Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Mark In theory it looks good, in practice it just does not work. In a cave you do not have the scope you would have in the open water. The cave can go in any direction at any time. In the past people have tried to use an ROV in a cave. It did not work efficiently. Keep in mind that when using an ROV on a wreck they have done a fair amount of research, and tend to know where things are. In an unexplored cave that luxury is nonexistent. The cost of running an ROV is EXPENSIVE. If you talk to any commercial ROV pilot he would walk away from the job. Remember time is money to the commercial guys. When they did Titanic there was a lot of money involved. The people on the cruise ship paid 5g and up to watch. The type of ROV that you would need for a cave would cost 10s of thousands of dollars. The less expensive ones like the Sea Otter although they may be quite good, they are not suited for the job of cave surveying. Regards ALex Mark Welzel wrote: > > Hi Alex, I see your point but can't a ROV be down longer or > virtually indefinitely? They use them all the time commercially > and even for that Titanic & Bismark stuff. So I think you can > get several miles of scope on your cables. If silting is a > problem can't you get it through the restriction, wait for > the silt to settle - even if it takes hours, then continue > your mission? > > You can send a ROV into smaller openings, down into deeper > depths, further along the system and they can stay down > longer ALL at no risk to humans. You can design ROV's for > specific applications as well. I would also venture > to guess that insurance on robots would be cheaper than > the insurance on the team members on WKPP's projects. > > Another point to consider is that the data retrieved from > an ROV would not be biased by the diver and would be available > to any necessary persons or agencies in its unadulterated form. > > As far as entanglements I will admit I know little of the inside > of caves. Perhaps you could have tender ROV's watching the > cable for the "push" machine? > > I would think that this might be worthy of further investigation > especially if you were seriously interested in mapping cave > systems. Not as glamorous as doing yourself, but definitely > safer. I guess it would depend on the objectives of those involved. > > My thoughts, > Mark > > Alex Varouxis wrote: > > > > Mark > > > > The amount of cable and the structure of a cave make this impossible. The > > tether would get tangled the ROV would kick up of silt. In this case a diver > > can do many times the amount of work than an ROV. The next problem would be > > the cost of the insurance for the ROV being used in a cave. > > > > Regards Alex > > > > At 02:39 PM 1/2/97 -0500, Mark Welzel wrote: > > >George, if you guys are so interested in DOING IT RIGHT and > > >SAFETY can you tell me why you risk your lives when ROV's > > >could do a better safer job exploring those nasty caves. Hell, > > >you would probably be done by now and could get on to some > > >other worthwhile project with your "team". > > > > > >But, of course YOU wouldn't have the end of the line, your > > >robot's would. It would be the BEST way, though. And you are > > >a stickler for BEST, regardless of cost. Or are there areas > > >where even you will weigh cost vs. risk? > > > -- Alex Varouxis Associated Design & Mfg. 814 North Henry Street Alexandria, VA 22314 (703)549-5999
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]