[nsg_ai_p1]
[nsg_ai_p2]
[nsg_ai_p3]
[nsg_ai_p4]
UAS mapping is faster for capturing broad site conditions, while a traditional survey is often better for boundary work, control, and other tasks that require ground-based measurement. The right choice depends on the project goal, the deliverables needed, and the level of detail required. In many cases, the best result comes from combining methods rather than choosing only one.
The timeline depends on site access, weather, airspace, project size, and the processing required for the final deliverables. Smaller mapping jobs may move quickly, while larger or more complex sites need more coordination. AMI reviews the scope first so the schedule is based on the actual project, not a generic estimate.
Have the site address, project purpose, desired deliverables, timeline, and any known access limits ready. If you already know whether you need an orthomosaic, contours, a point cloud, or CAD and GIS compatible files, include that too. Clear scope information helps AMI recommend the right collection approach and avoid unnecessary revisions.
Cost depends on site size, access, control requirements, processing effort, and the final file types requested. A simple mapping package is usually different from a coordinated dataset that includes multiple deliverables. The most reliable way to get pricing is to request a quote with the project scope and intended use.
Have a project that needs reliable surveying, LiDAR, or reality capture deliverables? Contact Aerial Metrology & Inspection to discuss your scope, timeline, and project requirements.
