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

mrk

mrk

Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
101,060
Location
South Coast
They did, that is true.

A few other questions:

  • How many dives was it rated for?
  • What depth was it rated for?
  • Was it rated for salt water?
  • Did NASA know what it was going to be used for?
  • NASA only helped, but to what extent? Did they give him a blueprint and go "build this, y'all be reet m8"?
  • Was any other part of the sub rated for any of these depths? (the window was rated to 1300m or something silly, this much has been proven)

The One is rather vividly demonstrating his lack of understanding of engineering here tbh.
Yeah I work in defence engineering where part of the job is change management, even changing some nuts and bolts on surface bolted items on a ship initiates the quizzing and impact assessments from basically all team disciplines that might be affected by the change and then the review cycles for each one that follows before can be OKd. NASA isn't going to build something or help with something without knowing all the dots and lines are accounted for tbh.
 
Caporegime
Joined
22 Oct 2002
Posts
27,429
Location
Boston, Lincolnshire
News update on live right now just said they have had word that some of the debris are the supporting parts of the submersible, not the hull itself, but the parts that connect to it...

Which makes total sense as the hull was the weakest and untested entity. It was always the part that was going to fail because it is untested. Most likely fatigue from previous runs. I know from my cars that aftermarket carbon prop shafts are only warranted for a certain time/mileage which just put me off even though they can handle way more torque in a specified direction and are lighter.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
24 Oct 2012
Posts
25,185
Location
Godalming
Yeah I work in defence engineering where part of the job is change management, even changing some nuts and bolts on surface bolted items on a ship initiates the quizzing and impact assessments from basically all team disciplines that might be affected by the change and then the review cycles for each one that follows before can be OKd. NASA isn't going to build something or help with something without knowing all the dots and lines are accounted for tbh.

My last client was the National Physical Laboratory in Teddington, where they do a LOT of underwater research for the MoD. I know perhaps 0.0000001% of what the team their know and some of the things they told me really educated me on how these things work. I very rapidly learned about tolerances, torque, stress, fatigue, etc.

As you say - even changing a bolt from stainless to titanium would require a massive process as these two materials, whilst widely regarded as being some of the toughest in the biz, still have weaknesses. Titanium for example would last a fraction of what stainless would in salt water.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrk
Associate
Joined
8 Sep 2020
Posts
1,460
I think that'll depend on what they find tbh. I wouldn't mind seeing the empty vessel but if there's any semblance of suffering or remains I doubt they'll air anything for a while.
There will be no remains , crushed and then whats left gone in the ocean is what happens , hull is gone . May get some photos of the landing frame and possibly the rear cover but doubt we will see anymore than that
 
Soldato
Joined
7 Aug 2004
Posts
11,008
I think that'll depend on what they find tbh. I wouldn't mind seeing the empty vessel but if there's any semblance of suffering or remains I doubt they'll air anything for a while.

There will not be any remains left at all, they would have basically been completely destroyed and any biological material in the water already consumed by ocean life.

There was a guy on TikTok following sharks on a tracking app - 2 sharks apparently went directly to the titanic wreck area, and have remained in the area since…….likely they picked up the blood in the water, strange coincidence 2 sharks went directly to the area of the titanic for no apparent reason & surfaced to allow their transmitters to work, sharks tend to exist near the surface to get warm before diving really deep depending on the species……..the fact the sharks have transmitters says they are a type that likes to swim at all depths.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
3 Apr 2009
Posts
3,977
Location
Warrington
Tbh I feel bad for all of them but do we know the dad dragged him along? I wonder if it was the kid who wanted to see it. All three of my nephews built at least one Titanic model when there were younger and are/were fascinated by it.
Yeah may well have been him that wanted to go in the first place, but can't help feeling his dad should have known better, especially as he's a businessman / director etc, so would be used to doing due diligence, checking things out etc
 
Associate
Joined
4 Aug 2016
Posts
287
Location
Surrey
Sadly, outside of being found alive in time this was probably the best outcome. The alternative is absolutely horrifying to me as someone who is very claustrophobic.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
29 Jul 2010
Posts
23,829
Location
Lincs
Who's to know that they didn't lose power, drop like a stone (it weighs 10ton) and then hit rocks at the bottom causing a breach and then imploding.

The sub may have been fine outside this event

They did lose communication 1hr 45 into the 2hr dive. I know that had happened before but I think it's safe to assume it failed at that point.
 
Caporegime
Joined
22 Oct 2002
Posts
27,429
Location
Boston, Lincolnshire
Who's to know that they didn't lose power, drop like a stone (it weighs 10ton) and then hit rocks at the bottom causing a breach and then imploding.

The sub may have been fine outside this event

The debris field will presumably be very small if that happened. If it went pop higher up you would have a much larger radius.

I am pretty certain all the data and telemetry will reveal everything and they knew this outcome more than likely from the start.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2005
Posts
12,484
Which makes total sense as the hull was the weakest and untested entity. It was always the part that was going to fail because it is untested. Most likely fatigue from previous runs. I know from my cars that aftermarket carbon prop shafts are only warranted for a certain time/mileage which just put me off even though they can handle way more torque in a specified direction and are lighter.
Wouldn't it just shatter into loads of fragments being CF ?
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Jan 2015
Posts
5,208
Location
Consett
X5sxbIH.png


If that's all they've found(Frame and cover), it'd have been over in seconds.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom