The easy way would be to get what Nate just upgraded to, an LS Plus and a Triumph 3.
Put the Triumph 3 on the chariot. Rover the LS Plus. Profit.
A few details to figure out.
Does the Triumph 3, as a base, need to talk to the local RTN or just the DPOS server?
Do I want the T3 unit with both a Verizon modem and a 900mhz spread spectrum radio? Do I want the UHF radio?
From watching Shawn Billings' excellent videos, I gleaned the detail that the new 4 constellation RTK corrections need a lot of bandwidth and a certain encoding on the radio link to be reliable, and I wonder about the performance differences between the 900 mhz spread spectrum and the regular UHF.
Also wonder if RTK corrections can be shared between the base and rover via wifi and bluetooth?
Do I want the LS plus likewise with both Verizon cell modem and a radio?
If I am in the desert with no canopy and an RTN with GPS/ GLONASS, would there be any wisdom in buying say, two or three identical older LS units (GPS + GLONASS) that could use RTN data and be bases for each other? Can you run two LS rover units simultaneously using another LS unit as a base?
?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
I thought I should at least reply to this. I got the LS+ upgrade, and the T3 for use as a local base. I had a 1/2 mile to mark through the woods. I have learned how to move a around, and get on line (stake to line function) without pressing the start button. About 70% of the time, it's right on. (For those of you not familiar with Javad, pressing start, runs a routine that verifies that it's not wrong.) It took me 3 hrs to set fully verified pins on that 1/2 mile. Plus survey 1/2 mile of road, with r/w mkrs. Plus set 4 pins around an old cemetery. For the 4 pins around the cemetery, they got shot 2x or 3x, to tighten accuracy. Shot spread was small. It was all dense hardwoods, and pines, 60-80 ft tall.
I have no way of knowing how this compares to other brands. But, I will say I'm well pleased with Javad.
For every shot, where you press start, it gives you a shot spread graph while you work. If shot spread is bigger than you like, just re shoot it. This tightens accuracy.
I may post a few pics later.
Nate
?ÿ
?ÿ
Just want to point out that I have quotes on base/rover pairs w/data collectors from several different vendors and Javads's prices are quoted on line.?ÿ Carlson's BRX7 is price competitive with the Javad, and that dc will run your total station also.?ÿ Even Leica's GS18 is not totally out of the price range.?ÿ So get the Javad if you think it best, but don't be fooled into thinking that it is lower priced than anything else.?ÿ
don't be fooled
If you are a land surveyor, you might not need anything else.?ÿ
merry holidays, Mark.?ÿ
Nate
Hey, guys.?ÿ Say someone has run certain units at work and are familiar with what they will and won't do and how they operate.?ÿ How much money would someone stepping out on their own have to spend to acquire the combination of equipment discussed above plus the computer/printer/licenses/etc. before they accept their first paying job as a self-employed land surveyor?
I don't know prices.
For me, I wanted
35 watt UHF.?ÿ
T3 on base
LS+ as rover.
I don't work for Javad.
However, you can use the internet to get corrections. The t3 comes with a 1 watt UHF.
So, if you got t3, LS+, and had cellular all going, you could have a full enchilada.
That's what I'd suggest for most. Out here, cell is spotty.
But, it's improving.
N
?ÿ
?ÿ
Hey, guys.?ÿ Say someone has run certain units at work and are familiar with what they will and won't do and how they operate.?ÿ How much money would someone stepping out on their own have to spend to acquire the combination of equipment discussed above plus the computer/printer/licenses/etc. before they accept their first paying job as a self-employed land surveyor?
I just made it through a first year startup. The answer to your question varies depending on where you are located, the type of work you seek, the type of work you are able to acquire, and if you are a solo operator or have employees. It is also dependent on what tools and equipment you may already have on hand such as a computer that can handle a decent software package as well as access to rental equipment, printing services, and VRS.?ÿ
I made it through my first year with only borrowing money from my personal savings to help purchase some used equipment. Thankfully I?ÿwas able to pay that back in full.?ÿ
@bushaxe?ÿ
That was wise.
