You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I just don’t understand the fascination with the Titanic
You wouldn't get me down there for love nor money but I totally understand the draw. It's the romance, the mythology and mystery of it. I rarely experience that emotional state these days because, well, the internet can reveal every mystery, and I'm lazy. But it's like when you're a kid and there's that huge tree that nobody has climbed, or the church tower, or the dark culvert that the brook runs into. Then later on, urban exploring, old mansions, trainyards etc... the buzz is delicious!
Or, cynic mode: it's all about the clout for social media 🙂
RIP
Anyone see the interview with Michael Harris on BBC news, 6.30ish? Ouch. Credible titanic site sub operator, was very direct on the risks and lack of testing etc. Said he wouldn't have got in it for a million dollars. Has been to the wreck 14 times in Ti sphere design subs.
It’s the romance, the mythology and mystery of it.
But the romance came after the fascination, and there is no mystery - it's the iceberg whodunit.
I guess the mythology is the alledged romance and mystery, so I'll give you that.
Sad conclusion to the incident.
But can't help thinking the gung-ho attitude of the CEO or Company are massively to blame.
Adventure tourism is a massive industry, whether it's a trek to Everest base camp, summiting Everest, plunging the depths of the ocean, going into space with Bezos or Branson or just a guided ride around the Lakes. There's risk involved in all of these - and more mundane activities.
Can't help thinking the more extreme end will find more niche adventures for those that can afford it.
Surprised that the solo British guy went on it though - sure I read he'd been down to the Challenger Deep on another submersible - the Titan looks very Heath Robinson in comparison (not sure Heath or Robinson would have put their name to it).
Sad end to the story, but not unexpected. I’m glad they didn’t suffer in any way
Calls for an investigation seem a bit pointless to me. Ultimately it’s clear that the vessel wasn’t fit for purpose, and had no place taking ‘tourists’, especially that poor 19 year old.
there is definitely a lesson to be learned here however for anyone else considering doing something similar, and I imagine anyone who is booked in to one of these tourist space flights is probably giving it a second thought now
Surprised that the solo British guy went on it though
It is a bit surprising. It sounded like he did a lot of adventuring so i would expect him to be able to assess risk. Maybe he decided that although it looked shonky he trusted that they had done the right work. A lot will come down to whether or not they properly assessed risks rather than what it appeared to be. I don't imagine the waivers will stand for much if they didnt take appropriate care
Calls for an investigation seem a bit pointless to me.
I think an investigation is very worthwhile, there are a lot of questions to be answered here, here are a few for starters:
- Was the fundamental design flawed or was there west and tear/deterioration in service
- Were all key components designed for this pressure with an adequate safety margin
- Was poor maintenance and inspection a problem
- What knowledge did the company have that some parts of the vessel were more at risk
- Who should be regulating and approving trips in vessels like this and did they do a good job?
No doubt much of this will come out in the inevitable law suits that will follow.
it’s the iceberg whodunit.
with possible twist of fire in the coal bunker hence steaming at full speed through a pre advised ice berg area
Calls for an investigation seem a bit pointless to me. Ultimately it’s clear that the vessel wasn’t fit for purpose, and had no place taking ‘tourists’, especially that poor 19 year old.
Probably more to close the loopholes that were being exploited than establish a cause at this stage. After all, it's obvious there are several billionaires out there that don't have an STW naval architecture degree and need protecting from something that's so obvious umpteen folk before them were taken in.
I imagine anyone who is booked in to one of these tourist space flights is probably giving it a second thought now
I think space flight is more tightly regulated though. Not least due to the risk of stuff falling on folk.
– Was the fundamental design flawed or was there west and tear/deterioration in service
Yes - there's a reason DSV's are usually spherical and not cylindrical.
– Were all key components designed for this pressure with an adequate safety margin
No, apparently the porthole was only certified to 1300m
– Was poor maintenance and inspection a problem
Yes - no non destructive ultrasound or similar was carried out before/after each mission
– What knowledge did the company have that some parts of the vessel were more at risk
Probably a fair bit - see gung-ho attitude of CEO and firing of 'Safety Expert'.
– Who should be regulating and approving trips in vessels like this and did they do a good job?
No one - it's not mandatory to get it type approved apparently, and Lloyds wouldn't insure it, so make of that what you will...
Deep sea tourism doesn't appear to be regulated, don't even know if you have to get a permit to dive Titanic like you do other wrecks.
Caveat the above with most of the info I got through reading news articles and other online sources.
