# Why do people still use depth sounders?



## barefootnavigator (Mar 12, 2012)

I haven't ran aground in 27 years, the last time I did I had a depth sounder. Since then I have been using a lead line although I really don't use it that often. Sure there are forward facing sonars but I doubt many of us have those. So with all the excellent charts and charting devices we have these days is there really any reason to cut another hole in your hull? It seems like a depth sounder is really only good for telling you what you just hit but my guess is by that point you don't need an electrical device to inform you that you are hard aground or sinking.


----------



## rhr1956 (Dec 18, 2010)

They provide something to look at and sometimes they give reason to have a conversation of impending peril.


----------



## flandria (Jul 31, 2012)

When you are using a chart plotter/GPS instrument, you likely need not to refer to depth all that much. I do still use the depth meter to double check depth that is supposed to be under the keel - since (rarely) there can be a GPS error, or (more likely) a chart error (where I sail some charts have not been updated since first plotted in the late 1800s...). When the GPS/chartplotter relies on an incorrect chart, it is prudent to have something else to help you out.

I do rely on the depth meter when anchoring to determine required scope as well as to assist in ensuring that I have sufficient swing room.

Of course you can do all this with a lead line, but I doubt that is very practical when you are about to set anchor - that little gadget does the job just fine.

Now, all of this is true so long as you have electricity to power your electronics, and electronics that work... but that is another chapter in the Book of Purists.


----------



## deniseO30 (Nov 27, 2006)

Why do people still use depth sounders? = to ease the surprise of running aground!


----------



## Dick6969 (Mar 4, 2012)

To see how deep it is... Mine is broke but when it did work I liked it.


----------



## Irunbird (Aug 10, 2008)

I just delivered my boat (~5'1" draft) down a part of the ICW from Savannah to the Thunderbolt boatyard and part of the channel that meanders through the two rivers narrowed down to maybe 50 yards, and I have zero local knowledge of that area. I was going solely on my plotter telling me where it thought I was and avoiding the shallows by keeping an eye on depth. In that area, to me, knowing depth trends was pretty valuable.


----------



## tempest (Feb 12, 2007)

Charts, plotters can be accurate and useful, Until a major hurricane, or storm comes through and changes everything. Since Sandy, my depth sounder has probably been the most useful instrument on the boat.


----------



## tomandchris (Nov 11, 2009)

Congratulations on not running aground in all those years. You must know your local waters well.

I rarely day sail with GPS or chartplotter on. I, too, know my local waters fairly well. In most cases I stay away from thin water. However, there are times when I am cutting some of those corners on a tack and I like to know if I am flirting too much with the bottom. The depth sounder tells me that, and usually in those cases a lead line would do me no good. I find it a great tool when making sure I find the deepest part of a strange channel as well.


----------



## arf145 (Jul 25, 2007)

Obviously asked by someone who doesn't sail in the Chesapeake Bay! We sail where we sometimes have less than a foot under the keel. Depth sounder is less expensive than using the keel as a feeler 

And as others stated, no reason to put a hole in your hull--a shoot thru transducer works for most boats.


----------



## mitchbrown (Jan 21, 2009)

Onboard True Blue we not only have a depth sounder but we have another one for backup. Most important gauge on the boat for both safety and peace of mind.


----------



## John Casey (Mar 3, 2014)

I can think of 3 general reasons with my limited experience:

1. GPS errors/problems, which are rare but do happen. Software/hardware/comms issues occur, and likely right at the wrong time;
2. Depth trends can be another source of confirmation of your preplanned route, and/or of any pending issues if you happened to deviate; and
3. Chartplotters/GPS are only as good as the data that is entered in them, and in some locations the data is not good at all.

Context is everything though. Where you tend to sail, none of this may really matter.


----------



## Alex W (Nov 1, 2012)

barefootnavigator said:


> I haven't ran aground in 27 years, the last time I did I had a depth sounder. Since then I have been using a lead line although I really don't use it that often. Sure there are forward facing sonars but I doubt many of us have those. So with all the excellent charts and charting devices we have these days is there really any reason to cut another hole in your hull?


The underwater topography changes faster than the charts are updated. For example I keep my boat at Shilshole Marina (I think you used to sail near here) and the sand bar off of Meadow Point is considerably different this year than last year -- you need to stay much farther off of Golden Gardens to avoid grounding than you used to. I've been on and have watched multiple race boats touch bottom here because people are used to the old configuration.

A depth sounder gives you warning of this, charts would not.

No electronics are necessary, most people have sailed without them.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

the depth sounder(either manual or electronic) is the single most important thing on a boat for me, after that its a trusty and reliable compass.

with those 2 you can navigate safely provided all else fails, some binoculars and youre golden.

of course if you live in waters you know perfectly and have been doing so for many years then yes of course you dont "need" a depthsounder

however that knowledge has to be daily knowledge, as you never know if a boat just sunk during the middle of the night, or a huge storm surge created a new sand bar where there wasnt one before(very common down here) or a submarine or whale decided to surface under you, or some mermaids are caressing your hull and you need to go check it out

all of which a depthsounder warns you about! jajaja

even lake sailing a depthsounder is helpful although not really needed, once again depends on the user.

btw you can put me in the fisfinder as depthsounder happy camp crowd...just installed on my boat no thruhull and reading real well

and falls in the $500 a month crowd category jajja


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Wow... Really? I love my depth sounder and value it far more than any gps-dependent plotter. A sounder (or lead line ... same thing) is giving real data about your actual situation. Your chartplotter is an approximation of where you are. This approximation can be very accurate, or it can be significantly off depending on the quality of the baseline chart, and also the current gps error factor. There's many a time when I've been 1/4 mile on shore according to the plotter when gunkholing. 

When water gets thin I relay on eyes and direct observations first, followed by use of a good chart and my sounder. Chartplotter info is great, but I use it very much as a secondary source. If the plotter and my sounder differ I always believe my sounder. 

Shoot-thru-the-hull transducers work great in solid boats. No need for more holes.


Why go fast, when you can go slow


----------



## fryewe (Dec 4, 2004)

barefootnavigator said:


> ...So with all the excellent charts and charting devices we have these days is there really any reason to cut another hole in your hull? It seems like a depth sounder is really only good for telling you what you just hit...


First of all...as Joe said you don't need a hole in the hull to install a good depth sensor head. They will shoot a signal through a FRP hull (don't know about wood or steel...coupling with the water column might be more problematic).

Second...because unlike the plotter position you suggest most rely on...a depth system is nearer to real time output and more likely to warn you of impending doom.

Third...only the highly trafficked world traveled by first world nations have excellent charts. Many soundings are a century or two old...and the soundings may be quite accurate but charted positions were very inaccurate until the satellite navigation age. So your position on the physical world may be accurate but the chart may not reflect that physical world but be offset by several miles. There are several stories of such occurrences with both good and bad endings in the coral shoals of the South Pacific.

Fourth...as pointed out charts in plotters and on paper are aged data...not real time and likely to be in error due to intervening storms or just simply because it's impossible to keep all chart info near real time.

Fifth...a good sounding in the absence of other navigation info can sometimes give you a pretty good fix on your position depending on bottom slope and contour.

Sixth...it's one of the lowest cost systems you can get to assist in puttering about in the water...less than a hundred bucks for a reliable no frills system...

...so why wouldn't you have one since they provide such important navigation info?


----------



## gtod25 (Aug 5, 2000)

Most important, simplest and most reliable electronic instrument on a boat. Anyone who has done any mileage in unfamiliar waters would know that.

1. The normal shallow water pilotage as stated previously. 

2. It gives you a line of position (i.e. the contour line) which when added to a bearing of a know object on shore gives you a reasonable manual fix (after your chartplotter has crapped out).

3. It alerts you when you are approaching shore after an offshore passage. (set the alarm at 200ft or whatever you choose) 

4. It allows you to run soundings, e.g. when heading South, at night, on the Florida coastline to stay out of the Gulf stream use the 200 ft contour to keep you off the shore.

