Simrad Sonar with Forward Scan transducer

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
C

CharliePatten

Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2017
Messages
13
Location
USA
I am considering buying the Simrad NSS9 Evo2 display with a NAVICO Forward Scan transducer. Has anyone had any experience with this unit? The only question I have is why do they recommend taking the transducer out if it is going to be in the salt water for more than a week?
 
CharliePatten said:
I am considering buying the Simrad NSS9 Evo2 display with a NAVICO Forward Scan transducer. Has anyone had any experience with this unit? The only question I have is why do they recommend taking the transducer out if it is going to be in the salt water for more than a week?
Click to expand...

That seems silly. I've never heard of that from any of the other vendors.

I've been following the various user reports on the latest generation of forward sonars, and so far the Garmin seems to be the best. It's really important to understand what they can and can't do, but in the context of their capabilities, the Garmin seems to work the best - or at least there are more people admitting they have one and saying they find it useful.

But removing a transducer if it's going to be in salt water for more than a week? Don't most of our boats live in salt water all the time? That sounds like a completely unworkable solution.
 
The NAVICO transducer is designed so that it can be removed from the boat in the water. The only criteria is that it be placed somewhere that is easily accessible.
 
CharliePatten said:
The NAVICO transducer is designed so that it can be removed from the boat in the water. The only criteria is that it be placed somewhere that is easily accessible.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen it specifically, but assume it's like my Airmar transducer that can be removed with the boat in the water, and a plug installed in its place. At a minimum you will get a good gush of water and flood the immediate area with salt water. And that assumes the transducer comes out easily, and the plug goes in easily. I pulled mine when hauled because the transducer needed to be replaced. It was not as simple and smooth a task as the ideal case. The old transducer didn't just pull out easily, and the new one took some work to get fully seated. I would do it while the boat was in the water if I had to, but would not want to be doing it every time I go out, which is more or less what the Navico device is calling for.

The only reason I can imagine they suggest removing the transducer after a week is because they have a problem with salt water incursion into the device. I'd run away, not walk away. But in teh interest of full disclosure, I have also been burned badly by Navico products, so am highly skeptical of everything they say.
 
twistedtree said:
I haven't seen it specifically, but assume it's like my Airmar transducer that can be removed with the boat in the water, and a plug installed in its place. At a minimum you will get a good gush of water and flood the immediate area with salt water. And that assumes the transducer comes out easily, and the plug goes in easily. I pulled mine when hauled because the transducer needed to be replaced. It was not as simple and smooth a task as the ideal case. The old transducer didn't just pull out easily, and the new one took some work to get fully seated. I would do it while the boat was in the water if I had to, but would not want to be doing it every time I go out, which is more or less what the Navico device is calling for.

The only reason I can imagine they suggest removing the transducer after a week is because they have a problem with salt water incursion into the device. I'd run away, not walk away. But in teh interest of full disclosure, I have also been burned badly by Navico products, so am highly skeptical of everything they say.
Click to expand...

Unlike twistedtree my experience with the Navico suite of products has beem remarkably problem free, literally plug and play including the forward scanning sonar. Perhaps the Garmin product is a bit better but unless one has installed and used both on the same boat how would one know. In any case the Navico works just fine as advertised limited by the depth of water which makes eminent sense to me. It's simple geometry at work.
 
Yeah, but having to pull the transducer after a week in salt water sounds mad, bad, impractical, and frightfully off-putting. I really query that instruction, and if they are genuinely saying that, then I'd run a mile from the product. Yet previously I also have had good service from Navico products.
 
affect the kind of crazy if you remove the sensor so often.


could the reason not to prevent contamination of the sensor tip. some materials can not be painted antifogul sensor is damaged, would this be possible? Smirad system, it seems appropriate if you are buying the whole system.


I studied the matter themselves extensively the last couple of weeks and I ended up echopilot platinium which can be combined with my old system Raymarin.


A little strange Smirad decided to use AISI gland, usually in bronze because we want to avoid electrical corrosion of different metals.


