So both the highest and lowest points of the planet are turning into graveyards for the bored and wealthy. Really though, if those folks are indeed alive and not already on the surface, that's got...
So both the highest and lowest points of the planet are turning into graveyards for the bored and wealthy.
Really though, if those folks are indeed alive and not already on the surface, that's got to be a special kind of terrifying. The article mentions they've got 96 hours of oxygen on board, but what about power? I'd have to imagine hypothermia is a bigger problem at that depth than oxygen in the event of a power loss, no?
If you have the money to buy a quarter-million dollar bus ticket to the bottom of the ocean to take turns staring at a maritime grave through a porthole for funsies, I have no idea what...
If you have the money to buy a quarter-million dollar bus ticket to the bottom of the ocean to take turns staring at a maritime grave through a porthole for funsies, I have no idea what constitutes adventure in your world.
Silly remarks aside, I do hope these people are found and returned safely. If they are, they'll certainly have a story to tell.
Value is relative. The cost of this tourist expedition is that other people are going to risk their own safety to find these people. If this this doesn't turn out like the last time this sub went...
Value is relative. The cost of this tourist expedition is that other people are going to risk their own safety to find these people. If this this doesn't turn out like the last time this sub went missing, this company will cease to exist. We've seen this before at high elevations, the lines of slowly-dying tourists and their guides among the already dead, waiting their turn to take their selfies, trying to keep the litter out of frame.
I applaud what you're teaching your kid, but I feel this sort of extreme tourism isn't quite the same.
It's worth noting that it does seem like the tourists are also subsidizing researchers to some extent, so beyond just rich-person utility there is seemingly some value being generated: And...
It's worth noting that it does seem like the tourists are also subsidizing researchers to some extent, so beyond just rich-person utility there is seemingly some value being generated:
Since 2021, the Bahamas-based OceanGate Expeditions has ferried about 60 paying customers and 15-20 researchers to the site in a deep-diving submersible, aiming to bring them within inches of one of the world’s best-known shipwrecks.
And unrelated, but that Twitter thread is wild. How can you engineer something for such an extreme environment and not have some contingency plans such as a detachable EPIRB.
Apparently, they did have those: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65957709 In the video, the journalist mentions detachable ballast that can be removed by getting everyone to one side of...
He told The Context programme that the craft, which is believed to be OceanGate's Titan submersible, had seven different functions to allow it to resurface and that it was "really concerning" none of these had so far worked.
However, Pogue said the vessel's resurfacing capabilities would be irrelevant if the sub became trapped or sprang a leak.
"There's no backup, there's no escape pod," he said. "It's get to the surface or die".
In the video, the journalist mentions detachable ballast that can be removed by getting everyone to one side of the sub and 'rolling' the ballast off. It does seem likely that the sub has either gotten stuck or there was a failure in the capsule. Or they have surfaced but not been found yet.
Ohh, I see. The articles on the topic have been a bit hard to scour for technical info. Makes complete sense to have removable ballast. If I'm not mistaken, it's unusual to not have it in a...
Ohh, I see. The articles on the topic have been a bit hard to scour for technical info. Makes complete sense to have removable ballast. If I'm not mistaken, it's unusual to not have it in a civilian sub.
And I'm kind of considering the same outcomes. Stuck is a weird one, it seems very reckless to me to dive into places where that could happen. But hey, we can't rule out reckless. But beyond that, it's sink or surface. A satellite phone and a gps receiver are cheap, so I doubt that surfaced but not found is very likely.
Also, what the hell kind of an approach is "all hands astern" and rolling the ballast off? I get that it works, but it might not be too reliable and might trigger unintendedly. I think I see what they were trying to do - avoiding any additional hull penetrations, particularly mechanical ones. Still...
Edit, I'm wrong, this article says the dive time is 90 minutes. So it sounds like they would have lost contact shortly after it arrived at the bottom.
If I recall rightly, it takes 4 hours to descend in this thing, and they lost contact after 1h45. If that's the case, it would seem the failure occurred before it reached the bottom, which doesn't bode well.
Edit, I'm wrong, this article says the dive time is 90 minutes. So it sounds like they would have lost contact shortly after it arrived at the bottom.
That is quite ominous I think. If a vehicle disappears shortly after reaching the point where the forces on it are greatest then there is an explanation that seems more likely than any other: the...
That is quite ominous I think. If a vehicle disappears shortly after reaching the point where the forces on it are greatest then there is an explanation that seems more likely than any other: the sub's hull failed.
I hadn't realized it was a Bahamas-based company. That actually explains how they got away with such shoddy safety measures. Cruiselines are based out of the Bahamas for their lax safety and...
I hadn't realized it was a Bahamas-based company. That actually explains how they got away with such shoddy safety measures. Cruiselines are based out of the Bahamas for their lax safety and employee regulations as well as their tax rules.
I'm not saying the Bahamas suck, I'm saying their laws are favorable to maritime fuckery. Which is how we get water craft that aren't safety tested and certified. like the craft that went missing. I won't say I'm sad for the loss, because I'm not. But I am sympathetic to the entirely terrifying way to die that is likely happening right now. I feel bad for the victims, but I have no sympathy for the CEO down there. He knowingly or unknowingly led the others to their grave.
This reminds me of a trip I took to the Bahamas. I stayed at a friend's place and met some of their neighbors. One was a man in his 50s who had two adult sons. The man was a bit of an adventurer...
This reminds me of a trip I took to the Bahamas. I stayed at a friend's place and met some of their neighbors. One was a man in his 50s who had two adult sons. The man was a bit of an adventurer who had done a lot of mountain climbing (IIRC including Mt. Everest) and other risky sporty endeavors. I went fishing with him and his sons on his boat and had a great time (i mainly observed them spear fishing and helped cleaning the fish). I later found out from my friend after I returned home that the father and his sons had been arrested for drug smuggling (the smuggling involved their boat). I bring this up because, after that Bahamas experience, I associate people taking extreme physical risks (the mountain climbing, etc.) with risk taking in other areas of life (breaking the law, working with drug smugglers). Maybe there's something to the personality of an extreme risk taker being willing to ignore safety concerns. Sort of like how CEOs often have sociopathic personality traits (maybe the OceanGate CEO had traits of both).
I think it’s valid to question why someone can, and whether they should, spend 5-7 years of an average person’s income on an 2-3 day adventure. It’s good to ask: Is this kind of ability and choice...
I think it’s valid to question why someone can, and whether they should, spend 5-7 years of an average person’s income on an 2-3 day adventure. It’s good to ask: Is this kind of ability and choice to spend so much money on this moral and ethical? So I wouldn’t chalk that up to envy, but rather philosophical frustration.
Yeah but then you also need to ask yourself that question when you go to Disneyland. Or even do a weekend-trip up to the folks. And don't get me wrong, it is a valid question to ask, but I also...
I think it’s valid to question why someone can, and whether they should, spend 5-7 years of an average person’s income on an 2-3 day adventure.
Yeah but then you also need to ask yourself that question when you go to Disneyland. Or even do a weekend-trip up to the folks.
And don't get me wrong, it is a valid question to ask, but I also automatically do things like spend 100€ at rituals without thinking much about it if I've already decided I'm going to buy stuff at rituals today. And if you think about it, that's an absolutely crazy amount to spend on a slightly parfumed version of what you get for 5€ at a supermarket.
Aaah, sorry. Rituals is a specific brand of cosmetic. They're known for a comparatively strong smell, and having "lines" of smells with a very strong marketing identity to each line.
Aaah, sorry. Rituals is a specific brand of cosmetic. They're known for a comparatively strong smell, and having "lines" of smells with a very strong marketing identity to each line.
The fact that they're spending so much money is inextricably linked to the difficulty of reaching their destination, and therefore of rescue or retrieval attempts. To bring back the Everest...
The fact that they're spending so much money is inextricably linked to the difficulty of reaching their destination, and therefore of rescue or retrieval attempts. To bring back the Everest comparison, The bodies and refuse stay there largely because they're so difficult to retrieve. Dying doing something stupid in a random state park is unfortunate, but unlikely to permanently damage even a small area of that park. Even cave divers are unlikely to cause serious harm to the ecology of the caves if their remains are unable to be retrieved.
It's not JUST the money they're spending. Amplified money means amplified impact.
And we wouldn’t have Titanic and some of James Cameron’s other movies without his fascination for the deep sea and his trips down there himself. The Abyss is my favorite.
And we wouldn’t have Titanic and some of James Cameron’s other movies without his fascination for the deep sea and his trips down there himself. The Abyss is my favorite.
I’m not envious at all, you’re the one bringing that into question and then trying to close down the discussion you responded to. Again I’ll reiterate, the only reason they can do this in the...
Exemplary
I’m not envious at all, you’re the one bringing that into question and then trying to close down the discussion you responded to. Again I’ll reiterate, the only reason they can do this in the first place is their vast amount of wealth. I’m not jealous of people spending 5x the annual salary to explore the ruins of the titanic, that’s presumptuous and frankly rude. I could make the same assumption based on how much you’re defending this. These people took a serious risk from someone who claimed to skirt safety laws, this is just as much on them as it is the ceo. It is an unfortunate consequence of taking such a deep and dangerous expedition.
It almost seems disingenuous comparing this to someone speeding in a Tesla or being lost in the woods as if they’re comparable at all. Is bringing up something I deem relevant in regards to the topic off the table, is that not what a forum or discussion is for? Because this is a pretty blatant case of people’s immense wealth and privilege affording them this dangerous expedition that put them at risk.
If you want to defend the Musks and Bezos of the world wasting millions on spaceships and underwater expeditions by all means go ahead but not everybody is going to see it that way, so I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Having experiences is one thing, and in a vacuum I would agree that it's admirable, but there are externalities that make this sort of thing a much bigger problem. The degradation of Mount...
Having experiences is one thing, and in a vacuum I would agree that it's admirable, but there are externalities that make this sort of thing a much bigger problem. The degradation of Mount Everest, both environmentally and as a site of spiritual significance to the Nepali people, is absolutely not admirable. I think the story of this submarine is too new to fully understand the ramifications, but will they be sending someone to retrieve it? Has the impact on the local environment been considered?
Having the curiosity to experience things is beautiful, but choosing to have those experiences at the cost of damaging or destroying the thing that you're experiencing isn't admirable, it's selfish and contemptible. That's not even examining the other, better things that money could be used for if we as a society didn't allow such a small subsection of the population to hoard it.
I agree with everything you’ve said here, but I don’t think the impact on the local environment will be very detrimental. A tiny sub is just nothing compared to the titanic, it’s not adding much....
I agree with everything you’ve said here, but I don’t think the impact on the local environment will be very detrimental. A tiny sub is just nothing compared to the titanic, it’s not adding much. Almost nothing lives that deep, usually, but wrecks can start off little ecosystems if spore happens to float that way and stick to it - we sink things on purpose sometimes for this reason.
You're most likely correct, especially if this is the last time an expedition like this is made. Part of the problem of Everest is volume. If a handful of people had died or left significant waste...
You're most likely correct, especially if this is the last time an expedition like this is made. Part of the problem of Everest is volume. If a handful of people had died or left significant waste up there over the years, it would probably be barely noticeable now. I do think it's possible that there may be ramifications that we aren't expecting, and I don't trust the designers of this sub to have been more cautious with the local ecosystem than with their customer's lives, but it would be unfair of me to take those possibilities into account with my judgement of this particular situation. My issue is more with "extreme tourism" as a whole than with this particular case.
