(They are doing exactly that a few miles from here though I'm paying attention). There are lots of open fields to the East, so why not extend your survey into them as well?Ī ski lift?! I wish! Given the hundreds of pounds of equipment I've schleped up and down the 300' of vertical over the past year, I should probably think of putting one in. Why didn't you run a traverse up the jeep trail to the West of where your network is? I get that you're apparently surveying control for a ski lift, but that doesn't mean that you can only run lines along the actual route of the thing. Kent McMillan, post: 386370, member: 3 wrote: Okay, so now that you've told us where your network is, I've got to know. Then, at the remote point, you can measure angles to all of the stations from which angles were taken and can observe azimuth to one or more of the stations. Where it gets very efficient and effective is if you can see the same remote point from various stations and can leave a semi-permanent target on the remote point to measure angles to it from a number of them. The exact distance should not be critical for reduction of astronomic azimuths to grid, but would be nice to have. If you can't take an azimuth observation from a station, but can see a point from the station where observations can be made, then the obvious solution is to just measure an angle and distance (or just angle) to the remote point, leave a target on the station, and go to the remote point to observe azimuth. You mean triangulate to a distant point as they did in the Arc of India? Count me in.Īctually, the technology is much simpler when you're within EDM range. Rfc, post: 386342, member: 8882 wrote: Interesting. When they did the network in India, they spent months sometimes, hacking down "vision" corridors through the jungle to distant points.hundreds of workers.Alas, I'm a field team of one. From there, I've seen some distant houses that may also be visible further down the hill. I'm headed there this fall when the leaves leave. The hill at the left of the image, along the old fence line, rises steeply. Don't think that was available previously (but don't know). (By the way, Version 8.2 of Starnet let's you put images behind your work, and also allows downloading imagery too. You mean triangulate to a distant point as they did in the Arc of India? Count me in.:) However, if there is a chance of opening up a keyhole to see some distant target from several stations, there is hope for other options. the forest, then your options are severely limited. There are quite a few other tricks that might apply, depending. Kent McMillan, post: 386340, member: 3 wrote: It would be interesting to see the terrain over which this survey extends. Is there a way to test this in Star*net by adding dummy, or fictitious observations, like from 14 to 1700 or from 1500 to 1900, and see what happens? If so, how would I characterize the errors for such "observations"? Just use the standard for distances? Thoughts? Attached files I have no easy way to get any but will if I have to (up steeply, densely wooded terrain).
![microsurvey starnet forum microsurvey starnet forum](http://s3.microsurvey.com/support/Knowledgebase/instrument-settings/instrumentsettings.jpg)
Station Semi-Major Semi-Minor Azimuth of ElevĪt first I thought it might be the number of observations south of 1600, or the veracity of the observations, but now I'm thinking that the trend south of 1600 is due to the fact that I have no triangulation across point 1600. NOTE - Adjustment Failed the Chi-Square TestĮrror Ellipses are Scaled by Total Error Factor Station Coordinate Error Ellipses (FeetUS) I'm looking at the error ellipses specifically how they trend, north to south, and see that around point 1600 they start to grow, seemingly more as a result of angles, not distances (azimuths of 90-115 or so). Ignore elevations please for this discussion (more on that later). I've freed or otherwise eliminated outliers. I generally started at the north and worked my way south. Not exactly the Arc of India, but it's a start. Finally able to adjust all 30 or so stations in phase one of my control network.