I've been hearing these two terms lately on this forum, but don't know what they are. Can anyone give me a brief description of these technologies? thanks.
Printable View
I've been hearing these two terms lately on this forum, but don't know what they are. Can anyone give me a brief description of these technologies? thanks.
I'm going INSANE!
Sonar Hub is the same thing as the LSS 2 HD module and the Touch "built-in" StructureScan HD.... in that it allows StructureScan HD (SI/DI)....but Sonar Hub also has an extra transmitter for CHIRP 2d...
The odd thing about this beast is that when Sonar Hub is set to CHIRP 2d...it shuts off the StructureScan HD...
So, one cannot view StructureScan HD (SI/DI) at the same time with CHIRP 2d...
An added StructureScan sounder must be attached (along with Sonar Hub and a CHIRP 2d xducer)...in order to view StructureScan HD (SI/DI) and CHIRP 2d simultaneously....
Rickie
then how is it worth the extra,i must amit it looks good though
I ain't got much floor space to add much more crap.
OK, so what does the CHIRP 2D Do more than the regular 2d? Is it just a clearer picture?
ChirpQuote:
Originally Posted by Dapet
Instead of sending just one single frequency, CHIRP sends a continuous sweep of
frequencies ranging from low to high. CHIRP sonar technology then interprets
frequencies individually upon their return. Since this continuous sweep of
frequencies provides CHIRP with a much wider range of information, CHIRP sonar
is able to create a much clearer, higher resolution image.
Sent from my iPhone
It gets fishermen to buy new stuff again :biggrin. I have only seen a few images, but the target separation is better than regular 2d. I still think down scan is better suited for shallow (<75') water fishing. I'd like to see some images of brush or stake beds in 10-15' of water compared to a good ds image of the same cover.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dapet
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinp61
Here's a DI image that can be used for comparison :
Attachment 162996
And just so you know ... this was taken well before I learned how to dial in for better images, and it comes off the Lowrance Elite 5DSI unit (which was discontinued in favor of the HDI units, because people still wanted 2d sonar capabilities in their units :Doh: )
... cp :kewl
I see fish sitting in a tree...K I S S I N G.
CHIRP is an acronym for Compressed High Intensity Radar Pulse.
CHIRP techniques have been used for a number of years above the water in many commercial and military RADAR systems. The techniques used to create an electromagnetic CHIRP pulse have now been modified and adapted to commercial acoustic imaging sonar systems.
AWACS (Awax) uses it in the air.
SOMEONE SEND ME ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS SO I CAN BUY CHIRP AND END MY SUFFERING!
(ps, according to section 1.446.7954465.086 of the US tax code.
Your $ 1000 . Donation will be deductible!
:Rofl:Rofl:RoflQuote:
Originally Posted by brettw
I got a better idea :ThumbsUp
Use what you've got, and quit trying to have the latest/greatest technology. All you're doing is spending yourself into a state of depression, instead of just going fishing to stay out of it. :bash And we all already know, just like computers, these units will be "old school technology" in a relatively short period of time. :Doh:
Even if you had a unit that would point you straight to where the fish were, told you what mood they were in, what color they currently preferred, etc. ... you still have to GO fishing, before any unit will make a difference. People caught fish before there was any such thing as a Depthfinder, let alone one with all the capabilities of today. How ?? They went fishing ... often !! They learned about the fish they sought ... what it ate, where it hid, what conditions were best/worst, and what bait & techniques/presentations were the most efficient at catching them. Trial & error, and word of mouth, taught them.
$1000 would allow me to take at least four 2-3day fishing trips ... whereas another $1000 worth of electronics wouldn't really make the fishing any more productive (even if I could afford to make the same number of trips). :twocents
... cp :kewl
Ok, can I count on you for 400?
Ring Ring Ring!!! Bells just went off in my head. I've been trying to remember where I've seen stuff like that before. SLAR developed during Nam. Side Looking Airborne Radar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cane Pole
:Rofl ... nope !! I'm not going to be your enabler.Quote:
Originally Posted by brettw
... cp :kewl
I'm still sending you minners Brett....individually wrapped...
Just add mustard....
Rickie
Good one.....:Rofl:Rofl:Rofl:Rofl:RoflQuote:
Originally Posted by brettw
I think I still have a Color-C-Lector, box of Flying Lures, some Banjo Minnows and some Helicopter lures if you guys are interested. Oh, and a Hydrowave as well.
Just kidding :peacesmile Personally, I just don't see the advantage of CHIRP over today's 2D and DI (for the money spent). If it came built in to the next unit/transducer I buy for my rig, fine. Otherwise, don't think so.
