) To: Kirk
Schmidt , qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org Subject: Re:
[Qgis-user] Trimble GeoXT 2005 Accuracy Hi Kirk,OK, I'll rule out the PPP for
now, although it doesn't seem to be practical for production mapping anyway.I
think my antennas are probably OK, none of them have a ground plane
Hi Kirk,
OK, I'll rule out the PPP for now, although it doesn't seem to be
practical for production mapping anyway.
I think my antennas are probably OK, none of them have a ground plane,
not practical for field mapping. I've only seen them in geodetic
applications. Of course, the aircraft
o your
survey corner.
Sent from my Galaxy
Original message
From: Springfield Harrison
Date: 2021-03-08 3:17 p.m. (GMT-04:00)
To: Nicolas Cadieux
Cc: kirk , Jorge Gustavo Rocha
, qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org, Greg Troxel
, Dan <19dm...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Q
Hi Springfield:
PPP requires long observation times in the order of hours and therefore
a new field survey. I would try post processing from a high precision
site with your existing data.
Another issue may be the aviation antennae you mentioned. These are
usually mounted on the top of a
Hello Garth,
Thanks very much for that reference. I have used the service in the past.
I'm in the middle of other work but may try to re-process some Map A
files using PPP to see what changes.
Your work sounds more like surveying than mapping, interesting.
I do use the GPS reception
Nicolas Cadieux wrote:
Kirk could be on the right track. You could try PPP using this site. You will need to create a user name and password. Then, you upload the Rinex file. I am 99% sure you can process point from outside of Canada.
I routinely use CSRS PPP to post process RINEX files
iles are being converted to gpx on a computer
>>>> since the raw terrasync files are proprietary binary files. If you are
>>>> using trimble pathfinder, you can post process differentialy correct the
>>>> data if you have access to base station logged at
) To: Nicolas
Cadieux Cc: kirk ,
Jorge Gustavo Rocha , qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org, Greg Troxel
, Dan <19dm...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Qgis-user] Trimble
GeoXT 2005 Accuracy
I'm resending this without the map as there is a size limit. The moderator
may let it through, I hope . . . .
:17 p.m. (GMT-04:00) To: Nicolas
Cadieux Cc: kirk ,
Jorge Gustavo Rocha , qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org, Greg Troxel
, Dan <19dm...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Qgis-user] Trimble
GeoXT 2005 Accuracy
I'm resending this without the map as there is a size limit. The moderator
may let it thro
4:00)
To: kirk , Jorge Gustavo Rocha
, qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org, Greg Troxel
, Dan <19dm...@gmail.com>, Nicolas Cadieux
Subject: Re: [Qgis-user] Trimble GeoXT 2005 Accuracy
Hello All, Thanks for the comments, I'll reply more fully tomorrow.
The receiver is Trimble mapping grade: "The GeoExplore
Hi Greg,
The cadastre is a provincial entity:
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/data/geographic-data-services/land-use/integrated-cadastral-fabric
A quick search didn't reveal accuracy specs but because these are legal
entities they have to be tight. Just talked to someone who manged this
Hi Greg,
Comments inserted below -
-
Cheers, Spring
On 08/Mar/2021 08:36, Greg Troxel wrote:
[I'm not sure how on-topic this is for qgis-user, but I'm guessing it's
relevant enough, at least until a Moderator comment otherwise.]
You're right but I took my que from other GPS related
[I'm not sure how on-topic this is for qgis-user, but I'm guessing it's
relevant enough, at least until a Moderator comment otherwise.]
Springfield Harrison writes:
To figure out what's going on this description needs to be tightened up,
which is probably going to require trimble documentation
gpx.
>>
>> As I mentioned in my previous comments, there are many issues which affect
>> accuracy. Just because the box says it is accurate you will rarely
>> replicate that in the field.
>>
>> In terms of WAAS dataframes, these are processed internally on
message From: Springfield Harrison
Date: 2021-03-07 5:57 a.m. (GMT-04:00) To: kirk
, Jorge Gustavo Rocha ,
qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org, Greg Troxel , Dan
<19dm...@gmail.com>, Nicolas Cadieux Subject: Re:
[Qgis-user] Trimble GeoXT 2005 Accuracy
Hello All,
cha
Date: 2021-03-06 6:41 p.m. (GMT-04:00)
To: qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [Qgis-user] Trimble GeoXT 2005 Accuracy
Hi,
I just jump in this thread to say I'm really impressed with
Ardusimple. I have a RTK Handheld Surveyor Kit [1] for +- 400 € and it
works really well.
