Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
CarlWBL

Sonar and Double Echo

6 posts in this topic

Can anyone speak a bit about sonar and how to read the transition from soft to hard bottom? What I gather is that a double echo indicates that the bottom is soft, or sandy, and the bottom echo is where the hard rock lies. So when there isn't a double echo, the bottom is a hard bottom. Please let me know if I'm on the right track.

Thanks

Carl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you are getting a double echo that is hard bottom. Soft bottom will usually only give you a single bottom reading.. HOWEVER, if you have your unit on auto mode, it often times will increase and or decrease the senistivity without letting you know, which can give you false readings.. also if you have it in auto mode, it will not have enough room at the bottom of the screen for a double echo.. when in auto mode I dont pay a ton of attention to double echos as many times they are false readings do to the auto settings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it is one of those things that differs a bit from brand to brand and even model to model within a brand. You really need to find the correct manual setting to gain a level of assurance in what you are looking at. I can get a triple echo out of loose sand if I crank the gain high enough.

A short cut to fine tuning your unit, use it with an underwater camera some time. That way you know what you are looking at and how your unit interprets it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I heard is that the harder the bottom the stronger the signal it returns. Therefore more echos is generally a harder bottom. I have only used a flasher. If there are any echos they will be at twice or if you have an even harder bottom twice and three times the depth.

I use a flasher and its extremely obvious when botttom type is changing. I've been getting better reading the signals and can usually have an idea of whether its silt, sand, gravel, rock etc. I usually kind of guess at what it is then confirm what the change is with a bottom dragging presentation and feeling what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fishcast,

Yep. You are exactly right. More echos you get the harder the bottom content. However, if you turn the gain up high enough on a flasher or graph, you can create hard bottom looking returns where there is not any. I too am a flasher die hard. I can't fish without a flasher on the bow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the help guys. For some reason I had my thoughts completely bassackwards. I do have an underwater camera and I think I'm going to take the suggestion to drop it down to view what I'm seeing on my graph. I think that will help a lot too. Frankly, I'm sick of using my graph as a depth only tool, and I think being proficient in sonar readings will help out my fishing a great deal.

I appreciate all the help.

Carl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • And if the leftists get lucky at the convention?     You aren't against human rights, like income, health care, equality, LBGTQ rights, and stuff like that, right?  
    • You scale them, no?
    •   So, why bother with locks?  Honest people won't take your stuff even if the door is unlocked.   I am in the camp that I want to make it at least a little difficult for the crooks.   Especially since three people in our family have had their houses burgled and stuff taken.
    • The result right now is not good. One way or the other the toilet needs flushing
    • Mostly I talk about this with respect to the nonsense about multiple parties or no parties some on here seem so fond of.      It is all a fantasy.   Some new party could possibly take over an existing party, like Trumpism did, or even replace it like happened back in the day but in the end there will be two parties.     Perhaps a parlimentary system with multiple parties would be better than what we have, but, in my opinion, you can't get there from here.  It's like the calls for a Constitutional Convention.   Do you guys seriously think that could happen, and that the result would be good?  
    • I haven't gone up the old Grade, but do head to Outing via Emily and NE from there, and it is really nice. Hardly any roads to go across and little to no ditch riding. I have got to try the Old Grade, as I would think it is like that. We grouse and duck hunt up there now and then, but haven't lately. Great place with lots of public land and opportunity.
    •   But yet I countered with an actual study but you think your own speculative based opinion is better. OK then.     How very hypocritical.      I would end the discussion after that last statement too.
    •     I can guess it is not for humanitarian reasons.   Mexico has about had their fill of fighting the drug war for us, and are moving towards decriminalization.  If California legalizes weed, this would be enough to tip the scales in favor of decriminalization for Mexico.       For years now, Mexico has paid an extraordinarily high price in lives and social disruption for Washington’s insistence that North America’s drug problem be tackled south of the border, where the drugs are grown and transported, rather than primarily in clinics and halfway houses at home to treat the medical and psychological issues of users. Mexican President Pena Nieto.   Successive administrations, starting with President Nixon, have demanded ever-tougher border controls, aerial-spraying programs, and DEA-backed anti-“cartel” operations in Mexico. All those efforts and sacrifices have been for naught. U.S. residents currently export up to $29 billion in cash to Mexican traffickers each year to buy marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamines and heroin.   Forcing that trade underground has taken a terrible toll on Mexico in terms of violence, corruption and social upheaval. Since 2006, when President Felipe Calderón ordered his military to join the “war” on drug traffickers, Mexico has lost about 200,000 lives and 30,000 more have disappeared,dwarfing the civilian death toll in Afghanistan and Iraq over that period.   The majority of those killed and disappeared were victims of criminal organizations, but human rights organizations also report soaring rates of human rights violations, including torture and killing, committed by security forces.   The 2016 Global Peace Index, prepared by the Institute for Economics and Peace, estimates the total cost of violence in Mexico at $273 billion, or 14 percent of GDP, with no end in sight. Direct fiscal costs of fighting the war on crime were about $32 billion in 2015 alone. Yet the United States has contributed only about $2.5 billion since fiscal 2008 to Mexico’s drug war, under the so-called “Merida Initiative.” Mexico’s pain shows no signs of easing. The New York Times reported in December that Mexico suffered more than 17,000 homicides in the first 10 months of last year, the highest total since 2012. “The relapse in security has unnerved Mexico and led many to wonder whether the country is on the brink of a bloody, all-out war between criminal groups,” it said.    
    •   But In Del's defense, he only does this on things he would like to stay as is. When you are talking about legislation he is in favor of then it is the law of the land and can't be changed. When it is something that he dislikes, it can and should be changed.
  • Our Sponsors