Seaeye versus Sub-Atlantic

[Scott Beveridge]

Martin,

Good of you to defend your vehicles and I agree with a lot of what you’ve stated above. Sub-A’s have come a long way and are in fact much more reliable than used to be ( I had worked on Mohawks and Super Mohawks). I’ve forgotten what the inside of the pods look like!. The only thing is with AC thrusters and new guys is ya’ gotta watch em’ like a hawk to make sure they put the right thruster in the correct position!

[Martin Wareham]

Thanks for the positive feedback Scot, I’ve been hanging around this site for a while now and like to hear what the guys and gals at the sharp end have to say, it’s a great medium for feedback, both positive and negative 😀

[hermawan]

i am sure that sub-atlantic better than seaeye product.. cause we used until now and reliable for inspection.

we used mojave now

[rover22]

Hi Hermawan,

Spell check your patch, international has a t not an s ( 😀 ).

Seaeye get my vote over sub-atlantic any day. I have flown almost all Sub Atlantic vehicles and all of the Seaeye vehicles, and I prefer Seaeye by far, for reliability, capability, durability and quality of service.

No, I genuinly do not work for Seaeye, nor have I ever worked for them or intend working for them. This is just my personal opinion.

[Scott Beveridge]

Rover,

That is how International is spelled in Indonesia, heh, heh….

Re: Seaeye reliability – I’ve had a few vehicle manufactured on a Friday or Monday if that makes any sense… Same goes for SubAtlantic…. There’s also the maintenance or lack of factor.

[rover22]

Hi Scotbeve,

No doubt right. The Apache and S. Mohawk and the TMS’s from SA are pretty good, and although I have not worked with them yet, the hydraulic thrusters are getting good feedback from some of the guys who have used them after they were retro-fitted on older systems.

To be fair, the problems we are experiencing with Seaeye at the moment are the quality of main lifts and tether (especially tether). On quite a few occasions now, the fibres are not good and break, as well as the quads and outer screen conductors. This may be down to the way the tethers/umbilicals are handled and stored on the drum before being fitted to the TMS and LARS systems, but I dont know for sure. The quality of the compass on the Cougar system is poor (even for a flux-gate and one that works well on other systems) and strangely, seems to work better in a jacket than in open deep water (how strange is that? You would expect it to be the other way around). This may be due to interference from the vehicle, but again, I dont really know the cause (thank goodness for sonar, HPR and sedimentComparing the Cougar/Cougar XT to the Panther/Panther Plus, I feel that the Panther and Panther Plus is a better system hands down. The new TMS has some good features, but the bailing mechanism is still fidly and the structure has sharp edges that shack a tether at the wrong angles.

Has anybody used the new Sub Atlantic vehcile (Mojave)? I think that it is meant to compete with the Falcon. 😀

[Robert Black]

Thanks to all who have joined this thread so far and who have PM’d me. It would seem Seaeye still have the edge over SA. There doesn’t seem to be a comparible sized vehicle from SA that can match the thrust of a Seaeye. It’ll be interesting to see what happens when they start integrating the new DC thrusters onto the small vehicles, this may close the gap.

[Author]

Posts