Running two sounders concurrently ???

[Rockfish]

Is it possible to run two sounders concurrently. I am thinking having one with the transducer pointed slightly back at 50 kHz and one with the transducer pointed down or very slightly forward at 200. Would this cause mutual interference?

My boat is set up to the extent possible to optimize the ability to track the ball, but tracking the ball is still limited by depth, current and speed as they relate to blowback, although we can track the ball to greater depth than most. If we had a transducer pointed backwards a bit we could track the ball to greater depth.

 

[scott craven]

what is the purpose of tracking the ball ? (not trying to be a smart butt)
my sounder is primarily used for locating bait and reading the bottom

 

[Rockfish]

Scott - tracking the ball does not preclude tracking bait and fish arches. It is just additional information I find useful. Especially when close to the bottom or wanting to clear over reefs or drop down in a hole for a short time between two close reefs and try for some big Chinook that are resting there out of the current. Ball depth on the counter and actual ball depth are not the same thing due to blow back and I really like seeing the ball as it gives you a better and more accurate perspective relative to the bottom and structure. If the bottom is rising slightly and we are on the bottom I can see it and don’t need to wait for the rigger to starts jumping or guesstimate the actual depth the ball is at as compared with the counter which changes greatly with conditions.

To track the ball to the extent possible we keep drag to a minimum, run a 20lb ball with high speed riggers which can handle it (am thinking finding a 23lb ball would be nice) and have a lot of separation between the riggers which are mounted more forward on the boat than most and the transducer which is way out the back on the large pod.

 

[easydoesit]

No problems from a theoretical or practical point of view in operating a 50 kHz and 200 kHz sonar simultaneously.

I run my Lowrance HDS 2 on the "sonar/sonar" setting routinely with no problems. I am using 200 kHz and a 50 kHz simultaneously using a dual frequency transducer (P66). Even with overlapping "cones" from a dual Frequency transducer there is no problem.

It's interesting to see the difference in the way 50 & 200 kHz frequencies display bait schools. My former employer (I'm retired) developed and marketed sonar for commercial fishing that could be used to distinguish between different species of schooling fish in midwater.

 

[Captain PartyMarty]

when I track my ball on the sounder I can tell if I am above or bellow the bait ball, caught many a fish by quickly dropping my gear bellow the bait ball.....

My setup will only track a ball in shallow water

 

[Rockfish]

Thanks EDI I have noticed that on occasion I get some slight interference on my sounder when passing closer to some other boats. It is nothing that is really a problem, just a few thin lines, usually on the diagonal for a short period of time. I assumed this is because we were both running at 200 KHz.

 

[easydoesit]

Rockfish, happy to assist.

As you identified, sonar interference can be due to other sonars of the the same frequency operating in your area as you pick up stray echoes.

Hope your new setup gives you the results you are looking for.

 

[Capt_Ed]

Learn how to mooch and you don't need to track the ball. Jmho

 

[wildthing]

there are few of us that run two sounders or more but to get the best returns in needs to be setup correctly
meaning straight up and down
tilting it to much and your going to lose the return ping .

same here running 50 htz on a p66 on one display and custom/ chirp 175 high /175 low /map/chart on the other
also have Lss-2 structure scan but don't use that much if at all ...

below shows the chirp off in its own world, as the p66 is showing correct depth
but they have know issues on steep drop off's

 

[Rockfish]

Learn how to mooch and you don't need to track the ball. Jmho

It is interesting how different fishing methods predominate in different areas. Not a lot of mooching takes place in Sooke or cut plugs used for that matter. My guess is it's the current. Here I would say 10 % of the fishermen catch 70% of the big Chinook and they almost exclusively use flashers and anchovies to do it. The 2nd most popular method is flashers and hootchies.

 

[Capt_Ed]

It is interesting how different fishing methods predominate in different areas. Not a lot of mooching takes place in Sooke or cut plugs used for that matter. My guess is it's the current. Here I would say 10 % of the fishermen catch 70% of the big Chinook and they almost exclusively use flashers and anchovies to do it. The 2nd most popular method is flashers and hootchies.

