Is a forward looking sonar / fishfinder worth adding?

[Mariano]

Originally Posted by Benz

I do find that paying attention to tradition keeps us from making the mistakes of the past.
Ben
zartmancruising.com

Have you seen the J Class sailboat "Endeavour"?(LOOK IN YOUTUBE) It´s one of the most beautiful and traditional sailboats I´ve ever seen, but it was updated with state of the art electronics and hydraulics, aluminum mast and boom and guess what? IT´S STILL A TRADITIONAL AND BEAUTIFUL SAILBOAT.

The OP asked for opinions about FLS, so lets stay there.

Mariano

Fair winds

[ramblinrod]

And in spite of all that, the captain of the Costa Concordia managed to cause a disaster. I'f he'd only had someone in the bows with a lead, it probably wouldn't have happened.

Quite the speculation on your part sir.

Do you consider yourself to have been negligent in putting to sea (or wherever you might have sailed) with those basic navigation tools?

If a maritime tragedy occurred due to lack of navigation information from attempting to use antiquated techniques, instead of properly equipping my vessel with modern instrumentation, I would never have forgiven myself.

As a result, after learning to use these techniques, my vessel is now equipped with a depthsounder, chartplotter, and other instruments, to help me know where I am and how much water I have underneath me at all times. (We still regularly practice "No Instrument" days to keep skills up.)

I consider it a responsibility to myself, crew, and vessel to adopt appropriate, modern, cost-effective technology that improves performance, comfort, and safety.

Do you look back and think, "That was the dumbest thing I ever did?"

Hell no; I've done way dumber things than navigate without proper instruments, but that doesn't make it smart. ;-)

With few exceptions, "Not having some form of electronic depth instrument on a cruising vessel, large enough one cannot step out and push off from a grounding, is pretty dumb."

Even though that first vessel was small enough to step off and free from grounding (which we did more than once), I ended up installing a $100 fishfinder on it. Good decision. Knowing depth at a glance in any sea state is quite valuable.

Attempts to justify using a lead line as sole determination of depth as "better seamanship" is completely and totally invalid.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by Benz

And in spite of all that, the captain of the Costa Concordia managed to cause a disaster. I'f he'd only had someone in the bows with a lead, it probably wouldn't have happened.

Do you consider yourself to have been negligent in putting to sea (or wherever you might have sailed) with those basic navigation tools? Do you look back and think, "That was the dumbest thing I ever did?" I have never put to sea with so little, but would not consider negligent someone who was perfectly competent and comfortable sailing with those alone. The best of tools won't make an incompetent sailor better (look at the Costa Concordia again), and the most basic tools, in the hands of a competent seaman, will be all he needs.
Ben
zartmancruising.com

Ben, that's a real stretch of credibility! As I recall, they kinda side swiped the rock in question, they were at speed, and their bow is perhaps 50 feet above the WL. Pretty hard to believe that a leadsman could have detected the rock at all, let alone in time to communicate to the bridge and have the course redirected enough to avoid the "disaster".

I recognize your zeal, but we need some reality in our thinking about these issues.

Jim

[Harry Brown]

Originally Posted by zboss

We recently bought a Dragonfly and installed it on our dinghy! We use it to scout out anchorages accurately using the Navionics link. I'll take the dinghy and drive around all the local anchorages for a few hours recording the bottom. I have been able to find many places to anchor that are not shown on the charts or locations within a known anchorage but off to the side where we can drop a stern anchor in a crowded anchorage and stay in place.

Anyone know how far in front of the boat the Dragonfly looks ahead or is it just directly down?

[zboss]

Originally Posted by Harry Brown

Anyone know how far in front of the boat the Dragonfly looks ahead or is it just directly down?

That is a Downview and side view. No forward capability but that was the point of putting it on my dinghy... as a scout ship. All that data, with detailed and tide adjust bathymetry is uploaded to my iPhone as I drive along then it's loaded up to navionics for additional processing and publication. Lots of more data is then made available to all mariners using the navionics sonarcharts.

Knowing the layout of the bottom in great detail has allowed me to find room in tight anchorages, especially when using a stern anchor.

I recently did the whole bottom of Lake Boca Raton in Florida, parts of lake worth, and parts of Fort Lauderdale.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by zboss

That is a Downview and side view. No forward capability but that was the point of putting it on my dinghy... as a scout ship. All that data, with detailed and tide adjust bathymetry is uploaded to my iPhone as I drive along then it's loaded up to navionics for additional processing and publication. Lots of more data is then made available to all mariners using the navionics sonarcharts.

