In geodetic surveying, we consider the spherical geometry of the surface though the surface is not perfectly spherical.
In-plane surveying, we consider a small surface area which is considered as a plane or flat surface whose results upon surveying do not get affected. But can't totally neglect the curvature of the earth's surface so the assumption of flatness must affect results to some extent.
I know that geodetic surveying has great precision than plane surveying. However, both will be accurate though.
If both survey methods were performed for an area then what would be the "precision difference"(in terms of significant figures/numbers) between these two surveying methods for the same area?
I am questioning about the "closeness of the results" of plane surveying to the actual/real parameters. So what is reality then? This is what we are trying to achieve with well equipped, periodically improved and advanced technology for great accuracy and precision that hadn't been achieved before. I want to compare their precision because I think results from geodetic surveying are very close to reality so "comparing these readings with plane surveying allows us to find out the extent to which the assumption of flatness affects results?"
And generally what is the precision (in numbers) for these(individual) methods when performed in their standard confined areas? I think this question can be answered with some experimental readings and experiences.