[nsg_ai_p1]
[nsg_ai_p2]
[nsg_ai_p3]
[nsg_ai_p4]
UAV surveying is often faster for capturing broad surface conditions, while ground surveying is better for certain boundary, control, and detail tasks. The right choice depends on the project objective, access, and required deliverables. In many cases, the best result comes from combining methods instead of relying on only one.
The timeline depends on scope, weather, airspace, access, and the final file types requested. After the project review, AMI can outline what to expect for collection and processing based on the site conditions and deliverables. A clear scope usually shortens the back-and-forth before scheduling.
Have the site address, project purpose, approximate area, access notes, timeline, and the deliverables you need. If you already know whether you need contours, a point cloud, orthomosaic imagery, or CAD or GIS-ready files, include that too. Those details help AMI evaluate the right workflow more efficiently.
Yes, deliverables can often be prepared for CAD, GIS, or BIM-compatible workflows depending on the project scope. The exact file types and processing steps should be confirmed during the project review so the output matches how your team plans to use the data. That prevents surprises later in design or coordination.
Have a project that needs reliable surveying, LiDAR, or reality capture deliverables? Contact Aerial Metrology & Inspection to discuss your scope, timeline, and project requirements.
