Dairy Chitchat 3

straight

whelan2 wrote: »

Ye had to put alot of water in to get it to pump out to fields. Silage is very dry too which isn't helping

You need it extra wet for the cording.

whelan2

straight wrote: »

You need it extra wet for the cording.

It wasnt going far

K.G.

whelan2 wrote: »

Ye had to put alot of water in to get it to pump out to fields. Silage is very dry too which isn't helping

Thats the down side to the pipes everything has to be mixed and spread the one day.i actually find its nearly easier to put it out myself in small bursts now than getting contractors in but i dont know whats going to happen after 15 th april.in my situation all silage comes in from outside so i like to get sllurry back to that ground.so i dont want to put any more watery stuff than i need to to get it spread.

K.G.

visatorro wrote: »

Extra bales here a disaster this year. Contractor understandably wouldn't use pipes. Plenty of water in all the tanks but feckin lumps of silage hard to get rid of. Most tanks either have washing or I can divert rainwater if needs be.

After the first agitation of this year all ill say is if there was any doubt about getting rid of bales 😡

Mooooo

whelan2 wrote: »

Tank in new shed filled up with slurry. Big job to get it out. There was a good bit of rainwater going into tank at my old shed plus dairy washing put in each week. Thinking of diverting
downpipe into tank. Tank is empty now. What do others do? Will probably start putting dairy washing into it

One year tank was fairly thick here but he was heading across a bridge anyway so rolled out and pumped water up while I agitated. Other than that we pump the parlour washings in to the tank so haven't had to do that in a while, well that combined with the odd down pipe/ gutter not going to the storm drains. As said above a roll or two of layflat and the pump agitator allow us to pump from tank to tank.

Mooooo

K.G. wrote: »

Thats the down side to the pipes everything has to be mixed and spread the one day.i actually find its nearly easier to put it out myself in small bursts now than getting contractors in but i dont know whats going to happen after 15 th april.in my situation all silage comes in from outside so i like to get sllurry back to that ground.so i dont want to put any more watery stuff than i need to to get it spread.

Yeah got them to come maybe 5 times last year as high covers in spring and targeting certain fields adds a bit of cost. Still with 3 day a week labour for the first half of the year it's easier to spend an half day pumping /agitating and let them drive on than have my man spending the days just at slurry. Not getting any cheaper tho. Prob 5k on slurry contracting last year

Castlekeeper

Timmaay wrote: »

Agreed and if you don't think your up to that level of management then it's an absolute waste of money paying that premium for an animal that you won't get anything more out of than say a 1300e animal.

Or is it just an extra tonne of meal?

Timmaay

Mooooo wrote: »

Yeah got them to come maybe 5 times last year as high covers in spring and targeting certain fields adds a bit of cost. Still with 3 day a week labour for the first half of the year it's easier to spend an half day pumping /agitating and let them drive on than have my man spending the days just at slurry. Not getting any cheaper tho. Prob 5k on slurry contracting last year

How much of that 5k would you of blown on machinery, diesel and labour though? Any sort of low emissions 2k+gls tanker is gonna set you back 20/30k at a min. Only slurry cap ex I've spent here has been a new agitator this year, and that was just because it let's me transfer slurry from the dairy washings tank.

K.G.

Timmaay wrote: »

How much of that 5k would you of blown on machinery, diesel and labour though? Any sort of low emissions 2k+gls tanker is gonna set you back 20/30k at a min. Only slurry cap ex I've spent here has been a new agitator this year, and that was just because it let's me transfer slurry from the dairy washings tank.

That being said the next couple of years could get fairly messy,there just isnt enough LESS spreaders in the country.travelled 90 kms today and if all the slurry that i saw spread by splash plate had to be spread by less next year it just isnt possible.probaly cant buy them this year either

Zetor19

It would be time farmers grew a pair and told the Monday to Friday **** in suits we will spread **** with our tankers the way we have the last 20 years and fcuk off with themselves and get back to their game of golf.

straight

Zetor19 wrote: »

It would be time farmers grew a pair and told the Monday to Friday **** in suits we will spread **** with our tankers the way we have the last 20 years and fcuk off with themselves and get back to their game of golf.

Less is a bit of a scam. There is no payback for the farmer. Have better things to spend my money on. Too much weight on the back of the tank too.

kevthegaff

High ground here with a 1350 gallon tank on a tm150, just not possible one of the bigger tanks with an injector. Also wouldnt like to see the back after turning it over..

