Can anybody share experiences with either one of these brand's fin stabilizers? Do they work as advertised? Any maintainance problems?

They seem offer a very similar product but while Naiad posts some testimonials, Quantum actually lists all the ships that carry their stabilizers.

And well, Quantum equipment is made in The Netherlands.....

Thorwald Westmaas

['roundthehorn]

Hi Thorwald,

I can't offer any insight into the Naiad versus Quantum question, but I am curious about the post in your blog regarding Rolls-Royce stabilizers. You seemed rather positive in your description of their equipment. Have you decided against them? If so, can you share with us what changed your mind? Thank you.

[K1W1]

Hi,

I have not had any direct dealings with NAIAD Systems.

I have however had extensive dealings with the Quantum 4 Fin system.

I am currently looking with Mike Perkins over there at Quantum at fitting another 4 fin set to a conversion I am looking at.

Their equipment works well and is finished absolutely beautifully. They also offer an integrated Hydraulic Power Pack which is worth looking at if you are doing a big hydraulic refurb on your trawler.

Off Topic- Thorwald, I saw some of your posts on the expedition yacht blog. It's a well presented story of your conversion trials and tribulations to date. Thanks for sharing the details with everyone. What size helicopter are you hoping to operate off this vessel when she is done?

What happened to RR?

Well, it certainly is my preferred solution but it's also about double the price and 4x the weight, and a lot more space is required.

If I were an oil sheik or had a lot of shares in Royal Shell, I'd probably go with RR; meanwhile, I'll have to go for something more economical. I've also looked at the Quantum Hydraulics rotory stabs, those that use the Magnus effect. But I'm a little concerned about maintainance issues (and lack of yachts using them). Also, I'd still need 4 rotors in my case; if I need 4 anyway, I might as well go for fins that have no fast-moving parts.

I've been in touch for some time with Mike Perkins and he has been very helpful and quick in follow-ups so QH has a big edge with me now.

Thanks for the positive comments on my blog. As far as the heli goes, a Bell Jetranger would fit but we prefer to use a nice used Eurocopter AS350b3.
And, we may start out with an R44 :-).

The deck - particularly near the life raft boarding area will actually be widened a little bit, to cover the deck below and make space for a tender crane. Of course, for the heli operation, the issue is tip clearance with the exhaust stag. Nothing will change there but I have landed in tighter spaces :-)

[JAG1]

Hi Balboa. I've had quite a bit of experience with both these systems recently on new builds - go with the Quantum.

The Naiads have several problems which have still to be sorted out; the cylinders seals are poor quality and leak horrendously and more importantly the software behind it is bedevilled with faults (Naiad are currently working on this). Overall we had problems with every aspect of the Naiad system and I'm talking design issues rather than a single poor installation. The tank leaked from a bad weld, the cylinders (all units) leaked, two feedback sensors failed in the first 3 months of operation and the software suffered from an horrendous feedback issue which would see us induce our own roll in flat calm seas. On top of all this the service backup in the Med was nigh on useless. Not a happy bunny.

The Quantums seem to be far more solidly built and in three builds I have had no major problems. I do not know about whether they're built in the Netherlands - certainly the control system is American. Hope that helps you out some.

[Captronlepard]

We had Naiad Satbilizers Onboard a vessel. After many problems with the actauators leaking and chattering we had Quantum refit with their actuators and had no problems with them 25,000 miles later. Would highly recomend Quantum as their service in my experience has been second to none.

[BMcF]

Originally Posted by balboa

I've also looked at the Quantum Hydraulics rotory stabs, those that use the Magnus effect. But I'm a little concerned about maintainance issues (and lack of yachts using them). Also, I'd still need 4 rotors in my case; if I need 4 anyway, I might as well go for fins that have no fast-moving parts.

I've been in touch for some time with Mike Perkins and he has been very helpful and quick in follow-ups so QH has a big edge with me now. :-)

Just a quick note on that: The Magnuss-Effect rotors are 'only' for low (< 6 knots..or thereabouts) and zero-speed control (something they apparently do well) and are retracted at cruising speeds. So they must be used in conjunction with fins to cover the entire speed range. Thus the question becomes: "Fins and rotors?..or fins alone?". The answer to that, is a matter of how much low-speed and at-anchor control is required and how much when underway. The rotors do not repace fins; they augment the fins in a system designed to provide roll control at any speed.

[The Reverend]

My experiences is with Niad have been very similar to JAG1's (post #6) apart from a personality clash with one of the Quantum techies I have found their product and support as a whole in a league above any other of the stabiliser systems I've dealt with in recent years. I don't believe it is an accident that in the last few years that they have dominated the market in high end stabilisation systems for yachts.

Originally Posted by BMcF

Just a quick note on that: The Magnuss-Effect rotors are 'only' for low (< 6 knots..or thereabouts) and zero-speed control (something they apparently do well) and are retracted at cruising speeds. So they must be used in conjunction with fins to cover the entire speed range. Thus the question becomes: "Fins and rotors?..or fins alone?". The answer to that, is a matter of how much low-speed and at-anchor control is required and how much when underway. The rotors do not repace fins; they augment the fins in a system designed to provide roll control at any speed.

Thanks all for your great feedback. I'm going with Quantum, needless to say :-).

But, let me correct the above: they work fine with speeds up to 12 kn (not just 6) although they do become more effective at slower speeds (unlike traditional fins). My situation is perfect for the Maglift, especially now that they will build a bigger system for my particular case (see post on my blog). I'll only need 2 rotors and they can be placed midships where I have lots of space in fuel tanks. When I don't need them, they retract.

[BMcF]

Originally Posted by balboa

Thanks all for your great feedback. I'm going with Quantum, needless to say :-).

But, let me correct the above: they work fine with speeds up to 12 kn (not just 6) although they do become more effective at slower speeds (unlike traditional fins). My situation is perfect for the Maglift, especially now that they will build a bigger system for my particular case (see post on my blog). I'll only need 2 rotors and they can be placed midships where I have lots of space in fuel tanks. When I don't need them, they retract.

Having been involved in some of the background work on the earlier Mag rotors (not the current Quantum production hardware), I recalled that there were limitations for the rotors at vessel speeds around the range I stated. But if QME says they are still effective at speeds to 12 knots, then I'm sure they are, since they are certainly not known for making claims that are not supported.