They almost never break and if it is inoperative on a boat that I'm moving, I'm not very happy. I will go as far as installing a cheap one by gluing it on the inside of a solid fiberglass hull.

Just my 2cents

Gerry


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

following contour lines is an art...only acheivable with a depthsounder...its a great way to navigate "known" and unknown waters

the offshore alarm is also a great plus especially singlehanding...

like everyone says its the single most important navigation aid we can use....


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

a. Sometimes charts say "buoys not charted: see note XX," since the sands move. Yes, you could use a lead line or a stick for that matter, but a sounder is faster and thus safer. Old school guys can and do run aground.

b. Charting errors. In remote areas charts are often a joke book.

Yes, for years I poked around using the senses and charts, and never got stuck that I couldn't get off. When the bottom is mud, you either "feel" it once is a while or never go anywhere interesting. If my sounder broke I certainly wouldn't run home. But it's useful.

I'm guessing the OP comes from an area where rocks abound. Still, I use my eyes and don't trust charts completely. What are the odds that everything beneath the surface has been found?


----------



## CaptainForce (Jan 1, 2006)

We used a lead line for poking into shallows while cruising from 1972 to the eary 1990's and now, for the last 20+ years, we've had a depthsounder. During our time without the depthsounder, we did not have a GPS as they did not exist for most of that time and we judged out depth by knowing our position from DR navigation and parallax views of on shore marks or navigation aids. Of course, the electronic depth sounder can provide hundreds of data points in the time it takes to get one lead line reading. In this respect they are the same except for the speed of gaining information at any depth.

So, for me, the original "Why use a depth sounder?" question is all about speedy information.


----------



## Alex W (Nov 1, 2012)

One more thing came to mind while reading this thread. A good sonar plot (usually called a "Fish Finder" instead of a "Depth Finder") also provides useful information about the bottom composition. It is easy to see the difference between a rocky bottom, grassy bottom, or sandy/muddy bottom by looking at the bottom plot. A chart or leadline doesn't provide the same information.

I used this last weekend when anchoring off of Hat Island to find out where the eel grass stopped and the clean bottom started. I also used the depth finder plus two waypoints on the GPS to figure out the closest point that I could anchor to shore with my intended scope without having any chance of touching the bottom. This was helpful when anchoring on a large shallow beach like the one on the SW corner of Hat Island. I could have done it without electronics, they just made it easier.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

When you drop the 300 ft line with prawn traps into 800 feet of water because you are 50 feet off the ledge ask yourself the value of a sounder. It also shows bait and schools of salmon and cod.No value there either, eh!


----------



## northoceanbeach (Mar 23, 2008)

I would ask:

"when you can get a depth sounder for $100-200, what is the point of having a lead line?"

To make yourself feel like a cool old timer? They're for traditionalist hipsters. I see no point. I had one and it did about nothing. At least it had lead on it so it sank when I pitched it overboard because I was sick of letting it sit on deck drying the line after using for five seconds, when I could just have dropped the anchor, felt when it touched, and looked at how much scope i had let out. Since we all mark our scope.

I don't think the depth sounder is the most important piece of gear, I rarely used mine when I had it, since I mostly use a chart, and my eyes to look around. I suppose the east coast can be murkier, but where you are, you can see pretty well.

Best for a quick check of depth and bottom contours before anchoring, and to match up to a chart to see exactly where you are.

I think their value is heavily dependent upon your local sailing grounds.


----------



## newhaul (Feb 19, 2010)

Alex W said:


> One more thing came to mind while reading this thread. A good sonar plot (usually called a "Fish Finder" instead of a "Depth Finder") also provides useful information about the bottom composition. It is easy to see the difference between a rocky bottom, grassy bottom, or sandy/muddy bottom by looking at the bottom plot. A chart or leadline doesn't provide the same information.
> .


Actually a real proper lead line will give you the bottom composition Navigation - Lead Line


----------



## Alex W (Nov 1, 2012)

newhaul said:


> Actually a real proper lead line will give you the bottom composition Navigation - Lead Line


That's cool and something I hadn't thought of.

How can it tell the difference between sandy (tallow will come up covered in sand) and sandy will eel grass (tallow will come up covered in sand)?

That is the most important differentiation for my anchoring.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

newhaul said:


> Actually a real proper lead line will give you the bottom composition Navigation - Lead Line


Beat me to it. Our leadline has a wax plug used for sampling the bottom. I've sailed for a season with in electronic sounder, using only the leadline. Got very good at sampling as we crept into small anchorages (we like to explore).

I love my sounder. As Christian says, following a depth contour is a great way to navigate around as you're exploring new tight areas. But I keep my leadline handy. It's great for when the electronics go pzzt, or when you want to sample from the dingy.

Or just to look cool ;-)

Why go fast, when you can go slow


----------



## mitchbrown (Jan 21, 2009)

for a single handler it seems rather ridiculous to try to operate a lead line and drive the boat at the same time. or in rough weather. Even operating with someone on the bow lead lining would be un-advisable in rough weather.


----------



## newhaul (Feb 19, 2010)

Alex W said:


> That's cool and something I hadn't thought of.
> 
> How can it tell the difference between sandy (tallow will come up covered in sand) and sandy will eel grass (tallow will come up covered in sand)?
> 
> That is the most important differentiation for my anchoring.


Likely to also come up with some eel grass stuck in the end barefoot give a couple tries and let us know the out come


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

north ask long distance cruisers and those that have had to navigate unfamiliar waters what the most important aid to navigation is was, and really high up on the list or at the top 99% of the time they will say a means to read depth

when the electronics on your boat fails what now? 

lead line...

paired with a crew at the spreaders or up on the mast high up you can get out of sketchy places that no chart or plotter or other aid to navigation shows or helps with

there were a few instances navigating in and out of the red sea coral reefs(we also had some issues off providencia island) where I was the designated eyes since I was the youngest and was sent up the mast to navigate along with one person standing watch at the depth sounder and one other at the helm controls

beleive it or not...eyeing the chart and plotter was way down the prirority list for the exact same reasons others have mentioned here...sometimes and in some places you have to make a decision to discard the chart as a useful aid if you find errors big or small, thats when you start to dead reckon the old school way.

throwing a lead line might seem hipsterish to you but it can save your butt if everything else fails...

being singlehanded going without a depthsounder is damn foolish...and it becomes much harder to navigate but doable...again dependant on where you sail.

thats why they have remotes for some autopilots so you can adjust course from somewhere else on the boat but the helm.

I completely agree with you that a depthsounders value is very dependant on location...for example we never used one down here on this crater lake where I taught classes...as basically about 10 feet from the shore it was deep water.

having said that I would guess that not many people cruise or sail(big boats) today without a means to read depth...


anywhoo


----------



## northoceanbeach (Mar 23, 2008)

Eh, I just don't like those dirty hipsters thinking they're better than me because they use a lead line and row their dinghies. They make a hawk eye handheld electronic depth sounder for under a hundred. 

Why are we always talking about when the electronics fail? The electronics don't always fail. you could have a backup. I had two depth sounder on my last boat, a fish finder sonar and a hawk eye.

You can always make a lead line in an emergency if the electronics fail. How about people actually take care of their stuff and then it rarely fails.

Dirty hipsters. People that have pretend wooden boats.


----------



## southbound (Jun 9, 2013)

MikeOReilly said:


> Wow... Really? I love my depth sounder and value it far more than any gps-dependent plotter. A sounder (or lead line ... same thing) is giving real data about your actual situation.


Yup, same thing. Except for the fact that they are completely different. If using an electronic depth sounder was comparable to using a lead line why would anybody take the trouble and expense to install the fishfinder?


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

Alex W said:


> That's cool and something I hadn't thought of.
> 
> How can it tell the difference between sandy (tallow will come up covered in sand) and sandy will eel grass (tallow will come up covered in sand)?
> 
> That is the most important differentiation for my anchoring.


