| caseihfarmer - 1/28/2017 19:36
Well not here and it's stupidly expensive, about 3 times more expensive than digifarm true rtk. Why pay several times more for less. Even if the repeatability was my fault explain why anyone would consider it when cost and accuracy are the only factor that matters.
Farm practices vary greatly from region to region. I suspect you're right for Nebraska, based on what little I know of growing corn and the amount of guys from that region that are on RTK. But for my region, western Canada, completely different story.
Cost and accuracy matter, but not as much as availability and reliability. We don't have Digifarm True RTK in my area. Most of my customers are unable to get consistent cell coverage in all of their fields as well. We do a huge amount of work with Centerpoint RTX.
$5000 FMX
$2000 Omnistar
$2000 RTK
$750 GLONASS (I think)
$1500 Modem
$500 Harness
$? RTK Subscription
$ data plan extra
Give or take, 11-12000 to get up and running for RTK, plus your subscriptions. Let's say $10000 for easy math.
$5000 FMX
$2000 Omnistar
$1650/year Centerpoint RTX
or
$4895/year 10 units Centerpoint RTX, or $500 a unit
10 displays would be $100 000 RTK or $70 000 Omnistar. That's $30 000 difference, or 6 years of signal, to match the same pricepoint, if you lowball RTK costs and ignore the subscription completely. Actual pricepoints would come in more strongly in favour of Centerpoint RTX. The fewer units you have running the signal, the sooner it swings in favour of RTK. It's not uncommon for clients of mine to have 2 4wd, 1 sprayer, 2 combines, 2 swathers, and perhaps a front wheel assist tractor.
If you're using Centerpoint RTX as a repeatable signal, you have to let it converge down to the level of accuracy you require. In my region, it's very common for farms to run high clearance sprayers in the same tracks multiple times with Centerpoint RTX. We're dealing with broad acre farms, not corn or potatoes, so it's likely we're more forgiving on precision requirements as well.
My customers use some of your same arguments against RTK and in favour of Centerpoint RTX. Unfortunately, like most everything in agriculture, there is no one size fits all and it's up to the customer and the dealer to arrive at the best solution for each individual operation. Some operations Centerpoint RTX is an amazing option. Most of my customers fit into that scenario. This is western Canada. 300-600HP articulating 4wd tractors, 60-86' seeding implements, 90-120' boom sprayers, wheat and canola for normal crops. Peas, lentils, and corn are starting to come into many areas, but I wouldn't consider them normal and 150 bushel corn crop would be outstanding.
I'm guessing, as your from Nebraska, you're growing mostly corn and using equipment appropriate for such. A quadtrac would probably murder a corn crop in a hurry, and most of my guys don't even own a planter, we use air drills. For your region, I suspect you're right. You have the provider to offer RTK at a low price, you have cell signal that actually works, and you have equipment sized appropriately to take advantage of the extra precision of RTK over RTX. It's hard to see half an inch when you're driving a 120' boom sprayer 18mph in a wheat field.
Hopefully that doesn't come off harsh, I'm merely wanting to point out some different farm practices in other regions and how those differences drastically change what's the best fit.
As for RTK in my area, we use it for water management almost exclusively. The locations of the fields mean multiple base stations would have to be setup, and the demand isn't there yet for networks to be in place that customers could subscribe to instead of purchasing their own. |
Tell me about RTX
