Hi @Willemb,
This isn’t something I’ve looked into in depth, but at a guess I’d assume the main causes are
- low volumes
- manufacturing of custom components (e.g. transducers, housings, etc) is expensive
- amortisation (spreading/averaging) of development costs is done over a small sample size, so contributes more to the cost of each purchase
- traditionally mostly used in high-budget high-requirement industries (e.g. military, oil&gas)
- significant depth ratings and high precision and accuracy requirements are expensive, and if that’s the primary market then volumes stay too low to start a feedback loop where costs decrease and demand increases (although that’s now definitely underway)
- low competition
- while the space is definitely heating up as consumer level ROVs and the like become more popular, that’s a reasonably recent phenomenon so there aren’t yet many companies involved in designing and producing positioning systems for that market
- alternative solutions with similar accuracy are also expensive, which reduces motivation for significantly lower prices
- vehicle incompatibility
- the existing vehicles on the market often have different ways of handling data, so developing a positioning system that’s actually usable by the addressable market also requires creating integrations for a variety of vehicle types, which may already have a positioning system they don’t want to undercut, or may not be designed to handle one at all
- with an open-source and modular system like ours that kind of integration is intended to be relatively straightforward, and we’re also planning to make it easier via BlueOS, but that still requires technical and software know-how
- most other systems would be more involved to create and share an integration for, and for pre-made systems the design company may refuse to allow it / provide the required information to make it possible
- setup requirements
- while underwater positioning is definitely useful, suitable external setup for USBLs is not always feasible for commercial requirements (e.g. infrastructure inspections may have too many obstacles), and may be too much hassle for many consumer dives (just want to explore a bit)
- external setup can be expensive in itself, which may reduce demand for the product
- low “public” accessibility of underwater sonar technology
- while the concepts themselves have been researched and written about, there aren’t yet affordable and accessible options for hobbyists and the like to try out and tinker with, so it’s hard for people to start development without potentially significant upfront costs and learning
I expect costs of various underwater positioning systems should continue decreasing, but at this point we’re not far enough down the curve for them to be readily affordable for whoever wants a play. For businesses where they’re essential, if they have sufficient work then the existing offerings are already affordable and in use, whereas applications that require cheaper options and can perhaps handle lower precision are either using a different approach (e.g. navigating more manually with camera feed, scanning sonar, etc), or are being handled by divers or just not being done at all.
Perhaps others can chime in with any significant considerations that I’ve missed 