I do judge those who chose to ride the Titanic as a pleasure cruise somewhat, yeah. Not quite as much, since they were specifically sold the expectation that the Titanic would be unsinkable, and...
I do judge those who chose to ride the Titanic as a pleasure cruise somewhat, yeah. Not quite as much, since they were specifically sold the expectation that the Titanic would be unsinkable, and the very fact that humans could impact the environment wasn't nearly as well understood, but I do still judge them a bit.
As far as what this mission destroyed, as I mentioned, the situation is still too new to fully understand the impact to the environment. I'm struggling to find out how much fuel would have been on board, and as of right now we have no idea how well contained that fuel is, which isn't even taking into account the environmental impact of the usage of that fuel if nothing has gone wrong at all. The materials used to build it are also very different from the steel and wood the Titanic was built with. We also don't know how much fuel will be expended searching for the submarine for rescue or recovery.
If this was the only time this ever happened, it would probably have very little ecological impact. I can't argue with that. My issue is not with the one trip, it's with the entire idea that a wealthy person's right to experience something novel trumps any ecological or cultural responsibility.
You could counter by pointing out the wasteful and harmful things that we all do every day, but there's a huge difference of degree. The wealthy engaging in this type of tourism are using far more resources per capita than, say, a mother using gas to take her children to the zoo. Less wealthy people also have far fewer options, and aren't always able to choose the sustainable options that are available to the wealthy.
This argument must be chalked up to no ethical consumption under capitalism. We can't scrutinize every choice everyone makes that has negative externalities, because they will always exist, but there are matters of degree. This is both wasteful far above the levels that the average person is guilty of, and also does not serve a practical purpose.
To be fair to me, I didn't bring it up, I responded to a conversation that was already happening, so the timing isn't really under my control. I'm also not sure what other concerns the focus could...
To be fair to me, I didn't bring it up, I responded to a conversation that was already happening, so the timing isn't really under my control. I'm also not sure what other concerns the focus could be on in order to prevent it from happening again, as the safety angle is already well covered. I can promise that I'm not envious of these people, or of those climbing Everest or partaking in space tourism, for all the good it will do.
I am sorry if this conversation put a damper on your spirits, and I hope that if we come across each other again it will be with clean slates and open minds.
Which makes me wonder. If you have the technology to go that deep, surely it would be better to simply send an unmanned, remote controlled vehicle, record beautiful footage and share that with the...
Which makes me wonder. If you have the technology to go that deep, surely it would be better to simply send an unmanned, remote controlled vehicle, record beautiful footage and share that with the world? The idea that millionaires are paying a tonne of money in a dangerous mission to see something on a small monitor is crazy to me.
Interesting question. The deep sea is always at a constant temperature of 4°C. Dangerous in minutes if you're in the water itself, but I think sitting in 4°C air without any wind chill moving heat...
I'd have to imagine hypothermia is a bigger problem at that depth than oxygen in the event of a power loss, no?
Interesting question. The deep sea is always at a constant temperature of 4°C. Dangerous in minutes if you're in the water itself, but I think sitting in 4°C air without any wind chill moving heat away from your body, in a T-shirt and jeans, you should be fine as long as you're not starving.
The most horrifying thing is they're sealed in from the outside. Even if they surfaced and are bobbing along, they can't get out of that sub unless they're found. They can still run out of oxygen...
The most horrifying thing is they're sealed in from the outside. Even if they surfaced and are bobbing along, they can't get out of that sub unless they're found. They can still run out of oxygen while no longer submerged.
That seems like a major design flaw to me and highly irresponsible too. How did this thing ever get approval to be launched? Do submarines even require approval or certification of any kind? You...
That seems like a major design flaw to me and highly irresponsible too. How did this thing ever get approval to be launched? Do submarines even require approval or certification of any kind? You probably don't know either but these are just questions that come to mind. It seems insane to me that this could actually happen.
Apparently more than 3 dozen experts signed a letter to the company warning about potential catastrophic problems, citing their lack of following safety standards (despite advertising that they would)
Apparently more than 3 dozen experts signed a letter to the company warning about potential catastrophic problems, citing their lack of following safety standards (despite advertising that they would)
it keeps getting worse: if I'm reading that right, the hull was made of carbon fiber (I think I read elsewhere it was 5 inches thick). which is a very strong, high-tech material, but not magic....
According to the court documents, in a 2018 case, OceanGate employee David Lochridge, a submersible pilot, voiced concerns about the safety of the sub. According to a press release, Lochridge was director of marine operations at the time, “responsible for the safety of all crew and clients.”
...
Lochridge was fired, and then OceanGate sued him for disclosing confidential information about the Titan submersible. In response, Lochridge filed a compulsory counterclaim where he alleged wrongful termination over being a whistleblower about the quality and safety of the submersible.
...
The counterclaim said that:
Given the prevalent flaws in the previously tested 1/3 scale model, and the visible flaws in the carbon end samples for the Titan, Lochridge again stressed the potential danger to passengers of the Titan as the submersible reached extreme depths. The constant pressure cycling weakens existing flaws resulting in large tears of the carbon. Non-destructive testing was critical to detect such potentially existing flaws in order to ensure a solid and safe product for the safety of the passengers and crew.
...
Lochridge was particularly concerned about “non-destructive testing performed on the hull of the Titan” but he was “repeatedly told that no scan of the hull or Bond Line could be done to check for delaminations, porosity and voids of sufficient adhesion of the glue being used due to the thickness of the hull.” He was also told there was no such equipment that could conduct a test like that.
if I'm reading that right, the hull was made of carbon fiber (I think I read elsewhere it was 5 inches thick). which is a very strong, high-tech material, but not magic.
the repeated changes in pressure as the sub dives and resurfaces causes stresses on the carbon fiber, which can eventually lead to it cracking. and they knew this from testing of a scale model.
the director of marine operations raised concerns about it, and was (allegedly) fired over it.
one of the things he proposed was doing non-destructive testing / inspection of the hull to find those possible cracks. and the response was that it's impossible, due to the thickness of the hull. which is understandable to a point, but that seems like an absolutely glaring design flaw if the hull is prone to cracks and it's impossible to inspect for the cracks.
the one tiny silver lining to this is that if the hull did indeed fail in this way, death was likely instantaneous and painless for everyone on board. the other equipment failure scenarios that are possible would have them sitting on the seafloor, slowly suffocating and/or freezing to death.
At this point, I'd say that's not a silver lining, but the second-best outcome besides a successful rescue since that means no prolonged suffering. The fact that instant death ranks as the second...
At this point, I'd say that's not a silver lining, but the second-best outcome besides a successful rescue since that means no prolonged suffering. The fact that instant death ranks as the second best scenario is pretty dang horrifying.
If your interpretation is accurate, that makes this situation even more horrifying and infuriating. This already seemed like a preventable accident, but this would mean OceanGate ignored and fired their own employees for expressing valid safety concerns.
I think a successful rescue at this point is as close as you can get to 0% probability while still technically being non-zero. the only plausible rescue scenario I can think of is if, due to the...
I think a successful rescue at this point is as close as you can get to 0% probability while still technically being non-zero.
the only plausible rescue scenario I can think of is if, due to the way the ballast works, they accidentally jettisoned the ballast and rose to the surface, but in an uncontrolled way that placed them far away from the control ship, out of radio range. and they've just been bobbing around on the surface waiting for a Coast Guard plane or ship to spot them.
if they're still underwater, they're either dead (least bad case) or slowly dying (horrific case). even if the rescue effort were able to locate them on the seafloor, sending down a rescue submersible wouldn't be an option. something like the SRDRS has a maximum depth that is less than half of the depth where they are; and the Titan does not have anything resembling the escape system that modern full-size submarines have.
Agreed to the probability. Currently they have included planes in their searches, precisely to help them look for the submarine bobbing on the surface. They started yesterday with planes but not...
Agreed to the probability. Currently they have included planes in their searches, precisely to help them look for the submarine bobbing on the surface. They started yesterday with planes but not the day before, from what I hear because the weather conditions didn't allow it. Not an expert by any means, but 'weather conditions were bad' implies to me that it's possible the sub, once it came to the surface, could have been blown further away from the original spot. My hope is that it will get spotted by a plane, it seems the best change of them being alive.
The titan did apparently have sister subs that may be capable of going that deep, but we are running out of time rapidly to locate and save them if they are that deep under still.
One of my friends is a physicist who works with military submarines, amongst other things. His first response is that 'it has imploded into itself' was the most likely event. Which means they're...
One of my friends is a physicist who works with military submarines, amongst other things. His first response is that 'it has imploded into itself' was the most likely event. Which means they're already dead, likely instantly without pain or suffering, and there is very little left of the submarine.
Btw, half the problem is that this was a private sub. It in no way shape or form came near the type of safety standards the military would apply.
Skipping NDT on composite structures is a really, really bad idea. I work with composites every day at work and I've seen specimens fail at half their expected load capability because of bond voids.
Skipping NDT on composite structures is a really, really bad idea. I work with composites every day at work and I've seen specimens fail at half their expected load capability because of bond voids.
Holy shit, that is…. damning to say the least. Instantaneous death would be a godsend compared to being crammed side-by-side in a tiny vessel in the pitch black waiting for the oxygen to run out....
Holy shit, that is…. damning to say the least. Instantaneous death would be a godsend compared to being crammed side-by-side in a tiny vessel in the pitch black waiting for the oxygen to run out. Oof. What a nightmare.
Call it irony, or karma, but..OceanGate's CEO was amongst the passengers on the sub. I have been following the latest update's on BBC and the company has confirmed as much. 5 passengers, oldest...
Call it irony, or karma, but..OceanGate's CEO was amongst the passengers on the sub. I have been following the latest update's on BBC and the company has confirmed as much. 5 passengers, oldest one 77, youngest 19, and amongst them the CEO.
This man refused to make testing and safety a priority for his subs, decided to launch them without the proper testing complete, and was arrogant enough to get on board himself in spite of all of this.
And it could never well cost him his life, if he hasn't passed away already.
Wow… Safety really was NOT a priority for those idiots. This is just another example of why it is important to listen to experts and have other people review your work. If they listened to those...
OceanGate said in the post that because its Titan craft was so innovative, it could take years to get it certified by leading assessment agencies. “Bringing an outside entity up to speed on every innovation before it is put into real-world testing is anathema to rapid innovation,” the company wrote.
Wow… Safety really was NOT a priority for those idiots. This is just another example of why it is important to listen to experts and have other people review your work. If they listened to those people, this crisis might have been prevented.
Bear with me while I lay down some quickly googled facts. I’ll pull them together at the end. World map showing average wave height has the North Atlantic at “very high”. I couldn’t find the exact...
Bear with me while I lay down some quickly googled facts. I’ll pull them together at the end.
World map showing average wave height has the North Atlantic at “very high”.
I couldn’t find the exact numbers but waves off of Ireland (also marked at “very high” on that map) is 2-12m. That is, indeed, very fucking high.
the Titan sub is about 2.5m high
So, even if that sub could have been opened from the inside, they’d be in big fucking trouble in waves that are at best the same size and at worst almost 5 times as high as their vessel. Waves that big would roll them around too, so you open it a crack and suddenly that crack is underneath you and you’re filling with water. There are also no seats or anything inside, so they’d all be being flung into each other ie it would be extremely hard to get anything open anyway.
All that to say that I don’t think their chances would be very much better in a sub that opened from the inside
I just want to put this out here: from when I first heard of this, this detail just made me think of the game Iron Lung. A horror game where you're sealed into a submersible, with the expectation...
