Will I Save Money......

[davidroberts30]

Go on experiment. .just make sure you got enough fodder un case it goes wrong...

Slightly off topic, but has anyone tried baling grass with a big square baler and building it into a clamp to sheet down like a silage pit !?

Heard of the idea a couple of years ago but haven't had the guts to try it !! Surely it'd save on haulage and wrap ?

 

[cousinjack]

Go on experiment. .just make sure you got enough fodder un case it goes wrong...

Was keen to have a go last year, but with the lack of grass I didn't think it was the year to chance ruining a load !!
Also, may need to get on top of our rat population first ..

 

[DocPhil001]

You sure it's not cheaper to do bales

Not at all. We did bales for a season. Then went wagon the repayments on the wagon are half the cost of the plastic.

 

[Bossfarmer]

Not at all. We did bales for a season. Then went wagon the repayments on the wagon are half the cost of the plastic.

this is a very simplistic assessment, are you aware the DM losses on pit silage are generally 15-20% with the very best pits being no lower than 10%? bales range from 2-5%, the DM losses from pit more than pay the plastic

 

[davidroberts30]

this is a very simplistic assessment, are you aware the DM losses on pit silage are generally 15-20% with the very best pits being no lower than 10%? bales range from 2-5%, the DM losses from pit more than pay the plastic

All the farmers care about is the bill cost

 

[james ds]

this is a very simplistic assessment, are you aware the DM losses on pit silage are generally 15-20% with the very best pits being no lower than 10%? bales range from 2-5%, the DM losses from pit more than pay the plastic

How do you come up with such a differance , I've seen plenty of rotten bales that were not minded properly and I've seen plenty of waste on pits that were not packed or covered properly . Or you can have a pit like the one I show in the picture above with no waste . By the time that pit is fed out there won't be 10% waste. I've also seen cattle waste a lot of bale silage where they pull it in and walk on it as its not too well chopped or the bale is too near the feed barrier or if fed in round feeders a lot of the bale gets pulled out and wasted.

 

[PREES]

There was a video on the internet somewhere but I can't find it - showing a new trailed forage harvester prototype using forage wagon pick up technology with a small accumulator and an off loading conveyor to fill trailers. Idea being that you had the low energy benefits of a forage wagon but the flexibility of trailers to haul the material back to the clamp.

 

[multi power]

There was a video on the internet somewhere but I can't find it - showing a new trailed forage harvester prototype using forage wagon pick up technology with a small accumulator and an off loading conveyor to fill trailers. Idea being that you had the low energy benefits of a forage wagon but the flexibility of trailers to haul the material back to the clamp.

60 year old idea

 

[ploughman1963]

How do you come up with such a differance , I've seen plenty of rotten bales that were not minded properly and I've seen plenty of waste on pits that were not packed or covered properly . Or you can have a pit like the one I show in the picture above with no waste . By the time that pit is fed out there won't be 10% waste. I've also seen cattle waste a lot of bale silage where they pull it in and walk on it as its not too well chopped or the bale is too near the feed barrier or if fed in round feeders a lot of the bale gets pulled out and wasted.

The figures he refers to are genuine and , I believe, substantiated. It covers field losses, waste, feed area losses and, importantly, DM losses in the clamp. An outstanding operator would do well to limit losses to 10%. I am not sure about the bale figure.

 

[PREES]

60 year old idea

Fliegl Buffel - might be an old idea but it could still be a good one!

 

[james ds]

The figures he refers to are genuine and , I believe, substantiated. It covers field losses, waste, feed area losses and, importantly, DM losses in the clamp. An outstanding operator would do well to limit losses to 10%. I am not sure about the bale figure.

I had 1000 ton in a pit last winter , everything that was mowed was picked up and brought into the pit , I did not dump 100 ton waste .

 

[ploughman1963]

I had 1000 ton in a pit last winter , everything that was mowed was picked up and brought into the pit , I did not dump 100 ton waste .

These are figures put together by sensible guys measuring very carefully- the rake will not get everything, the pick up reel will miss a proportion of the smaller fraction, some silage will miss to get from the feed face to the cows and there will always be some silage rejected/left at the feed area which gets swept away every couple of days - the big loss apparently is the DM lossss in the clamp that you cannot see. You cannot say that there is no wasteage. We are pretty careful and I would like to hope that with all the care we take and extra sheets that our physical losses would be well below 10% ( we reckon we have have virtually no waste on our clamps - but with old sleeper walls there is always somewhere that the sheet gets holed by an old nail). That is before the aerobic losses that I rely on additive and clamp management to keep down - again, we work really hard at clamp management so I’d like to think that we keep that figure low. However, there must be losses so it’s a question of doing what I can to keep that figure as low as possible- but it’s never going to be zero.