The most important thing in terms of the functioning of the FLS is the right location for the sensor and get it as right angle with respect to the water line. If this is successful, and the sensor must not disturb the flow of the bubbles and the turbulence it is successful and you are satisfied. several bad experiences with these devices and the functionality of the device, is caused by poor installation!
 
Last edited:
What is the diameter of the transducer, ie what size hole has to be closed when it is withdrawn? How is that done, does the mfr have a closure device, if so would you rely on it? Or is it just "plugged" as twistedtree suggests? Would you rely on that?
My Garmin transducer has been fine in salt water seven years (excl haulouts). What`s with this one its salt water max is 1 week?
If you still want this unit, can you mount the transducer inside the hull, ie "shoot through the hull". Some boats have a pocket for it. Others like mine you improvise. I have one thru hull and one shoot thru hull(Garmin said both GPS/Sounders run on one transducer so I bought them, but they can`t). To avoid another hole I set the transducer in silicone in a plastic tube(drainage line) using a level to get it vertical. It shoots thru a 1" solid f/g hull, initially takes a little time to "find" the bottom, after that it`s fine. I`d rather that than plug a hole in my boat.
Edit: The fwd facing aspect might rule out a "shoot thru" install.
 
Last edited:
BruceK said:
What is the diameter of the transducer, ie what size hole has to be closed when it is withdrawn? How is that done, does the mfr have a closure device, if so would you rely on it? Or is it just "plugged" as twistedtree suggests? Would you rely on that?
My Garmin transducer has been fine in salt water seven years (excl haulouts). What`s with this one its salt water max is 1 week?
If you still want this unit, can you mount the transducer inside the hull, ie "shoot through the hull". Some boats have a pocket for it. Others like mine you improvise. I have one thru hull and one shoot thru hull(Garmin said both GPS/Sounders run on one transducer so I bought them, but they can`t). To avoid another hole I set the transducer in silicone in a plastic tube(drainage line) using a level to get it vertical. It shoots thru a 1" solid f/g hull, initially takes a little time to "find" the bottom, after that it`s fine. I`d rather that than plug a hole in my boat.
Click to expand...

Sorry, FLS sensor must always be made through the hull, otherwise it will not work.:nonono:
 
Thanks NB, I thought of that too, just after posting, and added an edit.
There is special antifoul paint for transducers.
 
BruceK said:
Thanks NB, I thought of that too, just after posting, and added an edit.
There is special antifoul paint for transducers.
Click to expand...

:thumb:Thank you, this was a good point to add the discussion. apparently this antifouling solvent-free and does not contain copper?
 
Peter B said:
Yeah, but having to pull the transducer after a week in salt water sounds mad, bad, impractical, and frightfully off-putting. I really query that instruction, and if they are genuinely saying that, then I'd run a mile from the product. Yet previously I also have had good service from Navico products.
Click to expand...

So, all this talk about the manufacturer recommending removing the transducer weekly misses the obvious. I ask you, what manufacturer would design such a product? Of course users would run away, rapidly. Someone here has conflated something that he read into something that isn't. Once this sort of misinformation, reinforced by speculation based on supposed facts takes hold on the internet, it is near impossible for the record to be corrected. It's an Airmar product. Really, does this make sense to anyone?
 
I always go looking for the source data...
Interesting!
Bruce
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0260.jpg
    IMG_0260.jpg
    98.4 KB · Views: 141
  • IMG_0259.jpg
    IMG_0259.jpg
    109.8 KB · Views: 126
The manual says if I am reading it correctly...
Yes, paint with water based anti fouling
Yes, growth is bad.
Yes, still remove it after a week.

I would guess that the remove might be as much for galvanic protection as the others as well as it might get damaged by debris.

The removal is easy enough, so it may be one of those.....all inclusive protections that helps with other issues.

Anyone that ever had a paddlewheel inset for boat speed knows that removal is easy, without much water and was easier than cleaning the wheel to make sure the speed was close.
 