I'm not Marine/Naval engineer but have an interest in wrecks etc through diving.
Watch last nights channel 4 news. It’s pretty damning. The ‘vessel’ had obviously been cobbled together in someone’s backstreet lock-up and been declared as ‘experimental’ to avoid having to comply with any regulations.
I’d be absolutely amazed if this all turns out to be legal. Which I’m sure the families of the dead wil be about to test
But the main point is that you’d have to be out of your ****ing mind to be agreeing to a trip as dangerous as that on some untested ‘experimental’ vehicle
Would you get on a plane that somebody had knocked up in their shed?
Calls for an investigation seem a bit pointless to me. Ultimately it’s clear that the vessel wasn’t fit for purpose, and had no place taking ‘tourists’, especially that poor 19 year old.
there is definitely a lesson to be learned here however for anyone else considering doing something similar,
would the point of an investigation not be to ensure that the right lessons are learned (eg it might be a need for testing/classification, it might be a need not to use carbon, it might be that it was a material aging thing, there will also be lessons on how you respond to an incident, and you think there should be lessons on who is allowed on board etc.)
RIP hopefully they didn’t suffer
<p style="text-align: left;">Titanics big sister had interesting career, from trying to tow a battleship to taking out a U-boat.</p>
I’ve partied in the dining suite a few times.
Glad to see @dirkpitt has fully investigated the cause.
Would you get on a plane that somebody had knocked up in their shed?
Maybe, if it had previously completed more than 50 flights, including some very difficult and challenging flights.
But I wouldn't get into any 22 foot submarine in which only one person can stretch their legs, and then travel down over 12000 feet just to look at a rusting wreck, no matter how well constructed and vigorously tested the sub might be.
Even WW2 German U-boats would have felt like palaces compared to that.
I’d be absolutely amazed if this all turns out to be legal. Which I’m sure the families of the dead wil be about to test
mmm… Im not sure. If you inherited billions would you waste it suing the relics of the company that will almost certainly go bust anyway? If the CEO survived I could see you might want to make a point but in the circumstances it would seem like an expensive way to try and prove a point.
But the main point is that you’d have to be out of your ****ing mind to be agreeing to a trip as dangerous as that on some untested ‘experimental’ vehicle
well, I’m inclined to agree with that, although it wasn’t its first trip and I can see that this would give you a false sense of security. People take huge risks all the time, many of them being catastrophic - they just aren’t usually as public.
But the romance came after the fascination, and there is no mystery – it’s the iceberg whodunit.
I guess the mythology is the alledged romance and mystery, so I’ll give you that.
I think it demonstrates the arrogance of man’s belief the ship to be unsinkable hence the lack of life boats and the fact it foundered on its maiden voyage adds to the notoriety. It did lead to positive outcomes regards life boat provision and the establishment of the ice patrol though.
@tonyf1 although not it’s maiden voyage, there do appear to be some parallels here, especially if an inquest brings about some regulation as an output of this tragedy.
A quick wiki on ‘Alvin’ DSV certainly makes you think the craft was far from capable.
Actually, the lack of lifeboats wasn’t because it was ‘unsinkable’. The regulations applied to other ships as well. I believe they effectively did a hazard analysis which said “How could this sort of ship sink.?” Essentially they decided that if it hit rocks it would be close enough to shore not to need enough for everyone because they could essentially shuttle people ashore. If they hit another ship they reckoned it would stay afloat long enough for rescue to arrive. They just didn’t factor in icebergs. There was logic in the regulations, but it was sadly flawed.
I think it demonstrates the arrogance of man’s belief the ship to be unsinkable
I think that is part of the mythology. It was never claimed that the Titanic was unsinkable.
In reference to both the Olympic and Titanic the claim that White Star Line made was :
"as far as it is possible to do so, these two wonderful vessels are designed to be unsinkable"
The Olympic, which was pretty much identical, never sunk.
RIP hopefully they didn’t suffer
Equivalent of the Eiffel Tower landed on them, doubt they even knew what was happening
But the main point is that you’d have to be out of your ****ing mind to be agreeing to a trip as dangerous as that on some untested ‘experimental’ vehicle
I wonder what the share price of Branson's company is doing right now...
