Titanic submersible confirmed destroyed with loss of all five souls onboard.

DJMK4 said:
Did it have a guide cable or rope? Surely if your doing an expedition like this you would launch down and have an attachment from something if the sub had issues say half way down people who are floating above could winch
Click to expand...
From everything that has been said about the company and the sub, they didn't have anything remotely resembling an emergency plan or any backups for the sub
 
andy_mk3 said:
I can certainly agree with why it's been used in that sense. But there's also a good reason why nothing in the sky is flying around with an xbox controller. Something like this should have bespoke controls for the job, with high quality components that are rated for the temperatures, humidities and pressures they will be exposed to, to ensure they work reliably.
Click to expand...
Aircraft you need something that is exceptionally reliable and very resilient because you're usually moving at hundreds of miles an hour.

In a sub you're likely moving at a speed measures in low single digits miles per hour.

Also, IIRC some large drones do indeed use game controllers :)

Also the temperatures, pressure and humidity in the sub, if it's working fine will likely be well within the manufacturers range for a game controller given they're expected to work all over the world, from very warm and humid places, to deserts, to to the likes of Russia.
If you're outside of that sort of range of conditions in a sub at the sorts of depths they are talking about something has likely already gone very badly wrong and you're dead or any controller and it's interface is likely to be failing.
 
Last edited:
Bald-Eagle22 said:
Your a barrel of laughs tonight.

Can confirm your correct though , we had a small flood at 500ft in auxiliary machinery room when a cooling service flange decided it was time to leak ( seawater cooling at 10PSI above sea pressure ) compartment filled up in literally seconds . Luckily it was a small compartment and was contained just as quickly but very scary stuff .

Emergency surface was fun though.

I also took part in this


Oh and I brushed shoulders with Simon Le Bon at 03:00 on a Sunday morning as well !

HMS Otus (Collision) (Hansard, 21 July 1988)

HMS Otus (Collision) (Hansard, 21 July 1988)
api.parliament.uk
Click to expand...

That article/blog is fascinating. Are you from Barrow?
 
Minusorange said:
From everything that has been said about the company and the sub, they didn't have anything remotely resembling an emergency plan or any backups for the sub
Click to expand...
It certainly doesn't sound much like it, although if something goes wrong at 4km below the surface there isn't much anyone can likely do, what does seem unforgivable is that it doesn't sound like they had any independently powered way to track the sub, I would have hoped they'd at least have put a suitable acoustic pinger mounted on the sub that used it's own internal power, and something similar for RF once on the surface., even if they had to replace them every few dives.
 
Apparently this is the company. You couldn't pay me anything to get on board!

KT6iB5L.jpg


nauHWtY.jpg


8xGhC55.jpg
 
Werewolf said:
It certainly doesn't sound much like it, although if something goes wrong at 4km below the surface there isn't much anyone can likely do, what does seem unforgivable is that it doesn't sound like they had any independently powered way to track the sub, I would have hoped they'd at least have put a suitable acoustic pinger mounted on the sub that used it's own internal power, and something similar for RF once on the surface., even if they had to replace them every few dives.
Click to expand...
Definitely a Mickey mouse company. The Trieste managed it in 1960 at 11,000 meters in the Challenger Deep. They reached the ocean floor.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trieste_(bathyscaphe)
 
Last edited:
Werewolf said:
Aircraft you need something that is exceptionally reliable and very resilient because you're usually moving at hundreds of miles an hour.

In a sub you're likely moving at a speed measures in low single digits miles per hour.

Also, IIRC some large drones do indeed use game controllers :)

Also the temperatures, pressure and humidity in the sub, if it's working fine will likely be well within the manufacturers range for a game controller given they're expected to work all over the world, from very warm and humid places, to deserts, to to the likes of Russia.
If you're outside of that sort of range of conditions in a sub something has likely already gone very badly wrong and you're dead or any controller and it's interface is likely to be failing.
Click to expand...


It's not just about the speed though, it's peoples lives and the sub going into the deep sea, you would want something robust. Drones don't have people on board, while they could pose a danger to people on the ground, they often have safety mechanisms in place like they will return to a landing site if they lose comms with the controller. There's millions £/$ involved here, taking people to a very hostile environment and it should be made properly.

Controllers sure do work in a large range or conditions, but they're not exactly designed and proven to be 100% reliable in all those conditions.
 
Hades said:
Does the sub even have windows? A quick Google suggests it is windowless. So instead of watching video footage on a screen they take a highly risky and uncomfortable dive down to the wreck and watch video footage on a screen.

I don't see the appeal personally.
Click to expand...

I assume there's a window? Otherwise what's the point at all?
 
One More Solo said:
It’s simply nuts that the “what could go wrong” here is so obvious yet there are seemingly no safeguards in place. At this point, explosive decompression is hugely preferable to trapped at the bottom of the ocean.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Can't think of much worse than being stuck down there, knowing you're gonna die but days to stew over it.
I guess lack of oxygen isn't the worst way to go?
 
The New York Times has unearthed a 2018 letter sent by submersible experts to Stockton Rush, the CEO of OceanGate.

The authors of the letter expressed "unanimous concern" over the approach taken by OceanGate when building the Titan and warned of potential "catastrophic" issues with its design.

They also said OceanGate was making "misleading" claims about its design exceeding established industry safety standards and urged Rush to institute a prototype testing program reviewed and witnessed by an accredited registrar.

"It is our unanimous view that this validation process by a third-party is a critical component in the safeguards that protect all submersible occupants," the letter read.

The NYT said a spokesperson for OceanGate declined to comment
Click to expand...

:(
 
Also in 2018, a former OceanGate submersible pilot and its director of marine operations filed a lawsuit claiming he had been wrongfully terminated for bringing up concerns about the Titan's ability to safely operate at extreme depths, specifically stating the vessel was only certified to reach a depth of 1,300 meters, a third of the depth required to reach the Titanic. OceanGate, which was suing him for allegedly disclosing confidential information, settled the lawsuit a few months later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom