roger_LS, post: 378188, member: 11550 wrote: The ALTA standards...... Does this mean every single monument, control point, building corner, site feature, sideshot, etc. would be tied in from multiple control points.
No, it doesn't. Check http://www.amerisurv.com/PDF/TheAmericanSurveyor_Kent-RPA_Again_November2007.pdf&apos ;">this article by Gary Kent out.
roger_LS, post: 378188, member: 11550 wrote: The ALTA standards talk about running surveys through least squares, I also don't completely understand this.
What the current ALTA/NSPS standards specify is maximum allowable limits for the uncertainty between any pairs of boundary markers positioned by the survey. The specific measure of uncertainty is "Relative Positional Precision" defined as follows in the specification:
i. ÛÏRelative Positional PrecisionÛ means the length of the semi-major axis, expressed in feet or meters, of the error ellipse representing the uncertainty due to random errors in measurements in the location of the monument, or witness, marking any corner of the surveyed property relative to the monument, or witness, marking any other corner of the surveyed property at the 95 percent confidence level. Relative Positional Precision is estimated by the results of a correctly weighted least squares adjustment of the survey.
rfc, post: 378134, member: 8882 wrote: Who the heck is Pablo Reid?
Paul "Pablo" Reid's immortal sentiments about Star*Net outlived him. He was a mineral surveyor in Wyoming.
http://www.wyomingnews.com/milestones/paul-reid/article_30ebb68a-eeef-5d2b-99e4-c7be2f6df712.html