Here's the entire section quoted from the manual:

Using the Blanking Plug
To protect the insert, use the blanking plug:
• When the boat will be kept in salt water for more than a week.
• When the boat will be removed from the water.
• When aquatic growth buildup on the insert is suspected due to
inaccurate readings from the instrument.
1. The O-rings must be intact and well lubricated to make a watertight seal.
On the blanking plug, inspect the O-rings (replace if necessary) and
lubricate them with the silicone lubricant supplied or petroleum jelly
(Vaseline®) (see Figure 7).
2. Remove the insert from the housing by removing the safety wire and
unscrewing the cap nut (see Figure 4). This will jack out
the insert. Grasp the insert and remove it with a slow pulling motion.
Slide the blanking plug into the housing. Be sure the blanking plug is
fully inserted. Screw the cap nut several turns until the threads are
engaged. Continue to tighten the cap nut completely. Hand tighten
only. Do not over tighten.
NOTE: In the very unlikely event that the valve breaks, replace the
housing the next time the boat is hauled.
3. Reattach the safety wire to prevent the blanking plug from backing out
in the unlikely event that the cap nut fails or is screwed on incorrectly.

Cleaning the Insert
Aquatic growth can accumulate rapidly on the transducer’s face reducing
performance within weeks. Clean the insert with a Scotch-Brite® scour pad
and mild household detergent, being careful to avoid making scratches. If
fouling is severe, lightly wet sand it with fine grade wet/dry paper.

Winterizing
After the boat has been hauled for winter storage, remove the blanking plug to let the water drain away before reinserting it. This will prevent any water from freezing around the blanking plug and possibly cracking it.​

Seems to me like a lot of work and a lot of chances for issues and o-ring problems, a lot of in and out for a heavy user. If this was the only game in town, I might consider, but it isn't. No way I would consider this. It requires more babying than anything else on the boat. I call that a significant design weakness.
 
I know, as in other, Garmin, Echopilot, Interphase is not such clothes to remove sensors surrounding sand dune boating season. Quite difficult sounds Smiradin system, although the influence okay otherwise...
 
CharliePatten said:
I am considering buying the Simrad NSS9 Evo2 display with a NAVICO Forward Scan transducer. Has anyone had any experience with this unit? The only question I have is why do they recommend taking the transducer out if it is going to be in the salt water for more than a week?
Click to expand...


Why do you feel you need it? You will of course answer, "So I can see what is in front of me in unknown water." Does that mean: "so I can get myself into a more difficult situation, shallower, more rocky waters in an anchorage, channel." Is that a good idea? Will it give you a false sense of security?

With this technology, the range attenuates with water depth: The shallower the water, the shorter the range you can "see" with the sonar. Once any part of the beam strikes bottom or surface, it can see no further. Make sure you understand the limits of this technology in shallow water. Don't let a salesman oversell the system.

It's kind of like 4-wheel drive: it can give you the confidence to travel into areas that you might not be able to get out of.
 
The transducer is plastic. The thru hull fitting is S/S. If I end up buying this I will connect the thru hull to my common bond system
 
Peter B said:
Yeah, but having to pull the transducer after a week in salt water sounds mad, bad, impractical, and frightfully off-putting. I really query that instruction, and if they are genuinely saying that, then I'd run a mile from the product. Yet previously I also have had good service from Navico products.
Click to expand...

I have this Simrad transducer. I just last week had my boat short-hauled for cleaning and zincs after seven months in brackish water. The bottom was lousy with growth which is important to this discussion as you will see.

I called Simrad tech support and asked why the manual advises weekly pulling of the transducer. Turns out that the recommendations is to specifically address any bottom growth issues that may degrade performance. Now, back to my boat. Even though my bottom (and the transducer) was extremely foul, the forward scan was still working just fine. My sense is that Simrad's recommendation is one more of a CWA than a practical requirement but this is just based on my experience.

As to whether another manufacturer's product would work well with lots of growth my guess is that the potential problem would be the same. I think that the Simrad manual could have been written more clearly to explain this. The good part of this transducer is that, when removing the transducer with the boat in the water, the housing is designed with a flapper valve such that after a small inrush of water only a minimal amount of water comes into the boat while the transducer is being cleaned. Seems simple to me, that is, when degraded performance is perceived, that is the time to pull the transducer for cleaning, not weekly.

