Home
Background information
What's the Real Difference in Accuracy Between RTK (±2.5 cm) and SBAS/EGNOS (±10-25 cm)? Is RTK Worth the Premium?

What's the Real Difference in Accuracy Between RTK (±2.5 cm) and SBAS/EGNOS (±10-25 cm)? Is RTK Worth the Premium?

Technical Difference Between Systems

RTK (Real Time Kinematic) uses a network of ground-based reference stations that transmit correction signals via mobile internet. The system compares satellite data with precise station coordinates and corrects errors caused by atmospheric conditions and obstacles in real time.

SBAS (Satellite Based Augmentation System), which includes the European EGNOS, relies on geostationary satellites. These satellites broadcast corrections for areas within a 400-500 km radius around base stations. Correction delay time is several seconds, which reduces accuracy compared to RTK.

The key difference lies in the correction update frequency. RTK updates corrections several times per second, whilst SBAS does so once every few minutes. This explains the tenfold difference in positioning accuracy.

Impact of Accuracy on Field Operations

Precision Fertiliser and Crop Protection Application

RTK with 2.5 cm accuracy enables automatic section control systems to operate with minimal overlaps. In practice, this means 15-20% savings on inputs by eliminating double application. For a 2,000-hectare farm, this represents annual savings of £24,000-32,000 on fertilisers and chemicals alone.

Using SBAS with 30-60 cm accuracy results in 5-8% overlap between passes. This not only increases costs but also leads to chemical scorch in double-application zones and inadequate protection on missed areas.

Working with Row Crops

For maize, sunflower, and soya beans, centimetre-level RTK accuracy is essential. The system records the drilling trajectory and precisely repeats it during inter-row cultivation, herbicide application, and harvesting. With 2.5 cm accuracy, machinery travels exactly between rows without damaging plants.

SBAS with 30-60 cm deviation doesn't provide the necessary repeatability. The result is damage to 10-15% of plants by the cultivator or harvesting equipment, directly affecting yield.

Basic Operations

For broadcast cereal drilling, cultivation, and ploughing, SBAS may be sufficient. Here, maintaining parallel passes with metre-level accuracy is more important, which the system provides. Fuel savings from reduced overlaps compensate for lower precision.

Economic Justification for Choice

System Costs

RTK subscription costs £640-960 per year per machine. A private base station costs £3,200-6,400 as a one-off investment but serves unlimited machines within a 15-20 km radius.

SBAS is a free signal, requiring only a compatible receiver (£160-400 surcharge on basic GPS systems).

Return on Investment

For farms with row crops, RTK pays for itself within 1-2 seasons. With 500 hectares of maize, savings on herbicides, fertilisers, and yield preservation cover the annual subscription.

For arable farms without variable rate application, payback is longer - 3-4 years. Primary savings come from reduced fuel consumption (6-8%) and decreased operator fatigue.

Hidden Advantages of RTK

The technology enables work in any visibility conditions - at night, in fog, or smoke. This extends the working day by 4-6 hours during critical drilling and harvesting periods.

Autopilot with RTK reduces operator workload, allowing them to monitor equipment performance quality instead of constantly controlling trajectory. Productivity increases by 10-15%.

Practical Recommendations

RTK is worth choosing for:

Farms with row crops (maize, sunflower, soya)
Variable rate fertiliser and crop protection application
Strip tillage and no-till technologies
Night work and operations in challenging conditions
Areas from 1,000 hectares where savings cover subscription costs

SBAS is sufficient for:

Broadcast drilling of cereals and oilseeds
Basic cultivation and ploughing
Farms up to 500 hectares without precision technologies
Initial stage of precision farming implementation
Limited budgets with gradual transition to RTK

An important consideration is the possibility of combining systems. Use RTK for sprayers and row crop drills, whilst SBAS for cultivators and fertiliser spreaders. This optimises costs without losing efficiency on critical operations.

Conclusion

The 10-fold difference in accuracy between RTK (2.5 cm) and SBAS (30-60 cm) has a direct impact on farm economics. For precision farming with row crops, RTK is not a luxury but a necessity with payback within 1-2 years. For basic operations, SBAS remains an effective solution, particularly during the autopilot implementation stage. The key to the right decision is analysing cropping structure, technologies, and calculating economic viability for the specific farm.