I use the nat
Yes the Emlid unit is quite interesting for the price...
Nicolas Cadieux
https://gitlab.com/njacadieux
> Le 6 mars 2021 à 11:04, Dan <19dm...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>
> Kirk is spot on. That unit is for GIS use and cannot receive RTK GNSS
> corrections. You will need a survey grade receiver,
:41 p.m. (GMT-04:00) To: qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org Subject:
Re: [Qgis-user] Trimble GeoXT 2005 Accuracy
Hi,
I just jump in this thread to say I'm really impressed with
Ardusimple. I have a RTK Handheld Surveyor Kit [1] for +- 400 €
and it works really well.
I use
Hi,
I don’t currently have enough internet to check out the unit but I imagine this
is a single band unit with an onboard antenna. I imagine you are using it in
“point and shoot mode” or static mode where you are not taking measurements
over a long period time, nor are you using a second unit
Hi,
I just jump in this thread to say I'm really impressed with Ardusimple.
I have a RTK Handheld Surveyor Kit [1] for +- 400 € and it works really
well.
I use the national NTRIP service and I have consistently precisions
around 10 cm with just one receiver.
I use a free Android application
Springfield Harrison writes:
> My assumption (now it seems likely wrong) was that SBAS (WAAS in
> southern BC?) would "adapt" to the CRS designated in the receiver
> (NAD83, UTN 10N) and was also localized to the field location (as in
> Wide Area). Thus QGIS would see the resulting NAD83, UTM
OK, thanks for that. Lots of options. I tried the Ardu approach with
drones (Arducopter) and the tinkering overhead was horrendous, highly
experimental. I gave up and got a DJI that was stable out of the box.
Lots of CrazyGlu for the Arducopter!
I would like a good datalogger for my older
Springfield Harrison writes:
> Thanks Dan. See my relies to Kirk and Greg. The Emlid sounds
> interesting, will have a look.
I have an earlier Emlid Reach (not RS or RS2), which has L1 only, and I
never got it to work well.
Also look at the Ardusimple unit -- but it's more a parts kit than
Thanks Dan. See my relies to Kirk and Greg. The Emlid sounds
interesting, will have a look.
Thanks again . . . .
-
Cheers, Spring
On 06/Mar/2021 08:03, Dan wrote:
Kirk is spot on. That unit is for GIS use and cannot receive RTK GNSS
corrections. You will need a survey grade receiver,
Hello Greg, thanks for your notes. I think it involves Datum issues, as
you say. It seems to be very murky.
My assumption (now it seems likely wrong) was that SBAS (WAAS in
southern BC?) would "adapt" to the CRS designated in the receiver
(NAD83, UTN 10N) and was also localized to the field
hmidt
Sent from my Galaxy
Original message
From: Springfield Harrison
Date: 2021-03-06 4:35 a.m. (GMT-04:00)
To: qgis-user
Subject: [Qgis-user] Trimble GeoXT 2005 Accuracy
Hello All,
I recently acquired a Trimble GeoXT 2005 Series and am puzzled by the
results it p
Kirk is spot on. That unit is for GIS use and cannot receive RTK GNSS
corrections. You will need a survey grade receiver, with RTK corrections
(or post processed) for better accuracy.
Budget option for cm accuracy is the Emlid Reach RS or RS2
On Sat, 6 Mar 2021 at 23:53, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
Springfield Harrison writes:
> I recently acquired a Trimble GeoXT 2005 Series and am puzzled by the
> results it produces:
>
> 1. Compared to a variety of "known" points, it consistently records
>positions that appear to be in error by 1.2 - 1.5 m NW from the
>known point.
> 2. Points
rom: Springfield Harrison
Date: 2021-03-06 4:35 a.m. (GMT-04:00) To: qgis-user
Subject: [Qgis-user] Trimble GeoXT 2005 Accuracy
Hello All,
I recently acquired a Trimble GeoXT 2005 Series and am puzzled by
the results it produces:
Compared to a variety of "known
Hello All,
I recently acquired a Trimble GeoXT 2005 Series and am puzzled by the
results it produces:
1. Compared to a variety of "known" points, it consistently records
positions that appear to be in error by 1.2 - 1.5 m NW from the
known point.
2. Points are collected and then mapped
30 matches
Mail list logo
