAV's; it's those who offer surveying services that are not licensed surveyors. Just because the technology has become more affordable and easier to utilize, it doesnÛªt make sense to allow them to offer services they are not trained & licensed to perform. It is our duty to protect the public so help us and our profession promote why we worked to become licensed in the first place.
Timothy W. Burch, PLS
NSPS Secretary - Board of Directors
The article in GPS World is a well balanced summary of the situation.
The critical point to get across to those purchasing data from unmanned aircraft is that there are accuracies equivalent to the GPS ones mentioned in the article:
Equivalent Mapping grade : which is what you are likely to get AT BEST from a cheap UAV where photography has just been stitched together and scaled from a map
Equivalent Differential Grade : which is what you MIGHT get using a UAV with on-board GPS.
Equivalent RTK grade : for which you need a good tight ground control network Only this configuration will provide meaningful, consistent height data.
Following on, it is professional surveyors who have the understanding to ensure that the recorded data is translated into an accurate. controlled product. The UAV equivalent of mapping grade is fine if the customer just needs a general picture which is scaled to a few metres - but they weren't going to commission a survey in any case, just use Google.
The one question which is being glossed over at the moment is general safety and specifically the difference between rotary and fixed wing. The threat to manned aircraft is very low IF the rules are followed. There should be good airspace separation, unless there is a failure of the UAV autopilot or an idiot is in control. The biggest threat to a manned aircraft is probably not a body collision but the ingestion of Lithiium batteries into an engine causing an explosion. Proper regulation should minimise this risk - there is a far higher risk posed by idiots with high-power lasers.
Public safety is a different matter and the two types pose different risks. Because a rotary should be stoppable and brought down vertically there is a lower inherent risk of an accident (again dependent upon it being operated within the rules). However, if one does fail then it is almost certainly going to fall vertically and as most rotaries have a significant amount of pointy bits not to mention underslung cameras then the results are going to be unpleasant for anybody hit by it. Once it starts to fail then it is difficult to direct away from the spot.
With a fixed wing more operational space is needed, so it is likely that the operating area is less populated. Most failures would result in some form of glide, the direction of which the pilot might be able to influence. They are highly unlikely to fall vertically out of the sky. Critically fixed wings are generally foam bodied with few frontal protrusions, so even if a person was hit the effect would probably be no more than being hit by a large bag of sugar.
For safety, within the permitted guidelines for operational sites, rotary craft are better for limited areas with significant numbers of buildings, flying at low level. Fixed wing are better for more open areas or more limited buildings, but flying at higher (400 ft) level where they can glide to safety. For duration of flight fixed wing have 3-5 times the duration of a rotary, so can reduce the risks associated with landing and take off.
The attached image shows a dozer operating on a landfill site, taken from 350 ft. - no need for a surveyor to walk on all that nasty stuff!
Drones are as much of a threat to surveying as photogrammetrists and GIS were.
I'm not afraid of drones being a threat to surveying. I'm afraid incidents are a threat towards delaying surveyors being able to legally implement them
Freedom birds to the rescue. 😉
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/drone-hunting-eagles-can-snatch-the-devices-out-of-the-sky/
Wendell, post: 360726, member: 1 wrote: The article: https://surveyorconnect.com/news/land-surveying/unlicensed-uavs-threat-surveying-profession/
"There is now a bazooka designed to take down drones." Video on "YardBarker" and article. Why do I have a feeling that, for most people, this is illegal?
Unlicensed aerial mapping using drone technology is not a threat to us. The lack of standards or accountability IS a threat to the public.
Luddites, unite! Them electromagagicalistic thingys will be the ruination of us all. Next thing you know they will invent one to properly cleanse our nether regions following serious excretion activities in the bathroom. Little bitty critters to seek out every nook and cranny and remove anything not intended to be there.
thebionicman, post: 360774, member: 8136 wrote: Unlicensed aerial mapping using drone technology is not a threat to us. The lack of standards or accountability IS a threat to the public.
That is the simple truth. Make a reasonable standard to protect the general public. When an unregistered user gets in trouble, make sure lawyer grills them.