I just want to put this out here: from when I first heard of this, this detail just made me think of the game Iron Lung. A horror game where you're sealed into a submersible, with the expectation that you'll probably die down there. If you live and manage to return with photos, great! There's not really high hopes for that though.
Even then, at least that game let the player control the sub. From what I've gathered, this one doesn't.
Surely they have redundancies in place to control the sub without Bluetooth.. right? Lord, the amount of issues I have with every single BT device I've ever encountered.
Surely they have redundancies in place to control the sub without Bluetooth.. right? Lord, the amount of issues I have with every single BT device I've ever encountered.
My bluetooth controllers reliably lose connection to the console... seems ridiculous to use bluetooth connection to control something that will get you killed if you lose control.
My bluetooth controllers reliably lose connection to the console... seems ridiculous to use bluetooth connection to control something that will get you killed if you lose control.
The rich guy brought his bluetooth headset and 90 minutes into the dive it managed to supercede the gamepad connection and now it's all drive-by-asking-alexa.
The rich guy brought his bluetooth headset and 90 minutes into the dive it managed to supercede the gamepad connection and now it's all drive-by-asking-alexa.
Geezus, that's so weird. Some of these ideas are of course actually sensible, like using a modern game controller (like) device for controls, steer by wire, cool cool. But an actual Logitech...
Geezus, that's so weird. Some of these ideas are of course actually sensible, like using a modern game controller (like) device for controls, steer by wire, cool cool. But an actual Logitech controller you buy off of Amazon? That's a bit weird.
Also the fact that it has nothing built in. It's a metal tube with a toilet that doubles as the actual seat of the viewport. And that viewport is the only reason you're down there in the first place, since if you just see it on a screen there's no reason to be in the submersible. But there's nothing else.
And the outside of the sub is white? If you’ve got seven ways to surface in an emergency, why not do yourself one more favor and make sure you’re a color that can easily be spotted among whitecap...
And the outside of the sub is white?
If you’ve got seven ways to surface in an emergency, why not do yourself one more favor and make sure you’re a color that can easily be spotted among whitecap waves from the air?
Expert Parks Stephenson, technical director on James Cameron's Titanic film, says the loss of communication with the missing submersible is a "highly unusual event".
the submersible as an “experimental” vessel, "that has not been approved or certified by any regulatory body, and could result in physical injury, disability, emotional trauma or death".
“Everything else can fail. Your thrusters can go, your lights can go – you’re still going to be safe.”
Also, they were apparently charging $250k per person which means the families likely have enough money to effectively sue them and not let the company's lawyers run out the clock with delays,...
Also, they were apparently charging $250k per person which means the families likely have enough money to effectively sue them and not let the company's lawyers run out the clock with delays, regardless of any liability waivers those aboard may have signed. So I suspect this company is very likely about to go bust, even if the people aboard are eventually found and rescued.
There are so many terrible parts of this story: The father and son, both young, the son only 19. Imagine knowing that your enthusiasm for this risky trip led to your child's death, and that the...
There are so many terrible parts of this story:
The father and son, both young, the son only 19. Imagine knowing that your enthusiasm for this risky trip led to your child's death, and that the two of you will die side by side for something so trivial. And that you are leaving your wife and daughter behind.
The owner of company is on the sub with you. Imagine everyone turning on him in that tight space. I can imagine them killing him to save oxygen.
The irony of taking an adventurous pleasure trip to see the Titanic wreckage and becoming another wreckage that people will talk about for decades to come and maybe attempt to visit.
Ugh. If they are going to die I really hope it was instantaneous.
News likely isn't reporting this because they don't want family or public to despair before there is absolute certainty of their death - but the more likely scenario is that the sub imploded or...
News likely isn't reporting this because they don't want family or public to despair before there is absolute certainty of their death - but the more likely scenario is that the sub imploded or had other safety features go wrong. Most likely they are already dead and died suddenly.
Of course I hope I am entirely wrong about this and they still get saved. But at least it's more likely it was quick than the worse alternative, being trapped for days and eventually suffocating.
They must be spending insane amounts on this rescue mission. That makes me think that there must still be some amount of hope. Below a certain percentage of likelihood of rescue coastguards etc...
They must be spending insane amounts on this rescue mission. That makes me think that there must still be some amount of hope. Below a certain percentage of likelihood of rescue coastguards etc usually call off the search. Unless the families are paying?
I would love to see who pays for that search mission. Imagine a very small number of millionaires and billionaires have a vanity project that has no scientific or otherwise public value. It goes...
I would love to see who pays for that search mission. Imagine a very small number of millionaires and billionaires have a vanity project that has no scientific or otherwise public value. It goes awry and the public spends tons of money on an almost certainly futile effort to save the individuals. Who pays? I'm sure the company will get sued anyway, but I would very much like to see that money put on their tap or those of the participants as well.
If I did something stupid (boarding a sub that has no public safety clearance) for no good reason (to show off) and fucked up, I would imagine to have to pay for the fall-out from it.
The internet looses its damn collective mind about this story while last week hundreds (yes hundreds) of refugees died in the Mediterranean on a single ship that went under and no one bat an eye. WTF.
You’ve raised a good point there about what the news focuses on. I think the answer to why is that we generally enjoy reading about hubris over tragedy. We can comfort ourselves and say “I would...
You’ve raised a good point there about what the news focuses on. I think the answer to why is that we generally enjoy reading about hubris over tragedy. We can comfort ourselves and say “I would never be so stupid/cocky/selfish to do that” about the titanic trip, but we all know that those poor people seeking asylum are there as an accident of birth, and it could so easily have been any one of us.
I fully agree with what you said. And it's an accident spread out over several days, with a clock running down for everyone to see. And it involves the Titanic in some way. That's gold for pretty...
I fully agree with what you said.
And it's an accident spread out over several days, with a clock running down for everyone to see. And it involves the Titanic in some way. That's gold for pretty much any news outlet...
This gives an idea of the enormous amount of resources put towards the search and rescue (well, likely recovery) effort: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65957990
This gives an idea of the enormous amount of resources put towards the search and rescue (well, likely recovery) effort:
There seems to be quite a bit of military and major government rescue organization involvement here. I expect that they see this as serving as a better opportunity for training than a training...
There seems to be quite a bit of military and major government rescue organization involvement here. I expect that they see this as serving as a better opportunity for training than a training exercise would be. They'd likely be spending the money anyway, but it would be on training exercises with no real stakes and with contrived scenarios. Here, they have the opportunity to do something that fits within their general goals, involves far more unknowns than they'd be able to put into a training exercise, lets them practice all their ingenuity and utilize all their fanciest equipment on a mission at the edge of possibility, and rather than involving the potential for a "good job" sticker, involves real lives at stake, even if they are the lives of bumbling rich people. They likely get far better information on what works and doesn't work than they would in training.*
From a naval perspective, "can we find, and potentially recover, a sub we hadn't heard about until today, far deeper than we're used to, with a carbon fiber hull, in the middle of the Atlantic, in a few days, with lives at stake" is probably more valuable than something like "can we find this sub we're all familiar with pretending to hide from us".
And, of course, there's the significant PR benefit here. You can pay as much as you like for recruitment advertisements; you're not going to get days of top-headline international news coverage of you doing something cool and exciting.
Then, if you're the organization to find it, there's the enormous reputational benefit. The cave rescue in Thailand was years ago, and hundreds of millions of people around the world probably have views on the Thai Navy and British cave rescuers (and know that there are impressive British cave rescue organizations in the first place) that are influenced by that. If, eg, you're on a sub in a war 20 years from now, and you remember that your enemy found a tiny carbon fiber tube 4km down in the middle of the Atlantic, that's going to have an effect on morale.
As to why this rather than the Mediterranean sinking: unfortunately, likely because that isn't really challenging and rewarding training from an operational side, just a political one, and isn't a great PR opportunity.
(* For example, look at the most recent "our logistics and communications coordinating with an outside group during a crisis just brought an ROV to the back of our plane that we can't actually get to fit inside, oops".)
I think it's partially because most folk are humane enough to do everything they can to rescue them in spite of the odds. The other part is that family probably can and would pay. Tickets were...
I think it's partially because most folk are humane enough to do everything they can to rescue them in spite of the odds. The other part is that family probably can and would pay. Tickets were 250K per person, these were millionaire families who can afford to put all their savings forwards this if needed
Yes but it isn’t only about humanity. I’m sure the coastguard would prefer to keep searching in many missing persons cases, but resources are limited and there comes a point where the likelihood...
Yes but it isn’t only about humanity. I’m sure the coastguard would prefer to keep searching in many missing persons cases, but resources are limited and there comes a point where the likelihood of rescue is so small that they stop searching. I don’t think you can call them inhumane for that.
Remember the boy who jumped off the boat in the Bahamas and was lost? They searched for 2 or 3 days I think, before making the call to stop. They cannot search forever. So the fact that they are (or were, as of when I wrote that) still searching makes me think that either they have a higher chance of finding them or that someone is paying privately for the search to continue.
I agreed, they would have to make the call at some point. In this case I think it's a bit easier because they have a set time until they expect oxygen to run out, and up until that point there is...
I agreed, they would have to make the call at some point. In this case I think it's a bit easier because they have a set time until they expect oxygen to run out, and up until that point there is still a chance of survival. I reckon if there's no rescue by 11BST, they might try for a few more hours, let's say 6 or so, and then start to reduce the number of boats and planes they keep on the sight.
Really good point about there being a sort of obvious time to dial back the search. One article said they’ve got about 12 hours of oxygen left, but multiple are reporting that they’re still...
Really good point about there being a sort of obvious time to dial back the search. One article said they’ve got about 12 hours of oxygen left, but multiple are reporting that they’re still picking up that regular banging noise. So, fingers crossed
To be clear, I personally believe what's most likely is that the sub imploded and they are already dead, and the noises are from something else. If they are alive though, they are on the sub with...
To be clear, I personally believe what's most likely is that the sub imploded and they are already dead, and the noises are from something else.
If they are alive though, they are on the sub with an extremely experienced diver who has been on many of those missions. He would know the frequency for the banging, but he + the CEO would also be aware how much oxygen is available. If we are lucky, the diver has kept them calm and rested, and helped them practice how to breathe in a way that preserves this as long as possible. The rescue mission is aware of the skills of those on board, and the sounds may be from them, so I think that's why they are still trying.
There is a French ship arriving with an ROV that can get down to the right depth tonight. So they will have maybe 8 or so hours (and the math on the life support could be wrong) to locate it...
There is a French ship arriving with an ROV that can get down to the right depth tonight. So they will have maybe 8 or so hours (and the math on the life support could be wrong) to locate it exactly and see if it the problem is something the ROV can assist with. It's possible the sub is just stuck under some collapsed Titanic debris that an ROV would be able to knock off. It's still a very very slim chance, but if they're able to triangulate the noise in time, there's at least a chance.
5 people on board and they are somewhere near the Titanic. I presume they are limited on oxygen. If, according to the article, the trip takes 8 hours underwater lets say they have 10x the amount...
5 people on board and they are somewhere near the Titanic. I presume they are limited on oxygen. If, according to the article, the trip takes 8 hours underwater lets say they have 10x the amount of oxygen they need then they have around 3-3.5 days to find them.
O thing I found interesting is that the Titanic sits around 12,500ft down. This sub is capable of diving to depths of 13,123ft. That does not leave much margin for error. I have no idea when the surrounding area around the Titanic looks like, but lets say there is a trench. One is really threading the needle with only 623ft differential between the expected depth and the maximum depth of the vessel.
