This article compares two aerial unmanned systems in terms of solving problems of engineering geodesy and cartography. The unmanned aerial vehicles described in the article represent two segments - professional and semi-professional. The main differences between the studied systems are the availability of a high-class camera with a mechanical central shutter and a high-class GNSS receiver in a professional UAV. The aerial vehicle, positioned in this study as semi-professional, has a simple camera with a digital shutter, and a navigation satellite receiver, far from geodetic accuracy on board. The article assesses the possibility of using semi-professional unmanned aerial vehicles for solving professional tasks when performing geodetic and cartographic works. As part of the study, the territory was surveyed by both unmanned aerial vehicles. Mutual comparison and assessment of the characteristics of the results were made. Conclusions on the applicability of semi-professional systems for solving professional problems are drawn. As a result of the study, the suitability of a light unmanned aerial vehicle of the semi-professional segment was revealed. The light UAVS is suitable for performing quick aerial surveys and obtain geospatial data - a point cloud and high-resolution orthophoto maps, which can be used not just for reconnaissance and optimal planning of fieldwork, but also for engineering and topographic drafting. The horizontal accuracy of the orthomosaic and its spatial resolution make it possible to decode and coordinate the terrain objects with accuracy sufficient to compile topographic plans of scales 1: 1000-1: 5000.
References
1. Shumeyko S.A., Sologubov D.S., Photogrammetric technology for 3D modeling complex production facilities (In Russ.), Neftyanoe khozyaystvo = Oil Industry, 2018, no. 10, pp. 98–101.
2. Shinkevich M.V., Vorob'eva N.G., Altyntsev M.A. et al., EvaLuation of accuracy of dense digitaL surface modeL and orthophotos, received by aeriaL imagery from the "Supercam" UAVs (In Russ.), Geomatika, 2015, no. 4, pp. 37–41.
3. Silva M.R.S., Eger R.A., Anai Y. Rosenfeldt Z., Loch C., Testing DJI Phantom 4 Pro for urban georeferencing, The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 2018, URL: https://www.int-arch-photogramm-remote-sens-spatial-inf-sci.net/XLII-1/407/2018/isprs-archives-XLII-....
4. Nagendran Sh., Tung Wen et al., Accuracy assessment on low altitude UAV-borne photogrammetry outputs influenced by ground control point at different altitude, IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2018, DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/169/1/012031.