There is a hole in the bottom of the lead slug. When you drop it into the bottom it comes back up with a sample. I still have my grandfathers lead line, the actual one we used as kids. I spent many hours in the fog up on the bow with that antique contraption... Back in the day, with crappy anchors, we always took a bottom sample before anchoring...

Perhaps I will snap a shot of it this evening and add it to this thread. Most here would not know what it is if they stubbed their toe on it.....

I would give up every piece of electronic gear on my boat BEFORE the depth sounder. I used to navigate my commercial lobster boat entirely by depth.. When fishing commercially you really get that good at knowing the bottom.. Compass and depth, you can keep the rest, if it came to it.....


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

exactly

compass and depth


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

And Windex!


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

northoceanbeach said:


> Eh, I just don't like those dirty hipsters thinking they're better than me because they use a lead line and row their dinghies. They make a hawk eye handheld electronic depth sounder for under a hundred.
> 
> Why are we always talking about when the electronics fail? The electronics don't always fail. you could have a backup. I had two depth sounder on my last boat, a fish finder sonar and a hawk eye.
> 
> ...


I understand where your coming from but your view is very particular to your area...which is fine

yes electronics fail...

you submarine your boat or get a perfect lightning hit(read cruising blogs or latitude 38 enough, its not that uncommon) and your main dc panel goes berzerk or busts all your electronics you have to rig alternate or backup systems

the hawkeye depthsounder btw doesnt have the best performance record, part of the reason I went with a fishfinder that does...

hipsters I get it, you know them well, (think san francisco) doesnt change the facts though...you always need a backup to a backup when cruising

having said that I know very few people who have a backup depthsounder which speaks highly of the reliability of them when compared to other electronics...


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

barefootnavigator said:


> I haven't ran aground in 27 years, the last time I did I had a depth sounder.


Really? How often and where do you sail?

In the PNW I found depth knowledge to be very useful, just as everywhere else I have sailed other than off-soundings.

I can't count the number of times I've been aground.



christian.hess said:


> the depth sounder(either manual or electronic) is the single most important thing on a boat for me, after that its a trusty and reliable compass.


As so many others in this thread, I agree. Depth is the single most important piece of operational information to me. Is the depth appropriate for where I think I am? On or off the continental shelf? In or out of the channel? Trends?



Maine Sail said:


> I still have my grandfathers lead line, the actual one we used as kids.


Your grandfather was likely as smart as you. Current depth information is the best data you can have.

I have a dual-frequency depth sounder on Auspicious. It's great information as we head offshore, head back in, gunkhole well inshore, pass through inlets, and pilot inshore waters. I have a HawkEye handheld depth sounder I use from the dinghy to sound tricky entrances into creeks and streams from the dinghy before taking the bigger sailboat in. I do have a classic lead line complete with wax plug (although peanut butter will do in a pinch - creamy not chunky) from pre-HawkEye days. I keep it aboard in case I run out of batteries.



SloopJonB said:


> And Windex!


Useful, but now redundant. I'm old enough that the hair in my ears give me constant information about wind direction. *sigh*


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

I've had a sounder fail ... that's how I ended up sailing a season using just a leadline. But to be clear, I much prefer an electronic sounder, and the best option IMO is a good fish finder. But my point is that I think actual depth measurements are far more important than a chartplotter when you're in close to the hard stuff. A chartplotter shows an inferred position that may or may not reflect actual reality. 


Why go fast, when you can go slow


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

hair in the ears is a good thing! jajajaja

you know regarding the windex, on a new to me boat they are very very very useful as you can appreciate the boats wind angles better and where she likes to settle in...

for example my current boat came with a guess what(a failed electronic) windmeter and its kaput...so no windex for me...my first sail with the boat(after installing the fishfinder btw) was let say

un exciting and very slow and awkward, first because we were fighting currents up to 4 knots on tacks, and then because wind was shifty and light

a windex would indeed helped me get to know the boat a bit better this first time out

now if only I had hair in my ears man id be golden! jajajaa

good stuff auspicious, as always

ps regarding gradnfathers and how smart they were I still have a german hand bearing compass that has a long arm, weighs a ton but works great. oh and his old wax, yarn and sewing needles...

good memories


----------



## svHyLyte (Nov 13, 2008)

barefootnavigator said:


> I haven't ran aground in 27 years, the last time I did I had a depth sounder. Since then I have been using a lead line although I really don't use it that often. Sure there are forward facing sonars but I doubt many of us have those. So with all the excellent charts and charting devices we have these days is there really any reason to cut another hole in your hull? It seems like a depth sounder is really only good for telling you what you just hit but my guess is by that point you don't need an electrical device to inform you that you are hard aground or sinking.


Ah... I submit you have not been schooled in the proper use of the device. Moreover, there is no need to penetrate the hull to install a useful transducer.


----------



## CaptainForce (Jan 1, 2006)

I have no allegiance to lead lines though I used them for many years. 'and the tallow plug to sample the bottom was of little use. It does not pick up gravel or rocks or plant material. All that sticks to the wax is a little sand or mud and it can pick this up among gravel, plants or big rocks. I like electronic depth sounders regardless of my hipster factor, age or frequency of bathing,- what crap! Everyone should be able to embrace tradition and technology without conflict!


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

CaptainForce said:


> I have no allegiance to lead lines though I used them for many years. 'and the tallow plug to sample the bottom was of little use. It does not pick up gravel or rocks or plant material. All that sticks to the wax is a little sand or mud and it can pick this up among gravel, plants or big rocks. I like electronic depth sounders regardless of my hipster factor, age or frequency of bathing,- what crap! * Everyone should be able to embrace tradition and technology without conflict!*


this is a pretty darn good quote if I may say so

you might want to copyright it...


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

Depth sounder - I agree that they're worthless... A fish finder, however, is vital!

Seeing some number on a depth sounder, and wondering if it is the bottom, a fish, or an air bubble drove me crazy. The number of times that the depth sounder on my boat, which draws 5.7', showed 3.5 and caused me to wonder WTF? made it virtually useless. After I had the bottom painted, and the yard-monkey slapped paint on the transducer it stopped working entirely.

I was faced with the choice of spending $180 (minimum) to fix it, or replace it for $150 with a fish finder. I chose the latter. The fish finder shoots through the hull, it shows me the bottom contour, it reads deeper than the old depth sounder ever did, and I can actually see if the bottom is rocky, weedy, or sandy...

I would never rely only on a chart plotter. As nice as a plotter is, it only tells you what someone thought was in a particular spot. Every time that I enter Wickford, RI, I sail right *over* the spot where my chart plotter tells me that the FL G 6s 40ft 6M "1" day mark is.

The fish finder in combination with a single bearing, allows me to verify my location on a chart, and that I am in safe water.


----------



## SHNOOL (Jun 7, 2007)

Murphy is gonna fix the OPs arrogance about not having run aground... this can be assured.


----------



## Marcaiche (Aug 30, 2014)

Now, I'm pretty traditional and low-tech gear wise...even like to stay proficient with the sextant for the next run offshore...that being said, a fish-finder/sonar with the right frequency/wattage combination for your prevalent water conditions is mighty useful. I often fish under sail, do quite a bit of crabbing, and anchor out often. We have highly variable bottom conditions in the pacific northwest, so having an idea concerning what's down there makes dropping a hook easier and surer, and prevents lost pots too. I have a 15 year old Lowrance 85 that's simple, small, reliable and has a decent screen, with enough power at a low enough frequency to burn through the thermal layers we often have in the Salish Sea. Rigged an oil-cup for the transducer and placed it up forward in the Pearson and it works fine shooting through the hull. I always stow a lead line aboard too though, for tradition's sake if nothing else ;-) .