A full dive to the Titanic wreck, including the descent and ascent, reportedly takes around eight hours.
The OceanGate website lists three submersibles it owns, and only the Titan is capable of diving deep enough to reach the Titanic wreckage.
The vessel weighs 10,432 kg (23,000 lbs) and, according to the website, can reach depths of up to 4,000m and has 96 hours of life support available for a crew of five.
Can we just talk about a company only making one submersible that goes that deep? Aside from the safety standards not being great for the sub in question, they also seemingly didn't consider this...
Can we just talk about a company only making one submersible that goes that deep? Aside from the safety standards not being great for the sub in question, they also seemingly didn't consider this exact scenario - if only one can go this deep, what do you use for rescue if there are any issues and the sub can't come back up?
They can drop sandbags, they can drop lead pipes, they can inflate a balloon, they can use the thrusters. They can even jettison the legs of the sub to lose weight. And some of these, by the way, work even if the power is out and even if everyone on board is passed out.
So there's sort of a dead man's switch such that the hooks holding on to sandbags dissolve after a certain number of hours in the water, release the sandbags and bring you to the surface, even if you're unconscious.
The answer is as simple as unsatisfactory: robots. Robots don't need pressure vessels, so they are much simpler to build for these environments. The problem with that is that you only have limited...
if only one can go this deep, what do you use for rescue if there are any issues and the sub can't come back up?
The answer is as simple as unsatisfactory: robots. Robots don't need pressure vessels, so they are much simpler to build for these environments. The problem with that is that you only have limited options in terms of intervening. But for example cutting the Titanic's structure up if the sub is stuck, or cutting off the ballast of the Titan seem plausible to me. You don't need to (probably even can't) evacuate the passengers into another vessel. And if the sub is not buoyant after removing ballast, then the people aboard are dead anyway, because the hull has failed.
FWIW, they probably have more margin beyond 13,123 - 12,500. IOW, I am assuming the 13,123 is max working depth, not "crush" depth... Wuf - $250k ticket price! 'a 3 hour tour...the lil ship was...
FWIW, they probably have more margin beyond 13,123 - 12,500. IOW, I am assuming the 13,123 is max working depth, not "crush" depth...
i've seen so many people "celebrating" that a bunch of people might die a really scary and painful death just because... they have money. what the hell happened to compassion? "oh but they have no...
i've seen so many people "celebrating" that a bunch of people might die a really scary and painful death just because... they have money.
what the hell happened to compassion?
"oh but they have no compassion to others!" someone said on twitter.
you don't know
it doesn't matter. they are not genocidal maniacs. their only "sin" is that they are rich.
I think even if you don't have empathy for the two millionaires, or the CEO of the submarine company, at the least you should have empathy for the 19 year old, who did this with his dad. It was...
I think even if you don't have empathy for the two millionaires, or the CEO of the submarine company, at the least you should have empathy for the 19 year old, who did this with his dad.
It was the responsibility of his dad to make sure the journey they were taking was safe. As a literal teen the only thing he was guilty of was trusting his parents. I think nobody deserves this fate but that teen should be above all scrutiny no matter how heartless you are.
While I strongly agree with what you’re saying, I can’t believe the lack of empathy some people have, I would also like to point out the company ignored safety warnings and the ceo is on the sub....
While I strongly agree with what you’re saying, I can’t believe the lack of empathy some people have, I would also like to point out the company ignored safety warnings and the ceo is on the sub. The irony of that isn’t lost on me.
I think it’s atrocious that some of these private companies make these things that aren’t safe but because they’re private they’re allowed to get away with it. I hope this incident makes them regulate the safety of these private tours or whatever they call it
I think that might change after this incident. Re lack of compassion, yes, it's disturbing. I think the sympathy is tempered, though, by the fact that this endeavor was entirely voluntary,...
I think it’s atrocious that some of these private companies make these things that aren’t safe but because they’re private they’re allowed to get away with it. I hope this incident makes them regulate the safety of these private tours or whatever they call it
I think that might change after this incident.
Re lack of compassion, yes, it's disturbing. I think the sympathy is tempered, though, by the fact that this endeavor was entirely voluntary, unnecessary, and clearly dangerous. The Greece tragedy involved people presumably desperate for a better life, not trying to take a cool trip.
I have to agree with this. No matter how much money was spent or how the safety issues were not addressed, the fact is that lives are at stake here. I'm really hoping that they can all be rescued...
I have to agree with this. No matter how much money was spent or how the safety issues were not addressed, the fact is that lives are at stake here. I'm really hoping that they can all be rescued after the sub is found (hopefully they can be found).
Although the safety issues raised are just crazy to me that this was still allowed to move forward.
This will be my first post here and it is a really touchy subject; I am sorry if I come across as rude or malicious, it's truly not my intention. That said, I feel like there is some perspective I...
This will be my first post here and it is a really touchy subject; I am sorry if I come across as rude or malicious, it's truly not my intention. That said, I feel like there is some perspective I can add here.
To say that I would be celebrating their death is a bit strong, but in the billionaire case I feel like it would make the world a better place. Let me try to explain:
Happiness is not a linear scale. For most people, $10000 is a life changing sum. If you have $1m of wealth, this $10000 will not be life changing anymore. But it will be for someone else. At some point it becomes unethical to have too much money, because that same amount could make many more people so much happier. If you have 10$bln of wealth, you could change the life of every single person living in Djibouti for instance(approx. 1 million). A more detailed breakdown can be found here.
Yes, they are not genocidal maniacs. But the combined accumulation of wealth for so very little benefit(from what I can see, I may be ignorant as to what the wealth is used for) seemingly results in genocidal-scale destruction. So their only sin is that they are rich, but it ends up being a pretty big sin in my book.
When a billionaire dies, that money gets redistributed. It may not lead to any visible change, or it may not even lead to any change at all for the poorer people of the world, but it could. If even 1% of that wealth goes to charity, then tens of thousands of people may be saved from starvation or disease.
In conclusion, I wouldn't really be happy if he died, but I would be happy about the non-zero possibility of his death leading to the saving of many more lives.
Look, I understand where you're coming from. Accumulation of wealth is a terrible thing that we must fight against. However, I believe there is a major flaw in your argument. It's unclear how a...
Look, I understand where you're coming from. Accumulation of wealth is a terrible thing that we must fight against.
However, I believe there is a major flaw in your argument.
It's unclear how a billionaire's fortune will be redistributed. It is quite possible that it will remain largely concentrated in the hands of a few equally unethical heirs or entities -- or maybe they're even less ethical.
So the good that would come from their death is impossible to measure or predict.
However, the suffering they are going through is very much tangible and easy to predict.
You are equating an abstract, theoretical good to very tangible and dramatic human suffering.
Yes, this has been bothering me as well. I can't imagine the suffering these people are going through, and I feel nothing but compassion for them. Regardless of how rich and stupid they are. No...
Yes, this has been bothering me as well. I can't imagine the suffering these people are going through, and I feel nothing but compassion for them. Regardless of how rich and stupid they are. No one should go through this. It's horrifying.
A British businessman, Hamish Harding, a well-known aviator as well as an explorer and one of the tiny group of tourists who have already been to space, who is normally based in the United Arab Emirates, was booked on the current trip and is believed to be among those on board.
Harding, 58, wrote on his various social media accounts about the trip, including on Instagram that: “I am proud to finally announce that I joined oceangateexped for their RMS TITANIC Mission as a mission specialist on the sub going down to the Titanic.”
He further posted on Saturday that: “Due to the worst winter in Newfoundland in 40 years, this mission is likely to be the first and only manned mission to the Titanic in 2023. A weather window has just opened up and we are going to attempt a dive tomorrow. We started steaming from St Johns, Newfoundland, Canada, yesterday and are planning to start dive operations around 4am tomorrow morning. Until then we have a lot of preparations and briefings to do.”
He added: “The team on the sub has a couple of legendary explorers, some of which have done over 30 dives to the RMS Titanic since the 1980s.”
The Guardian – Edward Helmore & Leyland Cecco – 19th June 2023
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65953872 This article seems to be about the same sub that's lost, sounds like a big yikes to me. Lots of improvised parts, "one button" controls,...
This article seems to be about the same sub that's lost, sounds like a big yikes to me. Lots of improvised parts, "one button" controls, navigation by text messages from the ship? For $250k/seat? Nope, nope nope nope.
People with lots of money can say they did that. A someone who already doesn't like the idea of being in a submarine underwater, no thank you. Someone else can spend that money. Too many things...
People with lots of money can say they did that. A someone who already doesn't like the idea of being in a submarine underwater, no thank you. Someone else can spend that money. Too many things can go wrong and with my bad luck, they will.
A reporter for CBS did it years prior. They made him sign a waiver that basically said if he got injured or died they couldn't be held responsible. Personally if they made me sign anything like...
A reporter for CBS did it years prior. They made him sign a waiver that basically said if he got injured or died they couldn't be held responsible.
Personally if they made me sign anything like that before going into the deep sea, I would refuse to board. Let alone board and take my child with me. It's insane.
I think those kinds of waivers are standard when the recreational activity involves some kind of risk. I signed one of them once when going skydiving (for the first and last time). My family and I...
I think those kinds of waivers are standard when the recreational activity involves some kind of risk. I signed one of them once when going skydiving (for the first and last time). My family and I also signed similar waivers when visiting an abandoned warehouse that an artists group turned into a temporary art gallery. That said, signing a waiver shouldn't remove the responsibility of the company for having a reasonably safe and tested submersible that meets industry standards. ETA: Re your second paragraph, yeah, no way would I go on that trip with a kid. Far too much risk, even under absolutely perfect circumstances. I am upset that they allowed a 19 year to go but then again the company took lots of needless risks.
Leaders in the submersible craft industry were so worried about what they called the “experimental” approach of OceanGate, the company whose craft has gone missing, that they wrote a letter in 2018 warning of possible “catastrophic” problems with the submersible’s development and its planned mission to tour the Titanic wreckage.
...
“The submersible industry had significant concerns over the strategy of building a deep sea expedition submersible without following existing classification safety guidelines,” Kohnen said.
The letter said that OceanGate’s marketing of the Titan had been “misleading,” because it claimed that the craft would meet or exceed the safety standards of a risk assessment agency known as DNV, yet the company had no plans to have the craft assessed by the agency.
The industry leaders said that OceanGate should test its prototypes under the watch of DNV or another accredited registrar.
“While this may demand additional time and expense,” the signatories wrote, “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.”
Kohnen said in the interview that Rush, OceanGate’s CEO, called him after reading the letter and told him that industry regulations were stifling innovation. In a 2019 blog post titled “Why Isn’t Titan Classed?” the company made similar arguments.
OceanGate said in the post that because its Titan craft was so innovative, it could take years to get it certified by leading assessment agencies. “Bringing an outside entity up to speed on every innovation before it is put into real-world testing is anathema to rapid innovation,” the company wrote.
The passengers have been confirmed: Hamish Harding, chairman of Action Aviation who's known for being an adventurer; Stockton Rush, CEO of OceanGate, the company that runs these expeditions;...
The passengers have been confirmed: Hamish Harding, chairman of Action Aviation who's known for being an adventurer; Stockton Rush, CEO of OceanGate, the company that runs these expeditions; Paul-Henri Nargeolet, a Titanic expert who's led six expeditions to the wreckage; and Shahzada Dawood and Suleman Dawood, a Pakistani businessman and his son.
