ISSN 1694-6286
e-ISSN 1694-9250
Submit Article
English
Bulletin of the Kyrgyz National Agrarian University

Search Article

Analysis of accuracy of traditional and satellite methods of geodetic measurements

T Tursunbubu Sultanalieva
Received 03.05.2025
Revised 29.07.2025
Published 10.09.2025

Abstract

The article presented a detailed comparative analysis of the accuracy of traditional and satellite methods of geodetic measurements in relation to the tasks of the agricultural sector. The aim of the work was to identify the conditions under which a particular method or their combination provides the optimal ratio of accuracy, time of performance and stability to external factors in land surveying and land reclamation works, as well as in the process of monitoring of agricultural lands. As part of the study, field experiments were conducted in areas with different geomorphological characteristics of Kyrgyzstan, including flat areas of the Chüy Valley, hilly pasture zones and mountain gardens of Jalal-Abad region. The results showed that levelling retains its leading position in terms of vertical accuracy (up to 2 mm/km), which makes it indispensable in the design of irrigation systems. Tacheometry demonstrated stable values of RMS error in plan (8-12 mm) and elevation (15-25 mm) in conditions of plains and built-up areas. GNSS measurements in RTK mode provided high performance and accuracy (5-10 mm in plan, 10-20 mm in elevation) in open terrain, but in mountainous areas the accuracy decreased to 3-5 cm due to signal interruptions. Static GNSS survey provided the highest accuracy results (3-5 mm), but it was the most time-consuming (20-40 min/point). The practical value of the study lies in the development of recommendations on the selection of the optimal methodology for cadastral works, design of land reclamation systems and implementation of precision farming technologies, where the combined use of traditional and satellite approaches is most effective

Keywords

geodesy; measurement accuracy; RMS error; traditional methods; combined methods; GNSS; GPS
Suggested citation
Sultanalieva, T. (2025). Analysis of accuracy of traditional and satellite methods of geodetic measurements. Bulletin of the Kyrgyz National Agrarian University, 23(3), 30-37. https://doi.org/10.63621/bknau./3.2025.30