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

if you run aground sailing as little as barefoot does, in as small an area wiht as deep as water... well, when you sail in an are that actually has shallows, then come talk to us about how depth finders don't matter, mmmkay?
bragging that you haven't run aground on the west coast is like bragging you haven't had to buy a snowsuit in all the years you have lived in saudi arabia. you know who runs aground in BC? Ferry skippers. end of list.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

you know this just crossed my mind

is barefoot messing with us? jajaja

too funny


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

Marcaiche said:


> Now, I'm pretty traditional and low-tech gear wise...even like to stay proficient with the sextant for the next run offshore...that being said, a fish-finder/sonar with the right frequency/wattage combination for your prevalent water conditions is mighty useful. I often fish under sail, do quite a bit of crabbing, and anchor out often. We have highly variable bottom conditions in the pacific northwest, so having an idea concerning what's down there makes dropping a hook easier and surer, and prevents lost pots too. I have a 15 year old Lowrance 85 that's simple, small, reliable and has a decent screen, with enough power at a low enough frequency to burn through the thermal layers we often have in the Salish Sea. Rigged an oil-cup for the transducer and placed it up forward in the Pearson and it works fine shooting through the hull. I always stow a lead line aboard too though, for tradition's sake if nothing else ;-) .


I went even simpler...somebody on here reccomended toilet wax to install the transducer and it works like a charm! best trick yet

I just sanded smooth the glass and made a nice bucket shape and pressed firm.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

barefootnavigator said:


> I haven't ran aground in 27 years, the last time I did I had a depth sounder. Since then I have been using a lead line although I really don't use it that often. Sure there are forward facing sonars but I doubt many of us have those. So with all the excellent charts and charting devices we have these days is there really any reason to cut another hole in your hull? It seems like a depth sounder is really only good for telling you what you just hit but my guess is by that point you don't need an electrical device to inform you that you are hard aground or sinking.


I love your blog. But not nearly as much as I love good electronics.

I use my depth gauge like you use the internet and a digital camera. You could do a "blog" completely by hand like in the old days - but that would be stupid.


----------



## Tenoch (Sep 28, 2012)

Barefootnavigator does win the award for most-replies-per-new-thread-started. Well done sir!


----------



## northoceanbeach (Mar 23, 2008)

He's too busy cutting the fingers off all his gloves and being a sexy hipster to run aground. Have you seen his avatar? It's like the GQ sailing magazine cover for September. They're making a calendar of sailors like they did for firemen back in the day. Dirty hipsters and their lead lines.


----------



## Marcaiche (Aug 30, 2014)

Christian,

Never thought of using a wax ring before! Heckuva slick and simple idea that! Gonna definitely give it a try at the next opportunity.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

Tenoch said:


> Barefootnavigator does win the award for most-replies-per-new-thread-started. Well done sir!


he has a gift thats for sure


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

Marcaiche said:


> Christian,
> 
> Never thought of using a wax ring before! Heckuva slick and simple idea that! Gonna definitely give it a try at the next opportunity.


I feel bad I cant remember who exactly it was but it was on another depthsounder thread, Im truly greatfull for the tip...(I was contemplating making the pvc mineral oil cup, but this beats that for simplicity and quickness)

I beleive the shoot thru hull thread

its really works and no part is hard now to remove...I can simply take it onto my next boat or kayak or whatever

plus I get cool features you dont get with a depthsounder, temp, voltage and bottom countour

and FISH! jajaj

I got the garmin echo 150...budget but good rep.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

barefootnavigator said:


> I haven't ran aground in 27 years, the last time I did I had a depth sounder. Since then I have been using a lead line although I really don't use it that often. Sure there are forward facing sonars but I doubt many of us have those. So with all the excellent charts and charting devices we have these days is there really any reason to cut another hole in your hull? It seems like a depth sounder is really only good for telling you what you just hit but my guess is by that point you don't need an electrical device to inform you that you are hard aground or sinking.


Gee, ever hear of the one hundred fathom curve in your 27 years of not running aground? As every chartplotter, cruising guide and even some charts out there have this little note on them that warns that they are handy dandy reference materials, but should not be used as one's sole method of navigation, why wouldn't one have a depth finder aboard?
Your lead line is not going to tell you when you've just crossed the 10 fathom curve (the water might shoal precipitously from there), when you are too busy to use it, as a singlehander (if I remember right you are a singlehander, aren't you?).
I could give a hundred reasons why a depth finder might be useful, but not one single reason not to have one aboard a boat today.


----------



## northoceanbeach (Mar 23, 2008)

I'll give you one reason: dirty hipsters.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

eherlihy said:


> The number of times that the depth sounder on my boat, which draws 5.7', showed 3.5 and caused me to wonder WTF? made it virtually useless.


Was it calibrated? Was it showing depth below keel, depth below transducer, depth of water, or some random, uncalibrated number? RTFM.



eherlihy said:


> After I had the bottom painted, and the yard-monkey slapped paint on the transducer it stopped working entirely.


Then the yard owes you a haul and cleaning.

By the way all the spiffy stuff that the fishfinder does happens in software. The transducers are the same.


----------



## fryewe (Dec 4, 2004)

christian.hess said:


> I went even simpler...somebody on here reccomended toilet wax to install the transducer and it works like a charm! best trick yet
> 
> I just sanded smooth the glass and made a nice bucket shape and pressed firm.


Christian has the wax been holding its shape well in your tropical locale?


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

fryewe said:


> Christian has the wax been holding its shape well in your tropical locale?


because of the heat the wax is a lot softer to mold, basically you just squish it in your hands and set it once and forget it...I do notice though since I have very shallow bilges that the wax leeches some, Im assuming the wax is a parraffin type wax.

I noticed that if my water in the bilges touches the wax it will leech off. nothing horrendous but something to consider

i.e trick you into thinking you have a fuel leak...might not apply to paranoid owners per se! jaja

the wax itself has held with the heat(the bilges are around 88f) and the transducer hasnt moved...but its only been on less than a month...

time will tell

I could install it under the v berth or something too but I simply installed it next to the old transducer which should work, I just need a compatible signet display to hook it up to again but thats will take patience scanning ebay and craigslist for a replacement since the display only new costs something like $300!

peace


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

My depth finder shows me fish, too. Let a chartplotter tell you that.


----------



## kwaltersmi (Aug 14, 2006)

Mine is most relevant during anchoring. I'll glance at it from time to time while sailing, but almost never sail in areas where I don't know the local hazards or haven't checked the charts.

Having said that, I've seen plenty of charts that were either outdated or simply incorrect. With variables such as tides, water level fluctuation (a recent concern in the Great Lakes), shifting shoals, etc. I find that I'm more confident when using both charts and a sounder, even if they may sometimes be redundant.


----------



## alctel (Jan 25, 2014)

As a new sailor, I'm too busy trying not to fall overboard or run into a ferry to try to fiddle around with a lead line so the fish finder is invaluable.

I'm also a massive nerd, so like electronics (though I have paper or other backups for everything - I learnt this as a pilot the hard way)


----------



## newhaul (Feb 19, 2010)

SVAuspicious said:


> Was it calibrated? Was it showing depth below keel, depth below transducer, depth of water, or some random, uncalibrated number?
> 
> By the way all the spiffy stuff that the fishfinder does happens in software. The transducers are the same.


Mine shows the depth under the transducer which is mounted 18 inches below the water line and 24 inches above the bottom of my keel it is nice to know those numbers for your own vessel as well.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

smackdaddy said:


> I love your blog. But not nearly as much as I love good electronics.
> 
> I use my depth gauge like you use the internet and a digital camera. You could do a "blog" completely by hand like in the old days - but that would be stupid.


I nominate smackdaddy for the win.

I don't think the OP is really interested in our answers to this question, so I'll just add my +1 to smack's post and call it good.

MedSailor


----------



## BeejDeC (Feb 7, 2014)

It's an easy way to navigate in tandem with your gps or paper chart. When you're furiously tacking back and forth in a channel, it's nice to be able to hold the tack til the last minute. 

It is a bit like those "Traffic Ahead" signs on the highway that you come across 20 minutes after crawling to a stop though. Still, there's a certain charm to the shrill screeching of the alarm each time I sail/plow in and out of the skinny water of the home marina!