I won't lie, I gasped at Suleman. He's the youngest one there at 19. I can't imagine what's going through their minds right now... Somehow the idea of being trapped there with a relative feels even more disturbing to me than being alone, because you'd probably feel guilt for getting the other person into that situation.
Canadian P-3 aircraft detected underwater noises in the search area. As a result, ROV operations were relocated in an attempt to explore the origin of the noises. Those ROV searches have yielded negative results but continue.
Additionally, the data from the P-3 aircraft has been shared with our U.S. Navy experts for further analysis which will be considered in future search plans.
From what I've heard the noise hasn't been repeated since then. It could be them banging on the walls, could be something else entirely. The fact no similar noise has been reportedly detected...
From what I've heard the noise hasn't been repeated since then. It could be them banging on the walls, could be something else entirely. The fact no similar noise has been reportedly detected again feels pretty bleak though.
I haven't read anything else but they do mention noises (plural) in the tweet. And a P-3 is an anti-submarine aircraft, it's whole raison d'être is trying to find subs that are trying to avoid...
It could be them banging on the walls, could be something else entirely.
I haven't read anything else but they do mention noises (plural) in the tweet. And a P-3 is an anti-submarine aircraft, it's whole raison d'être is trying to find subs that are trying to avoid detection so while it could be a false positive they're probably fairly decent at filtering those out.
It's also possible the US Navy might know if the sub catastrophically failed if there was a navy submarine in the area. Not sure they'd divulge that though so maybe this whole showing would proceed anyways.
But even if these guys are trapped somewhere and they are found, it's still very bleak. I'm not even sure if there is a ROV or HOV that can do 13,000 feet anywhere remotely nearby.
From a recent update I stumbled across in my news reading: https://edition.cnn.com/americas/live-news/titanic-missing-sub-oceangate-06-21-23/h_7f0656bc13187bbe3d9448c500cb4050
From a recent update I stumbled across in my news reading:
Crews searching for the Titan submersible heard banging sounds every 30 minutes Tuesday, according to an internal government memo update on the search.
Four hours later, after additional sonar devices were deployed, banging was still heard, the memo said. It was unclear when the banging was heard Tuesday or for how long, based on the memo.
A subsequent update sent Tuesday night suggested more sounds were heard, though it was not described as “banging.”
The 30 minutes is really promising. One of the people on board is an extremely experienced diver, nicknamed Mr Titanic. He would know how to communicate effectively in these circumstances, and...
The 30 minutes is really promising. One of the people on board is an extremely experienced diver, nicknamed Mr Titanic. He would know how to communicate effectively in these circumstances, and what they look for - banging for 3 minutes, every thirty minutes.
So it could be them.
That said, the BBC also wrote this:
It must be stressed that in previous undersea rescue attempts – such banging signals have been checked and found to be spurious, notably in 2017 when the Argentinian submarine, ARA San Juan. Later analysis of the audio determined it was actually from a natural source and not from the submarine.
So, yeah. There are all sorts of noises you can detect in the ocean, and it hasn't been verified with certainty that this is actually the submarine making noises.
The thing that worries me is that it could have been banging noises on tuesday, and they are getting less because the people on board are running out of strength. No idea if they have food and water on board.
Btw, the estimates of 96 hours are based on normal breathing. It's how long you have when you stay calm. If you panic, you use more. And can you imagine being in that situation and not panicking?
Last I heard the noises had been repeated every 30 minutes. "banging for 3 minutes, on the hour and on the half-hour" is a standard for submarine rescue signalling - and there are experienced...
Last I heard the noises had been repeated every 30 minutes. I believe (can't find a source at the moment) that "banging for 3 minutes, on the hour and on the half-hour" is a standard for submarine rescue signalling - and there are experienced divers on board who would know that.
More information and updates: https://www.npr.org/2023/06/20/1183167120/titanic-submarine-hamish-harding From the article: "But even if the crews can locate the vessel at a low depth, hauling it...
From the article: "But even if the crews can locate the vessel at a low depth, hauling it up to the surface is another task. The Titan could be at a depth of over 13,000 feet and a distance of over 900 miles offshore. Frederick said the search and rescue crews did not yet have salvage equipment in place."
"David Marquet, a retired U.S. Navy submarine captain, told NPR's Morning Edition that the odds of survival are "about 1%." "
I really hope it was instant, if worst comes to worst. The thought of still being down there is agonizing. I cannot imagine.
'Landing frame and a rear cover from the submersible' among the debris
We have just had an update from dive expert David Mearns, who says the debris includes "a landing frame and a rear cover from the submersible".
Mearns is a friend of passengers aboard the Titan.
Mearns has told the BBC that the president of the Explorers Club (which is connected to the diving and rescue community), provided this new information.
If that's the Titan, it's the merciful outcome at this point. Almost no hope of rescue anymore, and this way we can be reasonably sure they didn't suffer.
If that's the Titan, it's the merciful outcome at this point. Almost no hope of rescue anymore, and this way we can be reasonably sure they didn't suffer.
I'm kindof surprised they didn't design it with a cable from a ship that could be used to lower and raise it. Seems like in that case they could have pulled it up as soon as they lost...
I'm kindof surprised they didn't design it with a cable from a ship that could be used to lower and raise it. Seems like in that case they could have pulled it up as soon as they lost communication.
My guess though is some kind of leak and instant death
The cable would have to be over 2 miles long, and you'd also need a ship with a massive winch capable of reeling in all that steel. I know very little about submarine engineering but just based on...
The cable would have to be over 2 miles long, and you'd also need a ship with a massive winch capable of reeling in all that steel. I know very little about submarine engineering but just based on the photos I've seen of this sub they probably didn't have the budget for that.
You might be thinking of the little rovers they sent out to explore the dive in closer proximity, namely the Jason Jr. from back in the day. In pictures you can see it tethered, but it's just a...
You might be thinking of the little rovers they sent out to explore the dive in closer proximity, namely the Jason Jr. from back in the day. In pictures you can see it tethered, but it's just a 300 foot fiber optic cable to allow for image data transfer back to the Alvin. Source at the bottom of this link.
The Titan, like the Challenger and the Alvin, is most likely using a Bathyscaphe sub. No tether, just an internal float for buoyancy.
I hope everyone is found and rescued safe and sound. I also wish this submarine had more safeties in place. I read that it can’t be opened from the inside so even if it surfaced it still needs to...
I hope everyone is found and rescued safe and sound. I also wish this submarine had more safeties in place. I read that it can’t be opened from the inside so even if it surfaced it still needs to be found to save everyone. This will probably impact all submersible missions in the future and hopefully it makes things more safe
I wouldn't trust an underwater vehicle controlled by a controller that is the equivalent of a plug & play dollar store video game console's controller in current days. But here we are. Let's hope...
I wouldn't trust an underwater vehicle controlled by a controller that is the equivalent of a plug & play dollar store video game console's controller in current days.
But here we are.
Let's hope they are still alive AND they find AND retrieve them (apparently that's also a thing people say might become impossible, even if they find them).
That's a silly thing to get hung up on. A video game controller is something specifically designed to make controlling motion easy and intuitive. Even the US Navy uses them to control periscopes....
controlled by a controller that is the equivalent of a plug & play dollar store video game console's controller
That's a silly thing to get hung up on. A video game controller is something specifically designed to make controlling motion easy and intuitive. Even the US Navy uses them to control periscopes. And they carry spares in case it gets broken. It's not a bad way of controlling a sub.
It is when they are using a wireless Bluetooth one that isn’t known for super reliability. But I would not trust my life to Bluetooth. They should have at least used a wired one. They already had...
It is when they are using a wireless Bluetooth one that isn’t known for super reliability. But I would not trust my life to Bluetooth. They should have at least used a wired one. They already had incidents of problems with the controller being iffy (one time they had to hold it upside down to get it to work. And another incident was filmed by a guy who filmed every step of his trip and they tried to keep him from posting that part).
It's not about "a controller" it's about the specific controller model used for this. It's far from "silly" to criticise the decision to use an extremely old model that is known for its connection...
It's not about "a controller" it's about the specific controller model used for this.
It's far from "silly" to criticise the decision to use an extremely old model that is known for its connection issues, aside from the bad idea to use a wireless one in the first place. That adds just so many additional ways for failure to this.
It depends. They could be bobbing near the surface, which is apparently not that easy to spot. If they are near the surface the rescue operation will be far more straightforward. And it's not...
It depends. They could be bobbing near the surface, which is apparently not that easy to spot. If they are near the surface the rescue operation will be far more straightforward. And it's not crazy for that to have happened, the set up of most submersibles is 'if something goes wrong, release ballast and go up'. Including like electrical failures and such.
The problem is they cannot open the sub from the inside, so even if they are near the surface they couldn't very easily climb out and get some air. They could still suffocate if they don't get out in time.
https://youtu.be/kz3sRab7elM This is a very well-done interview with a scientist who was trapped down there in an exploratory sub back in 2000. Highly encourage all to watch, he touches upon the...
This is a very well-done interview with a scientist who was trapped down there in an exploratory sub back in 2000. Highly encourage all to watch, he touches upon the subject with equal parts compassion, personal understanding, and stern realism. The reporter just sits back and lets him tell his story, it's very harrowing.
Similar vein, there is a documentary on Netflix: Last Breath that documents a professional diver at 330 feet who has his breathing cable severed and the race to find him before he runs out of air....
Similar vein, there is a documentary on Netflix: Last Breath that documents a professional diver at 330 feet who has his breathing cable severed and the race to find him before he runs out of air. Not quite the same thing, but a pretty harrowing watch.
So both the highest and lowest points of the planet are turning into graveyards for the bored and wealthy.
Really though, if those folks are indeed alive and not already on the surface, that's got to be a special kind of terrifying. The article mentions they've got 96 hours of oxygen on board, but what about power? I'd have to imagine hypothermia is a bigger problem at that depth than oxygen in the event of a power loss, no?
If you have the money to buy a quarter-million dollar bus ticket to the bottom of the ocean to take turns staring at a maritime grave through a porthole for funsies, I have no idea what constitutes adventure in your world.
Silly remarks aside, I do hope these people are found and returned safely. If they are, they'll certainly have a story to tell.
Value is relative. The cost of this tourist expedition is that other people are going to risk their own safety to find these people. If this this doesn't turn out like the last time this sub went missing, this company will cease to exist. We've seen this before at high elevations, the lines of slowly-dying tourists and their guides among the already dead, waiting their turn to take their selfies, trying to keep the litter out of frame.
I applaud what you're teaching your kid, but I feel this sort of extreme tourism isn't quite the same.
It's worth noting that it does seem like the tourists are also subsidizing researchers to some extent, so beyond just rich-person utility there is seemingly some value being generated:
And unrelated, but that Twitter thread is wild. How can you engineer something for such an extreme environment and not have some contingency plans such as a detachable EPIRB.
Or a manually detachable block of ballast, bathyscaphe style. If all goes to shit, pull the lever and you'll be going up.
Apparently, they did have those: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65957709
In the video, the journalist mentions detachable ballast that can be removed by getting everyone to one side of the sub and 'rolling' the ballast off. It does seem likely that the sub has either gotten stuck or there was a failure in the capsule. Or they have surfaced but not been found yet.
Ohh, I see. The articles on the topic have been a bit hard to scour for technical info. Makes complete sense to have removable ballast. If I'm not mistaken, it's unusual to not have it in a civilian sub.