Timmaay

K.G. wrote: »

That being said the next couple of years could get fairly messy,there just isnt enough LESS spreaders in the country.travelled 90 kms today and if all the slurry that i saw spread by splash plate had to be spread by less next year it just isnt possible.probaly cant buy them this year either

My contractor got 160kgls from 2 big tanks out in the space of a day using his spare umbilical trailing shoe system on thur, and he would of been out by lunchtime if it wasn't for 2 breakdowns, if I'd been messing around trying to empty that with the likes of a 1600gls tanker I'd been at it for a week or more.

jaymla627

straight wrote: »

Less is a bit of a scam. There is no payback for the farmer. Have better things to spend my money on. Too much weight on the back of the tank too.

The biggest con-job is tank manufactors putting dribble bars mounted on the hatch on new tanks, instead of welding in proper supports and mounting to chassis with weight spread evenly....
Seen a contractors tank with weights hung either side of vacuum pump to help her from hopping of the hitch after retrofitting a trailing shoe on it, on very hilly ground here and you'd want to be on a death wish to spread with one, other contractor spent 40k on a hi-spec 2500 gallon tank with dribble bar grant aided, and again it was mounted on the hatch , he was up doing some digger work and was giving out about tank been hoppy on road aswell, after paying what he did it was some pisstake they didn't supply him with the proper tank with inbuilt brackets to chassis to carry dribble bar

cjpm

straight wrote: »

Less is a bit of a scam. There is no payback for the farmer. Have better things to spend my money on. Too much weight on the back of the tank too.

A neighbour was telling me that it's a total scam. What you save on Nitrogen is less than the cost of the extra diesel lugging a dribble bar or trailing shoe around the farm....

K.G.

Zetor19 wrote: »

It would be time farmers grew a pair and told the Monday to Friday **** in suits we will spread **** with our tankers the way we have the last 20 years and fcuk off with themselves and get back to their game of golf.

But what gives us the right to stink up the country and our neighbour's when there is a way that avoids this or indeed lessens it.its just a change in the way we do things.we didnt always spread slurry its a relatively new phenomenon.

Say my name

Neighbour has a moscha device on the back of the tanker got lately.
It's the first year there was no smell/ammonia off the slurry.

Last year I had commercial bought slurry bugs in the slurry and same thing no smell/ammonia.
You can make slurry bugs yourself for almost nothing by carrying out instructions to make imo in the jadam book.

Both these two options were not considered by teagasc/government.

GrasstoMilk

visatorro wrote: »

Extra bales here a disaster this year. Contractor understandably wouldn't use pipes. Plenty of water in all the tanks but feckin lumps of silage hard to get rid of. Most tanks either have washing or I can divert rainwater if needs be.

We spread near 200k gallons here today with the umbilical and most of the slurry was produced off bales, only opened the pit 3 weeks ago
There wasn't one blockage. It was well mixed tbf and quite thick aswell. The lads thought it was lovely stuff

Mooooo

Say my name wrote: »

Neighbour has a moscha device on the back of the tanker got lately.
It's the first year there was no smell/ammonia off the slurry.

Last year I had commercial bought slurry bugs in the slurry and same thing no smell/ammonia.
You can make slurry bugs yourself for almost nothing by carrying out instructions to make imo in the jadam book.

Both these two options were not considered by teagasc/government.

The moscha device is considered ok for the moment but expected to be banned at the same times as a splash plate in a few years I think

Buford T. Justice XIX

cjpm wrote: »

A neighbour was telling me that it's a total scam. What you save on Nitrogen is less than the cost of the extra diesel lugging a dribble bar or trailing shoe around the farm....

The number one priority these days is ticking boxes and LESS does that. Results are secondary.

alps

Zetor19 wrote: »

It would be time farmers grew a pair and told the Monday to Friday **** in suits we will spread **** with our tankers the way we have the last 20 years and fcuk off with themselves and get back to their game of golf.

Many have taken that stance, unfortunately it will probably cost the rest of us substantially.

straight

alps wrote: »

Many have taken that stance, unfortunately it will probably cost the rest of us substantially.

Banning the rain gun and having adequate storage should be number 1.

Reggie.

jaymla627 wrote: »

The biggest con-job is tank manufactors putting dribble bars mounted on the hatch on new tanks, instead of welding in proper supports and mounting to chassis with weight spread evenly....
Seen a contractors tank with weights hung either side of vacuum pump to help her from hopping of the hitch after retrofitting a trailing shoe on it, on very hilly ground here and you'd want to be on a death wish to spread with one, other contractor spent 40k on a hi-spec 2500 gallon tank with dribble bar grant aided, and again it was mounted on the hatch , he was up doing some digger work and was giving out about tank been hoppy on road aswell, after paying what he did it was some pisstake they didn't supply him with the proper tank with inbuilt brackets to chassis to carry dribble bar

I'm trying to sort that issue myself as the tanks balance is all off

Reggie.

Mooooo wrote: »

The moscha device is considered ok for the moment but expected to be banned at the same times as a splash plate in a few years I think

I find it strange as its considered LESS in Germany

K.G.

