@northernsurveyor Hi Mike, I'd be interested in a copy.?ÿ In the rare event I have to do this, I run CMM in Win32 simulation to do the geodetic COGO.?ÿ I'd appreciate another tool for the toolbox.
@northernsurveyor Hi Mike, I'd be interested in a copy.?ÿ In the rare event I have to do this, I run CMM in Win32 simulation to do the geodetic COGO.?ÿ I'd appreciate another tool for the toolbox.
@frozennorth CAPD should be available from BLM on request as well.?ÿ ?ÿIt runs inside AutoCAD with or without C3D a very powerful Cadastral Geodetic computation utility.?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ It was really frozen north here yesterday, wind chill was mid -30s.?ÿ ?ÿ+6F and only 10mph of wind now so I'm heading out logging firewood.?ÿ ?ÿ
State plane isn't either surface distances or true bearings. Surveying using true bearings and surface distances is proper in the PLSS.
?ÿ
I want to check points collected in the field against calculated points, both platted and un-platted. The plat was recorded in 1926. I'm using the bearing of an excluded parcel, which is within a fractional section described as follows:
Beginning at the N.W. corner of the said N.E. 1/4 of Sec. 28 - Tp. 22 S - R 29 E. run East on the forty line ... . as a basis of bearings.
We started our traverse from 2 control points established with RTK. I want to find 2 collected points on the plat that closely match the plat with regards to bearing and distance. Then I want to rotate and translate those points to SPC. I'm not sure if this is the proper procedure based on your comments. This is not a boundary survey; it's to establish right-of-way lines for sidewalk construction. This survey has become a genuine learning experience for me because of the legal principles involved such as deed research and section breakdown, both of which I have very little experience with.
State plane isn't either surface distances or true bearings. Surveying using true bearings and surface distances is proper in the PLSS.
?ÿ
I want to check points collected in the field against calculated points, both platted and un-platted. The plat was recorded in 1926. I'm using the bearing of an excluded parcel, which is within a fractional section described as follows:
Beginning at the N.W. corner of the said N.E. 1/4 of Sec. 28 - Tp. 22 S - R 29 E. run East on the forty line ... . as a basis of bearings.
We started our traverse from 2 control points established with RTK. I want to find 2 collected points on the plat that closely match the plat with regards to bearing and distance. Then I want to rotate and translate those points to SPC. I'm not sure if this is the proper procedure based on your comments. This is not a boundary survey; it's to establish right-of-way lines for sidewalk construction. This survey has become a genuine learning experience for me because of the legal principles involved such as deed research and section breakdown, both of which I have very little experience with.
Well assuming that you have geodetic coordinates on your RTK shots, you can compute geodetic bearings. BUT, the CALL "East on the forty line" makes the actual bearing of the "forty line" the controlling direction (not the call for "East") at least in my opinion. That might not make much sense, but once you start playing in "true bearing/true distance" you need to play the whole game.
IMO the "easiest" way to attack these issues is with a project specific LDP (assuming a SMALL project, with limited vertical relief).?ÿ
Is it beer:30 yet??ÿ ?ÿ
Is it beer:30 yet??ÿ ?ÿ
I'm waiting on the Thanksgiving meal.
Well assuming that you have geodetic coordinates on your RTK shots, you can compute geodetic bearings.
I assume I have to find an online SPC to latitude/longitude converter?
"East on the forty line" makes the actual bearing of the "forty line" the controlling direction (not the call for "East") at least in my opinion.
I hope I have that info. I assume I could look that up online.
Well assuming that you have geodetic coordinates on your RTK shots, you can compute geodetic bearings.
I assume I have to find an online SPC to latitude/longitude converter?
?ÿ
Maybe...but I suspect that most folks have "programs" either on their Computers or their data collectors that will do that. If not, the NGS "NCAT" program will do it (and much more);
No association, nor have I ever used it, but would the QuickCogo program linked at the bottom of the forum not do this? It seems to suggest so from its overview page. Might be worth checking out an evaluation copy.
If not, the NGS "NCAT" program will do it (and much more);
Now pinned to my taskbar.
would be interested in looking at your excel spreadsheet when you can make it available, thanks
It was mentioned sometimes we are the first to break down a section. My experience is that may happen once or twice in a career. In most cases the section was broken down by the holders of the patents to the quarter or half sections 150 years ago. Hardly any patents went to one owner for the entire section in this state.?ÿ
Maybe once or twice in your career, but some of us do this on most jobs. The whole country is not developed yet, there is a lot of "wilderness" left.?ÿ
Doing it by the book is a lot less important when the same owner owns the whole section, so that's not where this really comes into play.?ÿ
@aliquot it??s SOP here to assume the world is flat for purposes of a single section.
True when surveying and restoring corners beyond a section geodetic considerations begin to matter.
If we are doing it correctly we should put away our calculators, get a solar compass and go out there and run the actual lines, that??s really how it??s supposed to be done.
@aliquot?ÿ
I've worked in many "virgin" sections, and then there are the mixed estate sections. Those can be a real PITA.?ÿ
You always need to be aware of mineral estate particularly when the mixed includes imperial involvement.?ÿ
Sectional breakdowns.
They are needed, even in sections that have been broken down 3x before. Not necessarily to change it. But to have a mechanism of comparison. Professional surveyors need to "know both". I've held many local monuments. But, knowing what the breakdown does, is an integral part of knowing the "theory" and "practice" of surveying. The theory of course, is the sectional breakdown. And the practice is the yielding to a pine knot from 1932.
It's a part of the whole evaluation process.
Nate
?ÿ