And I'm kind of considering the same outcomes. Stuck is a weird one, it seems very reckless to me to dive into places where that could happen. But hey, we can't rule out reckless. But beyond that, it's sink or surface. A satellite phone and a gps receiver are cheap, so I doubt that surfaced but not found is very likely.
Also, what the hell kind of an approach is "all hands astern" and rolling the ballast off? I get that it works, but it might not be too reliable and might trigger unintendedly. I think I see what they were trying to do - avoiding any additional hull penetrations, particularly mechanical ones. Still...
If I recall rightly, it takes 4 hours to descend in this thing, and they lost contact after 1h45. If that's the case, it would seem the failure occurred before it reached the bottom, which doesn't bode well.Edit, I'm wrong, this article says the dive time is 90 minutes. So it sounds like they would have lost contact shortly after it arrived at the bottom.
That is quite ominous I think. If a vehicle disappears shortly after reaching the point where the forces on it are greatest then there is an explanation that seems more likely than any other: the sub's hull failed.
I hadn't realized it was a Bahamas-based company. That actually explains how they got away with such shoddy safety measures. Cruiselines are based out of the Bahamas for their lax safety and employee regulations as well as their tax rules.
I'm not saying the Bahamas suck, I'm saying their laws are favorable to maritime fuckery. Which is how we get water craft that aren't safety tested and certified. like the craft that went missing. I won't say I'm sad for the loss, because I'm not. But I am sympathetic to the entirely terrifying way to die that is likely happening right now. I feel bad for the victims, but I have no sympathy for the CEO down there. He knowingly or unknowingly led the others to their grave.
This reminds me of a trip I took to the Bahamas. I stayed at a friend's place and met some of their neighbors. One was a man in his 50s who had two adult sons. The man was a bit of an adventurer who had done a lot of mountain climbing (IIRC including Mt. Everest) and other risky sporty endeavors. I went fishing with him and his sons on his boat and had a great time (i mainly observed them spear fishing and helped cleaning the fish). I later found out from my friend after I returned home that the father and his sons had been arrested for drug smuggling (the smuggling involved their boat). I bring this up because, after that Bahamas experience, I associate people taking extreme physical risks (the mountain climbing, etc.) with risk taking in other areas of life (breaking the law, working with drug smugglers). Maybe there's something to the personality of an extreme risk taker being willing to ignore safety concerns. Sort of like how CEOs often have sociopathic personality traits (maybe the OceanGate CEO had traits of both).
I think it’s valid to question why someone can, and whether they should, spend 5-7 years of an average person’s income on an 2-3 day adventure. It’s good to ask: Is this kind of ability and choice to spend so much money on this moral and ethical? So I wouldn’t chalk that up to envy, but rather philosophical frustration.
Fair enough.
Yeah but then you also need to ask yourself that question when you go to Disneyland. Or even do a weekend-trip up to the folks.
And don't get me wrong, it is a valid question to ask, but I also automatically do things like spend 100€ at rituals without thinking much about it if I've already decided I'm going to buy stuff at rituals today. And if you think about it, that's an absolutely crazy amount to spend on a slightly parfumed version of what you get for 5€ at a supermarket.
Sorry if this is veering off topic, but what kind of rituals are these and what perfumed supermarket items are you buying?
Aaah, sorry. Rituals is a specific brand of cosmetic. They're known for a comparatively strong smell, and having "lines" of smells with a very strong marketing identity to each line.
The fact that they're spending so much money is inextricably linked to the difficulty of reaching their destination, and therefore of rescue or retrieval attempts. To bring back the Everest comparison, The bodies and refuse stay there largely because they're so difficult to retrieve. Dying doing something stupid in a random state park is unfortunate, but unlikely to permanently damage even a small area of that park. Even cave divers are unlikely to cause serious harm to the ecology of the caves if their remains are unable to be retrieved.
It's not JUST the money they're spending. Amplified money means amplified impact.
And we wouldn’t have Titanic and some of James Cameron’s other movies without his fascination for the deep sea and his trips down there himself. The Abyss is my favorite.
I’m not envious at all, you’re the one bringing that into question and then trying to close down the discussion you responded to. Again I’ll reiterate, the only reason they can do this in the first place is their vast amount of wealth. I’m not jealous of people spending 5x the annual salary to explore the ruins of the titanic, that’s presumptuous and frankly rude. I could make the same assumption based on how much you’re defending this. These people took a serious risk from someone who claimed to skirt safety laws, this is just as much on them as it is the ceo. It is an unfortunate consequence of taking such a deep and dangerous expedition.
It almost seems disingenuous comparing this to someone speeding in a Tesla or being lost in the woods as if they’re comparable at all. Is bringing up something I deem relevant in regards to the topic off the table, is that not what a forum or discussion is for? Because this is a pretty blatant case of people’s immense wealth and privilege affording them this dangerous expedition that put them at risk.
If you want to defend the Musks and Bezos of the world wasting millions on spaceships and underwater expeditions by all means go ahead but not everybody is going to see it that way, so I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Having experiences is one thing, and in a vacuum I would agree that it's admirable, but there are externalities that make this sort of thing a much bigger problem. The degradation of Mount Everest, both environmentally and as a site of spiritual significance to the Nepali people, is absolutely not admirable. I think the story of this submarine is too new to fully understand the ramifications, but will they be sending someone to retrieve it? Has the impact on the local environment been considered?
Having the curiosity to experience things is beautiful, but choosing to have those experiences at the cost of damaging or destroying the thing that you're experiencing isn't admirable, it's selfish and contemptible. That's not even examining the other, better things that money could be used for if we as a society didn't allow such a small subsection of the population to hoard it.
I agree with everything you’ve said here, but I don’t think the impact on the local environment will be very detrimental. A tiny sub is just nothing compared to the titanic, it’s not adding much. Almost nothing lives that deep, usually, but wrecks can start off little ecosystems if spore happens to float that way and stick to it - we sink things on purpose sometimes for this reason.
You're most likely correct, especially if this is the last time an expedition like this is made. Part of the problem of Everest is volume. If a handful of people had died or left significant waste up there over the years, it would probably be barely noticeable now. I do think it's possible that there may be ramifications that we aren't expecting, and I don't trust the designers of this sub to have been more cautious with the local ecosystem than with their customer's lives, but it would be unfair of me to take those possibilities into account with my judgement of this particular situation. My issue is more with "extreme tourism" as a whole than with this particular case.
I do judge those who chose to ride the Titanic as a pleasure cruise somewhat, yeah. Not quite as much, since they were specifically sold the expectation that the Titanic would be unsinkable, and the very fact that humans could impact the environment wasn't nearly as well understood, but I do still judge them a bit.
As far as what this mission destroyed, as I mentioned, the situation is still too new to fully understand the impact to the environment. I'm struggling to find out how much fuel would have been on board, and as of right now we have no idea how well contained that fuel is, which isn't even taking into account the environmental impact of the usage of that fuel if nothing has gone wrong at all. The materials used to build it are also very different from the steel and wood the Titanic was built with. We also don't know how much fuel will be expended searching for the submarine for rescue or recovery.
If this was the only time this ever happened, it would probably have very little ecological impact. I can't argue with that. My issue is not with the one trip, it's with the entire idea that a wealthy person's right to experience something novel trumps any ecological or cultural responsibility.
You could counter by pointing out the wasteful and harmful things that we all do every day, but there's a huge difference of degree. The wealthy engaging in this type of tourism are using far more resources per capita than, say, a mother using gas to take her children to the zoo. Less wealthy people also have far fewer options, and aren't always able to choose the sustainable options that are available to the wealthy.
This argument must be chalked up to no ethical consumption under capitalism. We can't scrutinize every choice everyone makes that has negative externalities, because they will always exist, but there are matters of degree. This is both wasteful far above the levels that the average person is guilty of, and also does not serve a practical purpose.
To be fair to me, I didn't bring it up, I responded to a conversation that was already happening, so the timing isn't really under my control. I'm also not sure what other concerns the focus could be on in order to prevent it from happening again, as the safety angle is already well covered. I can promise that I'm not envious of these people, or of those climbing Everest or partaking in space tourism, for all the good it will do.
I am sorry if this conversation put a damper on your spirits, and I hope that if we come across each other again it will be with clean slates and open minds.
Which makes me wonder. If you have the technology to go that deep, surely it would be better to simply send an unmanned, remote controlled vehicle, record beautiful footage and share that with the world? The idea that millionaires are paying a tonne of money in a dangerous mission to see something on a small monitor is crazy to me.
There is indeed a single porthole for viewing.
It’s like a million dollars in gasoline per trip. I don’t find that admirable.
I think it's 96 hours of life support. Not sure if that's limited by power or oxygen.
Ah, you are correct.
Interesting question. The deep sea is always at a constant temperature of 4°C. Dangerous in minutes if you're in the water itself, but I think sitting in 4°C air without any wind chill moving heat away from your body, in a T-shirt and jeans, you should be fine as long as you're not starving.
The most horrifying thing is they're sealed in from the outside. Even if they surfaced and are bobbing along, they can't get out of that sub unless they're found. They can still run out of oxygen while no longer submerged.
Just, damn.
That seems like a major design flaw to me and highly irresponsible too. How did this thing ever get approval to be launched? Do submarines even require approval or certification of any kind? You probably don't know either but these are just questions that come to mind. It seems insane to me that this could actually happen.
Apparently more than 3 dozen experts signed a letter to the company warning about potential catastrophic problems, citing their lack of following safety standards (despite advertising that they would)
it keeps getting worse:
if I'm reading that right, the hull was made of carbon fiber (I think I read elsewhere it was 5 inches thick). which is a very strong, high-tech material, but not magic.
the repeated changes in pressure as the sub dives and resurfaces causes stresses on the carbon fiber, which can eventually lead to it cracking. and they knew this from testing of a scale model.
the director of marine operations raised concerns about it, and was (allegedly) fired over it.
one of the things he proposed was doing non-destructive testing / inspection of the hull to find those possible cracks. and the response was that it's impossible, due to the thickness of the hull. which is understandable to a point, but that seems like an absolutely glaring design flaw if the hull is prone to cracks and it's impossible to inspect for the cracks.
the one tiny silver lining to this is that if the hull did indeed fail in this way, death was likely instantaneous and painless for everyone on board. the other equipment failure scenarios that are possible would have them sitting on the seafloor, slowly suffocating and/or freezing to death.
At this point, I'd say that's not a silver lining, but the second-best outcome besides a successful rescue since that means no prolonged suffering. The fact that instant death ranks as the second best scenario is pretty dang horrifying.
If your interpretation is accurate, that makes this situation even more horrifying and infuriating. This already seemed like a preventable accident, but this would mean OceanGate ignored and fired their own employees for expressing valid safety concerns.
I think a successful rescue at this point is as close as you can get to 0% probability while still technically being non-zero.
the only plausible rescue scenario I can think of is if, due to the way the ballast works, they accidentally jettisoned the ballast and rose to the surface, but in an uncontrolled way that placed them far away from the control ship, out of radio range. and they've just been bobbing around on the surface waiting for a Coast Guard plane or ship to spot them.
if they're still underwater, they're either dead (least bad case) or slowly dying (horrific case). even if the rescue effort were able to locate them on the seafloor, sending down a rescue submersible wouldn't be an option. something like the SRDRS has a maximum depth that is less than half of the depth where they are; and the Titan does not have anything resembling the escape system that modern full-size submarines have.