Its is interesting how certain methods take over an area. When I ran the lodge at Hippa all we did was mooch. I taught lots of die hard trollers how and they said they would never go back. As far as big fish, well I was aboard for hundreds over thirty , 29 over 40# and 2 over 50# and in the 10 years there I saw 2 in the high 60's both caught by guys on there first salmon trip ever.
When WCR decide to invade Hippa (and yes that was a shot) all they did was troll and they seem to have good numbers also but I think on average mooching there at Hippa will produce larger fish. JMHO

 

[Rockfish]

Hi Capt. We are far off topic but what the heck, I started this thread. If I was way up north where you fish I would likely be Mooching also. Down here it is almost never done and I suspect it is more than just staying with what you know.

I suspect we catch a much greater percentage of our bigger Chinook deeper than you typically mooch and in faster current. We do get them at 35 or 40 feet sometimes but have got a lot in the 70 to 90 foot range and down to 140 and even some at 200. For that you really need a rigger.

Then there is the comparative availability of large Chinook. I am pretty sure you see a lot more especially the really big ones. There is a lot of space and time between our big fish and I think the glow flashers really help attract the fewer fish that come through, especially when they are deeper. When there is a lot around there is a better chance a big one will find your bait without a flasher.

We are also subject to massive slot restrictions which in recent years finally end mid July (we hope) which gives us a window of only a few weeks when we can keep a big one unless it is clipped before most of the runs are past us headed for the rivers. A lot of people now plan their trip here for Aug and the locals increasingly try to squeeze what use to be 6 months of fully open large Chinook fishing into those few weeks. When the slot is finally lifted everyone wants to fish.
That means the hot spots like the Trap, Possession and Otter etc. have a huge and increasing number of boats all very close together and that is another reason riggers get used rather than mooching. It keeps the gear under the boat and helps prevent, - shall we say, a lot of swearing.

 

[Capt_Ed]

Rockfish, Your correct to a degree about depth but we only fished shallow in the morning . Typically we fished a method we coined as the "Hippa drop" and fished lots in depths between 150-250 ft.

 

[ericl]

I'll share a discussion with a couple of good guides on this subject:

Ken Hunter, Bayshore/Island West resort in the 80's/90's - Ken liked mooching but only did it if the fish were in thick as Anchovy/Flasher was more productive. I lost one Ken estimated at over 60# & caught many over 40# in 25ft of water, so "spooking of large Chinook did not seem to be an issue.

Brent Gallacher West Coast Fishing Club Langara. We downrigger trolled cut-plug with false flashers. Brent said Anchovy/flasher works great as well but company policy is "no in-line flashers".

Mooching was invented by the Japanese in Seattle back in the 1930's - the white guys would see them with their catches & "mooch" bait from them. Back then the other option was trolling with a few pounds of sinker. I first started S/W fishing in the Early 1960's & the shores around Seattle were lined with bait houses & small boat rentals.

The guy that owns the local tackle shop had a charter outfit in Sitka - it's a mooching show up there. I have seen mooching small cut plug to be successful on the bottom in winter in Needle fish country be very successful.

You can mooch a couple anglers with wind/current by using the motor up to around 150ft deep. Deep mooching like this produces lot's of line twist & tangle. The big place to Salmon fish in WA used to be Westport WA where large boats with 20-25 anglers mooch cut-plug about 30ft deep. They either fish swallow water close to the harbor mouth or target shallow water Salmon offshore a bit in 150 - 200ft of water.

I have mooched/jigged/trolled all in the same day. Trolling to find concentrations of fish then mooching/jigging works well. My old arms are not up to a lot these days so I troll more.

 

[mbowers]

I run two transducers no problem: shoot through hull bottom and a side scan off transom. Transom mount is up high so it doesn't spray because I only use it at below planing speeds.

