Variable rate drilling

[Clive]

I suppose the cost of gatekeeper is not bad compared to the cost of paying soyl to produce our maps for us....

It's very easy in gk

 

[farmerfred86]

Depending on the cost of the proposed soyl website it may be better for us to use GK mapping as the data for our fields will never change... Only the rates used...

 

[Brisel]

The cost of the mySOYL website should be cheaper than paying SOYL techs to do the shape files for you. Most of the cost is the conductivity scanning & ground truthing.

I told my SOYL rep I wouldn't be paying 50p/ha for shape files generated by their website in future. IIRC I should have the BGR files somewhere which can be imported into Gatekeeper. SOYL don't own the data, you do.

 

[T Hectares]

Depending on the cost of the proposed soyl website it may be better for us to use GK mapping as the data for our fields will never change... Only the rates used...

Have you looked at the Courtyard partnership ? I have been using their toolbox to generate my own VRA drilling plans for 2 seasons now, I'm very pleased with it, I also use it for VRA p+k plans, and lime, my own costings showed the system more than paid for its self through p+k savings, which meant the seed plans are free, As has been mentioned before, the more variable your soils, the more more benefit to varying seed rates.

 

[Clive]

Have you looked at the Courtyard partnership ? I have been using their toolbox to generate my own VRA drilling plans for 2 seasons now, I'm very pleased with it, I also use it for VRA p+k plans, and lime, my own costings showed the system more than paid for its self through p+k savings, which meant the seed plans are free, As has been mentioned before, the more variable your soils, the more more benefit to varying seed rates.

Has anyone ever proved that VRA P&K improves GM rather than just save money ? - saving money is easy, you don't need computer to not apply something !

I was doing VRA P&K 12 years ago, i don't now despite having all the kit and PC know how to do it myself at no cost

 

[Brisel]

Good question. I justified to myself by money saved on blanket maintenance or corrective doses of P, K, MG & lime. When base fert prices were high gave a positive return over additional input cost in year one vs. blanket doses. That was ok for the first 4 years. How do we quantify it now???

Time to ignore the spreadsheets & sleep soundly, safe in the knowledge we know our soil variablility in greater detail than we did before?

 

[Clive]

Good question. I justified to myself by money saved on blanket maintenance or corrective doses of P, K, MG & lime. When base fert prices were high gave a positive return over additional input cost in year one vs. blanket doses. That was ok for the first 4 years. How do we quantify it now???

Time to ignore the spreadsheets & sleep soundly, safe in the knowledge we know our soil variablility in greater detail than we did before?

i have a theory now that most precision farming is being done because it can be and not because it should be !

I love doing it as I find the tech interesting but I don't kid myself it makes us money !

 

[Steevo]

i have a theory now that most precision farming is being done because it can be and not because it should be !

I love doing it as I find the tech interesting but I don't kid myself it makes us money !

Agreed, think you're right there Clive. Guidance pays for itself no question, but anything else i'm not so sure about.

 

[Clive]

Agreed, think you're right there Clive. Guidance pays for itself no question, but anything else i'm not so sure about.

yes guidance is the only think I haver ever been able to hand on heart say improves the bottom line

the rest is interesting and very clever but not much evidence to say it makes money at all - in most case the resolution is just to large to base inputs upon from samples and the models application is based on is wrong using a very over simplified idx system to work out needs with no regard to nutrient availability or crop needs

until we have live sample system - real time tissue testing as we drive through crops (pipe dream !) VRA N P&K are pointless imo

 

[Renaultman]

I think most precision farming is done more because it can be than that it actually adds much (if anything)

Keeps the job interesting though !

Do you think it's any better than actually 'knowing'the field?
Knowing what will respond to more seed or fert and what is just throwing good money after bad? There are so many things that can affect the seed once it's actually in the ground, I agree it keeps it interesting though.

 

[Clive]

Do you think it's any better than actually 'knowing'the field?
Knowing what will respond to more seed or fert and what is just throwing good money after bad? There are so many things that can affect the seed once it's actually in the ground, I agree it keeps it interesting though.

its very interesting and I do like messing about with it

I think a lot of big farms maybe don't know their land so well so the box in the cab is to some extent replacing the quality operator who has drilled the land etc for many years and knows the thin / thick patches

I'm not saying PF tech is useless but its not the silver bullet its often sold as IME

 

[T Hectares]

I dont think sweeping statements can be claimed for VRA p+k, it depends on your farm, the less your indices and soil type vary the less need for it, if any, we too have been in and out of it for 15 years, we have varying soils and indices and use significant tonnages of sewage cake, cattle fym and dirty water and digestate, the VRA helps to even up the nutrients applied through these sources with targetted applications to the parts of the field that require them, for us that has worked out as a saving over the last period we had of blanket applications, some parts of the fields have received higher rates as a result, some less, some none at all, it's not just about cutting back, as I am sure you are aware

 

[T Hectares]

its very interesting and I do like messing about with it

I think a lot of big farms maybe don't know their land so well so the box in the cab is to some extent replacing the quality operator who has drilled the land etc for many years and knows the thin / thick patches

I'm not saying PF tech is useless but its not the silver bullet its often sold as IME

You are quite right, but now we can vary seedrates in line with our past experiences of our soil types, using our yield maps to back this up, then not apply unnessary nutrients where they are not needed, I for one would find it hard to go back to blanket rates !! As soon as we put steering in the main tractor the controller allowed is to do all this at minimal cost, pf facilitates a transfer of knowledge and experience into practical tasks imho, how do you implicate it without pf, in reality you don't, back to blanket apps and guess work !!!