L. You obtained your results how?
D. The drone acquired and the computer spit out these results.
L. Did you check your work against surveyed ground control?
D. No.
L. Did you verify accordance with national map accuracy standards?
D. No.
L. Did you verify accordance with state x topo standards?
D. No.
L. Can you describe the difference between accuracy and precision?
D. What difference?
J. Case closed, D is an idiot who should pay many damages and forfeit his drone to a surveyor who will understand how to verify the results.
I will be glad to take on such a responsibility. [emoji12]
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
I can see this fundamentally as a downward pressure on the land surveying industry. How this manifests itself, only time will tell.
There are already companies advertising for UAV services in the usual cheap places, whether they have an FAA waiver isn't mentioned, but they have a UAV and that's what matters.
I'm just the field crew and my argument becomes more, maybe egalitarian, and disdain for the crappy forces that dictate the business.
The technology is available, and some of it is creative and inventive, but what historically ends up happening when a new technology arrives is that less and less field crew are needed to complete a surveying process, companies that have managed to iron out the wrinkles in their survey department now have to face the prospect of competing with anyone who manages to get their hands on a UAV, regardless of whether they understand the technology .. they have a license to survey.
There are a number of companies where i live that made a great effort to keep field crew employed in the last economic downturn. I don't feel that effort should be undercut.
You know, and what type of license are talking about here? A driver's license? A pilot's license? A surveying License? What i'm hearing here is that only licensed land surveyors should be able to offer products from UAV flights, why is this? These products should properly fall under the purview of licensed and or degreed photogramatrists, you certainly don't have a problem cutting them out.
just the field crew here
A concern is the ability to trust the numbers provided. Some invisible geek living in a rat's maze office with piped-in sunlight is the interpreter defining what raw data actually means. The same problem applies to scanners in general. A trillion bits of raw data are to be transformed into a seamless projection simulating reality through the wonders of math that 0.00001 percent of the population understands fully. It really is smoke and mirrors, but, if it's pretty, we will ooh and aah at its existence. Anything can happen in the movies. The difference with surveying is that the surveyor needs to understand how and why it works and not simply accept any result as being correct. You push a button and your black box tells you the mark across the street is 10000 feet away. Do you believe that? No. But, put a million bits of such information through a complex simulation and IT MUST BE CORRECT because you can not tell if it is true.
Unlicensed UAVs are a Threat to the Surveying Profession in EXACTLY the same manner as:
GPS
Magnetic Locators
Transits
Pocket Tapes
Calculators
Compasses
Pencil and Paper
... (endless list)
get real kids, it is just another tool...
just what we need, more regulation
Holy Cow, post: 360807, member: 50 wrote: A concern is the ability to trust the numbers provided. Some invisible geek living in a rat's maze office with piped-in sunlight is the interpreter defining what raw data actually means. The same problem applies to scanners in general. A trillion bits of raw data are to be transformed into a seamless projection simulating reality through the wonders of math that 0.00001 percent of the population understands fully. It really is smoke and mirrors, but, if it's pretty, we will ooh and aah at its existence. Anything can happen in the movies. The difference with surveying is that the surveyor needs to understand how and why it works and not simply accept any result as being correct. You push a button and your black box tells you the mark across the street is 10000 feet away. Do you believe that? No. But, put a million bits of such information through a complex simulation and IT MUST BE CORRECT because you can not tell if it is true.
For a professional surveyor, a critical part of a UAV operation will be an adequate system of ground check points. I can't recall seeing any surveyor checking scanning on a routine basis against a series of points observed by a different technique and very few who regularly compare their GPS results with check points observed by a total station.
In addition, there are options within software to flag up any points outside set tolerances relative to their neighbours, in the same way as a surveyor would look at a series of intersected points on, say, a building, and investigate any which were not in sympathy with those adjacent. The maths isn't that wonderful, just a large number of intersection calculations where each point has probably been observed from 10-15 locations. How many check the satellite geometry and data for every spot level point they observe by GPS.
Competent operation needs at least two field crew for the flying and there's ll the ground control and check points to fix as well (and any hidden areas to survey on the ground) so there isn't a great threat to field crew numbers. The benefit is safety, time saving in the field (but probably more to be spent by the surveyor on the computer model), the fact that everything is captured at a point in time and the customer gets a visual image of that moment.
The UAV is an opportunity to increase the income on certain types of work (by providing desirable information) within the same labour constraints. It is unlikely to threaten boundary work or setting out.
