MitchPTD, post: 396969, member: 10124 wrote: "I don't know. I pushed a button and the program gave me the answer." - He lost me at this. Was it an actual surveyor, or a dirtwork guy? No one with any formal training or professionalism at all, would "push a button in Autocad". Besides, which button do you push? I think the author has had no training in CA D either.
Formal training and professionalism have not been prerequisites for obtaining a license, at least not in the past.
MitchPTD, post: 396969, member: 10124 wrote: "I don't know. I pushed a button and the program gave me the answer." - He lost me at this. Was it an actual surveyor, or a dirtwork guy? No one with any formal training or professionalism at all, would "push a button in Autocad". Besides, which button do you push? I think the author has had no training in CA D either.
I hope this isn't an inappropriate place to say this because I am NOT pointing fingers at the author of the AS article.
But in my travels and times I have written article and also stood in front of a room full of folks that paid to hear what I've had to say. And interesting I learned there are generally two camps of folks that do that kind of stuff for a living: Those that are good at writing or talking, and those that know what they are talking about. Sadly the latter generally doesn't do so well "on the circuit" because communication is so very important in those arenas.
I heard a ditty once that rings so very true, "Those than can, do. Those that can't, teach."
My point is I'd like to admonish my fellow surveyors to read or listen what is "thrown out there" with just as much scrutiny as you would show an unrecorded found pin in the field. Acceptance depends on proof. Sometimes they're good, sometimes you wind up discounting them. It is ultimately up to you to make the decision. And there are bus loads of folks that would like to make a room full of practicing land surveyors believe they know what they're talking about. But they have no applicable experience except as a subordinate and no hands on experience with clients or the concept of CAD or document production. It is all too common to take the approach that practicing land surveys 'need' a high-brow seminar full of five dollar words thrown at them by some expert. In my experience the inverse is a lot more common.
Take things at face value; a paragraph full of words may just be 'fodder' that was sold by the pound.
Precisely why my signature says what it has, for quite a while now...
The only superior evidence is that which you haven't yet found.
You guys don't have the Resolve Boundary hotkey for AutoCAD?
I'm surer Marc Cheves would like to hear from any one who has a different opinion.
He will even help you write an article.
FL/GA PLS., post: 396937, member: 379 wrote: I wonder if younger surveyors have even heard of latitude and departure? (or God forbid a trig table!)
You know its funny ( or maybe not) I use to inverse by hand, say about 20 years ago...now, I'm not sure I could remember how to do it.
Totalsurv, post: 396965, member: 8202 wrote: Maybe all the good surveyors are now doing GIS.
and making more money.
RADAR, post: 397041, member: 413 wrote:
OOPS; I think I meant to post this in the FrancisH Thread...
Carry on.
Joe the Surveyor, post: 397047, member: 118 wrote: You know its funny ( or maybe not) I use to inverse by hand, say about 20 years ago
Me too, except it was about 40 years ago and on an HP-35. 😉
I began surveying when the philly rod, theodolite, and chain were still regularly used. Not because we didn't have electronic stuff, but the old way was faster for the task at hand. I got to "see" how the "good old days" were. They weren't that good. Fast forward to me sitting for the SIT. My father didn't have an HP48GX with surveying card at his disposal. Whether or not some 25 years later he remembered all that formulae or not remains to be seen, but I knew I was inferior because I didn't. So I studied and can still do 95% of what I need to do, long hand, if necessary. That's not to say I don't use AutoCAD or GPS or all kinds of tools, but I know what the answer "should" look like.
Fast forward to me training new surveyors who were going to get the license. One said he didn't need to know how to calculate a curve by hand. He still can't. The other recognized the need and, can, do many of those calculations long hand. I made him understand how to calculate a 3 point curve by hand. If you can do that, you can solve 99% of all surveying applications, with a $3 calculator that does sine, cosine, and tangent.
Fast forward to today. My son wants to take the SIT. He works for a large engineering company. I told him I'd sign, but he has to be able to solve the problem by hand. He's in Cal 3 right now and it blows his mind when we do it, but, he will be able to do it. Can he throw a chain or run a DMD sheet, well no. If I showed him once could he, well yes. Did we forget to show the focus of the importance of the calculations to those we trained and have, subsequently, created our own monsters with respect to this article, yes.
