We all probably depend on the GNSS in some form or fashion nowadays. Some maybe exclusively, some maybe not so much. I'm sure it depends heavily on the type of work in which one specializes.
How many of you would still maintain a positive work load and income if the GNSS was either compromised or destroyed?
A positive work load would probably still be there and a positive income would therefore remain. However the positive attitude of the surveyor (me) would probably be severely damaged.
Brian Allen, post: 409790, member: 1333 wrote: A positive work load would probably still be there and a positive income would therefore remain. However the positive attitude of the surveyor (me) would probably be severely damaged.
I can relate. Although I maintain serviceable brushing equipment in the truck, I'm not all that excited about putting it to use on a scale of times past. 😉
My productivity would take a major hit, but the work and income would still be there. In a sense GNSS is a reflection of the over all economy and disappearance of many jobs through automation and efficiency. Wasn't long ago I'd need a 3 man crew to do what I do solo now, in half the time.
Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get me.
Since I work in the public sector (DOT), we'd get the tax dollars anyway. However, the cost to deliver a biddable construction project would increase quite substantially and the traveling public would pay more, one way or another. As for field work involving a ROS for highway R/W, I much prefer the total station whenever possible so the cost would not change very much if at all.
As for attitude, I'm inherently grumpy anyway so probably not much change there.
The only superior evidence is that which you haven't yet found.
The reason for my question stems from something that happened to a colleague of mine a month or so ago. Due to repairs he was without GPS equipment for one crew for a week or so. Adding to the confusion the last time they used their TS was before he upgraded his DC a few months ago. A simple and routine staking of a half mile of aerial spans turned into a multi-day affair. He was shaken by how quickly his "field abilities" fell apart. Although he himself is an older and accomplished surveyor, the "crew" consists mainly of younger men.
My suggestion was to make one day a week "leave the receivers in the office" day. 😉
paden cash, post: 409816, member: 20 wrote: Due to repairs he was without GPS equipment for one crew for a week or so.
paden cash, post: 409816, member: 20 wrote: My suggestion was to make one day a week "leave the receivers in the office" day.
Why cripple yourself?
My suggestion would be to either have a service plan that includes a replacement unit or to hire a replacement unit as needed
If it went down for everyone, us dinosaurs would rule the earth again...
Would be a dream come true;)
Cant think of anything much better thats realistic, bring it on, would be swamped and make more money:)
It wouldn't impact the flow of my projects at all. I think that I could keep a positive flow even if we had a micro magnetic burst. I'd have to re-learn how to read a verniar but that's about it. I sue GPS on maybe 90% of my projects, but as an add on tool, not my only one.
paden cash, post: 409816, member: 20 wrote: My suggestion was to make one day a week "leave the receivers in the office" day. 😉
The GPS Sales-Guy says "You need to purchase backup equipment." :smarty:
Since we specialize in providing new equipment to first time GPS users, I have the pleasure of hearing 'We have had the units in the field three days total. Yesterday I did a full day's work in 20 minutes. And I am quite sure that I could not have duplicated the accuracy with my total station. I may not ever take it out of the box again." I heard this yesterday and again this afternoon from two different customers. So I fear that the 'can't easily go back' event occurs after only a few field days.
However, this is a competitive business. If the entire group of systems fails (GPS + GLO + GAL) then everyone (you and all your competitors) will be in the same boat. The relative costs will increase, be passed on and soon everyone will be back to making about the same amount of net profit.
I can assure you that if GNSS fails, then I am going to sell a boat-load of robots! :imp:
M
paden cash, post: 409786, member: 20 wrote: How many of you would still maintain a positive work load and income if the GNSS was either compromised or destroyed?
I would. I'm a dinosaur that only uses TSÛªs with DCÛªs. And from a financial aspect it works. Of couse I only do construction work, no huge boundary's. 😎
The problem I foresee is finding employees who know how to work when they don't have their standard equipment. Step one-- pretend there were no data collectors. They would go nuts without them. Sort of like asking someone to find the square root of 67 without an electronic device to do it for them.
Holy Cow, post: 409854, member: 50 wrote: The problem I foresee is finding employees who know how to work when they don't have their standard equipment. Step one-- pretend there were no data collectors. They would go nuts without them. Sort of like asking someone to find the square root of 67 without an electronic device to do it for them.
8.19 minus some change...(it's not just a place for my ball cap to sit...)
Williwaw, post: 409797, member: 7066 wrote: My productivity would take a major hit, but the work and income would still be there. In a sense GNSS is a reflection of the over all economy and disappearance of many jobs through automation and efficiency. Wasn't long ago I'd need a 3 man crew to do what I do solo now, in half the time.
True dat.
GNSS amounts to about 15% of my billable hours.
It would be more if anyone of the several people that help me sometimes were interested in learning how to GPS and become full time workers.
I do not mind the old ways, that equipment is on my shelves and needs to be used.
:bomb:
paden cash, post: 409816, member: 20 wrote: The reason for my question stems from something that happened to a colleague of mine a month or so ago. Due to repairs he was without GPS equipment for one crew for a week or so. Adding to the confusion the last time they used their TS was before he upgraded his DC a few months ago. A simple and routine staking of a half mile of aerial spans turned into a multi-day affair. He was shaken by how quickly his "field abilities" fell apart. Although he himself is an older and accomplished surveyor, the "crew" consists mainly of younger men.
My suggestion was to make one day a week "leave the receivers in the office" day. 😉
There are too many trees in Tennessee for us to be that reliant on GNSS. I'm not sure that I've ever worked on a project, short of setting aerial panels, that did not require using a total station at some point.
It would make life very interesting to say the least. Survey assistants would have to be hired, jobs would take significantly longer and prices would be raised considerably to cover those time costs.
Also I don't believe I would be able to comply with the current requirements we have to coordinate all registered surveys. Rural jobs especially that are a fair way from coordinated permanent marks would take even longer. Just think of the time difference in traversing a few km/miles along winding roads as opposed to driving directly to the mark and measuring it.....
Williwaw's six fold increase in field man hours doesn't sound too extreme. For us, going from one person to two and taking double the time (ie four fold field man hour increase) is probably not far out.
I hope everyone is charging the true cost of doing it by the alternative method. Otherwise you are cheating yourselves. You are merely making less profit than what the project should be providing. If you aren't charging accordingly, you are contributing to the demise of the profession. Imagine a day in the not too distant future when you might have the technical capability to do all phases of the work, except the excavation of existing monuments and the setting of new monuments, in a matter of a few minutes from a remote location. Are you then going to send the client a bill for $99?
Holy Cow, post: 409885, member: 50 wrote: I hope everyone is charging the true cost of doing it by the alternative method. Otherwise you are cheating yourselves. You are merely making less profit than what the project should be providing. If you aren't charging accordingly, you are contributing to the demise of the profession. Imagine a day in the not too distant future when you might have the technical capability to do all phases of the work, except the excavation of existing monuments and the setting of new monuments, in a matter of a few minutes from a remote location. Are you then going to send the client a bill for $99?
We are the only Profession I know of that spends most of our profit on tools to reduce billable hours...