First year, and Yes, I've run aground.


----------



## newhaul (Feb 19, 2010)

If you don't run around at least once a year you ain't sailing


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

SHNOOL said:


> Murphy is gonna fix the OPs arrogance about not having run aground... this can be assured.


Well, that might require that he ventures beyond his local waters...

You know, like... _"Voyaging"..._

)


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

SVAuspicious said:


> Was it calibrated? Was it showing depth below keel, depth below transducer, depth of water, or some random, uncalibrated number? RTFM.
> 
> Then the yard owes you a haul and cleaning.
> 
> By the way all the spiffy stuff that the fishfinder does happens in software. The transducers are the same.


Dude,

I read the F'ing manual... and the unit was calibrated to display the depth of water from the surface... Don't go making assumptions.

While I am sure that it was state of the art in '87, it was a complete POS in 2012, when I ripped it out. Back when I first bought the boat it would read 10.5, 10.7, 3.5, 3.2, 8.8, then 10.2. WTF was that? a fish? did I run aground?

Yes, I agree that the yard that stripped, barrier coated, and painted the bottom of my boat owed me a new transducer. But, I'd have a new transducer, with the same old POS depth sounder, and I would have to pick a fight to get it. Not worth the aggravation.

A fish finder is a FAR better tool because it shows you the depth, the bottom contour, and gives you a pretty good idea of what the bottom looks like... I installed the dual frequency transducer, which is far different from the old one, to shoot through the hull. It does not just show the user a number which may, or may not be accurate, as my old depth sounder did.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

fwiw I had a standard horizion unit that did the numbers game...howver I git used to it and decided that the first and last numbers of the series where the right ones...jajajaja

all my previous boats for whatever reason have included fishfinders and I bet you its because people dont want to bother with installing a thruhull

ps why would a new transducer be needed because its painted over? do some get damaged like that?

new to me


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

I too used to walk to school 10 miles in the snow in my bare feet. Old enough to mean it...sort of.

Seriously, priority for NAV gear starts with a compass and a sounder. In my youth that's all we had in the fog. Others have mentioned following a contour to a A boy, then headings marker to marker to find your way home. It works.
Could do this with a hand line but you'd be plenty busy

When entering an unfamiliar harbor I'm happy when everything agrees including compass, sounder, chart plotter, radar, marker numbers, and if it's clear, eyeball. Some places in my neighborhood change with moving sand. Chart plotter alone won't show that.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

eherlihy said:


> I read the F'ing manual... and the unit was calibrated to display the depth of water from the surface... Don't go making assumptions.


I didn't make assumptions - I asked questions.

You appear to have missed my most significant point, that the transducer in a modern fishfinder and the transducer in a modern depth sounder is the same piece of equipment. So you replaced an old transducer with a new one, and an old display with a new one. You still have a depth sounder, whatever the graphics are.

Most likely you had corroded connections in the old unit, but I wasn't there and I certainly am not going to ask you anymore questions at this point.

You asked why people would use a depth sounder and the overwhelming answer was that they are important navigational and operational tools. Remember that your fishfinder IS a depth sounder.

Now I am going to make an assumption that you bought a kit somewhere and now have a transom mounted transducer which means its readings will be subject to cavitation and air entrainment. You would be best off with a replacement thru-hull transducer with whatever kind of display head makes you happy.

The Airmar (pretty much the only game in town for recreational acoustic transducers for Garmin, Raymarine, Lowrance, Hummingbird, ...) dual-frequency transducer that came with your fishfinder is the same one that comes with a lot of numeric display depth sounders. The fishfinder display you have is surely available with thru-hull and through-the-hull transducers as well as transom mounts.


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

christian.hess said:


> fwiw I had a standard horizion unit that did the numbers game...howver I git used to it and decided that the first and last numbers of the series where the right ones...jajajaja


My old one was a Signet Marine SL172. It updated about once a second, and would continue to spew numbers that I really didn't trust.


> all my previous boats for whatever reason have included fishfinders and I bet you its because people dont want to bother with installing a thruhull


Nope, fish finders can use through hulls, and can also be far more accurate, with more features, than a numbers only depth sounder. The real reason is that they are cheaper. Because they are frequently stand-alone devices, they don't have to have the networking (NMEA 0183/2000/other) interfaces that depth sounders do. You can buy a great stand alone fish finder for $300. You want a sounder from Garmin; that'll be $399 and up for a GCV10, plus $150-$1000 for a transducer, plus you have to tie it to a MFD, for another $1K...


> ps why would a new transducer be needed because its painted over? do some get damaged like that?
> 
> new to me


Because the paint can (and usually does) disrupt the sound wave emitted by the transducer (one way is that the paint can form a bubble on the face of the transducer), it will either decrease the range of the transducer, or (as in my case) disable it entirely.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

AUSPICIOUS you can wax that puppy in the hull and be ahead of the game(if your solid glass)

I agree however that the airmar p70 I think is the major transducer for most manufacturers

I think thats what my boat has still installed...

just need to find a display for it and then Ill have 2 reliable depthsounders at least in my case

anywhoo I want to know from barefoot if he was just fishing for bites man

I feel duped

jajajaja


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

eherlihy said:


> My old one was a Signet Marine SL172. It updated about once a second, and would continue to spew numbers that I really didn't trust.
> 
> Nope, fish finders can use through hulls, and can also be far more accurate, with more features, than a numbers only depth sounder. The real reason is that they are cheaper. Because they are frequently stand-alone devices, they don't have to have the networking (NMEA 0183/2000/other) interfaces that depth sounders do. You can buy a great stand alone fish finder for $300. You want a sounder from Garmin; that'll be $399 and up for a GCV10, plus $150-$1000 for a transducer, plus you have to tie it to a MFD, for another $1K...
> 
> Because the paint can (and usually does) disrupt the sound wave emitted by the transducer (one way is that the paint can form a bubble on the face of the transducer), it will either decrease the range of the transducer, or (as in my case) disable it entirely.


I understand what you are saying but respectfully disagree on some

price wise most fishfinders are cheaper and pack more value, so yes thats why they are so popular even for sailors installing them inside the hull like me

2. the paint thing, from experience if I have decreased max readings why would that affect the true purpose of a depthsounder that is, low readings...?

this fishfinder for example goes down to decimals...

3. it has not been my experience that paint destroys a transducer, at least on those boats I have had with true depthsounders and on others where I have done work on.

hence my question are all transducers affected dramatically or rendered useless by paint?

Im assuming and this is wrong of me that maybe some paints or epoxies would do more "damage" than say plain old ablative. I can understand that.

lastly the price thing is exactly why I installed a fishfinder shut thru instead of looking for a new display for my signet which might or might not work transducer wise

so the risk of $100 was a no brainer versus a possible 300 down the drain move

I guess we are saying many of the same things just differently


----------



## barefootnavigator (Mar 12, 2012)

I posted looking for solid responses and not a debate, we all sail our own way. I'm wrapping up a book for the first time boat buyer and in my research learned that over 90% of hard groundings in the Salish were with boats that had depth sounders on and were being used at the time. I found it very interesting because in my 5 years of sailing here I have never missed or wanted one and I have sailed into some pretty scary places. I work on the water so I spend more time at sea the the average guy. I should mention that I always have a paper chart in the cockpit and love the challenge of navigation. I wasn't implying that one form is better than the other but more looking for the responses I got, I love sail net and all the awesome people that post here. I also enjoy the flack from the knuckleheads that think everything is a pissing contest.
PS didn't mean to dupe anybody, all valuable responses..


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

SVAuspicious said:


> I didn't make assumptions - I asked questions.
> 
> You appear to have missed my most significant point, that the transducer in a modern fishfinder and the transducer in a modern depth sounder is the same piece of equipment. So you replaced an old transducer with a new one, and an old display with a new one. You still have a depth sounder, whatever the graphics are.
> 
> ...