I don't know the author, but he sounds like the standard CEU talker. Remember the good old days. Well, they weren't that good, but, they did require a larger knowledge base than today, that is for sure. Those that do not embrace the new, in conjunction of the old, are just as much of the problem as those who embrace the new and say they do not need the old.
I do think that many who are on the "circuit" were good, but today cannot go and prove it in the dirt. Many don't have to. Some still can. I recently had a semi-argument with one of the CEU presenters. He said he didn't need GPS and that best fit routines were the worst thing ever. Both are absolute BS and both have applications. Understanding when to use both are what separates the men from the boys or, in this case, the old from the new.
"resulted in a panhandle with a width of 19.5 feet, something that was obviously unacceptable"
Maybe, maybe not, 19.5 can sure be argued to round up to 20; depending how the law reads, and depending if the parcel was accepted in the past by a regulator then it may be accepted legally.
I know a number of attorneys that could well argue that it meets regulations for a number of reasons.
Sometimes we get way too caught in numbers.
As far as surveyors who don't know how to survey or how numbers work, I see much better results in the GPS era than what came before it. Maybe I'm in a area that has better surveyors. From comments on this board Texas must be a mess.
I just received an email that shows a surveyor in the area having set two rebars with his caps about 0.3' apart. Is it disgraceful for another surveyor to point out this practice and say he doesn't know what the hell he is doing?
Tommy Young, post: 397447, member: 703 wrote: I just received an email that shows a surveyor in the area having set two rebars with his caps about 0.3' apart. Is it disgraceful for another surveyor to point out this practice and say he doesn't know what the hell he is doing?
I've never seen that in 40 years of practice and doubt it's true. OTOH I've recorded an ROS, 10 years later been surveying nearby with discovery of original monuments where I had to call one of my earlier ROS pins as found, not accepted, 0.3' north of corner. Gosh that was embarrassing!
But I did not pull it, pincushion it or otherwise muddy the waters concerning its repose. It had little effect on my contemporary ROS and the County reviewer was amused, but agreed with me and accepted my most recent ROS without adding the disclaimer he's entitled to add.
Mike Marks, post: 397456, member: 1108 wrote: I've never seen that in 40 years of practice and doubt it's true.
It is true. I've got the photographic evidence, and this isn't the only picture I have of this surveyor pincushioning his own corner.
Mike Marks, post: 397456, member: 1108 wrote: I've never seen that in 40 years of practice and doubt it's true. OTOH I've recorded an ROS, 10 years later been surveying nearby with discovery of original monuments where I had to call one of my earlier ROS pins as found, not accepted, 0.3' north of corner. Gosh that was embarrassing!
But I did not pull it, pincushion it or otherwise muddy the waters concerning its repose. It had little effect on my contemporary ROS and the County reviewer was amused, but agreed with me and accepted my most recent ROS without adding the disclaimer he's entitled to add.
I have to agree with Tommy cause Ive seen it also. But its rare, the last one was a corner with two monuments about .6' apart. Same #, i just pulled the "off" one and left the "good" one.
Mike Marks, post: 397456, member: 1108 wrote: I've never seen that in 40 years of practice and doubt it's true.
A few years ago I found a surveyors pin and cap and literally touching it was the SAME surveyors pin and cap. I shot them both and went to his office that afternoon to let him know. We went to the site together and he asked me which one checked better...he pulled the other one.
I have a picture but I won't post it. I like the guy and in general he does good work. We laugh about it at every conference and he makes fun of himself for it.
Accidents happen and maybe he had a crappy crew that didn't bother to get a metal detector out before setting the other rod. Who knows but his quality of work got him close enough to make them touch...I guess.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Jason Graves, post: 397557, member: 9531 wrote:
Crap. That didn't post correctly
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
paden cash, post: 396963, member: 20 wrote: I thought so too. But I think Mike spends a lot of time blowing hot air over a room full of folks in the legal profession. I'm sure he's not a dummy but it seems he might be 'calling names' in our profession merely for the sake of selling tickets to his seminars or magazine articles.
meh...
Anyone who can get large government bureaucracies to change their way has my vote of confidence. Michael did it with the San Diego Grand Jury! Brilliant! He is also working on FEMA. Bravo!!!! http://www.amerisurv.com/PDF/TheAmericanSurveyor_Pallamary-SanDiegoGrandJury_Vol10No7.pdf
Jp