Reggie. wrote: »

I'm trying to sort that issue myself as the tanks balance is all off

Had a look back on the machinery thread and to look at your tank it looks well balanced on it as in you tank has the wheels well back.or is it you feel the.tank is gone top heavey?

jaymla627

Reggie. wrote: »

I'm trying to sort that issue myself as the tanks balance is all off

If you where to spec a tank to carry a trailing shoe to the proper spec, it would add a couple of grand onto the tank, 2500 hi spec here was a ex-demonstator tank with the full works to carry a trailing shoe and the contractors tank up the road from us isn't anything similar to my one even though they are ment to be the same tank, he has a 6930 on his one and its playing with the tractor on hills and weight distribution is all off

awaywithyou

jaymla627 wrote: »

If you where to spec a tank to carry a trailing shoe to the proper spec, it would add a couple of grand onto the tank, 2500 hi spec here was a ex-demonstator tank with the full works to carry a trailing shoe and the contractors tank up the road from us isn't anything similar to my one even though they are ment to be the same tank, he has a 6930 on his one and its playing with the tractor on hills and weight distribution is all off

put a mastek dribble bar on our 2250 abbey yr and a half ago... tank used to do some serious bouncing on the road.... this has stopped since dribble bar went on.. actually a nice tank to pull now....

Reggie.

jaymla627 wrote: »

If you where to spec a tank to carry a trailing shoe to the proper spec, it would add a couple of grand onto the tank, 2500 hi spec here was a ex-demonstator tank with the full works to carry a trailing shoe and the contractors tank up the road from us isn't anything similar to my one even though they are ment to be the same tank, he has a 6930 on his one and its playing with the tractor on hills and weight distribution is all off

Mine was specced to carry a dribble bar but seemed to bottom out as it bounces back. So going to at 2 or 4 in of cow mat under the drawbar to cushion it going backwards

blue5000

Say my name wrote: »

Neighbour has a moscha device on the back of the tanker got lately.
It's the first year there was no smell/ammonia off the slurry.

Last year I had commercial bought slurry bugs in the slurry and same thing no smell/ammonia.
You can make slurry bugs yourself for almost nothing by carrying out instructions to make imo in the jadam book.

Both these two options were not considered by teagasc/government.

Had to google that.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/JADAM-Organic-Farming-Ultra-Low-Cost-agriculture/dp/8989220203

Was out with a 1300 gal tanker on russian tyres for the past 2 days. Soil was moving under the tyres a bit. Now I know they're not the greatest tyre in the world, but what tyres would hold up almost 40 tons at this time of year?

Say my name

blue5000 wrote: »

Had to google that.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/JADAM-Organic-Farming-Ultra-Low-Cost-agriculture/dp/8989220203

The last bit on there of the pictures of the book.
That's how you make imo the jadam way.
You get some soil from a native forest for the various bacteria and fungi and lacto bacteria. You then need sea salt, a round container, boiled potatoes for starch to feed the microbes. You basically use all those and strain the soil and potatoes in a muslin cloth. And leave for 36 hours in a 20 degree water.
A foam will form on the top of the water with a ring between that and the edge of the container. If it's a strong foam you're ready to go and you have the optimum amount of life in the water. If the foam breaks down. It's gone too far and all your microbes are dead and it can only be used as fertilizer.
When you've the right stage you mix the solution with wheat bran to store the microbes and fungi. To reactivate it you just mix it back with luke warm water again.

stretch film

Reggie. wrote: »

Mine was specced to carry a dribble bar but seemed to bottom out as it bounces back. So going to at 2 or 4 in of cow mat under the drawbar to cushion it going backwards

Explain what you mean there reggie.
Our tankers were fitted with the same dribble bar going on pics you put up.
My tanker was not specced for a bar and whilst not perfect when empty I'm fairly happy with balance. Was your axle set further back along with brackets added.
Could the relatively forward nature of the bar be going against you with the axle positioning

Reggie.

stretch film wrote: »

Explain what you mean there reggie.
Our tankers were fitted with the same dribble bar going on pics you put up.
My tanker was not specced for a bar and whilst not perfect when empty I'm fairly happy with balance. Was your axle set further back along with brackets added.
Could the relatively forward nature of the bar be going against you with the axle positioning

Yeah my axle was put further back and lower into the tank as it was specced. I think it was 6in lower and 9in back.

I have a plate going underneath the drawbar and the spring on top of the drawbar as suspension. The the tank goes down theres no issue as the spring takes the hit but when the tank kicks up with the weight on the rear the plate hits the bottom of the drawbar.

Now this just happens on the road if you hit a bad bump and only if empty. In the pics you can see the front of the plate has actually bend into the shape of the drawbar

Reggie.

