Topic: LDD 2005 vs Civil 3D

[drizzt]

I heard that Civil 3D will eventually replace LDD. Anyone hear/know of any condradictory information?

Also, I am looking into upgrading from LDD 2000. Should I go for the Civil 3D or the LDD 2005. Any comments will be greatly apprciated.

[MSTG007]

great question... any ideas

[Mark]

So far I'm not impressed with it. How ever I don't do a lot of design work either. I was expecting more. Seems to be just a bunch of reactor based stuff running on top of 2005. So I guess it just depends on what type of work you do. Most of mine is boundary surveys so I can't live without LDT.

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=4624505#section4

1.3 Is Autodesk Civil 3D a replacement for Autodesk Land Desktop with Autodesk Civil Design?

Autodesk Civil 3D 2005 is not a complete replacement for Autodesk Land Desktop and Autodesk Civil Design. Autodesk plans to continue to support Autodesk Land Desktop and Autodesk Civil Design. Autodesk Civil 3D is ready for use on production projects and has many new features, including model-based road design, grading, and parcel layout. However, there are some functionality gaps between Autodesk Civil 3D and the Autodesk Land Desktop/Autodesk Civil Design solution.

Autodesk recommends using Civil 3D with Land Desktop and Civil Design where functionality gaps exist and the programs were designed to allow users to “round-trip” data. For example, use Autodesk Civil Design for projects that require sewer and storm drain design or drafting. Because there is not yet a survey add-on product for Civil 3D 2005, use Autodesk Land Desktop and Autodesk® Survey to move survey data to and from the field. Autodesk Civil 3D includes tools to both import and export Autodesk Land Desktop project data, so that the products can be used together smoothly.

[Dent Cermak]

As of the relrase due out next month (Mar 05) it will be a nonissue. Civil 3D will replace all of the civil packages. I think the total LDD package will be called Civil 3D , but the civil module is the only real change. The Land Development pac and the Survey pac remain pretty much the same.
Look, they've got to change SOMETHING in order to justify forcing everyone to upgrade on an annual basis now.

[Dinosaur]

I am about half way through getting my first Civil 3D project ready for first submittal.  It is a VERY steep learning curve, but I am liking the program more as I keep using it.  It is producing excellent surfaces compared to what we are used to getting from LDDT 2k5.  It has proven difficult to get the street profiles to appear labeled the way I prefer, but once done, the settings are saved and can be reused in future drawings do much of the time spent is a one-time thing.  The Civil 3D board at AUGI is getting busy at last as more people are starting to use the program for the first time and find questions.

I think that with the next release, LDDT will be available as stand alone or be packaged with Civil 3D instead of Civil Design.  Civil design will be still be available as part of a package, probably to make up for the lack of Hydrology or Pipe Works in Civil 3D.  If / when 3D gets these modules, Civil Design will go away, so I would suggest start getting used to Civil 3D now.

[drizzt]

I currently use LDD for land permiting. Mostly sand and gravel mines, so I disign a lot of "Ponds" I need to be able to create surfaces, volumes, 3d surface visualization is a plus, but I have terra model for that if I need it. Also, dynamic cross sections would be nice! I have only needed road stuff a couple of times, but the same idea applies to trenches and dewatering pit floors.

Thank you all for your imput!

[Craig Davis]

We've purchased a couple of copies and will hopefully receive it in a couple of weeks. We have had LDD for a few years now and found it prettty useless for Civil design. The only reason we upgraded to Civil 3D was because 1. we had no choice 2. it wasn't that much of an outlay compared to the potential cost of updating later on and 3. it looked more promising than the previous LDD for civil works.

I'm dreading getting it standardised for our work and also getting the surveyors up to speed on it as well as the designers.

 

[Dinosaur]

I am just getting into my first Civil 3D project and all of the settings and styles are indeed intimidating.  The best advice I can give is to just start working on a small project and stick with it.  Create as much of the drawing as possible within 3D and establish a strict layer convention before creating anything.  The program is based almost totally on a set of objects defined by their properties and styles.  At first just let the program create the objects in the style it wants and tinker with the styles after they are in use.  Otherwise it will be a lesson in futility trying to figure out what styles you are going to use and need to change.  I also would suggest checking out AUGI's Civil 3D forum.  We are minus our heavy hitter who really knows the program at the moment, but there are a handfull of us chucking ideas and observations back and forth.  If you are patient, it will become more clear how the program works , but many of the more impatient users are giving up without giving it a fair chance.

[Anonymous]

Thank you all for your input. I really appreciate it. I took the price quotes for Civil 3D and LDT 2005 up to the big guys, and was shot down for both. So... I am still on LDD 2000.  

[drizzt]

oops forgot to log in

[sinc]

Thank you all for your input. I really appreciate it. I took the price quotes for Civil 3D and LDT 2005 up to the big guys, and was shot down for both. So... I am still on LDD 2000.  

I still know a couple of people using R14.  One of them even has 2002, but only uses it to open drawings and save down to R14.

Penny-pinching execs think they're saving money by sticking with old software, but I'm pretty sure they're actually losing money.  2000 isn't as bad as R14, but my productivity is so much higher with 2004 than with R14 that I'm sure I've made up the cost of switching many times over by now.

I think they also feel comfortable with R14, and are afraid of upgrading.  They don't want to have a rush project come in and be stuck fighting the software.  My boss was the same way - we had 2004 for several weeks before he would even try it.  The only reason he did was because I kept talking about how much better it was, and showing him new features.  He finally swallowed his trepidation and switched.  Only a week later, I heard him try to open an old project in R14, and after several excamations of dismay heard him finally decide to convert the project to 2004 and use that instead because R14 was so annoying...  (I think not being able to zoom with the scroll-wheel was the deciding factor... )

[drizzt]

Well one good thing with the company sticking with 2000 is I do get paid by the hour! I did explain to them that the efficiency is dramatically increased with an upgrade. I believe there is better color in the later versions isn't there?

[Dinosaur]

Sinc,

I think we may have been playing tag over at AUGI.

Regarding stingy exec's who won't anti up for an upgrade - mine is the odd sort of duck who will get the software and the latest computers to run it, but won't drop the cash to teach the staff how to use it.  We used r13 and EaglePoint until last spring while r2000 and LD2 set in their box because no one could take the time to even learn how to get it to plot.