I don't think the depth that the balls mark at is the true depth but instead is the distance from the transducer. That's why fish produce arches: the fish is at the same true depth but its distance from the transducer changes so its depth on the sounder changes.

http://www.teachinfishin.com/fish-arches.html

It would take some very fancy electronics to calculate the true depth of a return based on its angle away from transducer. Not saying it can't be done but would take an engineer from the electronics company to describe how its done before I believe it. If anyone has such info I'd love to read it. You could test by trolling so fast at 150ft can just see ball on a calm day and then cut the engines: does the ball depth on the sounder change?

http://www.glanglerforum.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-21739.html

I've always found the downrigger counter to match the sounder depth. I think the best option for true ball depth is to buy one of these depth / temperature probes and figure out true depths versus speed for your setup. So far so good for me with the TD model, just attach it to the ball and don't slide it down the downrigger line afterwards or the auto retrieve might throw it off the line. thankfully it just bent the clip badly and didn't lose the fish hawk! About 10ft less depth at 100ft and 2.5mph. 12lb ball and no flasher. Bonus is you get thermocline info.

http://www.fishhawkelectronics.com

I like your plan to reduce drag. Have you tried using thinner braid? I'm down to 80lb and thinking of trying 50.. Line diameter becomes more important as depth increases.. Same is true for fishing line attached to the clip: 20lb braid should produce a lot less blowback than 30lb mono.

 

[gunnerlove]

If I run both my Sounders ( Standard Horizon 390 and Lowrance X25) at 50 hz the Lowrance reads depths that are all over the map and looses bottom so it sits on 50hz and the SH on 200hz and all is well.

 

[SpringFever552]

If I run both my Sounders ( Standard Horizon 390 and Lowrance X25) at 50 hz the Lowrance reads depths that are all over the map and looses bottom so it sits on 50hz and the SH on 200hz and all is well.

I do the same with my lowrance and furuno sounders..perfect

 

[Seagirt]

Easydoesit, what was the sonar (or software) that your former employer marketed? I'm curious about the species differentiation. Was it based on precise measurements of the echo (different swimbladder shapes between species) or was it based more on behaviour (school formation & habitat & ???)? What are some examples of species that could be distinguished from one another?

No problems from a theoretical or practical point of view in operating a 50 kHz and 200 kHz sonar simultaneously.

I run my Lowrance HDS 2 on the "sonar/sonar" setting routinely with no problems. I am using 200 kHz and a 50 kHz simultaneously using a dual frequency transducer (P66). Even with overlapping "cones" from a dual Frequency transducer there is no problem.

It's interesting to see the difference in the way 50 & 200 kHz frequencies display bait schools. My former employer (I'm retired) developed and marketed sonar for commercial fishing that could be used to distinguish between different species of schooling fish in midwater.

 

[Sharphooks]

Lots of factors to consider when running two or more fish finders/sonar units as to whether or not they will "step" on each other. Transducer placement is important. IF you're running two transom mount skimmer type transducers side by side off your stern, both in dual mode at 50/200 kHz, chances are you'll see interference on the screen as "snow". It can be tuned out to a degree by adjusting gain and signal strength but the transducers will still likely step on each other due to proximity

I run a P66 skimmer off my stern for a Furuno 587, then have an M260 in-hull (in a wet box) and a CHIRP through-hull approx. a foot away from it. I can run all three simultaneously and still get a clean picture. Again, part of it is transducer placement on your boat as well as what frequency they are producing



The M260 in the wet box is a true 50/200 transducers (at 1,000 W) and the Chirp scans between 150 to 250 so there is minimal "noise" when running both together. The third "puck" transducer at the lower right fires at 235 KHz and is just for tracking bottom in shallow water

Also, never run your transducer wiring in a bundle---keep them separate, and ground them where possible.

There is the brand of electronics to consider. Keeping everything the same brand might help--- I've stuck with Furuno in my boats--- the newer Furunos have lots of digital noise suppression software-----the FDF (Furuno Digital Filter) technology helps adjust gain and clutter and output power, as well as suppressing "main bang" which keeps the targets clean and easier to decipher, even when multiple units are being used simultaneously.

As to the comment ...." what is the purpose of tracking the ball.....just focus on tracking the bottom and the bait..." Yes, tracking bait and bottom is good


But when I fish, I want to see my ball's position relative to the bait. I feel a fish will be more likely to see my offering if I'm able to skim the top (or bottom) of each bait ball, (rather then plowing through the middle of it...)




Or.........