Surveying.

The black box and the science behind it are not magic. We can and should learn enough of the science to know what we can and cannot make it do.
I contend that an ethical Surveyor is no more dangerous with all of our new toys than with a compass and tape. The problem is the speed and magnitude of horrors imposed on us by those who work beyond their expertise.
In other words, a handful of idiot low ballers can make a very large mess in a very short time...

gschrock, post: 333971, member: 556 wrote: a new theme! "The Bogus Theory of Black Boxes" 😉

That made me LOL!

Thanks Gavin:clap:

Nothing is more annoying than having to read something like this. When I grew up I often wondered why surveyors cautioned that I needed to measure a distance with a steel tape to check the EDM because the EDM made errors... that I had to write in the field book while using the data logger because the data might just disappear... and that electronic data would not be admissible evidence in a court case. I walked out on a meeting once when the client's engineer wanted to know why I planned to use GPS instead "biting the bullet and using a traditional traverse". Then I got the job. Yet I still wonder why people feel the need to hold back progress.

not my real name, post: 333977, member: 8199 wrote: Nothing is more annoying than having to read something like this. When I grew up I often wondered why surveyors cautioned that I needed to measure a distance with a steel tape to check the EDM because the EDM made errors... that I had to write in the field book while using the data logger because the data might just disappear... and that electronic data would not be admissible evidence in a court case. I walked out on a meeting once when the client's engineer wanted to know why I planned to use GPS instead "biting the bullet and using a traditional traverse". Then I got the job. Yet I still wonder why people feel the need to hold back progress.

There is nothing inherently wrong with advances in technology. Diving in and not understanding what it can and cannot do is wrong. Show me repeatable and reliable results and I'm all ears. Read me a sales brochure and I'm just gonna laugh...

not my real name, post: 333977, member: 8199 wrote: ...cautioned that I needed to measure a distance with a steel tape to check the EDM because the EDM made errors ...

Who among us has been to a calibration baseline in the last year? What percentage of EDM users do you suppose carry a barometer?

not my real name, post: 333977, member: 8199 wrote: ......that I had to write in the field book while using the data logger because the data might just disappear... and that electronic data would not be admissible evidence in a court case.

The other day we had a thread about backing up data collector data - the thrust of which led me to believe that a lot of guys think downloading data on a daily basis is an unreasonable expectation.

not my real name, post: 333977, member: 8199 wrote: Yet I still wonder why people feel the need to hold back progress.

I wholeheartedly agree. Yet it depresses me how so many blindly accept the results reported by their black boxes. There is a middle ground here.

One surveying company I used to work for would download the data at the end of the job. Many of the jobs lasted only a few days. Occasionally on bigger jobs that lasted weeks, we would download daily.

I suspect many of us have heard stories of (or had happen to us) of computers crashing. Hard drives failing. Yet how many of us back up computers on a regular basis of once a week to once a month? Especially on work computers, there is quite a bit of data that can evaporate quickly.

Though technology can be useful and add many benefits, they can also be a source of great frustration. As can be seen by some of the threads on this very board.

The "I saw it on the internet, it Must be true"/ "it's in the computer, it must be true" mentality can still be prevalent. How easy is it to forget that computers are programed by humans and information is entered by humans? I have not personally met a single human who does not make occasional mistake, only some who claim they haven't and don't make mistakes.

That original compass was a "black box" - and subject to significant errors and distortions

The original "black box" is the brain- and subject to significant errors and distortions.

Being an old timer, I took Nate's comments in the truth that in "those days" we virtually had total control over things. Sure we applied scientific corrections for various aspects, which often involved complicated maths done longhand by today's standards.
But what needsto be considered also is the expectation that modern society demands.
If something was a foot out in the back of beyond (way out in unpopulated areas) "who cared".
These days everything has to be exact, quantified, justified, qualified, verified, validated and so on.
I don't for one minute question the capabilities of any generation of survey methods equipment etc.
The world we once had has or is fast being overtaken by the technology we longed for but then leaves us behind at an ever increasing rate.
Never hurts to reflect. But only if it makes me better for it.

Richard, from Tasmania above, Got the point of my post. It's not really complaining, it's understanding how the dream of being a surveyor has changed.

And, contemplating where we are headed.

N

We've tried very hard to keep up with technology along with software. I remember doing everything by hand notes and printout sheets with radial stakeout. Then it was the Corvallis with the crappy telephone line that you had to jiggle to get a shot to record. We then went to SMI w/ const. V cards that would crash randomly and loose all of your jobs. Then onto the never ending generations of TDS Rangers. At one point I was working for a large engineering company in the early 2000s and we were on top of everything. New Topcons, Leica 500s and it felt as if we could do anything rather efficiently. Within 5-6 years the robots started to take over. I had a great rodman at the time and we were as efficient as I thought we could be. Year after year it was getting harder to keep up. I've now been using robotics and RTK for the past 10 years and the technological advancements have been amazing IMO. I can do more with my robot and a helper in a few hours than I could accomplish all day with a total station. I just had a bridge inspector asking me a few questions the other day about beam seat layout. It made me think. 10-12 years ago it would take me the better part of the day to layout beam seats and bearings on a 2-span bridge w/ a rodman and minors legs. I can now have the same thing done in a hour or two by myself and that includes setup and tear down. The CQ on modern GPSs are astonishing at times. Much better than having to run conventional traverse over a 4 mile stretch of highway or 400 acre tract of land. If I can do that and keep my tolerances to the size of a golf ball, I'm much better for it. Granted, you still need your checks in place and one can't get too confident or dependent as not to tie in and do back checks at every given chance. 99% of the error in the robot is me. My setups aren't exact enough, my rod is a little out of plumb, or I didn't get a hot enough reading for my HI. I get to yell at myself if something isn't right because I'm holding the brain, I can ensure that I'm absolutely plumb before I accept the shot. If I set up on control now and it's off more than .01-.02, I automatically know something is fishy. Before I would have been happy to be that close.
If used properly, I think technology is a great tool that enhances our work and takes one less question mark out of our already complicated daily routines. I still believe one needs to trace the steps of those before but it's nice to have the balance as well. I'd much rather find an original monument than have to reestablish a 200+ year corner using modern equipment! So common sense still prevails.