Quote:
Originally Posted by kirkdavis
I am a retired Navy SonarTech, so I get it, but it is great to see the differences that you pointed out.
As a rule with sonar, the lower the frequency goes, the further the sound will travel. The higher the frequency, the greater the resolution. Sound in the audible range is used to find big object like submarines miles away, but a very high frequency is used to see the precious baby in a mother's womb.
Even with that knowledge, I have been too lazy or preoccupied trying to catch fish to figure out how to make changes like that on my Lawrence. Dropping to a lower freq will extend the range, but it is still a high enough freq to get pretty good detail.
Thanks!
|
Ya you're totally right... the downscan frequencies (455/800) give even greater detail. But they can see such small objects that the scattering layer can be too much for them too look through. On 83 (or med chirp) small objects will kinda all lump together as big clouds, where as on 200 or hi chirp
you might see individual sardines. If you can run dual frequency there are a lot of advantages and further inferences you can make... but that will have to wait for the intermediate lesson.
Another thing to remember is the scale of column. When fishing in deep water say over 150', the returns look so much smaller due to the scale of the fish in relation to the depth of the water. A school of yt in 200' looks almost identical to a wad of greenback in 65'.
If you're preoccupied with catching fish... tuning your sonar is how its done.