I accidentally changed a global setting on my Carlson/Allegro data collector today while fumbling with the DC. The result was that the DC didn't set zero on the backsights, recording the uncorrected angle reported by the gun for every shot instead. I did 3 small jobs with it today before figuring out what happened. I now have around 300 points to straighten out.
What surprised me is that Carlson didn't report the corrected angle in the RW5, though it did so for its internal calculations. My usual workflow involves converting the RW5 for use in Star*Net, but the RW5 as written doesn't lend itself to that procedure. I'll probably write a bit of one-off software to modify the RW5, but I wish I'd caught the bad setting right away instead.
Another live-and-learn experience.
> I accidentally changed a global setting on my Carlson/Allegro data collector today while fumbling with the DC. The result was that the DC didn't set zero on the backsights, recording the uncorrected angle reported by the gun for every shot instead. I did 3 small jobs with it today before figuring out what happened. I now have around 300 points to straighten out.
>
> What surprised me is that Carlson didn't report the corrected angle in the RW5, though it did so for its internal calculations. My usual workflow involves converting the RW5 for use in Star*Net, but the RW5 as written doesn't lend itself to that procedure. I'll probably write a bit of one-off software to modify the RW5, but I wish I'd caught the bad setting right away instead.
>
> Another live-and-learn experience.
The DC import utility doesn't automatically reduce observed angles? That's a bit difficult to believe. Can you output the DC file in SDR format? If so, I know that the SDR-to-Star*Net conversion utility will handle non-zero circle settings on the backsight and reduce the angles perfectly well. I'd be glad to run the conversion for you and sent the Star*Net input back.
> The DC import utility doesn't automatically reduce observed angles?
It does now. 🙂
I use a homebuilt application. I've never had to deal with non-zero backsights before, so never needed that particular functionality. I don't plan on needing it again, but I'm good to go now if I somehow manage to change that setting again in the future.
well that is wicked
You mean to say you did not notice when you checked your backsight. Admittedly I could not do any 3 small jobes in one day, so my comments do not count for much. I am 2 slow but i have screwed the pooch only once on basksights since 2007.
well that is wicked
Well, when you get down to the bare facts, setting 0 in the instrument is really only for you. The data collector doesn't really care and it will do the math just fine without your having set 0 at all. Of course, you know that.
I once did a side project with a TDS data collector that was set to record the raw data in "true azimuths". I didn't even know until that time there even was such a setting. I had done the whole traverse angle-right, set 0 backsight angles as usual. But when I printed out the raw data, all the angle data was reported as azimuths. I thought I was facing a whole lot of tedious correction until I looked and realized that the geometry of the traverse was correct as the points were displayed on screen. I still didn't like the raw data being recorded that way but at least I did not have to go beck and run it again.
I made before an excel based application used to convert azimuth values to right-sweeping-angle-from-backsight-line values.
> I accidentally changed a global setting on my Carlson/Allegro data collector today while fumbling with the DC. The result was that the DC didn't set zero on the backsights, recording the uncorrected angle reported by the gun for every shot instead. I did 3 small jobs with it today before figuring out what happened. I now have around 300 points to straighten out.
>
> What surprised me is that Carlson didn't report the corrected angle in the RW5, though it did so for its internal calculations. My usual workflow involves converting the RW5 for use in Star*Net, but the RW5 as written doesn't lend itself to that procedure. I'll probably write a bit of one-off software to modify the RW5, but I wish I'd caught the bad setting right away instead.
>
> Another live-and-learn experience.
well that is wicked
> You mean to say you did not notice when you checked your backsight.
I didn't notice when checking backsights because the DC was making the correction internally, and the backsight checks looked good. It was only the raw data that was receiving the uncorrected angle values.
Well, In a previous version of survce, the backsight azmith changed on me. It gave me a lot of headaches. My problem would show up in the raw file. I suggest always staking to at least 1 or 2 known points after a backsight setup.