MorePosted By John Francis on 1/29/2010 at 7:37 AM
In particular L1/L2 & GLONAS
In Ohio, it seems many property owners have a penchant for planting pine trees at or near property lines and especially near corners.
Obviously this means GPS is not worth a carraap(RTK or STATIC).
Most places where things can be located, there are trees, but enough open space to make RTK useable . . . barely.
What I'm wondering is between static, rapid-static and RTK, which has proven to be the best way to collect data?
In RTK, when I'm in these conditions, I get a FIX and let it sit, then take a reading. After gettng a couple of readings, I usually raise or lower the rod(my rover's always on a 15' rod) and get additional shots, or I walk 10 or so feet away and get shots(then measure between the shots).
OF COURSE, this winds up taking 20-30 or more minutes.
I have done rapid static in these conditions and the results were varied, although I do have to say that the final static results properly indicated the expected accuracy(in other words I have not been fooled . . . so far).
I'm not asking anyone who might have a thought on this "what works", since it's all a little bit of a carraap-shoot anyway, BUT, I am asking if anyone has a reasonable preference that seems to work decently in somewhat questionable areas.
To read the rest of this thread go to www.i-boards.com/bnp/pob/messages.asp?MsgID=1525572&ThreadID=143839&IsResponse=False#1525572.
In particular L1/L2 & GLONAS
In Ohio, it seems many property owners have a penchant for planting pine trees at or near property lines and especially near corners.
Obviously this means GPS is not worth a carraap(RTK or STATIC).
Most places where things can be located, there are trees, but enough open space to make RTK useable . . . barely.
What I'm wondering is between static, rapid-static and RTK, which has proven to be the best way to collect data?
In RTK, when I'm in these conditions, I get a FIX and let it sit, then take a reading. After gettng a couple of readings, I usually raise or lower the rod(my rover's always on a 15' rod) and get additional shots, or I walk 10 or so feet away and get shots(then measure between the shots).
OF COURSE, this winds up taking 20-30 or more minutes.
I have done rapid static in these conditions and the results were varied, although I do have to say that the final static results properly indicated the expected accuracy(in other words I have not been fooled . . . so far).
I'm not asking anyone who might have a thought on this "what works", since it's all a little bit of a carraap-shoot anyway, BUT, I am asking if anyone has a reasonable preference that seems to work decently in somewhat questionable areas.
To read the rest of this thread go to www.i-boards.com/bnp/pob/messages.asp?MsgID=1525572&ThreadID=143839&IsResponse=False#1525572.
