Why not just go with meters? 
(I know the answer, state laws…) But given that the feet is already based on the meter, not using the meter is simply just extra work 
2 Likes
I wish we could… I love the metric world !!! Meters are your friend.
But the standard is feet in the USA, whether ift (SC) or usft elsewhere. When showing control marks on our maps, I show ift and meters.
Have to go with the flow…
Same thing here and all CAD and Engineering work is done the same. I would love to work in meters, but it’s not surveyors that are the problem there. Talk to the Architects… inches, bleh…
1 Like
We’ll, if you consider that we as Surveyors/Contractors use decimal format of the foot, it’s similar to the metric system.
A lot of people really can’t even comprehend that. Foot divided into hundredths and tenths, really messes with the minds of architecture field
Haha, wait until someone picks up the wrong tape measure…
I have seen construction plan tolerances to 1/32in before which is barely achievable with an optical instrument. I guess 0.01ft isn’t good enough.
I think all measurement systems are daft in some respect. I mean basing a system off of a theoretical measurement of the earth? Or we can go all the way back to a cubit based off of body parts which is reported as 1.5ft. At least that is somewhat achievable if you take a couple of people and pick the one in the middle. I’m not a big guy and my cubit is 1.528ft. Yep, that how surveyors measure. It’s funny though how my foot is a foot and my stride is 3.0ft. I was in a contest at a training one time and whoever paced off 100ft the closest won a gift card. I was 99.8ft 
.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 100 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.