Too many who want to make that jump think they must have the top of the line equipment to impress their clients and to compete with existing firms in the area.
That is why I was hoping a few people would provide an estimate of that initial outlay.?ÿ Anyone know the current annual fee to AutoCAD, for example.
Thank you sir. Hearing I made a wise choice means a lot to me coming from you.
My clients don't know and don't care about what equipment I use. I rarely see a client in the field. When I do they don't have a clue what they are looking at as far as equipment goes. They care about delivery of a quality product on time and for a reasonable price. I find in my neck of the woods all you have to do to impress a client is to do what you say you are going to do when you said you would do it.?ÿ
As far as pricing: CAD/Survey software, Carlson Survey with IntelliCAD can be purchased for under $2K. It has everything I need. DC Tablets are about $4K new with SurvCE. I bought a used Surveyor 2 DC with the latest SurvCE from a dealer for much less. Someone was trading it in for a tablet. He threw in a claw and a brand new pole. I ended up buying a used GNSS Receiver from him as well. It's not top of the line, but I know its limitations and I work within those bounds. I bought my TS from an Engineer in Alaska who was closing the surveying portion of his business. He gave me a good deal on a Leica. I had it serviced once it made its trip across the continent. Everything checked out within spec. Its not new, its slow compared to newer models, but works just fine.
I plan to upgrade both my GNSS and my TS for newer faster models in the next 1-2 years. But for now, I am making money with what I have. And if you're not doing that, then what are you doing?
Edit: The TS is Robotic and Reflectorless, certainly key factors for anyone thinking about a solo gig.
OK, I went to Javad web site.
To get what I have, it appears that it comes close to 35,600.
This is:
LS+ 19,970
T-3 12,500
35 Watt radio, with battery kit 3,140
But, If you were going to do it this week, I'd probably ask for a discount, like before friday!
I did not buy mine this way.
I bought a package, with the T-2.
Then, bought a T-3, and then upgraded my old LS.
Your Mileage may vary.
I don't work for Javad.....
THEY WORK FOR ME!
🙂 (Big grin)
Nate
?ÿ
?ÿ
Of course, you might come out ahead skipping the 35 watt radio, and going full cellular. This a great solution, if you have cell in your work area.?ÿ
Also, you can put an external antenna on the t3 base, with a tall mast. This will improve range, but I've not experimented with it. Because I have the other options.
N
I'll take a shot at answering your questions.
Does the Triumph 3, as a base, need to talk to the local RTN or just the DPOS server?
If I understand your question correctly, the answer is neither. If you want to use the local RTN to get coordinates for the base, you will connect the Triumph-LS to the RTN and get the coordinates, then use the Triumph-LS to start the Triumph 3 base with those coordinates. Similarly, to send the base file to DPOS, you download the file from the Triumph 3 to the Triumph-LS and the Triumph-LS sends the base file to DPOS via GSM or WiFi and corrects all the rover points. The next time you start the Triumph 3 with the Triumph-LS on that base point, you select the DPOS coordinates and start the base.
Do I want the T3 unit with both a Verizon modem and a 900mhz spread spectrum radio? Do I want the UHF radio?
If you have good cell service where you work, I highly recommend the GSM modem with a Verizon static IP address at the base sending corrections to the rover via TCP. It's quick and easy. If cell service is not so great, you will want a radio.?ÿ If service is spotty, you will want both.?ÿ I've never used the spread spectrum radio, but those that use it like it. My understanding is that it is limited to 1 watt and does not require a license from the FCC. UHF radios are available in 1, 4, and 35 watt options and require a license. I've used the 1 and 4 watt UHF radios. Practically speaking, UHF range is limited by terrain. Elevating the transmit antenna helps a bunch.
From watching Shawn Billings' excellent videos, I gleaned the detail that the new 4 constellation RTK corrections need a lot of bandwidth and a certain encoding on the radio link to be reliable, and I wonder about the performance differences between the 900 mhz spread spectrum and the regular UHF.