Dave,

"RTFM" is based on the assumption that I did not read the F'ing manual. I take exception to this, and you were wrong in that assumption. And you are wrong in the assumption that my current installation is subject to cavitation and air entrapment... I'll leave it at that, as I have no interest in getting into this with you.

I will agree that a fish finder and a depth sounder are based on the same technology.

However most depth sounders only give you a number in the display;

























These are IMHO useless.

It is far better, again IMHO, to see a picture that gives you context of what the number represents;

























Note: I am not recommending any of these units (and mine is not pictured). These were simply selected for illustration.


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

christian.hess said:


> I understand what you are saying but respectfully disagree on some
> 
> price wise most fishfinders are cheaper and pack more value, so yes thats why they are so popular even for sailors installing them inside the hull like me
> 
> ...


I think that we agree on the value. And yes, I have oversimplified.

The deal with the paint is that it does not adhere well to the plastic surface of the transducer. Most bottom paint will quickly form a "bubble," which wreaks havoc on the transducer's operation.

In my situation, above, they painted the thing... So what do I do now? Scrub the paint off with sandpaper? Strip it off with solvent? I highly suspect that the yard soda blasted it before they painted it. So, yeah, they should have owed me another transducer.

The solution is to paint the transducer with "transducer paint." Or better yet, install a "shoot through the hull" transducer, and avoid the problems of making a hole in the boat, and not getting paint on the transducer (or soda blasting it) entirely.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

eherlihy said:


> Dude,
> 
> I read the F'ing manual... and the unit was calibrated to display the depth of water from the surface... Don't go making assumptions.
> 
> ...


You simply had a bad depth sounder. They do not operate like that when working properly...


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

barefootnavigator said:


> I posted looking for solid responses and not a debate, we all sail our own way. I'm wrapping up a book for the first time boat buyer and in my research learned that over 90% of hard groundings in the Salish were with boats that had depth sounders on and were being used at the time. I found it very interesting because in my 5 years of sailing here I have never missed or wanted one...


Well it's good to know that you were posing a genuine research question, but really it sounded a little like, "Why does anyone use a car, when a horse works just fine." It looked a little like bait. 

Regarding whether or not sounders help avoid groundings I would ask if you found, in your research, anything about how many groundings were avoided by the use of depth sounders? I would guess not because that kind of data is harder to come by, because people don't report close calls, but I'd venture to guess that they've saved many many a grounding.

Sure, you can hit a rock with no warning (did that on a race) while looking at the sounder, but if the bottom contour gently slopes you can watch the numbers count down and take action when it gets shallow (did that 2 weeks ago on a powerboat).

I have a lead line and it has its uses, but it's hard to use while moving, takes hands and concentration away from other tasks and a depth sounder is a cheap, easy to install and reliable way to get the same info. It's kind of like the GPS. It's a cheap, easy, quick way to get the same info as the sextant can provide...

MedSailor


----------



## Tenoch (Sep 28, 2012)

barefootnavigator said:


> ...in my research learned that over 90% of hard groundings in the Salish were with boats that had depth sounders on and were being used at the time. .


I wonder what percentage of boats HAVE a depth sounder....could it be close to 90%? I also wonder what percentage of groundings were avoided by quick use of a lead line?


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

eherlihy said:


> I think that we agree on the value. And yes, I have oversimplified.
> 
> The deal with the paint is that it does not adhere well to the plastic surface of the transducer. Most bottom paint will quickly form a "bubble," which wreaks havoc on the transducer's operation.
> 
> ...


aaaaaaaah I gotcha now


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Tenoch said:


> I also wonder what percentage of groundings were avoided by quick use of a lead line?


How dare you remind me of how I got rid of my last girlfriend!!!

.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

barefootnavigator said:


> I wasn't implying that one form is better than the other...


Oh c'mon. At least be honest. It doesn't take a poodle surgeon to figure out from your blog that you're a serious advocate for the "simple ways".

I see absolutely nothing wrong with Luddite sailing - even though I'm firmly on the other end of the spectrum. Just don't try to make it "holier-than-thou". That gets annoying.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> I see absolutely nothing wrong with Luddite sailing .


I find a lot wrong with Luddite sailing! Lack of safety and lack of seamanship topping the list.

Mark


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

eherlihy said:


> "RTFM" is based on the assumption that I did not read the F'ing manual.


I knew when I suggested "reading the fine manual" that I should take a different approach. Bad on me. I apologize for offending you.



eherlihy said:


> It is far better, again IMHO, to see a picture that gives you context of what the number represents


An observation that might lead to a rational and interesting discussion about how people interpret information and how long that takes. People are different.

Some people interpret textual information faster and more effectively while others are better served with graphical information. My radar and chartplotter are plenty of graphical information _for me_. Depth, speed, and wind in text are fast and easy _for me_ to capture and integrate.

With specific regard to depth, we are both talking about an acoustic sounder whether mounted through the hull, shooting through the hull, or hanging off the transom. Fundamentally the same hardware. The exact same data goes back to a display whether that data is displayed as a number or as a two(ish) dimensional display. Neither tells you anything significant about what the beam has not yet passed over. The bottom can do crazy things and tends to do so right in front of you.

Fishfinder displays (same transducers, remember) do some interesting things. It's been some years since I was engaged in sonar technology. When I was, Kalman filters where all the rage and the filtered data was used to smooth the bottom data and the error terms were used to identify things like fish and other artifacts. Regardless there is a lot of software between you and the measurements in a fishfinder. Good, bad, or indifferent that is worth bearing in mind. The really good news is that most fishfinders allow you to display a number that is the best, most recent depth measurement that is only subject to a short window moving average.

In my opinion it is good to know where the data you are making decisions on came from and what has happened to it before you see it.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

capecodda said:


> When entering an unfamiliar harbor I'm happy when everything agrees including compass, sounder, chart plotter, radar, marker numbers, and if it's clear, eyeball. Some places in my neighborhood change with moving sand. Chart plotter alone won't show that.


Hell, it's not only sand that moves around...Sometimes, entire _HARBORS_ and communities, situated on some of the oldest rock on the earth's surface, apparently still shift position...










Anyone who truly believes "today's excellent charts and charting devices" are alone sufficient, or infallible, really needs to get out more...


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Anyone who truly believes "today's excellent charts and charting devices" are alone sufficient, or infallible, really needs to get out more...


No one says they are infallible except the pathetic old buggers who think nothing can be relied upon unless its on paper, hopefully printed more than 100 years ago. Those buggers are stark raving loony!


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

JonEisberg said:


>


The photo appears to have been taken from a vantage point high and dry. The chart plotter shows the same. So what's the problem?



MedSailor


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> No one says they are infallible except the pathetic old buggers who think nothing can be relied upon unless its on paper, hopefully printed more than 100 years ago. Those buggers are stark raving loony!


LOL! Well, the OP appeared to suggest they are sufficiently accurate as to render depth sounders unnecessary...

When (if) I make it back home from my summer's cruise, I'll post a de-brief of the trip that will include my experience with the comparative accuracy of my paper charts vs. 2 different versions of their electronic cousins...

2 guesses as to which proved to be the more accurate, in the end...


----------



## abrahamx (Apr 3, 2006)

Yea, I'm in lake st clair which averages like 11ft. I just like to know the depth so I dont ground out any more than I have. Drawing 5 ft in my Tartan, that is important to me. I hate having to gun it in reverse to hopefully get sailing again. Depth sounder is my most valuable tool on board. Next to myself.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> 2 guesses as to which proved to be the more accurate, in the end...


Thats the point, Jon. Who cares? Everyone (but a very few) has electronics.


----------



## goboatingnow (Oct 10, 2008)

barefootnavigator said:


> I haven't ran aground in 27 years, the last time I did I had a depth sounder. Since then I have been using a lead line although I really don't use it that often. Sure there are forward facing sonars but I doubt many of us have those. So with all the excellent charts and charting devices we have these days is there really any reason to cut another hole in your hull? It seems like a depth sounder is really only good for telling you what you just hit but my guess is by that point you don't need an electrical device to inform you that you are hard aground or sinking.