On another thread I said I got hot under the collar about grass not all getting into the trailer due to overfilling, missing with the spout etc - but walk behind a trailer being filled by a forage harvester and ‘feel’ the amount of forage (the lighter fraction - including all the clover leaves that are so fragile when dry) that is landing on you/the ground. So, if I am very careful and have to accept losses of 10% (?) you can see why the experts reckon most operators are losing at least 15%.

I cannot believe the figure that was quoted for bales - I think that must have been the ‘in bag’ and feed losses as the field losses must be similar to clamp material- ie mowing tedding raking etc

 

[Bossfarmer]

How do you come up with such a differance , I've seen plenty of rotten bales that were not minded properly and I've seen plenty of waste on pits that were not packed or covered properly . Or you can have a pit like the one I show in the picture above with no waste . By the time that pit is fed out there won't be 10% waste. I've also seen cattle waste a lot of bale silage where they pull it in and walk on it as its not too well chopped or the bale is too near the feed barrier or if fed in round feeders a lot of the bale gets pulled out and wasted.

watched a video on scientific research about it was quite interest, most of the DM losses in pit silage cant actually be seen but are significant, in the video a perfect pit which had been done with a compator was shown to have lost 10% DM, DM losses were the biggest cost difference between bales and pit silage i found it interesting that noone had ever mentioned it on the bales v pit silage arguments on here

 

[Bossfarmer]

I had 1000 ton in a pit last winter , everything that was mowed was picked up and brought into the pit , I did not dump 100 ton waste .

could have been 1050-1100t if it was baled

 

[Bossfarmer]

These are figures put together by sensible guys measuring very carefully- the rake will not get everything, the pick up reel will miss a proportion of the smaller fraction, some silage will miss to get from the feed face to the cows and there will always be some silage rejected/left at the feed area which gets swept away every couple of days - the big loss apparently is the DM lossss in the clamp that you cannot see. You cannot say that there is no wasteage. We are pretty careful and I would like to hope that with all the care we take and extra sheets that our physical losses would be well below 10% ( we reckon we have have virtually no waste on our clamps - but with old sleeper walls there is always somewhere that the sheet gets holed by an old nail). That is before the aerobic losses that I rely on additive and clamp management to keep down - again, we work really hard at clamp management so I’d like to think that we keep that figure low. However, there must be losses so it’s a question of doing what I can to keep that figure as low as possible- but it’s never going to be zero.

On another thread I said I got hot under the collar about grass not all getting into the trailer due to overfilling, missing with the spout etc - but walk behind a trailer being filled by a forage harvester and ‘feel’ the amount of forage (the lighter fraction - including all the clover leaves that are so fragile when dry) that is landing on you/the ground. So, if I am very careful and have to accept losses of 10% (?) you can see why the experts reckon most operators are losing at least 15%.

I cannot believe the figure that was quoted for bales - I think that must have been the ‘in bag’ and feed losses as the field losses must be similar to clamp material- ie mowing tedding raking etc

i believe it was on average 2-5%

 

[ploughman1963]

i believe it was on average 2-5%

But field losses alone exceed that figure?

 

[james ds]

could have been 1050-1100t if it was baled

Not if a couple of rats went through the heap of bales . There's just too much money spent on plastic with bales when the numbers get high . 12-1500 bales would rise some plastic bill.

 

[james ds]

i believe it was on average 2-5%

Are you saying the field loss with a baler is less than with a wagon . The bigger the sward and the less swards you have the less losses you will have in the field . Balers work on smaller swards so should have more field losses than with a big wagon on big swards , the only thing is with both balers and wagons what ever grass they pick up leaves the field but a sp blows a nice bit out on te ground.

 

[multi power]

Not if a couple of rats went through the heap of bales . There's just too much money spent on plastic with bales when the numbers get high . 12-1500 bales would rise some plastic bill.

Yes a big plastic bill, but zero cost for concrete, definitely less losses with bales, and more milk, I'd expect between 2 and 5 bad bales in the 1200

 

[multi power]

Are you saying the field loss with a baler is less than with a wagon . The bigger the sward and the less swards you have the less losses you will have in the field . Balers work on smaller swards so should have more field losses than with a big wagon on big swards , the only thing is with both balers and wagons what ever grass they pick up leaves the field but a sp blows a nice bit out on te ground.

Rubbish,