Knowing the layout of the bottom in great detail has allowed me to find room in tight anchorages, especially when using a stern anchor.

I recently did the whole bottom of Lake Boca Raton in Florida, parts of lake worth, and parts of Fort Lauderdale.

Zboss,
What's the cost of a setup like yours, excluding the dinghy?

[Benz]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Ben, that's a real stretch of credibility! As I recall, they kinda side swiped the rock in question, they were at speed, and their bow is perhaps 50 feet above the WL. Pretty hard to believe that a leadsman could have detected the rock at all, let alone in time to communicate to the bridge and have the course redirected enough to avoid the "disaster".

I recognize your zeal, but we need some reality in our thinking about these issues.

Jim

Hi Jim,

That wasn't my point--my point was that even with all the geegaws and screens and what-all that the Costa had, the captain still managed to do something ill-advised. Of course a leadsman in the bows of a cruise ship is impractical--but a leadsman in the bows of a small sailboat is not. We had been talking about small cruising boats until a different animal was brought in as a distraction. It was said somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but at the same time, that captain should have been paying better attention. And all his fancy screens didn't save him.

Ben
zartmancruising.com

[Benz]

Originally Posted by Mariano

Have you seen the J Class sailboat "Endeavour"?(LOOK IN YOUTUBE) It´s one of the most beautiful and traditional sailboats I´ve ever seen, but it was updated with state of the art electronics and hydraulics, aluminum mast and boom and guess what? IT´S STILL A TRADITIONAL AND BEAUTIFUL SAILBOAT.

The OP asked for opinions about FLS, so lets stay there.

Mariano

Fair winds

Hi Mariano,

J-class sloops are hardly traditional! They have horrible long overhangs and only one mast in spite of their great length. But you also are bringing in distractions: an hyper-expensive racing boat of antiquated design is not a modern cruising boat, and (just like a cruise ship) must be operated differently. What is safe and practical for a budget-conscious cruising family may not be practical for a behemoth like Endeavour. The OP asked for opinions about FLS on a cruising boat: suppose we stick to those.
Before you bring it up, no, a lead line would not be practical on an airplane. That too is a different thing.
Ben
zartmancruising.com

[Benz]

"I consider it a responsibility to myself, crew, and vessel to adopt appropriate, modern, cost-effective technology that improves performance, comfort, and safety."

As do I. We're in the same boat.


"Hell no; I've done way dumber things than navigate without proper instruments, but that doesn't make it smart. ;-)"

"With few exceptions, "Not having some form of electronic depth instrument on a cruising vessel, large enough one cannot step out and push off from a grounding, is pretty dumb.""

I count myself fortunate, then, to be one of the exceptions.

"Even though that first vessel was small enough to step off and free from grounding (which we did more than once), I ended up installing a $100 fishfinder on it. Good decision. Knowing depth at a glance in any sea state is quite valuable."

"Attempts to justify using a lead line as sole determination of depth as "better seamanship" is completely and totally invalid.[/QUOTE]"

I never said using only a lead line was better seamanship: I said that putting all your eggs in the fragile basket of electronic screens was ill-advised. I have a method of piloting that has worked flawlessly thus far, with which I feel comfortable and safe. Why do the rest of you choke on that? You may navigate any way you wish, and I will not get on your case. So why get all wrathy when I offer the OP an alternative? If something has worked for me, surely it could work for other as well--why not let them know?

Ben
zartmancruising.com

[zboss]

Originally Posted by Paul L

Zboss,
What's the cost of a setup like yours, excluding the dinghy?

The power kit was $90 (it has a matching plug) and the Dragonfly including the sonar was $280. On Amazon. It also is a chartplotter with Navionics+ charts. You can update the microsd card for a year for free. The battery is 4.4 Ah and the device consumes 8 watts on high power. We could easily power it from our folding backpack solar panel.

Of course, I also have an iPhone but it'll also work with Android phones.

The most difficult thing is getting the sonar fitted just right to avoid bubbles at high speed. Right now I can only do about 5 knots without the sonar going wonky but when I move the sonar further away from the prop wash and the bubbles being blown down the from the bow of the boat we should be able to go at full 15-17 knots to cover a lot more area faster. Of course, you are in an anchorage so you need to be respectful of the boats anchored.

- z

[markpierce]

Best to have a keel-protected propeller and shaft. We're all going to be grounded at least twice (me six times but always on a rising tide in the last forty years).