Obviously you have never sailed in an area with tides , come back to us when you have


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Thats the point, Jon. Who cares? Everyone (but a very few) has electronics.


Huh? Guess I'm missing something, here... Because "everyone has electronics...only a few" might be interested in knowing which charts might be the most accurate for a given region?


----------



## lancelot9898 (Dec 30, 2008)

Next to the compass, I think the depth finder is the most important tool aboard for navigation. I used a lead line in my first boat and went aground many times even with a 2 1/2 foot draft. Now with the present boat at almost 6 feet and having an electronic finder, I go aground much less and can verify my position easily with the charts.


----------



## out of irons (Sep 3, 2014)

Racing in confined coastal waters... gunkholing in the islands... both situations where charts are not nearly fine enough resolution to be useful for avoiding grounding.


----------



## nighthawk (Sep 25, 2013)

Captain Obvious to the rescue!!!! So, if I understand the OP correctly, he wants to know why he needs a depth sounder because he has a ...dare I say it...DEPTH SOUNDER. The two devices perform exactly the same function, accurate measurement of the depth below the boat. Does it really matter which device you use? Tell you what, you paint your boat any color you want, and I'll do the same. Really, why are we arguing this point?


----------



## TQA (Apr 4, 2009)

northoceanbeach said:


> Eh, I just don't like those dirty hipsters thinking they're better than me because they use a lead line and row their dinghies. They make a hawk eye handheld electronic depth sounder for under a hundred.
> 
> Why are we always talking about when the electronics fail? The electronics don't always fail. you could have a backup. I had two depth sounder on my last boat, a fish finder sonar and a hawk eye.
> 
> ...


It is a piece of electronic equipment; it is not IF it will fail it is WHEN.

Get hit by lightning [ I have been ] and PZZZZT all your electronics can be toast. ** In my case not all but most }.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

exactly

but you learn that along the way


----------



## killarney_sailor (May 4, 2006)

Barefoot,
Seems like a lot depends on where you sail and how much time you spend there. There are places (parts of the Bahamas) we have gone where the water is just deep enough (7' or so) or not deep enough (4') and it all looks the same and changes so rapidly that you can do with all of the help you can get. In parts of Indonesia areas of charts where the anchorages were either had no soundings at, very few soundings that were hopelessly wrong, or showed as land even though the water was hundreds of feet deep. A sounder is like everything else on the boat, a plotter, radar, paper charts, no replacement for good common sense, but at times very, very useful.

For Jon
I just found out that Grand Bruit has been abandoned. Were you there when it was still occupied year round? Sad that it has gone. One of the loveliest places I have ever visited - scenery and people.


----------



## Dave_E (Aug 7, 2013)

barefootnavigator said:


> I haven't ran aground in 27 years, the last time I did I had a depth sounder. Since then I have been using a lead line although I really don't use it that often. Sure there are forward facing sonars but I doubt many of us have those. So with all the excellent charts and charting devices we have these days is there really any reason to cut another hole in your hull? It seems like a depth sounder is really only good for telling you what you just hit but my guess is by that point you don't need an electrical device to inform you that you are hard aground or sinking.


Come sail with me in the Salish Sea... I'll show you why. Unless you were wanting to stir something up, I really don't know why anyone would ask this question.  There are 3 types of sailors: those who have instruments and run aground, those who have lied about it and those with no instruments and run aground, you know, "that guy". I don't want to be "that guy".

Maybe when it says 5 - 4 - 3 - 2.... you ought to combat reverse and think about it?


----------



## barefootnavigator (Mar 12, 2012)

Dave_E said:


> Come sail with me in the Salish Sea... I'll show you why. Unless you were wanting to stir something up, I really don't know why anyone would ask this question.  There are 3 types of sailors: those who have instruments and run aground, those who have lied about it and those with no instruments and run aground, you know, "that guy". I don't want to be "that guy".
> 
> Maybe when it says 5 - 4 - 3 - 2.... you ought to combat reverse and think about it?


Not trying to stir the pot at all, I've been sailing in the Salish since 2007 most of it engineless. I don't have a gps I just put that in the post as a question. I use Charts a hand bearing compass a lead line a little caution and a lot of common sense/experience and of corse up to date guide books.


----------



## Dave_E (Aug 7, 2013)

barefootnavigator said:


> Not trying to stir the pot at all, I've been sailing in the Salish since 2007 most of it engineless. I don't have a gps I just put that in the post as a question. I use Charts a hand bearing compass a lead line a little caution and a lot of common sense/experience and of corse up to date guide books.


That's cool. It's my guess that about 95%+ of the forum participants don't share in your methods. Your going to raise a few eyebrows that's all. Best of continued luck to you. 

Dave


----------



## CharlzO (Nov 12, 2013)

I haven't read all, and I'm sure I'm not alone, but in the lake I'm on currently, there is a lot of sediment that can move and accumulate in the inlet from the marina, so without the depth reading on my plotter, I wouldn't know what the ACTUAL depth is. I've seen water that should be 10' or so, drop to an actual 6-7' when stuff has settled and not been cleared yet. That's a definite difference that can easily affect certain drafts. While I do generally look at the marked depths, when I'm getting closer to shallower areas, that reading becomes front and center alongside the chart as a precaution.


----------



## newhaul (Feb 19, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Huh? Guess I'm missing something, here... Because "everyone has electronics...only a few" might be interested in knowing which charts might be the most accurate for a given region?


I believe what mark is saying is that most people have various electronics I have a fish finder that rarely gets used and a vhf marine radio that only gets turned on when I'm needing a weather forecast and I do know people that sail and don't even have a compass on their boat there are several in my marina like that .


----------



## fryewe (Dec 4, 2004)

Just ran across this ad for an interesting little gizmo that is kind of an "electronic lead line" - fascinating - I just can't keep up with all the whiz bang stuff being offered

Fugawi Store ? Vexilar SONARPhone SP100 - T-POD WiFi Sonar Transmitter

Anybody use this thing?


----------



## tsell (Dec 9, 2012)

I use my depth finder to confirm that I have run aground!:batter


----------



## nighthawk (Sep 25, 2013)

tsell said:


> I use my depth finder to confirm that I have run aground!:batter


Very smart--just in case the sudden stop and grinding noises are caused by grazing a sea turtle or manatee. Or even a hoard of zombies on the sandy bottom below the boat! Wake up the zombie thread! :laugher


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

The OP seems critical of people who use a depth finder, as suggested by "I haven't run aground in 27 years, and that was with a depth finder..."

Yesterday, one of my dockmates was critical of my purchase of a Manson Supreme, and made the comment that he "hasn't drug his older generation anchor in XX years", and asked why I felt I needed to buy a new design of anchor.

All I can say is, it must be nice to be so perfect. I guess I'm a sh---y sailor.
It wouldn't be the first time I've been accused of such.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

jajaja

people who get sucked into buying the best "whatever" game are often very offended and embarrassed when they see jo blo do the same for much cheaper, or with something that was thought of as underperforming or crap, or not good enough etc...

if a guy anchors next to me with a homemade anchor, rusty old **** but gets to enjoy the same anchorage, same sunset, same everything

who is the dumbass there???????

extreme cases aside, it happens all the time out there...

there will always be someone scraping by his existence more than you, and there will always be those above you...

even if your the smallest crappiest boat in the anchorage, you might eat better than those on a bigger boat, or have a better head than those with a nicer more cruisy boat etc...


goes each and every way

guess the point here is criticise less...enjoy more if out there

ps. heres a secret, there are many cruisers in paradise WHO ARENT happy out there...stay away from them or better yet the catalog queens at the dock jajaja


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

It's funny, but the longer I sail & cruise, the more often I run aground. When I was new to it all we were very cautious about anchoring. Never ran aground, but always anchored where the guide books told us to. Now that we know what we're doing we try anchoring in many off-the-guides areas ... and we sometimes run aground. 

