When satellite-derived bathymetry beats a boat survey, and when it does not:
Satellite-derived bathymetry (SDB) is not a replacement for a survey in every case, and we will tell you so plainly. A boat survey still wins when you need engineering-grade precision, when the water is deep or persistently turbid, or when a regulator requires a specific survey standard. SDB wins when you need a broad, affordable, current picture: scouting a site before you commit to a full survey, monitoring how a basin or channel is shoaling over time, or comparing this year to last across a large area. The practical way to think about it is this: SDB tells you where to look and whether a problem is developing. A boat survey, when you still need one, can then be aimed precisely instead of sweeping the whole site blind. For many coastal operators and waterfront developers, an SDB report once or twice a year, with a targeted boat survey only when imagery flags an issue, costs far less than surveying everything on a fixed schedule. That is the whole idea behind our BottomBee line: to tell you where the money needs to go, so you do not spend it everywhere.
When radar beats optical, and when it does not: Two of our products show what changed:
Construction and Land Change Detection uses optical imagery, and Storm and Flood Radar Change Detection uses radar. People often ask which is better. The honest answer is that they are built for different conditions, and the smart move is knowing which one your situation calls for. Optical imagery is what most people picture when they think of a satellite photo. It records sunlight reflected off the ground, in colors close to what the eye would see, plus a few extra bands. It is detailed, intuitive, and excellent for vegetation and land-cover work. It has one hard limitation: it cannot see through clouds or at night. That is a problem precisely when you most need a look, in a storm or a flood. Radar does not depend on sunlight. It supplies its own signal and reads what comes back, so it sees straight through cloud, smoke, and darkness. The trade-off is that radar is less intuitive to interpret and requires more processing to make it usable by a non-specialist. For routine before-and-after work in fair weather, optical is the clear, readable choice. For storms, floods, and persistently cloudy sites, radar is the only thing that works. When a job calls for both, the Optical plus Radar Pair runs them together and cross-references the findings.
Not sure which product is the best fit?
Describe the decision you are trying to make, send us a site and dates, and we will point you to the right one.