RTK Torch vs Canopy & tall buildings

Other
1

How accurate is the RTK Torch under canopy, and how does it perform next to tall buildings?

2

Under canopy: depends on the thickness and whether you have some clear line-of-sight the the sky or not (and whether a satellites passes over that alignment!); it is the best product for such use cases however.
Next to tall budlings: it should work fine, though rftop has some notes in the next post too :slight_smile:

Here are the base specs (unobstructed)…if stuff is in-between expect some degradation

  • 1408-Channel concurrent reception of GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou, QZSS
    • GPS: L1C/A, L1C*, L2P(Y), L2C, L5
    • GLONASS: L1, L2
    • Galileo: E1, E5a, E5b, E6*
    • Beidou: B1I, B2I, B3I, B1C, B2a, B2b*
    • QZSS: L1, L2, L5
    • SBAS
  • Horizontal Accuracy
    • Autonomous: 1.5m
    • DGPS: 0.4m
    • RTK: 0.8cm + 1ppm
  • Vertical Accuracy
    • Autonomous: 2.5m
    • DGPS: 0.8m
    • RTK: 1.5cm + 1ppm
  • Max Altitude: 18km (11 miles)
  • Max Velocity: 515m/s (1152mph)
3

I performed side-by-side comparisons (Facet, Facet-LB, and Torch) under heavy canopy and I was impressed with the Torch. It beat the Facets under heavy canopy using PointPerfect corrections. I attributed that to the L5 band.

I have successfully logged points next to tall buildings with the Torch, and they were repeatable.
Like any GNSS, you have to be careful next to any hard structure and be aware of multi-path sneaking by the GNSS engine.

I personally don’t prefer a helical antenna such as what’s used in the Torch.
However, you cant complain about the Formfactor that a helical provides.
The Torch has a slick enclosure for sure.