Ok guys, here is the scenario. Hardware includes 3 Loci, the original HP48GX controller, and software version is Locus 1.2
Static session done, all fits great. Then comes the kinematic. On the bar. Processing looks good, but there are a few things that don't really look right. For instance, the site ID I used for the initialization point on the bar is listed under the sites tab as processed. Everything else listed as adjusted. The site is "greyed out" so to speak, as it has been denoted as the "kinematic initialization point" and the box under properties for this observation is checked. Now, what is very peculiar, is that the X, Y and Z of this "site", on the bar, differ from the site at the other end of the bar by about 5.4'X, 2.6'Y and a whopping 12'Z!
I must note that the kinematic session was run with 2 Loci static, the third being the "rover" that began its' day on the bar.
Chi square passes fine. 95% error none.
"Reprocessing all" results in the absolute loss of 4 static vectors to 2 sites. The files are there, but somehow they just didn't process. The vectors in the map view appear as dashed, and the sites tab shows them as "raw".
Exit without saving. Go back to project and it looks like it did when I started.

Enter same data and Solutions 2.4
Solutions 2.4 can't handle the custom grid (the old grid to ground routine we had to do in 1.2) and defaults to WGS84. Attempting to work with the project here is a nightmare! I find no spot to delineate the kinematic initialization point on the bar (although it is "greyed out"), the antenna heights are all 0 for the kinematic shots, and all the kinematic observations of 15 seconds each are listed as "static", and the points where I was walking between shots are listed as "kinematic"! Furthermore, if the antenna types are changed from "unknown" to the Locus designation of "800372", it furthermore conflicts with the "antenna height". In this case, I had the rover Locus on the 2 meter pole, with the quick adapter that when measured made the antenna height 2.23 meters.
So, anybody have any suggestions? And STILL, the 64 million dollar question...if you are using Solutions 2.4 and designating the 800372 antenna parameters, are you measuring to the BOTTOM of the receiver or are you changing the offsets in the antenna properties tab for "this session" or ???

Dave:
It's my understanding that the vertical height for the locus is to the bottom of the receiver and slant height is to the extender. In 1.xx versions the .125m vertical offset had to be accounted for in vertical height, but in 2.4 the software accounts for it when the 800372 antenna is defined. I hope someone corrects me if I'm wrong.
As far as the screwey data, I don't have any suggestions. Perhaps someone will have a solution.
terry

I have some answers for this evening and will work on more tomorrow. I feel like I keep answering this question about the antenna height measurement but maybe I need to paint a bigger sign.

With the new version of Solutions you get to choose whether you will measure the vertical height to the ARP or the slant height to the antenna measuring point. The former works well for antennae on poles, with or without adapters. The latter works well for wood tripods where a height to the ARP is harder to get.

So where is the ARP? It is the bottom of the antenna, or the bottom of the Locus, where it mounts to the pole.

You don't have to use one or the other measuring method. You can use both in one project. You just have to keep up with what you did and where.

How much of the $64 million was that worth?

Solutions calls the points where you stop and put in a SiteID static points. Let's hope you are static when you take those shots because if you wiggle too much it will kick you out of static and back to kinematic. In between shots, when you are moving, it calls the data kinematic since it is doing all it can to keep a solution while you are moving around.

I do not have an answer for why the initialization is peculiar. I am going to have to consult Mr. Wizard for that one. Maybe one of the other guys will clue you in yet this evening. The last time this was a discussion topic at the office it centered around what order each of the receivers was synchronized with the HP (or IPAQ), whether they had a good solution going when they were synchronized, and whether the operator verified that communication had taken place. As I recall, the procedure we went for was the odd man first, then the base with the bar, then the rover. Richard and I were successful with that when we tried it.

Use project settings to choose the appropriate coordinate system and map projection. You should always start with something related to the NSRS (even if it's raw GPS) and then switch to that local grid or ground system when data processing and adjusting is almost done. I only saw the Locus local grid in action once or twice. After I figured out the way the new software does it I was much more impressed with it. It does a good job of giving you a choice of matching a total station traverse or creating a ground coordinate system on its own. If you don't like the way it works you can always use your COGO to turn those grid coordinates into ground coordinates like I did long before such tools were put in GPS processing software.

Remember, Dave, you don't have to feel like a mushroom, the tech support team really does want to help you get used to your new software. It will cost much less than $64 million.

Come to one of my seminars and we will get you completely squared away on antenna height measurement. I have pictures.

Phil,

Good enough. Now, lets suppose you have a network that was done with Processor 1.1 or 1.2. You now bring that project into Solutions 2.4 and add new data that you have just observed. The old data is going to list the antenna type as "unknown", and the new data is tagged as type 800372.
For some reason, you change all the old data from "unknown" to 800372, and "process all". What is going to happen?
I'll look at things again this weekend. Thanks again for your answer to the $64 million dollar question. The ARP vs. the AMP toggle just seems like a disaster waiting to happen, but then again I am the guy that measures the height 3 times before starting and 3 times before I take it down. How many times have I sent my assistant to a site and told him "the only thing you can screw up is the height measurement"....and guess what happens.