[ramblinrod]

Originally Posted by Benz

"I consider it a responsibility to myself, crew, and vessel to adopt appropriate, modern, cost-effective technology that improves performance, comfort, and safety."

As do I. We're in the same boat.


"Hell no; I've done way dumber things than navigate without proper instruments, but that doesn't make it smart. ;-)"

"With few exceptions, "Not having some form of electronic depth instrument on a cruising vessel, large enough one cannot step out and push off from a grounding, is pretty dumb.""

I count myself fortunate, then, to be one of the exceptions.

"Even though that first vessel was small enough to step off and free from grounding (which we did more than once), I ended up installing a $100 fishfinder on it. Good decision. Knowing depth at a glance in any sea state is quite valuable."

"Attempts to justify using a lead line as sole determination of depth as "better seamanship" is completely and totally invalid.

"

I never said using only a lead line was better seamanship: I said that putting all your eggs in the fragile basket of electronic screens was ill-advised. I have a method of piloting that has worked flawlessly thus far, with which I feel comfortable and safe. Why do the rest of you choke on that? You may navigate any way you wish, and I will not get on your case. So why get all wrathy when I offer the OP an alternative? If something has worked for me, surely it could work for other as well--why not let them know?

Ben
zartmancruising.com[/QUOTE]

Just because one has run with scissors for 40 years, does not make it safe or best practice. There is always tomorrow to impale one's self.

Relying solely on a lead line for depth is most certainly putting all of one's eggs in a basket; a very limited basket at that, and a much less safe basket than an electronic depthsounder that while reliant on electrical power, with it, is always running and available, unless on a very rare occasion it fails (as can a lead line).

Any skipper worth their salt can fashion a lead line out of materials on board in a moment or two. Can you fashion an electronic depthsounder if your lead line slips out of your hands? I think not.

That an electronic depthsounder is superior in so many ways to a lead line, is common knowledge. (Hence the reason that almost every boat larger than can be shoved off a grounding has one.)

You are entitled to endanger yourself, your vessel, your guests, and your loved ones, how ever you wish, within the bounds of applicable law.

Unfortunately laws cannot be created to protect everyone from themselves or every hazard they may encounter, including a skipper who refuses to adopt reasonable electronic technology for navigation instruments.

PS, I don't expect to change your opinion.

Hopefully I can steer any follower of this thread from adopting such a foolhardy position, as to suggest that an electronic instrument may fail, therefore they are not worthy of having.

[Benz]

"Any skipper worth their salt can fashion a lead line out of materials on board in a moment or two. Can you fashion an electronic depthsounder if your lead line slips out of your hands? I think not."

But that's why I carry a spare!

"Hopefully I can steer any follower of this thread from adopting such a foolhardy position, as to suggest that an electronic instrument may fail, therefore they are not worthy of having."

I have never said that electronics are not worth having because they may fail. I say that there are simple, safe, reliable alternatives to many electronics. It begins to sound as if you're in the marine electronics business, and have an axe to grind here. Don't think I'm against all use of electronics, or that I'm opposed to people using them. But I prefer to sail without a lot of them.
Ben
zartmancruising.com
__________________

[ramblinrod]

Originally Posted by Benz

"Any skipper worth their salt can fashion a lead line out of materials on board in a moment or two. Can you fashion an electronic depthsounder if your lead line slips out of your hands? I think not."

But that's why I carry a spare!

"Hopefully I can steer any follower of this thread from adopting such a foolhardy position, as to suggest that an electronic instrument may fail, therefore they are not worthy of having."

I have never said that electronics are not worth having because they may fail. I say that there are simple, safe, reliable alternatives to many electronics. It begins to sound as if you're in the marine electronics business, and have an axe to grind here. Don't think I'm against all use of electronics, or that I'm opposed to people using them. But I prefer to sail without a lot of them.
Ben
zartmancruising.com
__________________

Semantics and argumentative.

There are lots of grounded vessels at the bottom of the sea that had lead lines aboard.

To suggest that a lead line is a safe, reliable, and viable alternative to an electronic depth sounder is extremely foolish in my opinion, and yes, I am somewhat of an expert on the subject.

You are free to risk your life in any number of ways. Walk along the edge of a cliff, weave in and out of traffic, use a lead line instead of a depthsounder, etc.

Just be careful what risks you promote to others, especially newbies, especially newbies trying to cut costs. Compromising safety to save cost is a dangerous proposition indeed.