I have seen a lot of geocachers reporting vertical set marks as being suitable for GPS, but today I read one where a USGS person said that...OK, obviously not a surveyor but if he works for USGS he should have a clue...
LX0178_SATELLITE: THE SITE LOCATION WAS REPORTED AS SUITABLE FOR LX0178+SATELLITE: SATELLITE OBSERVATIONS - September 13, 2011 LX0178'AT GROTON.
LX0178'AT GROTON, AT THE TRUMBULL AIRPORT, AT THE ADMINISTRATION
LX0178'BUILDING, SET VERTICALLY IN THE SOUTH BRICK FACE OF THE BUILDING, LX0178'52.4 FEET SOUTHEAST OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE ADMINISTRATION LX0178'BUILDING, 12 1/2 FEET WEST OF THE CENTER OF THE SOUTH ENTRANCE LX0178'TO THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AND 0.9 FOOT ABOVE THE LEVEL OF LX0178'THE GROUND.
LX0178'RECOVERY NOTE BY US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 2011 (TS) LX0178'RECOVERED BY U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY AS PART OF STORM SURGE SENSOR LX0178'SURVEYING FOR TROPICAL STORM IRENE
Indeed, USGS people should know.
I have campaigned to the point of being obnoxious, but I don't think the NGS GPSonBM program is ever going to let us do a short level run for an "eccentric" GPS position.?ÿ They are still talking about needing official resets, which few will put the effort into.?ÿ They are missing the opportunity to fill a lot of gaps in coverage.
My argument is that we would be pleased with 1-cm verticals with the GPS, and they trust me to do a measure-up on a tripod-mounted receiver to maintain that accuracy, so why won't they trust me to do a 1-turn leveling to a nearby stake, that anybody should be able to do to 1 or 2 mm accuracy?
And even better, sometimes with patience you can set the ARP to match the line on the disk.
If you can get GPS on your phone at the site, then the site is suitable for GPS, isn't it?.
