After getting ideas on ground control points for more accurate maps I am curious what others have done. I am not a licensed surveyor and I do not advertise services as such. In order to provide a more accurate product I wanted to start using ground control points but I am at odds with myself if this is even possible. Do you have to be a licensed surveyor to get coordinates for GPCs? My plan was to being to utilize them for more accurate maps and just shoot point with the Emlid Reach RS+ as a rover and base unit. The final work product would not be advertised as a survey and measurements would not be given to our clients although they would be able to perfrom their own measurements through our DD Enterprise license.
You do not need to be a PLS to set GCP’s or create aerial maps. Non-PLS mappers are not permitted to call out dimensions related to real property nor make any markings on the ground that delineate said real property.
An Emlid RS+ base and rover would be a great way to make your maps more relatively accurately. This does not mean that they will necessarily be more accurate to the world or a project using a specific or specialized coordinate system, but measurements from point to point on the map should match the same measurements on the ground much better.
Have you visited the Emlid Community Forum? I am @chascoadmin on there.
Thanks Michael. I figured you may have some input given your experience. I had actually started research on the Emlid products based on your previous posts. They are certainly more appealing in terms of affordability as opposed to Trimble units. I will check out the community forum before I really think about a new purchase. These units will be used in conjunction with our current Mavic 2 Pro to hopefully tighten up the models and maps. I am also contemplating switching to a Phantom 4 Pro for better mapping but need to find out what is a better use of capital moving into the new year.
Depending upon where you are located you might check to see what type of CORS NTRIP services are available in your area. Many places have free services that can be connected to. Unfortunately Texas makes you pay no matter what direction you go. This would potentially eliminate the need for a second receiver as a base station and may give you the capability to purchase an RS2 as a rover. I would highly suggest the RS2 over the RS+ if you can justify it. It won’t necessarily be more accurate, but it will be more efficient and save a few frustrating days when satellite performance is not the best.
I would recommend the move to the P4P V2.0 as well, but how strongly depends on what your projects will consist of and what your environment is like. The Mavics are very capable to a point. Any cons against them regarding the rolling shutter while still true is not nearly as big of a deal as it once was with there being many more compensations in modern processing softwares. My main beefs are the size and FOV of the camera. It requires more work to cover the same area as a P4P which is a double whammy when you start doing larger projects.
Finding a network shouldnt be a problem here in North Dakota. The agricultural industry in the state requires NTRIP for equipment. I will dig into it further. One RS2 would be nice and as mentioned, more efficient for a one man band such as myself (for now).
As far as the Phantom, all of our work is in the western part of the state in oil country. Lots of dust and dirt and I am not sure the Mavic is up to the task long term. The enterprise series would be more beneficial but certainly not at the price points they are now.