 

[Clive]

You are quite right, but now we can vary seedrates in line with our past experiences of our soil types, using our yield maps to back this up, then not apply unnessary nutrients where they are not needed, I for one would find it hard to go back to blanket rates !! As soon as we put steering in the main tractor the controller allowed is to do all this at minimal cost, pf facilitates a transfer of knowledge and experience into practical tasks imho, how do you implicate it without pf, in reality you don't, back to blanket apps and guess work !!!

Most PF is guess work - all those pretty contoured nutrient maps are just a guess based on a equation between a few known points

the index system is flawed and the applications you make are based upon it - its all very clever but not really that good if you look beyond the sales pitch !

 

[T Hectares]

Most PF is guess work - all those pretty contoured nutrient maps are just a guess based on a equation between a few known points

the index system is flawed and the applications you make are based upon it - its all very clever but not really that good if you look beyond the sales pitch !

Surely a standard application is just as flawed, with no account taken of in field variation ?

 

[Steevo]

Most PF is guess work - all those pretty contoured nutrient maps are just a guess based on a equation between a few known points

the index system is flawed and the applications you make are based upon it - its all very clever but not really that good if you look beyond the sales pitch !

I think you are correct here Clive. The sales pitch and the coloured maps make it look extremely accurate, as if there is a distinct dividing line between this patch and that. It's all extrapolation of data , nothing more. If you run 10 P, K, pH samples in a 10ha field (each costing £10 each), you're still working based on patches that are 100m x 100m, that's a pretty big pixel. You could divide it down to 100 samples, but the sampling cost would then be £900 for the field, excluding the labour involved in sampling.

Then, even if you did this greater sampling accuracy.....you're then applying fertiliser in 24m wide lines up and down the field, a boom width spanning two and a half pixels. It's like painting the Mona Lisa using a paint roller!

 

[Clive]

Surely a standard application is just as flawed, with no account taken of in field variation ?

Indeed it is but it doesn't pretend to be anything its not either

I would rather feed P& K etc based on crop needs rather than soil indices

money spent on ha grid samples for VRA applications would be better spent on some decent Albrecht tests on most farms - farms are already divided up into nice grids called fields (our ancestors did a good job of this early Precision farming !) 1 x proper test per field and then a clear picture of what is needed to correct ratios rather than just looking whats missing plus crop needs would I bet get most farms better results without a computer or control box in sight

 

[Clive]

I think you are correct here Clive. The sales pitch and the coloured maps make it look extremely accurate, as if there is a distinct dividing line between this patch and that. It's all extrapolation of data , nothing more. If you run 10 P, K, pH samples in a 10ha field (each costing £10 each), you're still working based on patches that are 100m x 100m, that's a pretty big pixel. You could divide it down to 100 samples, but the sampling cost would then be £900 for the field, excluding the labour involved in sampling.

Then, even if you did this greater sampling accuracy.....you're then applying fertiliser in 24m wide lines up and down the field, a boom width spanning two and a half pixels. It's like painting the Mona Lisa using a paint roller!

exactly - there is bugger all precision about it other than the way its sold

until live real time tissue testing exists it will be of rather limited use

 

[T Hectares]

Indeed it is but it doesn't pretend to be anything its not either

I would rather feed P& K etc based on crop needs rather than soil indices

money spent on ha grid samples for VRA applications would be better spent on some decent Albrecht tests on most farms - farms are already divided up into nice grids called fields (our ancestors did a good job of this early Precision farming !) 1 x proper test per field and then a clear picture of what is needed to correct ratios rather than just looking whats missing plus crop needs would I bet get most farms better results without a computer or control box in sight

With your reference to grids, do I take it that when you talk of pf you are referring to soyl ? We used to use them, but came to similar conclusions, that's why we now use courtyard, they use those nicely difined grids called "different bits of soil in a field" of course they call them "zones" which they then test, and of course they charge to package the zones together into a toolbox to allow you make differing decisions on different soil types, but it's cheaper than soyl, and from our past experiences, allows us to make more decisions ourselves ( it was some time ago we used soyl of course )

 

[farmerfred86]

I had never heard of the courtyard before... Ill need to have a look.

Im reserving judgement for the moment. Our VR seeding is in the ground now. Will make a decision next year when we see the results. I agree with clive that often these are just done "because they can be" but every farm is different... Time will tell for us!