I think Eileen Quinn has a good song about this: "Now that we know what we're doing we run aground all the time" or something like that (sorry Eileen). 

Oh, and a good electronic sounder is great for this kind of gunkholing. A leadline will work as well, and we use ours for probing with the dingy (especially when we've run aground and are looking for the way out), but our depth sounder is by far the most important instrument for getting off the beaten path. 


Why go fast, when you can go slow


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

down here and many parts of the world a 20-25 ft bamboo stick is the tried and true sounder

works every time...never fails, and if it breaks use it for something else...

its also a great grappling type pole to push off and fend off other boats...its also used to push yourself trough shallow water, then the yuloh or paddle in an J curve off the stern does it for propulsion


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

christian.hess said:


> jajaja
> 
> people who get sucked into buying the best "whatever" game are often very offended and embarrassed when they see jo blo do the same for much cheaper, or with something that was thought of as underperforming or crap, or not good enough etc...
> 
> ...


I don't feel that I got sucked into the hype. I didn't buy the anchor "just because".

I bought it because my Danforth takes forever to bite, doesn't reset well, and doesn't bite at all, in some of the creeks I frequent, which have carpets of dead leaves on the bottom. My anchor alarm would usually sound at least once per night, when anchored out with the Danforth. (My dockmate actually criticized my use of a anchor-drag alarm as well).

Conversely, I just finished a solo trip around the Delmarva peninsula. The Manson makes singlehand anchoring a breeze, because it bites quickly and deeply. My drag alarm never sounded once during the entire trip. I bought the Manson because my old anchor wasn't setting or staying set, and I wasn't sleeping well, not because of "catalog hype".

I thought that adequate ground tackle, and use of a drag alarm was good seamanship? I thought we were supposed to secure our vessels, to avoid becoming a hazard to our neighbors?

Now I'm being fed this bravado bullsh-t, that depth finders, modern anchors, and alarms are crutches for people who don't really know how to sail, and that I apparently have "catalog fever".

Maybe some of you "real sailors" can clue me in as to whether I'm a "prudent mariner" or "catalog queen".


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

man Im having a hard time lately expresing myself I guess...

I WAS DEFENDING YOU

did that not come across? can you tell me where I failed there? I was defending the fact that you got some crap from a guy next to you that said such and such anchor sucks when all you were doing was tryong to get a better anchor suited to your boat...

regarding anchors the "best" anchor depends on the bottom you are currently cruising...

if here a danforth on a bit of chain and much rode works great...

Ill take my post down if it came across lobsided or whatever

sorry


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

Chris-

Your post seemed a bit ambiguous to me, but you're not really the person my statement was directed at.

My dockmate (and others) do rant on about irresponsible people dragging down on them, using inadequate gear etc, then turn around and criticize those who are attempting to be safer and responsible because they employ "technology" such as a new-fangled "depth finder" or a new generation of anchor that doesn't look like it fell off of the Black Pearl.

My statement is directed at these "real sailors".


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

BubbleheadMd said:


> Chris-
> 
> Your post seemed a bit ambiguous to me, but you're not really the person my statement was directed at.
> 
> ...


gotcha, sometimes its the language thing where I see my sentences are reversed in thinking order...

were on the same page then

but Ill happily change my post so its more helpful

that double standard you talk about is the exact same thing Im talking about but when seen from another angle...

if that makes any sense...

if you are going to complain that somebody constantly drags

HELP them

if you then criticise them for trying to IMPROVE(be safer), your an ass...and if thats what your dock "friends" are doing them screw them!!!

fwiw the manson anchor is what most of the guys down here are using

fwiw x2 the guy that hit me down here on their whitby 42 and DRAGGED was using a new MANTUS

what was the users error? not resetting after a big shift in winds hours earlier

laziness got the best of them...they damaged their boat, mine got a destroyed pulpit, and he ran off and isnt paying up

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah the "cruising" life


----------



## newhaul (Feb 19, 2010)

I have been known to collect a debt or three in my time want I should collect some from him for ya chris you need a new prop and strut don't ya


----------



## bvander66 (Sep 30, 2007)

Ever notice that the opening screen on chartplotters says essentially "dont rely on this as sole means of navigation and we (the manufacturer/chart maker) are not responsible if you run aground.
Many of our trips on ICW with 6' draft the chartplotter with latest chart shows us chugging through land (ie phantom island south of Jeckyl Island).
Some e charts of Caribbean are not accurate.
depth sounder imho is a very accurate and important nav aid.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

bvander66 said:


> Ever notice that the opening screen on chartplotters says essentially "dont rely on this as sole means of navigation and we (the manufacturer/chart maker) are not responsible if you run aground.
> Many of our trips on ICW with 6' draft the chartplotter with latest chart shows us chugging through land (ie phantom island south of Jeckyl Island).
> Some e charts of Caribbean are not accurate.
> depth sounder imho is a very accurate and important nav aid.


+1.

On one of our return deliveries, we were in a channel leaving the marina and heading out to the bay in Corpus. I was sitting on the foredeck with my boys, with the skipper at the helm, and noticed we were heading toward a green marker. The skipper is very, very experienced so I wasn't worried. Yet, we kept heading right toward it with only 40 feet or so left at 6 knots. I yelled back at the skip and he saw it and turned hard to starboard to avoid the marker. We immediately grounded.

He had been working with his instruments at the helm, glancing at the chartplotter as we went. The plotter had him right in the middle of the channel. I used to trust the chartplotter much more than I do now (but I still trust it).


----------



## scratchee (Mar 2, 2012)

Using a chart to determine the depth under your keel is like using the weather forecast to trim your sails.


----------



## bvander66 (Sep 30, 2007)

Good one
I like this one too
"Two types of sailors who have done the icw, those who have run aground and those who lie"


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

scratchee said:


> Using a chart to determine the depth under your keel is like using the weather forecast to trim your sails.


This is going to show up in someone's signature.



bvander66 said:


> "Two types of sailors who have done the icw, those who have run aground and those who lie"


Those who give back post their "oopsies" on ActiveCaptain.


----------



## Coquina (Dec 27, 2012)

I didn't wade through the whole 12 pages, but I cannot imagine not having a depth finder where I sail. Sandbars move and I have been aground where the chart plotter swears there is 10-12 feet of water. Some areas of the world may be different. In the Bahamas I can just look at the water for one example, but in the Chesapeake a sounder is pretty much required equipment. Also anyone around here that hasn't run aground in 27 years isn't going anywhere. Even our highly skilled pilots get the freighters stuck every now and again.


----------



## northoceanbeach (Mar 23, 2008)

I think here too. I didn't realize it, but the San Francisco Bay is often super shallow. I pictured this big deep, like 100's of feet throughout bay. Somewhat like puget sound, where you will often be in 60-100 feet within throwing distance of land. 

The chart here is surprising. It's super shallow in many places. People are telling me I WILL run aground. My neighbor says he does all the time. He has tricks on his fin keel like having everyone move to the bow to tilt the fin.


----------



## smurphny (Feb 20, 2009)

I have the simplest depth finder and another as a backup. It's absolutely essential. I gave up on the lead line years ago along with that line with the knots


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

bvander66 said:


> Good one
> I like this one too
> "Two types of sailors who have done the icw, those who have run aground and those who lie"


The last place I ran aground, WAS the ICW! 

And, I wasn't looking at the depth finder, because I knew I was skimming the bottom, and it wasn't like I had anywhere else I could go anyway.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Fired up the depth sounder this am and it was reading 253, then 35, then 11.5, then 112... So out came the trusty leadline. Hope it's just some odd electrical problem, or perhaps gunk on the transducer. I would give up all my chart plotters for a good sounder right now!


Why go fast, when you can go slow


----------



## johnnyquest37 (Feb 16, 2012)

"Only two sailors, in my experience, never ran aground. One never left port and the other was an atrocious liar." -- Don Bamford


----------