I don't have experience with both radios, but my understanding is that both work well to send 4-constellation corrections.
Also wonder if RTK corrections can be shared between the base and rover via wifi and bluetooth?
Not via Bluetooth. As for WiFi, this can be done if base and rover are on separate networks and you have a static IP address at the base.
Do I want the LS plus likewise with both Verizon cell modem and a radio?
If you are sending corrections from base to rover over the internet via TCP, you need the Verizon static IP address only at the base. The SIM card in the rover can be from any carrier that gives good service.
If I am in the desert with no canopy and an RTN with GPS/ GLONASS, would there be any wisdom in buying say, two or three identical older LS units (GPS + GLONASS) that could use RTN data and be bases for each other?
Yes.?ÿ And as I understand it, with the LS as a base you get all 4 constellations, but not all the signals that you get with the T3 or LS+ as a base, but almost all.
Can you run two LS rover units simultaneously using another LS unit as a base?
Yes.
?ÿ
As others have mentioned, prices for all the options are on the Javad website if you click on the Buy button in the upper left corner of the receiver page. I'm a sales agent for JAVAD. I sent you a PM with my contact info. Call or email me if I can help you further or if I misunderstood your questions.
@holy-cow yes - Autodesk Civil 3D runs me approximately $2400 annually. Lots of vendors for it. I forget the name of mine but you can also buy it through Autodesk I believe. My license a login based subscription
That is why I was hoping a few people would provide an estimate of that initial outlay.?ÿ Anyone know the current annual fee to AutoCAD, for example.
Vanilla Autocad is $1775/yr, $220/mo.
Pricing has been adjusted on the Triumph-3 and Triumph-LS Plus. The website does not yet reflect those changes. Contact a sales agent to get the current pricing. I would share here, but don't want to violate any rules.
John answered your questions very well. Communications are really the most variable option to discuss. UHF is great for rural areas that don't have good cellular coverage, particularly for projects that require long range from base to rover. FHSS is great for smaller projects and allows for significantly more bandwidth than UHF. FHSS protocols are proprietary for all manufacturers (to my knowledge). So UHF will allow you to communicate with other radio systems from other manufacturers (theoretically), but FHSS will be limited to your specific brand of equipment. FHSS does not require a license, while UHF does. UHF will allow for up to 35-watt output power (and up to 70-watts Effective Radiating Power), while FHSS is limited to 1-watt output power (not sure about ERP).?ÿ
Cellular is the near-term future for RTK. With cellular coverage, receivers can be lighter, require less power, and perform at longer ranges from the base. When I was working with GPS and Glonass only, I would usually try to keep my baselines at 7 miles or less (about 10km). The rover would work farther, but the ppm would begin to become apparent and the time to fix in canopy was noticeably longer beyond those ranges. With the addition of Galileo and Beidou today, I have doubled my range tolerance to about 13 miles (about 20km) with good performance. Except for locations with perfect conditions UHF will struggle to reach those distances, but cellular can easily provide a connection between the base and rover at those distances and beyond. We have worked with RTK vectors out as far as 30 miles (50km) but reliability begins to suffer for production work.
Regarding price comparisons to competing products, there are, of course, other great products on the market. From what I can tell, Galileo and Beidou have caused a dramatic performance gain for most (maybe all) of the manufacturers. There are a lot of things that can be done with the additional signals. From my own experience in our standard version of the Triumph-LS, going from GPS/Glonass to GPS/Glonass/Galileo/Beidou decreased occupation times in canopy by around 50%. For example, a point that required 30 minutes to get a verified position, would only require 15 minutes. When we went from the Triumph-LS to LS Plus with its additional processing power, we saw occupation times drop by another 50%, so that the 30 minute observation is now well under 8 minutes. This is partly because of the better processing power, but also because we have so many signals that we can use new strategies to demonstrate verification in less time than before by providing fixed solutions with different constellations (for example a solution with GPS and Glonass signals agrees with an independent solution with Galileo and Beidou signals), whereas before, we required time for the constellation to change to demonstrate verification.