I hear Chirp sonar is included somewhere in Obamacare.
It's embedded in those free cell phones.Quote:
Originally Posted by brettw
problem is Obama do not Care for you:dono:Rofl
OK, OK, OK ... that's enough "political" references in this thread. Let's keep it on subject, before it gets dumped into the Way Off Topic forum.
... cp :kewl
Some early CHIRP results with an HDS12, sonar Hub and HDI transducer. The "true" CHIRP transducers for the Sonar Hub are made by AIRMAR and are not available yet.
But the HDI can be used on medium or high chirp plus down scan and only cost $99.... The lowest cost CHIRP transducer is in the $300 range.
http://i559.photobucket.com/albums/s...psf4d3cace.png
hawk,nice shot.could you post a chirp shot of fish in 25 ft. of water and also a non chirp of the same fish.i no I would like to see if theres enough of difference between the two in 25 ft. to warrent using churp. I don't want to be to negative,but so far I haven't seen all that much difference in,what I consider shallow water,in the pictures that ive seen.?Whats your opinion of the difference?just a little, somewhat better or substantial in shallow ?Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk22
Justin,its clearer and crisper,but is churp going to be all that much better in shallow water such as kentucky lake. All of the species of fish that are in kentucky lake really don't have all of that big of size difference. (Unlike whats found in the ocean) were churp helps to distinguish between species by size.Quote:
Originally Posted by justinp61
Hawk22, what % overlay are you using in that screen shot?
Kosmo I don't think it's going to be a big advantage here. If I bass fished and needed the separation from the bottom, maybe.Quote:
Originally Posted by kosmo
None in that shot. This one has overlay (see the 455khz at the bottom left). Not sure about this percentage, just moved the scale up/down to I liked the colors.Quote:
Originally Posted by justinp61
http://i559.photobucket.com/albums/s...ps4dac9bdf.png
Really you don't see a great deal of difference in the results. Not in shallow water anyway. Lowrance HDS Broadband sonar is very good before adding CHIRP.Quote:
Originally Posted by kosmo
Standard sonar shot in shallow water.
http://i559.photobucket.com/albums/s...psb4c555f6.png
Hawk,thanks for the reply and thats another good shot,but the reason that im asking for a side by side is to not only observe the better crispness but to all look for the superior target separation to compare at the 25 ft. +-
Even though these are not identical targets,when I zoom in I do see the pizalation in the non churp but I can't tell target separation without the two pitures being identical targets
I don't see much 2d that my 9touch can't do.
BUT, the key for me is chirp downscan and side scan, if you have the capabilities, please post
Thanks
Still got an old paper graph stuck away in my shop. I believe I could hook it up and still catch as many fish tomorrow as I could with my touch 9
Years ago I had a Lowrance X-16 paper graph on my boat. Nice graph with incredible detail. Had trouble finding parts and paper for it so I sold it. Wish I'd kept it now. I also believe I could catch just as many fish with it hooked up as I can today with my two HB SI units.Quote:
Originally Posted by brush pile
Come , you old dogs need all these new tricks!
My bass fishing partner had a paper graph on his boat in the mid 80s, detail was amazing. IIR correctly the paper was expensive and is seems he had some problems with the stylus. It didn't like cold weather either.
Still have 2 paper graph, x16 and mach 1,it is good not to worry about paper
Yeah, I still have one of those paper graphs in my garage also.......no way I would go back to using it though. Maybe it will be a collectors item
Old school Technology is still better then no Technology. I am not saying you need every new gadget that comes along but I can tell you one thing. My fishing success has skyrocketed since I added my SI/DI locators to the boat. I spend less time hoping there is a fish in the pile and more time finding the pile with the fish and catching fish instead of wishing I was catching fish. I only get to fish on weekend. I only get so much time on the weekend to fish. No doubt the more time spent doing something the more you will learn about that craft. But if you only have some much time why not shift the odds in your favor with a few gadget? I use to hope for a good day of fishing. Now, for the most part, I go out and make the day a good one. I feel I owe much of this to my locators. The money spent will never be recovered in the fish caught, for me anyway, but if I can use a tool to accomplish my goal then let me have it.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrappiePappy
I wonder how many use a boat to fish these lakes? Lets just all start bank fishing again. Boats are great technology themselves. Do we need them? I have heard of guys that have won tournaments from the bank. Making pros look silly. They are not even using paper graphs from the bank.
Just my two cents. Several good post on this tread. thanks to everyone for sharing.