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

Why do journalists ask stupid questions?

I've just tuned in to a live Q&A with someone I assume from the US Coast Guard as that was mentioned a few times, and a journalist ask whether the tapping came from the submersible. It's like WTF really... That can only be confirmed if they were found and asked whether they were tapping. But as surely most know, there's a lot of noises at the bottom of the ocean so you can never be 100% sure that it would have come from the submersible.
 
How cold is the water at those depths and how much migration of temperature occurs to the interior of the submersible?

I recall from my youth, a "bathysphere", which seems a much less potentially problematic deep sea exploration / viewing vehicle than this apparently technically wanting creation


*** don't even go there ***
 
VaderDSL said:
It was a tube made from 5inch ish thick carbon fibre with titanium mounting collars glued to either end and half hemisphere titanium pressure hulls either end, one of which housed the window iirc

Edit : actually I might be wrong, that vid below is for cyclops and not titan, anyone know how the titan was made? Was it made in the same way?

Edit 2 : So the titan is a cyclops class, so presumably that vid would be how it was made or very similar.

Click to expand...
According to Wikipedia you are correct

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean...Gate began developing,to catastrophic failure

Thought this was interesting regarding the carbon fibre cylinder
OceanGate signed a contract with Spencer Composites in January 2017 for the carbon-composite cylinder. Spencer previously had built the composite pressure hull for the single-person DeepFlight Challenger for Steve Fossett to a design by Graham Hawkes.[18] After Fossett died, DeepFlight Challenger was acquired by Richard Branson's Virgin Oceanic, which had announced plans to conduct a series of five dives to the deepest points of the oceans; DeepFlight refused to endorse the plan, as the craft had been designed to dive only once. Adam Wright, the president of DeepFlight, stated in 2014 "The problem is the strength of the [DeepFlight Challenger] does decrease after each dive. It is strongest on the first dive."
Click to expand...
 
adam cool dude said:
From what I see is that the whole lot is basically a carbon fibre cylinder with two titanium steel domes bolted/bonded on either end. Everything is then bolted onto the outside. Everything is controlled from inside wirelessly. No wires or anything link from the outside to the inside so if something goes pear shaped then that's it you are locked in without any mechanical way of sorting it out.

I haven't looked into it but I don't think Cameron's sub was built the same way.
Click to expand...
How does co2 get out?
 
adam cool dude said:
From what I see is that the whole lot is basically a carbon fibre cylinder with two titanium steel domes bolted/bonded on either end. Everything is then bolted onto the outside. Everything is controlled from inside wirelessly. No wires or anything link from the outside to the inside so if something goes pear shaped then that's it you are locked in without any mechanical way of sorting it out.

I haven't looked into it but I don't think Cameron's sub was built the same way.
Click to expand...

No Challenger deep was built properly - his spherical pressure vessel had physical wires going from inside it to the outside electronics.

Infact in an interview today, he said his crew wanted to make his ballast drop mechanism part of the software with the onboard computer, but he insisted it was on its own separate simple circuit (to their annoyance as they needed to get another physical wire out the sphere to the outside)

In a test dive to 27,000 feet (almost double what the titanic is at) - this saved his life, as all his electronics on the external sub began to fail, including the computer crashing - so he threw the circuit to drop the ballast, and it worked and he floated up.........turns out it was 1 line of computer code that as the issue, that caused an entire sub wide crash, so not the pressure.

Now I write this story back........it's easy to see how this comparatively rubbish novice sub can mess up, may even be the software inside it crashed, stopping comms and dooming the sub to sink to the bottom.
 
Combat squirrel said:
No Challenger deep was built properly - his spherical pressure vessel had physical wires going from inside it to the outside electronics.

Infact in an interview today, he said his crew wanted to make his ballast drop mechanism part of the software with the onboard computer, but he insisted it was on its own separate simple circuit (to their annoyance as they needed to get another physical wire out the sphere to the outside)

In a test dive to 27,000 feet (almost double what the titanic is at) - this saved his life, as all his electronics on the external sub began to fail, including the computer crashing - so he threw the circuit to drop the ballast, and it worked and he floated up.........turns out it was 1 line of computer code that as the issue, that caused an entire sub wide crash, so not the pressure.

Now I write this story back........it's easy to see how this comparatively rubbish novice sub can mess up, may even be the software inside it crashed, stopping comms and dooming the sub to sink to the bottom.
Click to expand...
Those type of systems should have layers of redundancy, but that’s probably NASA-level work, whereas this feels like a hobbyist job; although a hobbyist would take more care as they aren’t commercialising it.
 
Also why aren't the US military using those confiscated UFOs that can move under water like they're in the air like all those military personnel and people of good repute have witnessed??? (this is an ironic question given the other news lately...)

Combat squirrel said:
No Challenger deep was built properly - his spherical pressure vessel had physical wires going from inside it to the outside electronics.

Infact in an interview today, he said his crew wanted to make his ballast drop mechanism part of the software with the onboard computer, but he insisted it was on its own separate simple circuit (to their annoyance as they needed to get another physical wire out the sphere to the outside)

In a test dive to 27,000 feet (almost double what the titanic is at) - this saved his life, as all his electronics on the external sub began to fail, including the computer crashing - so he threw the circuit to drop the ballast, and it worked and he floated up.........turns out it was 1 line of computer code that as the issue, that caused an entire sub wide crash, so not the pressure.

Now I write this story back........it's easy to see how this comparatively rubbish novice sub can mess up, may even be the software inside it crashed, stopping comms and dooming the sub to sink to the bottom.
Click to expand...
With no means of manually activating safety measures in the event of such issues, it's no wonder that loads of people that were once connected to Oceangate questioned the safety.

Most of the buyers of those tickets aren't going to be techheads like we online who would take one look and go "nope" - We don't need to be experts in diving or whatever either, just be tech savvy enough and have a vested interest in these sorts of things to put 2+2 together. Hell the owner's mate is one of us in that sense, since he raised the concert and bailed on his ticket before they set off for that trip.
 
Last edited:
mrk said:
With no means of manually activating safety measures in the event of such issues, it's no wonder that loads of people that were once connected to Oceangate questioned the safety.

Most of the buyers of those tickets aren't going to be techheads like we online who would take one look and go "nope" - We don't need to be experts in diving or whatever either, just be tech savvy enough and have a vested interest in these sorts of things to put 2+2 together. Hell the owner's mate is one of us in that sense, since he raised the concert and bailed on his ticket before they set off for that trip.
Click to expand...

Yeah exactly, you can't do something like this and not have several built in safety features designed around tried and tested simple circuits and/or simple mechanical ideas that are ancient (such as salt water erosion ballast)

To have an all wireless sub, using off the shelf electronics - with no physical wires, absurd.

It makes me wonder how the external electronics that are meant to pick up the internal wireless signals are housed externally - what testing did it do, whats it housed in, how are the batteries stored etc

The challenger deep team are all leading experts in their areas, sub design, electronics, marine engineering etc & literally every one of them in the documentary said all parts on the sub had to be bespoke & designed from the ground up for deep sea use.

I.e. the experts said the exact opposite of the clown CEO now at the bottom of the Atlantic - who should we believe? experts ? or some dude that happens to have the gift of the gab ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom