In the mid '80s we broke down a section near Sheridan MT from 2 set-ups-
Set up the Backsight on the northeast (as I recall) corner- a fnd stone- drove out to where we've figured the c1/4 would be. plunked in a nail- set-up the TH2 and did a sunshot (altitude method)- put the Autoranger on top and from there shot 3 of the 4 1/4 corners - fnd stones- then- set a control point on top of a small knob that was obscuring the last corner. Move up- and tied that fnd stone. moved back to the 1st point-set up -turned an angle and set the c 1/4.
went home-
One. A number of times. Of course that would be in that eastern country that you used to work in; no trees. And probably not eight corners, but at least five-the four 1/4 corners and a section corner.
Although, I'm not counting checking the corners....so two would be the minimum.
Thats two too many, Man I love my GPS!!!
I tend to want some redundancy and a good strength of geometric figure. Radial surveying doesn't fit the bill.
Then again, it isn't possible in my area.
I couldn't compete for the least amount, but I'm surely in the running when it comes to most. I just did a section with 125 setups. Not the most, but is closer to the high average.
125 that's more than I ever had, but I have approached 50.
I do not see how you guys can survey a section with that few setups. You must work in great climate conditions and your guns have 6" diameter optics. The distances may be OK but I bet the angles suck.
Yeah Paul-clear sky, big country, high ridges, accurate instrument (T2), good distance meter, wind up a bunch of angles to controlling corners, calculate the section "break down" and set any monuments needed, Then locate everything from another control point and check your geometry. But, it's rare to see everything from two points. Normally its running a control traverse for miles and secondary control triangles to see into ravines and gullys to tie into monuments, setting on-line and checking line points and relocating monuments as you expand the survey.
But when it's possible to see a section from one point and check it from another, that's what we will do. Of course, those days are over with GPS. Now its about getting reduntant measurements with your rover. I just don't trust the first measurement and I always check it.
Here is a part of a boundary I surveyed in 94 showing the control traverse and the line we were staking-posts about 300' along line. Of course we would set on line and check it which gave us better results as we went, and I'm not showing setting on the corners in this diagram-only main traverse points. The red line is the boundary and north is to the right.
by clearcut...
...Radial surveying doesn't fit the bill....
If it helps you find the original corners, it is plenty good enough.
I've got over a dozen corners in a recent (1974) dependent resurvey that were misset even though all the surveying was done along the lines. It happens.
Maybe, but the answers have no check, so a minute bust in a radial angle at half a mile mAY show up.
I try and have control points by my corners now with a tight loop.
However, I'm not saying that I haven't done the same before, just that its not great practice.
by Kris Morgan...
...Maybe, but the answers have no check, so a minute bust in a radial angle at half a mile mAY show up.
I try and have control points by my corners now with a tight loop.
Who is to say that minute bust didn't show up in your control points?