Agreed to the probability. Currently they have included planes in their searches, precisely to help them look for the submarine bobbing on the surface. They started yesterday with planes but not the day before, from what I hear because the weather conditions didn't allow it. Not an expert by any means, but 'weather conditions were bad' implies to me that it's possible the sub, once it came to the surface, could have been blown further away from the original spot. My hope is that it will get spotted by a plane, it seems the best change of them being alive.
The titan did apparently have sister subs that may be capable of going that deep, but we are running out of time rapidly to locate and save them if they are that deep under still.
One of my friends is a physicist who works with military submarines, amongst other things. His first response is that 'it has imploded into itself' was the most likely event. Which means they're already dead, likely instantly without pain or suffering, and there is very little left of the submarine.
Btw, half the problem is that this was a private sub. It in no way shape or form came near the type of safety standards the military would apply.
Skipping NDT on composite structures is a really, really bad idea. I work with composites every day at work and I've seen specimens fail at half their expected load capability because of bond voids.
Holy shit, that is…. damning to say the least. Instantaneous death would be a godsend compared to being crammed side-by-side in a tiny vessel in the pitch black waiting for the oxygen to run out. Oof. What a nightmare.
Call it irony, or karma, but..OceanGate's CEO was amongst the passengers on the sub. I have been following the latest update's on BBC and the company has confirmed as much. 5 passengers, oldest one 77, youngest 19, and amongst them the CEO.
This man refused to make testing and safety a priority for his subs, decided to launch them without the proper testing complete, and was arrogant enough to get on board himself in spite of all of this.
And it could never well cost him his life, if he hasn't passed away already.
Wow… Safety really was NOT a priority for those idiots. This is just another example of why it is important to listen to experts and have other people review your work. If they listened to those people, this crisis might have been prevented.
The CEO of the company is on board of the sub. He will have to likely pay the highest price for those mistakes.
That's good. Shame he had to take other people to his watery grave with him.
Yeah but I’d like to see him face the lawsuits and legal ramifications and public condemnation.
Bear with me while I lay down some quickly googled facts. I’ll pull them together at the end.
So, even if that sub could have been opened from the inside, they’d be in big fucking trouble in waves that are at best the same size and at worst almost 5 times as high as their vessel. Waves that big would roll them around too, so you open it a crack and suddenly that crack is underneath you and you’re filling with water. There are also no seats or anything inside, so they’d all be being flung into each other ie it would be extremely hard to get anything open anyway.
All that to say that I don’t think their chances would be very much better in a sub that opened from the inside
I just want to put this out here: from when I first heard of this, this detail just made me think of the game Iron Lung. A horror game where you're sealed into a submersible, with the expectation that you'll probably die down there. If you live and manage to return with photos, great! There's not really high hopes for that though.
Even then, at least that game let the player control the sub. From what I've gathered, this one doesn't.
I'm claustrophobic just watching this. Essentially a steel coffin with a toilet.
Hope they remembered to put in new batteries before they left.
Image if it’s the Bluetooth receiver or it’s computer that messed up…
Surely they have redundancies in place to control the sub without Bluetooth.. right? Lord, the amount of issues I have with every single BT device I've ever encountered.
Up up down down left right - and a steering wheel plops out?
My bluetooth controllers reliably lose connection to the console... seems ridiculous to use bluetooth connection to control something that will get you killed if you lose control.
The rich guy brought his bluetooth headset and 90 minutes into the dive it managed to supercede the gamepad connection and now it's all drive-by-asking-alexa.
Thanks for this, that is considerably smaller than I expected.
That’s a claustrophobic nightmare for one, I can’t imagine for five….
Geezus, that's so weird. Some of these ideas are of course actually sensible, like using a modern game controller (like) device for controls, steer by wire, cool cool. But an actual Logitech controller you buy off of Amazon? That's a bit weird.
Also the fact that it has nothing built in. It's a metal tube with a toilet that doubles as the actual seat of the viewport. And that viewport is the only reason you're down there in the first place, since if you just see it on a screen there's no reason to be in the submersible. But there's nothing else.
Well, that is what I would call terrifying.
And the outside of the sub is white?
If you’ve got seven ways to surface in an emergency, why not do yourself one more favor and make sure you’re a color that can easily be spotted among whitecap waves from the air?
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-65953941
Also, they were apparently charging $250k per person which means the families likely have enough money to effectively sue them and not let the company's lawyers run out the clock with delays, regardless of any liability waivers those aboard may have signed. So I suspect this company is very likely about to go bust, even if the people aboard are eventually found and rescued.
There are so many terrible parts of this story:
Ugh. If they are going to die I really hope it was instantaneous.
News likely isn't reporting this because they don't want family or public to despair before there is absolute certainty of their death - but the more likely scenario is that the sub imploded or had other safety features go wrong. Most likely they are already dead and died suddenly.
Of course I hope I am entirely wrong about this and they still get saved. But at least it's more likely it was quick than the worse alternative, being trapped for days and eventually suffocating.
They must be spending insane amounts on this rescue mission. That makes me think that there must still be some amount of hope. Below a certain percentage of likelihood of rescue coastguards etc usually call off the search. Unless the families are paying?
I would love to see who pays for that search mission. Imagine a very small number of millionaires and billionaires have a vanity project that has no scientific or otherwise public value. It goes awry and the public spends tons of money on an almost certainly futile effort to save the individuals. Who pays? I'm sure the company will get sued anyway, but I would very much like to see that money put on their tap or those of the participants as well.
If I did something stupid (boarding a sub that has no public safety clearance) for no good reason (to show off) and fucked up, I would imagine to have to pay for the fall-out from it.
The internet looses its damn collective mind about this story while last week hundreds (yes hundreds) of refugees died in the Mediterranean on a single ship that went under and no one bat an eye. WTF.
You’ve raised a good point there about what the news focuses on. I think the answer to why is that we generally enjoy reading about hubris over tragedy. We can comfort ourselves and say “I would never be so stupid/cocky/selfish to do that” about the titanic trip, but we all know that those poor people seeking asylum are there as an accident of birth, and it could so easily have been any one of us.
I fully agree with what you said.
And it's an accident spread out over several days, with a clock running down for everyone to see. And it involves the Titanic in some way. That's gold for pretty much any news outlet...
This gives an idea of the enormous amount of resources put towards the search and rescue (well, likely recovery) effort:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65957990
There seems to be quite a bit of military and major government rescue organization involvement here. I expect that they see this as serving as a better opportunity for training than a training exercise would be. They'd likely be spending the money anyway, but it would be on training exercises with no real stakes and with contrived scenarios. Here, they have the opportunity to do something that fits within their general goals, involves far more unknowns than they'd be able to put into a training exercise, lets them practice all their ingenuity and utilize all their fanciest equipment on a mission at the edge of possibility, and rather than involving the potential for a "good job" sticker, involves real lives at stake, even if they are the lives of bumbling rich people. They likely get far better information on what works and doesn't work than they would in training.*
From a naval perspective, "can we find, and potentially recover, a sub we hadn't heard about until today, far deeper than we're used to, with a carbon fiber hull, in the middle of the Atlantic, in a few days, with lives at stake" is probably more valuable than something like "can we find this sub we're all familiar with pretending to hide from us".
And, of course, there's the significant PR benefit here. You can pay as much as you like for recruitment advertisements; you're not going to get days of top-headline international news coverage of you doing something cool and exciting.
Then, if you're the organization to find it, there's the enormous reputational benefit. The cave rescue in Thailand was years ago, and hundreds of millions of people around the world probably have views on the Thai Navy and British cave rescuers (and know that there are impressive British cave rescue organizations in the first place) that are influenced by that. If, eg, you're on a sub in a war 20 years from now, and you remember that your enemy found a tiny carbon fiber tube 4km down in the middle of the Atlantic, that's going to have an effect on morale.
As to why this rather than the Mediterranean sinking: unfortunately, likely because that isn't really challenging and rewarding training from an operational side, just a political one, and isn't a great PR opportunity.
(* For example, look at the most recent "our logistics and communications coordinating with an outside group during a crisis just brought an ROV to the back of our plane that we can't actually get to fit inside, oops".)
I think it's partially because most folk are humane enough to do everything they can to rescue them in spite of the odds. The other part is that family probably can and would pay. Tickets were 250K per person, these were millionaire families who can afford to put all their savings forwards this if needed
Yes but it isn’t only about humanity. I’m sure the coastguard would prefer to keep searching in many missing persons cases, but resources are limited and there comes a point where the likelihood of rescue is so small that they stop searching. I don’t think you can call them inhumane for that.
Remember the boy who jumped off the boat in the Bahamas and was lost? They searched for 2 or 3 days I think, before making the call to stop. They cannot search forever. So the fact that they are (or were, as of when I wrote that) still searching makes me think that either they have a higher chance of finding them or that someone is paying privately for the search to continue.
I agreed, they would have to make the call at some point. In this case I think it's a bit easier because they have a set time until they expect oxygen to run out, and up until that point there is still a chance of survival. I reckon if there's no rescue by 11BST, they might try for a few more hours, let's say 6 or so, and then start to reduce the number of boats and planes they keep on the sight.
Really good point about there being a sort of obvious time to dial back the search. One article said they’ve got about 12 hours of oxygen left, but multiple are reporting that they’re still picking up that regular banging noise. So, fingers crossed
To be clear, I personally believe what's most likely is that the sub imploded and they are already dead, and the noises are from something else.
If they are alive though, they are on the sub with an extremely experienced diver who has been on many of those missions. He would know the frequency for the banging, but he + the CEO would also be aware how much oxygen is available. If we are lucky, the diver has kept them calm and rested, and helped them practice how to breathe in a way that preserves this as long as possible. The rescue mission is aware of the skills of those on board, and the sounds may be from them, so I think that's why they are still trying.
There is a French ship arriving with an ROV that can get down to the right depth tonight. So they will have maybe 8 or so hours (and the math on the life support could be wrong) to locate it exactly and see if it the problem is something the ROV can assist with. It's possible the sub is just stuck under some collapsed Titanic debris that an ROV would be able to knock off. It's still a very very slim chance, but if they're able to triangulate the noise in time, there's at least a chance.
5 people on board and they are somewhere near the Titanic. I presume they are limited on oxygen. If, according to the article, the trip takes 8 hours underwater lets say they have 10x the amount of oxygen they need then they have around 3-3.5 days to find them.
O thing I found interesting is that the Titanic sits around 12,500ft down. This sub is capable of diving to depths of 13,123ft. That does not leave much margin for error. I have no idea when the surrounding area around the Titanic looks like, but lets say there is a trench. One is really threading the needle with only 623ft differential between the expected depth and the maximum depth of the vessel.
From the BBC article linked above
Can we just talk about a company only making one submersible that goes that deep? Aside from the safety standards not being great for the sub in question, they also seemingly didn't consider this exact scenario - if only one can go this deep, what do you use for rescue if there are any issues and the sub can't come back up?
They have a number of ways) to pop back to the surface
The answer is as simple as unsatisfactory: robots. Robots don't need pressure vessels, so they are much simpler to build for these environments. The problem with that is that you only have limited options in terms of intervening. But for example cutting the Titanic's structure up if the sub is stuck, or cutting off the ballast of the Titan seem plausible to me. You don't need to (probably even can't) evacuate the passengers into another vessel. And if the sub is not buoyant after removing ballast, then the people aboard are dead anyway, because the hull has failed.
FWIW, they probably have more margin beyond 13,123 - 12,500. IOW, I am assuming the 13,123 is max working depth, not "crush" depth...