References

  1. Chai, D., Wang, X., Ning, Y., & Sang, W. (2025). Partial ambiguity resolution strategy for single-frequency GNSS RTK/INS tightly coupled integration in urban environments. Electronics, 14(13), article number 2712. doi: 10.3390/electronics14132712.
  2. Cheng, C., Yang, J., Wang, C., Zheng, Z., Li, X., Dong, D., Chang, M., & Zhuang, Z. (2023). Automatic detection of aerial survey ground control points based on Yolov5-OBB. arXiv:2303.03041. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2303.03041.
  3. Chodura, N., Greeff, M., & Woods, J. (2025). Evaluation of flight parameters in UAV-based 3D reconstruction for rooftop infrastructure assessment. arXiv:2504.02084. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.02084.
  4. El-Rabbany, A. (2002). Introduction to GPS: The global positioning system. Norwood: Artech House.
  5. Haines, B., et al. (2024). A global combination of geodetic techniques at the observation level: New perspectives on the terrestrial reference frame. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 129, article number e2024JB029527. doi: 10.1029/2024JB029527.
  6. Hamza, V., Stopar, B., Sterle, O., & Pavlovčič-Prešeren, P. (2025). Recent advances and applications of low-cost GNSS receivers: A review. GPS Solutions, 29, article number 56. doi: 10.1007/s10291-025-01815-x.
  7. Huisman, L., & de Ligt, H. (2023). Validation of reference frame consistency of GNSS service products. In J.T. Freymueller & L. Sánchez (Eds.), Gravity, positioning and reference frames. REFAG 2022. International Association of Geodesy Symposia (vol. 156, pp. 175-182). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/1345_2023_232.
  8. Jansson, P., & Lundgren, L. (2018). A comparison of different methods using GNSS RTK to establish control points in cadastral surveying. Stockholm: KTH.
  9. Kutymbek, N., Yestaev, K., Rustem, E., Musabekov, K., & Tursunbayev, Kh. (2025). Justification of the impact of complex melioration on the fertility of compacted sierozem soils of irrigated lands of the Zhambyl region. Scientific Horizons, 28(3), 68-79. doi: 10.48077/scihor3.2025.68.
  10. Leick, A., Rapoport, L., & Tatarnikov, D. (2015). GPS satellite surveying. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
  11. Maboudi, M., Backhaus, J., Mai, I., Ghassoun, Y., Khedar, Y., Lowke, D., Riedel, B., Bestmann, U., & Gerke, M. (2025). Very high resolution bridge deformation monitoring using UAV-based photogrammetry. Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring. doi: 10.1007/s13349-025-01001-0.
  12. Maciuk, K. (2018). Advantages of combined GNSS processing involving a limited number of visible satellites. Scientific Journal of Silesian University of Technology. Series Transport, 98, 89-99. doi: 10.20858/sjsutst.2018.98.9.
  13. Naumowicz, B., & Kowalczyk, K. (2025). Integration of leveling and GNSS data to develop relative vertical movements of the earth’s crust using hybrid models. Applied Sciences, 15(15), article number 8224. doi: 10.3390/app15158224.
  14. Papco, J., Bakon, M., Kubica, L., Belicova, G., Droscak, B., Ferianc, M., Rovnak, M., Ruiz, A.M., & Sousa, J.J. (2024). Satellite-based InSAR geodesy and collocation with GNSS. Procedia Computer Science, 239, 2329-2340. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2024.06.426.
  15. Raufu, I.O. (2025). Exploring the accuracy of height measurements with multi-constellation RTK GNSS. Nova Geodesia, 5(2), article number 336. doi: 10.55779/ng52336.
  16. Reinprecht, V., & Kieffer, D.S. (2025). Application of UAV photogrammetry and multispectral image analysis for identifying land use and vegetation cover succession in former mining areas. Remote Sensing, 17(3), article number 405. doi: 10.3390/rs17030405.
  17. Reshadati, M., & Shirzaei, M. (2024). A model-based approach for transforming InSAR-derived vertical land motion from a local to a global reference frame. arXiv:2412.10282. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.10282.
  18. Sestras, P., Badea, G., Badea, A.C., Salagean, T., Roșca, S., Kader, S., & Remondino, F. (2025a). Land surveying with UAV photogrammetry and LiDAR for optimal building planning. Automation in Construction, 173, article number 106092. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2025.106092.
  19. Sestras, P., et al. (2025b). A novel method for landslide deformation monitoring by fusing UAV photogrammetry and LiDAR data based on each sensor’s mapping advantage in regards to terrain feature. Engineering Geology, 346, article number 107890. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2024.107890.
  20. Wagh, R.V., & Auti, S.K. (2025). The role of geographic information systems (GIS) in land use planning. International Journal of Innovations in Science, Engineering and Management, 4(1), 366-370. doi: 10.69968/ijisem.2025v4i1366-370.
  21. White, A.M., Gardner, W.P., Borsa, A.A., Argus, D.F., & Martens, H.R. (2022). A review of GNSS/GPS in hydrogeodesy: Hydrologic loading applications and their implications for water resource research. Water Resources Research, 58, article number e2022WR032078. doi: 10.1029/2022WR032078.
  22. World Geodetic System (WGS84). (n.d.). Retrieved from https://gisgeography.com/wgs84-world-geodetic-system/.
  23. Zhang, X., Yang, Y., Yang, H., Ren, X., Lin, X., Le, X., & Li, X. (2025). Performance of PPP and PPP-RTK with new-generation GNSS constellations and signals. Satellite Navigation, 6, article number 17. doi: 10.1186/s43020-025-00169-6.
  24. Zhong, H., Duan, Y., Tao, P., & Zhang, Z. (2025). Influence of ground control point reliability and distribution on UAV photogrammetric 3D mapping accuracy. Geo-Spatial Information Science, ahead of print. doi: 10.1080/10095020.2025.2451204.