One of our bugs was with the GPS accuracy in certain conditions. There is a status bar now that shows a color to correspond to the "level" of accuracy. It doesn't give a number, just a color (numbers are BAD - people put too much weight onn them and we get phone calls if it isn't just right).

If you've ever seen the tractors pulling grain carts right along side combines as their harvesting (unloading on-the-go) - the machine guidance makes this really easy. All the tractor operator has to to is hold his speed constant with the combine, he doesn't have to worry about the distance between the machines. If the bug pops up either one of the machines could turn unexpectedly. If it goes one way you loose a little grain. If it goes the other way you wreck two machines - and maybe your whole load of grain.

Then you have operators that go changing things or not calibrating something and wonder why there are problems. Thats why there is now content managing - the administrator password-protects applications so only certain features can be changed, in either their entirety or only from the selections given.

 

The hard part is you end up tearing a project, and people, between advancing technology or making work with what is already there. We see that all the time. Instead of integrating if our batch of products make their way on to a competitors machine it is usually because the whole package is going, not one part.

Case-in-point - I just put a system on a competitor's tractor. Their guidance system was third party but they bought our planter. Our planter is ISO-compatible (to a point). We plugged it in to the competitors machine and brought up the controller for the planter. Because we were able to seemingly control the planter everyone said "hey, look it works!" The problem was the communication was only one-way. We couldn't read off that controller - the ability to read is "proprietary", as well as the automated control parameters. The very basic operation of the planter can be run by a third party system, but it needs our programming (and display that has it) to do what the customer is paying $$$$$ for it to do. Otherwise they might as well buy a 10 year old planter...

Theres even a controller we have that can go on ALL kinds of things (its like a PLC that can translate to PCM, PWM, high/low logic and integrate with our language). They are used to run valves, pumps, clutches, etc. In this case it is again sticking our "brains" on a machine using the existing structure. I could have some fun with that and the programming

 

The trick is only to use the land tech to the farmer's "office" building.

That gets you the speed of at least dial up, and possibly DSL.

Then you relay it via a network / wireless to the equipment for the last mile (few farmers own more than a few square miles).

That cuts down on satellite time.

I don't think cellular wireless would work as the older equipment in rural areas all have very limited data capability.

Onstar is via old cell networks, think they default back to analog often found in rural areas.


As for the pinpoint accuracy --- you are using basically a form of differential GPS where a known reference signal is locally transmitted. (e.g. from the office).

That is matched with the GPS signal (relatively coarse) to get the accuracy you want.

I remember talking with people working on this decades ago!



You are in a new business with no standards, no interconnects, and no impetus to get it done --- it is a public good that is good for everyone and bad for any particular one that wants open systems.

Look at cars --- OBDII is public (because the government made it so).

But, all the innards are all proprietary --- down to even the radio harness (how obvious one to simplify??) and now, connections for GPS, iphones / MP3, etc.

Auto makers tried to lock in all the accessory profits for themselves, with predictable consequences --- rather than to do plug compatible add on devices.