On other projects, I am the one who uses the control and understands its use. I this case, someone else, whom I do not know, will be using it to do something I don not know he is qualified to do.
In short, I have no problem loading my 44Mag and blowing four or five sets of rounds. I have a real problem with loading a single chamber and then leaving than lying around for anyone to pick up and use. This feels EXACTLY like that.
So, tight control over comes any problems from lack of experience, training and knowledge on the part of someone who I do not know and have no idea regarding their qualifications to run the GPS equipment?
Since I am the only one in the bunch who is professionally licensed, I'm the one who will be left holding the bag...even if it's a"Y'all ought to have known better, y'unz being the professional and all!"
> On other projects, I am the one who uses the control and understands its use. I this case, someone else, whom I do not know, will be using it to do something I don not know he is qualified to do.
>
Then turn that work down & stick to boundaries - easy peasy
Well, if it has been designed and is ready to stake...who did the original work (R.O.W. and topo)?
If you did it, then no problem.
You probably already have existing control to use to meet the required spacing.
Give them the info and get paid.
> then mark r and tim will tell us how the only thing we have to fear is O himself
Pppffffttttt...if this was a P&R thread, I probably would.
[sarcasm]But since you have already bloated it with your hot air, I don't have too.[/sarcasm]
B-)
The only thing you can held accountable for is what you set. If you get blamed for anything else, you should easily be able to show what YOU provided was correct and anything THEY did after that is not your problem.
> If you get blamed for anything else, you should easily be able to show what YOU provided was correct and anything THEY did after that is not your problem.
1. When there's a problem, it's usually a problem for everyone who touched the job. And it's always your problem when someone suggests it was your work that caused it, whether they're right about that or not.
2. When the problem is blamed on bad control, and the project is built and the control gone, it becomes a "he said/she said" situation. Those tend to end up costing the innocent as well as the guilty. If it actually goes to court, everyone loses but the lawyers.
I don't blame Ian for having misgivings about this. If I had to provide control in that situation, I think I'd be getting a signature on some sort of limited-liability agreement, or charging a sizeable fee explicitly to cover heightened liability exposure.
If you do it(I would), make sure you set "hidden" control for your control and use a total station as a check on your GPS points . . . just in case something gets knocked over and someone else has to make a decision on what to do.
I would also try to CMA by informing them that "things" happen and that if anything looks amiss, they need to inform you.
I really like the GPS of the points and a re-location of the points with the total station. Document the results very well and keep the data as two independent sets of data . . . makes a great check and a great argument if needed.
Holy Crap Ian! If you're this scared, then there are ONLY two options.
1. Pass on the SOB and forget it
2. Actually call the contractor asking for the bid and get more information so that you can better protect yourself and possibly get it right the first time.
This is academic.
1. When there's a problem, it's usually a problem for everyone who touched the job. And it's always your problem when someone suggests it was your work that caused it, whether they're right about that or not.
2. When the problem is blamed on bad control, and the project is built and the control gone, it becomes a "he said/she said" situation. Those tend to end up costing the innocent as well as the guilty. If it actually goes to court, everyone loses but the lawyers.
1. It has been suggested that my model was wrong on a couple of sites but I could easily show what I had sent was correct. Anything they had done with it is their problem. When they are shown (2d and 3d)where my data is correct, they tend to accept the fact that they did something wrong (or their equipment isn't working properly or ....). BTW- They all have paid.
2. The control is checked the first day before any GPS machine control is used. That "calibration" (using the control) is used for the longevity of the project. The control points can be destroyed 5 minutes after the calibration is completed and it wouldn't change a thing.
I give a class on how contractors are taught to setup sites. The training can be used for continuing education in some states. Custom classes range in time from 1-8 hours.
Do you set points for contractors to build catch basins? Do you check the qualifications on everyone that is using those points? I think not. There is no difference.
If you are scared don't do it and leave it for others, simple.
> If you are scared don't do it and leave it for others, simple.
My guess is that Ian would prefer not to set the control because the perceived risk/reward ratio is too high, but higher-ups are concerned that if they don't follow through the project owner might not understand the complication, which could damage the relationship. Thus the decision might not be Ian's to make.
The sad part is that localizing or calibrating is totally not needed. It is like handing somebody a loaded 45.
I don't understand why folks don't set up coordinate systems tied directly to GPS. Have a expert read the control and give them a coordinate system and no need to calibrate or localize any longer. I haven't calibrated for over ten years.
