Thanks for the quick response. I am aware of multiple sevices that can be used to improve the accuracy of the measurement, but have no experience with any of them. Do you use Point perfect? Do you think that is a better option?
I appreciate your recommendation regarding the two different models. They certainly look different, but the specifications regarding their accuracy look fairly identical to a beginner. It appears that the dome shaped units are easy to work on, modify and repair if needed. Not sure if the same is true for the other type.
I didn’t want to bore anyone with my story, but I am happy to share since you asked. I am planting trees in open pasture to create silvopasture. The plan is to increase shade and pasture quality, while increasing soil fertility and water infiltration. Our livestock should be more comfortable and better fed. Planting trees on contour using a swale and berm design allows for storm water to be captured and moved across the land with less run off. If I get vertical measurements with cm level accuracy, I can create tree plans more quickly and avoid a lot of hiking across pastures with a laser tripod. I also enjoy learning new skills and using these gnss devices seems like a fun experience to try out. I can imagine this could also be very handy for marking farm boundaries and building projects. Please feel free to give additional suggestions or ask more questions.
That sounds like a really cool project. I’ve seen people use GNSS for farm boundaries but silvopasture was a new term for me!
I wouldn’t say PointPerfect is automatically better than the NC CORS network. Both can provide RTK corrections, so the choice is mainly about cost, coverage and convenience. Since you’ll be working regularly in North Carolina, the NC network may be the simpler option. If you plan to combine your measurements with an existing survey or map, you’ll also want to make sure they use the same coordinate system and vertical datum.
I would say the FPM is a better choice if you’ll often work around existing trees, buildings or other obstructions. Those objects can create multipath, which happens when satellite signals bounce off something before reaching the receiver. This can reduce accuracy or cause the receiver to lose its fixed solution. The FPM handles these difficult signal conditions better, although dense canopy can still affect any GNSS receiver.
For the property you described, I’d choose the FPL-T or TX2 ( no tilt) if most of the work will be in open pasture. If you expect to work regularly near tree lines or want tilt compensation, I’d look at the FPM-T.
Learning how to reply properly in this forum. Hopefully this works. Greatly appreciate your response and ideas. My main concern right now is our farm in NC, but once I learn how to use this, I may be traveling out of state to assist on other projects. New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey are on my list. I think PointPerfect would be available there as well? I haven’t looked into what’s available yet. There are plenty of spots on the farm with mature tree stands, so the FMP may be the better option.
Yes, PointPerfect Flex covers the entire contiguous United States, including North Carolina, New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey. You could travel between those projects using the same service instead of registering separately with each state’s correction network. You can always add the NC CORS network later if it makes sense for your regular work at the farm.
For out-of-state projects, I’d ask whether your measurements need to match an existing survey or GIS map. If they do, make sure everything uses the same coordinate system and vertical datum ( Ryan and gdt mentioned this on the original thread)
With mature tree stands on the property, I agree that the FPM may be the better choice. It should perform better around canopy edges where reflected or partially blocked satellite signals can cause problems. Dense overhead canopy will still be difficult for any GNSS receiver, so the laser level may still be useful in the deepest areas. If you have questions while comparing the options or setting up the correction service ( it gets a little confusing), feel free to ask. I’d be happy to help.
Thanks for your generous offer to continue helping. I hope to narrow down my options on what device to purchase and get something ordered in the near future. So far it looks like the FPM tilt model may be the best option for me. This appears to be SparkPNT’s most expensive device and that’s ok if that is what I need. Are any comparable non Spark devices I should also consider?
I would also need a pole, a phone or pad holder and maybe a cable? Any recommendations? Thanks.
Glad you’re narrowing it down! There are other companies to consider, including Emlid, CHCNAV and Hi-Target. It’s worth comparing their receivers, software and total setup costs before deciding what fits your work best.
SparkPNT receivers aren’t locked to one RTK correction provider; they’re designed so you can configure the compatible service you prefer. Our RTK Everywhere firmware is also open source, and the Facet’s modular design allows you to repair or upgrade components without replacing the whole receiver.
No extra data cable is needed for normal field use because the receiver connects to your phone over Bluetooth. The charging cable and wall adapter are included.
Yes, I work for SparkPNT as a Technical Specialist. Sorry about that, you are right that clamp has been retired. Any survey pole clamp for your phone or tablet will work; SECO makes good ones and there are plenty of generic options online. And if you run into anything while setting up corrections or the app, you can post here or email me at juan.cortes@sparkpnt.com and I will be happy to help.