Here's a question: does marine growth degrade the performance of "standard" transducers? If so, I see no difference, no reason to be afraid of the Simrad product or another maker's.
 
catalinajack said:
Here's a question: does marine growth degrade the performance of "standard" transducers? If so, I see no difference, no reason to be afraid of the Simrad product or another maker's.
Click to expand...

We have no problems with our transducers but then we also use divers on a monthly basis and keep the bottom clean.
 
Thank you for your detailed response. I think I read also that they recommend putting a (water base only) bottom paint on the transducer. Did you do that? Just wondering if that affects the performance.
 
Years ago there was a company that made many forward looking sonars called Interphase. My buddy had one on his 42 Jefferson Sundeck. The thing worked great, but the display was funky.

Our own Scary owns a Hatt 48 LRC that was the Interphase testbed. The forward cabin on his boat was modified years ago to remove the sonar mounts and modifications.

Years ago, Garmin bought Interphase and many expected some great things to come to market. Then years went by and nothing was mentioned. All thought the dream had died.

Garmin: Interphase Technologies Inc.

Now we have a Garmin product with Interphase technology. That's the only product I'd buy especially after learning here of Simrad's record of false performance promises.
 
Last edited:
FlyWright said:
Years ago there was a company that made many forward looking sonars called Interphase. My buddy had one on his 42 Jefferson Sundeck. The thing worked great, but the display was funky.

Our own Scary owns a Hatt 48 LRC that was the Interphase testbed. The forward cabin on his boat was modified years ago to remove the sonar mounts and modifications.

Years ago, Garmin bought Interphase and many expected some great things to come to market. Then years went by and nothing was mentioned. All thought the dream had died.

Garmin: Interphase Technologies Inc.

Now we have a Garmin product with Interphase technology. That's the only product I'd buy especially after learning here of Simrad's record of false performance promises.
Click to expand...

We have Garmin sonar on our Sunseeker. It's good. Like it better than we expected to. Very short range but good. Echopilot has a bit more range. Far Sounder has far more but price reflects it.
 
I guess you are aware of the problem of crevice corrosion of stainless steel thru hull under water (only 254SMO is good resitance). If you aisi installation through the hull should be checked between the thru hull installation to see if the color of rust around the thru hull and avoid any surprise. this does not help zinc bonding system, since the chemical reaction


here is an litle bit article written By M.Sc. Eng, Naval architect and corrosion specialist Piet Jansen

In ocean seawater acid proof stainless steel AISI 316 has only limited corrosion resistance. The corrosion properties of stainless steel AISI 316 in seawater depends of the water temperature and the salinity of the water. This Means That it might work in the northern Norway, Sweden and Finland the where the water temperature is below 10 ° C all year and the salinity in the upper bay Botnia is below 1%. In tropical and subtropical seawater, the conditions are the opposite with water temperatures varying between 20-30 ° C and a salinity level of 3.5%. Corrosion attacks in the
form of crevice corrosion will be initiated after an incubation period of 3-6 months. In Danish sea environments, the incubation period May last a few years before crevice corrosion attacks starts. The crevice corrosion attacks will be visible as rusty red stripes going from the space between the external flange fitting and the glass fiber hull. This is a characteristic sign of active crevice corrosion in the joint. Over time, it will lead to a leak. However, this is seldom more than a slowly seeping leak.


Full articel
http://www.google.fi/url?sa=t&rct=j...16.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGvJ8XP0arcxgUBHPAnKE7CUylVbw
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

boating rich
Forward looking transducer? Do they work?
Replies
28
Views
3K
tpbrady
tpbrady
AnsleyS
Garmin Sonar for Cruising
Replies
18
Views
2K
AnsleyS
AnsleyS
H
Camera Video display on SIMRAD NSE12 and/or NSS evo2
Replies
5
Views
1K
Greg QS
Greg QS
Mark Laurnen
Simrad AP with Furuno plotter
Replies
7
Views
424
Pascall
Pascall
Nick14
In-hull (Airmar P79) vs. through-hull transducer
Replies
16
Views
2K
Nick14
Nick14

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom