I'm right there with you. Twenty years of surveying and the are some things that you just have to do for documentation and sometimes certification. It may even go as far as shooting GCPs with a robotics total station or running a level loop if accuracy requires it. Collection raw logs and point metadata can come into play to so I'm pretty sure we know how to get accuracy.Yes. We set up a base station on a surveyed benchmark that provides an RTK stream to refine the aircraft's GPS numbers. I've flown both ways; both with an RTK stream supplemented with Aeropoints as checkpoints as well as without an RTK stream using only the Aeropoints as control points and checkpoints. I've flown with and without terrain avoidance ( and that term is not accurate in this case) which only became available on the FireFly sometime last summer?? It makes a difference.
I know by looking at the data and comparing it, then spot checking it in the field. I don't take anything for granted. I'm old school. Technology breaks when you need to rely on it the most. I don't trust anything I haven't field verified when it comes to the important stuff. A lot of things we collect fall outside that level of scrutiny. It doesn't matter if a tree is exactly at that given location of if its 5 inches east of where we drop the point. OTOH, a 13.2 KVA duct bank is down to the centimeter, as is a fiber trunk line. Some things you can't afford to find accidently. At that voltage everyone about 8 feet around the excavator will be a mort.
The bottom line is you have to trust the equipment. But I don't trust the equipment so I have more equipment to check the numbers multiple times. If they come up close (1-2cm) THEN I know we did it right.