My guntering solution is to cut out a piece of cow mat and place it between the plate and drawbar. It will be tested tomorrow

jaymla627

Reggie. wrote: »

My guntering solution is to cut out a piece of cow mat and place it between the plate and drawbar. It will be tested tomorrow

Is their grease points in that area hi-spec design is totally different, with two hinge points on tank and alot straighter drawbar rather than the swan-neck on the belmac, shes very similar to conor tank design wise that had weights at vacuum pump

Reggie.

jaymla627 wrote: »

Is their grease points in that area hi-spec design is totally different, with two hinge points on tank and alot straighter drawbar rather than the swan-neck on the belmac, shes very similar to conor tank design wise that had weights at vacuum pump

Yesh the belmac has a suspension design like the major tanker

K.G.

Reggie. wrote: »

Yeah my axle was put further back and lower into the tank as it was specced. I think it was 6in lower and 9in back.

I have a plate going underneath the drawbar and the spring on top of the drawbar as suspension. The the tank goes down theres no issue as the spring takes the hit but when the tank kicks up with the weight on the rear the plate hits the bottom of the drawbar.

Now this just happens on the road if you hit a bad bump and only if empty. In the pics you can see the front of the plate has actually bend into the shape of the drawbar

Maybe i m looking at this wrong but it looks to me like the bottom flat plate is not in line with the drawbar and is hitting it wrong.

Reggie.

K.G. wrote: »

Maybe i m looking at this wrong but it looks to me like the bottom flat plate is not in line with the drawbar and is hitting it wrong.

Your right it's only the first inch of it hitting the drawbar. Even if it was level with the drawbar I would have the same issue

Aravo

Slurry out over weekend. Had a contractor agitating and putting it out. I had the water in and put out as well with a smaller tank. Usually I would do the spreading myself. In summer that's fine, long evenings, dryer ground. But in Jan/Feb it's tough. Glad to have it done. Ground was dryer than expected. I imagine a lot of farmers (especially dairy as they have more stock and some with more stock and same storage facilities) in the Zone C area must be under pressure.

ruwithme

In zone c here in cavan. majority of land in this county wouldn't haven't being able to carry machinery this last week even if we could spread legally. the hand we are dealt i suppose.

although there will be undoubtedly lads spreading tomorrow week in conditions that are unlikely to be suitable for same.

K.G.

Daft idea here but in relation to dribble bars on tanks-why dont they put them on the front instead of the back.surely it would be better for weight distribution and wouldn't it be much easier to keep an eye on them blocking.wouldnt be that hard to engineer for a new tank and theres no mist dirty ing the tractor issues is there

Reggie.

K.G. wrote: »

Daft idea here but in relation to dribble bars on tanks-why dont they put them on the front instead of the back.surely it would be better for weight distribution and wouldn't it be much easier to keep an eye on them blocking.wouldnt be that hard to engineer for a new tank and theres no mist dirty ing the tractor issues is there

The macerator would still need to be at the back for most tanks which is the majority of the weight but it has been done for tanks over 3500

K.G.

Reggie. wrote: »

The macerator would still need to be at the back for most tanks which is the majority of the weight but it has been done for tanks over 3500

Why does it have to be at the back

Reggie.

K.G. wrote: »

Why does it have to be at the back

Size of it and distance the slurry would have to travel from back to the front. Be hard to clear a blockage on a pipe that long

Injuryprone

K.G. wrote: »

Daft idea here but in relation to dribble bars on tanks-why dont they put them on the front instead of the back.surely it would be better for weight distribution and wouldn't it be much easier to keep an eye on them blocking.wouldnt be that hard to engineer for a new tank and theres no mist dirty ing the tractor issues is there

Your tank would be traveling on slurry all the time.

K.G.

Reggie. wrote: »

Size of it and distance the slurry would have to travel from back to the front. Be hard to clear a blockage on a pipe that long

Why does the slurry have to come out the back?yeah the tank travelling on slurry would result in dirty grass i suppose

Reggie.

K.G. wrote: »

Why does the slurry have to come out the back?yeah the tank travelling on slurry would result in dirty grass i suppose

That's the way tanks are sloped to let the slurry out.

Say my name

This was at this year's ploughing.

https://www.shanks.ie/new-safer-tanker-to-be-showcased-at-the-national-ploughing-championships-2019/

Reggie.

Say my name wrote: »

This was at this year's ploughing.

https://www.shanks.ie/new-safer-tanker-to-be-showcased-at-the-national-ploughing-championships-2019/

One thing that never took off were them low tankers. I think major called it the alpine or was it NC

kevthegaff

My cousin was spreading one here across the hill, obviously the ground was dry but it was some job

Say my name

Reggie. wrote: »

One thing that never took off were them low tankers. I think major called it the alpine or was it NC

It's no ordinary tank, it has a baffle system that keeps slurry up the front of the tank and weight on the drawbar till the most of it is gone out the back then it releases that front slurry back.