Not everything on a spec sheet is always apples to apples. I recommend doing some homework. Talk to a knowledgeable sales agent. Talk to users. Get a demo from a knowledgeable user or agent. Carefully review the full suite of features in each system and the cost of maintenance/support. Once upon a time, as a customer/user, I saw spec sheets that showed receivers tracked GPS and Glonass. I thought to myself then that the performance must be the same since both are using the same signals. It was not until later that I learned some manufactures needed to get a fixed solution from GPS only and then added Glonass to help maintain the solution as the receiver was moved around. Of course, these days that isn't an issue. I think most receivers will fix on any single constellation or combination of signals. The reason I mention this is that a spec sheet won't typically describe how signals are used. Different manufacturers will use signals in different ways with different performance. So if you compare a $3,000 receiver to a $20,000 receiver only by the spec sheet, you may wonder why you would pay the higher price for the $20k receiver. But in the field the differences will almost certainly become more apparent.?ÿ
Look to the features also. We offer features that no one else has. Those features may or may not be important to you. This is probably true for all of the manufacturers. What features distinguish the various receivers from one another and are those features valuable to you?
I'm in between buying two LS units (and upgrading later in the learning curve), and buying an LS+ and a T3.
If I can do all the DPOS etc. via wifi, I am inclined to get two FHSS 900mhz units of whichever. I'm gonna put the base on the chariot, so if I get outside range of 900mhz spread spectrum it's time for a search party or a nap.
?ÿ
A couple of weeks ago I was working with cellular in a marginal location. Eventually my luck ran out and I had no contact with the base due to loss of cell signal at the rover. I wasn't staking anything, so I went ahead and continued locating features without corrections (with raw positions at about the meter level). When I finished, I returned to the base and downloaded the raw data it had been recording to the rover. I then post-processed the points right on the receiver and got centimeter level positions after the fact. Post processing on the receiver has significantly reduced communication range anxiety. It's reliable and works with fairly short data files, even under light to medium canopy. It works under difficult canopy with longer observations too. So even with the limited FHSS range, you still have options that can keep you working when longer vectors are required.
Regarding whether to buy two Triumph-LS's and upgrading later or buying a Triumph-LS Plus and Triumph-3, I will send you a PM. Both are valid plans, just want to make sure you have all of the information to make the best decision for you.
?ÿ
If I am in the desert with no canopy and an RTN with GPS/ GLONASS, would there be any wisdom in buying say, two or three identical older LS units (GPS + GLONASS) that could use RTN data and be bases for each other? Can you run two LS rover units simultaneously using another LS unit as a base?
?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
One more thought, Mr. Bubble. You mention working in the desert with no canopy. I think the benefits of four constellations compared to two constellations is going to be less significant in open skies. Under canopy, the difference is stark. I would not want to work without multi-constellation if I worked in canopy. The productivity gains are just too great to not upgrade. The older LS units are multi-constellation so you still get the benefit of that, but the newer units work with multi-constellation much better.
From my own experience, apart from canopy, multi-constellation can offer some benefits though. First, I think that the multi-constellation probably improves precision a bit. This is anecdotal as I don't have a solid comparison, but the precision I see from the newer LS Plus is better than the older LS. Most of my experience with the older LS was with GPS and Glonass only. So it could be that the older LS with 4-constellations will also see improved precision with multi-constellation. The other benefit that I've seen is in range. As I mentioned above, I feel confident in a working range of 20km now for production work in most environments I encounter (medium to heavy canopy), whereas with GPS and Glonass only I kept my production work to about 12km. The older LS with multi-constellation may also see an improvement in range, but I never got around to testing this. Range improvement will only be meaningful if you are transmitting your corrections over the internet (cellular), as UHF will not likely reach the ranges where you can see the difference. FHSS even less so.
I bring this up because I'm curious if users of other systems have also seen multi-constellation improve their effective baseline range and precision.?ÿ