Wuf - $250k ticket price!
'a 3 hour tour...the lil ship was tuff...'
i've seen so many people "celebrating" that a bunch of people might die a really scary and painful death just because... they have money.
what the hell happened to compassion?
"oh but they have no compassion to others!" someone said on twitter.
I think even if you don't have empathy for the two millionaires, or the CEO of the submarine company, at the least you should have empathy for the 19 year old, who did this with his dad.
It was the responsibility of his dad to make sure the journey they were taking was safe. As a literal teen the only thing he was guilty of was trusting his parents. I think nobody deserves this fate but that teen should be above all scrutiny no matter how heartless you are.
While I strongly agree with what you’re saying, I can’t believe the lack of empathy some people have, I would also like to point out the company ignored safety warnings and the ceo is on the sub. The irony of that isn’t lost on me.
I think it’s atrocious that some of these private companies make these things that aren’t safe but because they’re private they’re allowed to get away with it. I hope this incident makes them regulate the safety of these private tours or whatever they call it
I think that might change after this incident.
Re lack of compassion, yes, it's disturbing. I think the sympathy is tempered, though, by the fact that this endeavor was entirely voluntary, unnecessary, and clearly dangerous. The Greece tragedy involved people presumably desperate for a better life, not trying to take a cool trip.
I have to agree with this. No matter how much money was spent or how the safety issues were not addressed, the fact is that lives are at stake here. I'm really hoping that they can all be rescued after the sub is found (hopefully they can be found).
Although the safety issues raised are just crazy to me that this was still allowed to move forward.
This will be my first post here and it is a really touchy subject; I am sorry if I come across as rude or malicious, it's truly not my intention. That said, I feel like there is some perspective I can add here.
To say that I would be celebrating their death is a bit strong, but in the billionaire case I feel like it would make the world a better place. Let me try to explain:
Happiness is not a linear scale. For most people, $10000 is a life changing sum. If you have $1m of wealth, this $10000 will not be life changing anymore. But it will be for someone else. At some point it becomes unethical to have too much money, because that same amount could make many more people so much happier. If you have 10$bln of wealth, you could change the life of every single person living in Djibouti for instance(approx. 1 million). A more detailed breakdown can be found here.
Yes, they are not genocidal maniacs. But the combined accumulation of wealth for so very little benefit(from what I can see, I may be ignorant as to what the wealth is used for) seemingly results in genocidal-scale destruction. So their only sin is that they are rich, but it ends up being a pretty big sin in my book.
When a billionaire dies, that money gets redistributed. It may not lead to any visible change, or it may not even lead to any change at all for the poorer people of the world, but it could. If even 1% of that wealth goes to charity, then tens of thousands of people may be saved from starvation or disease.
In conclusion, I wouldn't really be happy if he died, but I would be happy about the non-zero possibility of his death leading to the saving of many more lives.
Look, I understand where you're coming from. Accumulation of wealth is a terrible thing that we must fight against.
However, I believe there is a major flaw in your argument.
It's unclear how a billionaire's fortune will be redistributed. It is quite possible that it will remain largely concentrated in the hands of a few equally unethical heirs or entities -- or maybe they're even less ethical.
So the good that would come from their death is impossible to measure or predict.
However, the suffering they are going through is very much tangible and easy to predict.
You are equating an abstract, theoretical good to very tangible and dramatic human suffering.
Yes, this has been bothering me as well. I can't imagine the suffering these people are going through, and I feel nothing but compassion for them. Regardless of how rich and stupid they are. No one should go through this. It's horrifying.
Search under way for tourist submarine missing on dive to wreck of Titanic
The Guardian – Edward Helmore & Leyland Cecco – 19th June 2023
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65953872
This article seems to be about the same sub that's lost, sounds like a big yikes to me. Lots of improvised parts, "one button" controls, navigation by text messages from the ship? For $250k/seat? Nope, nope nope nope.
And they perform maneuvers with what looks like the grey wireless version of those cheap blue Logitech F310s everyone used to own a few of.
People with lots of money can say they did that. A someone who already doesn't like the idea of being in a submarine underwater, no thank you. Someone else can spend that money. Too many things can go wrong and with my bad luck, they will.
A reporter for CBS did it years prior. They made him sign a waiver that basically said if he got injured or died they couldn't be held responsible.
Personally if they made me sign anything like that before going into the deep sea, I would refuse to board. Let alone board and take my child with me. It's insane.
I think those kinds of waivers are standard when the recreational activity involves some kind of risk. I signed one of them once when going skydiving (for the first and last time). My family and I also signed similar waivers when visiting an abandoned warehouse that an artists group turned into a temporary art gallery. That said, signing a waiver shouldn't remove the responsibility of the company for having a reasonably safe and tested submersible that meets industry standards. ETA: Re your second paragraph, yeah, no way would I go on that trip with a kid. Far too much risk, even under absolutely perfect circumstances. I am upset that they allowed a 19 year to go but then again the company took lots of needless risks.
OceanGate was warned of potential for ‘catastrophic’ problems with Titanic mission
...
Seems like the red tape was there for a reason.
The passengers have been confirmed: Hamish Harding, chairman of Action Aviation who's known for being an adventurer; Stockton Rush, CEO of OceanGate, the company that runs these expeditions; Paul-Henri Nargeolet, a Titanic expert who's led six expeditions to the wreckage; and Shahzada Dawood and Suleman Dawood, a Pakistani businessman and his son.
I won't lie, I gasped at Suleman. He's the youngest one there at 19. I can't imagine what's going through their minds right now... Somehow the idea of being trapped there with a relative feels even more disturbing to me than being alone, because you'd probably feel guilt for getting the other person into that situation.
I sincerely hope they're all found soon.
Looks like they have picked up some noise.
From what I've heard the noise hasn't been repeated since then. It could be them banging on the walls, could be something else entirely. The fact no similar noise has been reportedly detected again feels pretty bleak though.
I haven't read anything else but they do mention noises (plural) in the tweet. And a P-3 is an anti-submarine aircraft, it's whole raison d'être is trying to find subs that are trying to avoid detection so while it could be a false positive they're probably fairly decent at filtering those out.
It's also possible the US Navy might know if the sub catastrophically failed if there was a navy submarine in the area. Not sure they'd divulge that though so maybe this whole showing would proceed anyways.
But even if these guys are trapped somewhere and they are found, it's still very bleak. I'm not even sure if there is a ROV or HOV that can do 13,000 feet anywhere remotely nearby.
From a recent update I stumbled across in my news reading:
https://edition.cnn.com/americas/live-news/titanic-missing-sub-oceangate-06-21-23/h_7f0656bc13187bbe3d9448c500cb4050
The 30 minutes is really promising. One of the people on board is an extremely experienced diver, nicknamed Mr Titanic. He would know how to communicate effectively in these circumstances, and what they look for - banging for 3 minutes, every thirty minutes.
So it could be them.
That said, the BBC also wrote this:
So, yeah. There are all sorts of noises you can detect in the ocean, and it hasn't been verified with certainty that this is actually the submarine making noises.
The thing that worries me is that it could have been banging noises on tuesday, and they are getting less because the people on board are running out of strength. No idea if they have food and water on board.
Btw, the estimates of 96 hours are based on normal breathing. It's how long you have when you stay calm. If you panic, you use more. And can you imagine being in that situation and not panicking?
Well, I really hope they're able to reach them in some fashion because it certainly sounds like they are stuck down there...
Last I heard the noises had been repeated every 30 minutes.
I believe (can't find a source at the moment) that"banging for 3 minutes, on the hour and on the half-hour" is a standard for submarine rescue signalling - and there are experienced divers on board who would know that.Edit: Source
More information and updates: https://www.npr.org/2023/06/20/1183167120/titanic-submarine-hamish-harding
From the article: "But even if the crews can locate the vessel at a low depth, hauling it up to the surface is another task. The Titan could be at a depth of over 13,000 feet and a distance of over 900 miles offshore. Frederick said the search and rescue crews did not yet have salvage equipment in place."
"David Marquet, a retired U.S. Navy submarine captain, told NPR's Morning Edition that the odds of survival are "about 1%." "
I really hope it was instant, if worst comes to worst. The thought of still being down there is agonizing. I cannot imagine.
Quick update from BBC on this, seems like they found some debris:
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-65967464
Another update, looks like they found part of it:
If that's the Titan, it's the merciful outcome at this point. Almost no hope of rescue anymore, and this way we can be reasonably sure they didn't suffer.
I'm kindof surprised they didn't design it with a cable from a ship that could be used to lower and raise it. Seems like in that case they could have pulled it up as soon as they lost communication.
My guess though is some kind of leak and instant death
The cable would have to be over 2 miles long, and you'd also need a ship with a massive winch capable of reeling in all that steel. I know very little about submarine engineering but just based on the photos I've seen of this sub they probably didn't have the budget for that.
Weren't the previous subs that have gone down been tethered? i.e. the ones that Ballard and James Cameron used? So it's not impossible
You might be thinking of the little rovers they sent out to explore the dive in closer proximity, namely the Jason Jr. from back in the day. In pictures you can see it tethered, but it's just a 300 foot fiber optic cable to allow for image data transfer back to the Alvin. Source at the bottom of this link.
The Titan, like the Challenger and the Alvin, is most likely using a Bathyscaphe sub. No tether, just an internal float for buoyancy.
I hope everyone is found and rescued safe and sound. I also wish this submarine had more safeties in place. I read that it can’t be opened from the inside so even if it surfaced it still needs to be found to save everyone. This will probably impact all submersible missions in the future and hopefully it makes things more safe
I wouldn't trust an underwater vehicle controlled by a controller that is the equivalent of a plug & play dollar store video game console's controller in current days.
But here we are.
Let's hope they are still alive AND they find AND retrieve them (apparently that's also a thing people say might become impossible, even if they find them).
That's a silly thing to get hung up on. A video game controller is something specifically designed to make controlling motion easy and intuitive. Even the US Navy uses them to control periscopes. And they carry spares in case it gets broken. It's not a bad way of controlling a sub.
It is when they are using a wireless Bluetooth one that isn’t known for super reliability. But I would not trust my life to Bluetooth. They should have at least used a wired one. They already had incidents of problems with the controller being iffy (one time they had to hold it upside down to get it to work. And another incident was filmed by a guy who filmed every step of his trip and they tried to keep him from posting that part).
It's not about "a controller" it's about the specific controller model used for this.
It's far from "silly" to criticise the decision to use an extremely old model that is known for its connection issues, aside from the bad idea to use a wireless one in the first place. That adds just so many additional ways for failure to this.
It depends. They could be bobbing near the surface, which is apparently not that easy to spot. If they are near the surface the rescue operation will be far more straightforward. And it's not crazy for that to have happened, the set up of most submersibles is 'if something goes wrong, release ballast and go up'. Including like electrical failures and such.
The problem is they cannot open the sub from the inside, so even if they are near the surface they couldn't very easily climb out and get some air. They could still suffocate if they don't get out in time.
https://youtu.be/kz3sRab7elM
This is a very well-done interview with a scientist who was trapped down there in an exploratory sub back in 2000. Highly encourage all to watch, he touches upon the subject with equal parts compassion, personal understanding, and stern realism. The reporter just sits back and lets him tell his story, it's very harrowing.
Similar vein, there is a documentary on Netflix: Last Breath that documents a professional diver at 330 feet who has his breathing cable severed and the race to find him before he runs out of air. Not quite the same thing, but a pretty harrowing watch.