Dff3d vs wassp

[Dean1345]

Have maxsea times zero v4 with hondex sounder for hardness / 3D

Was thinking about dff3d for building 3D picture up on maxsea

Could some one tell me difference between dff3d and wassp or what frequencies would be best for bottom detail on a single point sounder

 

[Snips]

Dean1345,
The DFF3D is 165Khz and the high frequency WASSP is 160Khz (it is also available in 80khz). When you say Maxsea I assume you mean TZ Pro (Nobletec). Both WASSP and DFF3D are compatible with the proper licenses. Both need to be paired with a GPS heading sensor. The motion sensor for the DFF3D is in the transducer where the WASSP can use a variety INU's. While the side to side beam width is the same the for/aft beam width is much narrower for WASSP than the DFF3D. A narrow beam width yields better bottom detail. Probably the biggest difference is WASSP's ability to record bottom hardness (backscatter), the DFF3D doesn't record hardness. If you are using a Hondex sounder you are recording hardness in a single beam format which is OK if you are mapping a small area. In the below screen shot we are record bottom hardness data at twice the water depth, 960ft wide in a single pass. One advantage that the DFF3D over the WASSP is it can use a variety of different transducer configurations i.e. thur-hull, pocket mount or transom. WASSP only has one style of 160khz, which is a pocket/can mount.

Hope this information helps.

Snips

 

[Dean1345]

Thanks for that snips

Would the dff3D be more accurate than a single point sounder or would a single point sounder build up the same picture but just take alot longer.

I have a 38khz / 50khz / and 200khz does that make the 3D picture any more detailed

 

[Snips]

Dean1345,
Its a fair question. Building bottom data is about collecting PBG points. The closer together these points are the more detailed the information. The below screen shot is the densest PGB bottom data that I have. Currently you are adding one point at a time, depending on the depth a DFF3D can add 10-50. If you were going to paint your house and the level of detail was going to be the same, would you choose a 1" paint brush or a 12" roller?

Snips

 

[Dean1345]

This is a ship wreck outside the harbour i have went over about 10 times with brush set to 1. on the hondex 50 khz

Does 200 khz or 50 khz make a difference when building up 3D picture?

 

[Snips]

Dean1345,
A narrow beam works better than wide. It took ten passes to map that wreck by contrast a DFF3D could do it in a single pass with higher detail. If you wanted higher detail than the DFF3D (50 points) below is a WASSP mapped vessel at 200 points.

Snips

 

[Dean1345]

That's a good detail on the wreck . But should a single point sounder
Map it the same but maybe 100 passes if that makes sense could you get it to look the same as that with a load of passes

 

[Snips]

Dean 1345,
It will get better but you still won't get the that level of detail. Below is an old car ferry.

Snips

 

[Dean1345]

It's very accurate do you have any pictures of ship wrecks with the dff3D think I will purchase the dff3D

 

[Snips]

Dean1345,
Below is a 180ft barge mapped with both systems. First is the DFF3D and second is WASSP. Now its a flat barge so there is not a lot of detail to be seen.

Snips

 

[Dean1345]

Is that just one pass with both systems ? If you keep going over it with the dff3D would it even looks close to the wassps one pass ? 

We fish for white fish up to 100 fathoms would the dff3D be ok in that depth of water ? 

Is the wassp the best system for bottom detail ?

 

[Snips]

Dean1345,
In order of detail. Single beam, DFF3D and WASSP.

Snips

 

[Septimus]

Snips,

Is this a typo - don't you mean WASSP and then DFF-3D?

 

[Snips]

Septimus,
Not a typo, less (single beam) to more (WASSP).

Snips

 

[Johnny Electron]

WASSP it the king of kings for this type of stuff. You get what you pay for.

 

[Septimus]

Hahaha... my mistake, I though you meant DFF-3D more detailed than WASSP - clearly not the case!
All good.

 

[Aggeloseco]

Snips, do you think this kind of mount would be ok for the wassp transducer for a small rib boat? (6m)

https://www.transducerliftmount.com/

 

[Snips]

Aggeloseco,
That looks like a nice mounting system for a small light weight transducer. However the WASSP transducer is much bigger and heavier so I wouldn't recommend that mount for it.
Below is how one vessel had theirs mounted.

Snips

 

[WalneyDalBosco]

Good morning gentlemen,

I use DFF3D and I have known limitations of mapping at depths greater than 200m.

As I am very interested in fishing between 250m and 600m, I ask if it is possible to make 3D maps or record bathymetry with DI-FFAMP and R509-LH transducer with 2xTZT3-12F (SXC20) at these depths?

I also ask if it is possible to use WASSP simultaneously for depths greater than 200m.

Thanks

 

[Deep Blue]

WalneyDalBosco,

Mapping those depths the WASSP F3X at 160kHz has a maximum mapping depth of 525 meters (or 1722 ft). Multibeam Sounders generate the best mapping data over that of typical single beam sounders due to the increased PBG data points that are generated from the multibeam.

-Deep Blue :cool