Hopefully tanking as he's a greasy weaselly shitbag
RIP hopefully they didn’t suffer
Equivalent of the Eiffel Tower landed on them, doubt they even knew what was happening
A nautical expert on a programme earlier said the pressure at that depth is something like 350psi, and that a pinhole would cause a jet of water that would slice through a human like a laser cutter - for a fraction of a second, until the whole thing is crushed like a Coke can. Nobody would have been able to even react, it would have been almost instantaneous. Which is at least a blessing. I doubt very much any human remains will ever be found, they will join those lost with Titanic, which is classified as a marine gravesite, IIRC.
The living (now dead) embodiment of the phrase ‘ just because you can, doesn’t mean you should’
A nautical expert on a programme earlier said the pressure at that depth is something like 350psi
I thought they were about 3000 meters down, which would be about 300 atmospheres, so more like 4000 psi. The pressure on a 12 inch diameter circle would exert a force of around 200 tons.
Bloke on 5live said earlier that as vessel was largely made of carbon fibre it's still a relatively untried material for this kind of use.
Assuming a sea water density of 8.68 ppg, and that the incident happened at the same depth as the Titanic, 12500 ft The pressure would be ~5600 psi.
This is as reported on the Beeb.
The aunt of the 19 yo lad that lost his life says he told her he was terrified of the upcoming mission. He went ahead with it to please his dad on Fathers Day over there. Desperately sad.
Condolences to the bereaved. Sadly the outcome was not unexpected from the moment the disappearance was reported.
RIP hopefully they didn’t suffer
Equivalent of the Eiffel Tower landed on them, doubt they even knew what was happening
Someone on Reddit worked out that the vessel would have taken 0.025 seconds to implode at the pressures it was at assuming it went the second they lost contact. Seeing as it takes 0.125 seconds for the pain signal to reach the brain and then get processed it's likely they had no idea it was happening until it had happened. Even if it took 1/4 second to crush them they wouldn't have had the time to realised what was happening, some comfort to the families I hope.
The aunt of the 19 yo lad that lost his life says he told her he was terrified of the upcoming mission. He went ahead with it to please his dad on Fathers Day over there. Desperately sad.
I think "press-gang" is the term for this.
Rip an avoidable tragedy 🙁
Glad to see @dirkpitt has fully investigated the cause
Ironic comment? Dirk Pitt is a Clive Cussler character from the National Underwater and Marine Agency (NUMA), which does exist (now) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Underwater_and_Marine_Agency
RIP hopefully they didn’t suffer
+1
The implosion would happen in under 20 milliseconds, faster than our brain could comprehend. Let's hope that the failure wasn't obvious before this
Seeing as it takes 0.125 seconds for the pain signal to reach the brain and then get processed
Does it take a different path when you get a cricket ball in the nuts? Touring all the other areas of the body first just to tell them 'watch this!'
Coming out now that noise of an implosion was heard on Monday.
Im guessing the military know what the sound of an implosion sounds like, but I guess they keep looking as you just do until you know oxygen would have definitely run out or you can see the outcome with you own eyes
RIP all on board. Some lessons possibly will have been learnt from this
They are also saying that as it was being used in international waters there is no regulatory authority involved so no testing, inspection, compliance or anything like that required.
"These men were... protecting the world's oceans."
I have to take issue with this nonsense at the end of the official statement about protecting the ocean. They were doing the opposite for vanity.
I think what annoyed me was that OceanGate didn’t have a remote vehicle with them to use in an emergency, all the safety aspects were designed into the submersible.
They would have known exactly what had happened within hours instead of it being days and relying on other peoples equipment to confirm the situation.
Still oddest place in the world for a Logitech game controller to end up.
Rockhopper
They are also saying that as it was being used in international waters there is no regulatory authority involved so no testing, inspection, compliance or anything like that required.
Thank goodness... all the HSSE fairies rubbing their hands together for the opportunity to regulate yet something else.
Would you get on a plane that somebody had knocked up in their shed?
You used to be able to .. and I have before it was over regulated.
Back when they were being made in sheds one specific commercial company (Mainair) had a design flaw and the Jesus bolt (holds the wings to the frame) was prone to snapping unlike the ones people literally made in sheds that were aware and over specified and had double safety.
As a kid my dad, uncle and their mate made microlights and an auto giro (the autogiro was only ever towed behind a car).
This led to the government rewarding Mainair by giving them the right to certify microlights and prevent those being made in sheds being flown thus giving them the market to produce shoddy minimal designs.
The five people who died on the Titan submersible were "true explorers", the company who operated the dive has said.
They really weren't.
Live by the sub, die by the sub I say.
Some right claptrap being spouted this morning not least:
Guillermo Söhnlein, a co-founder of OceanGate, has rejected some of the criticisms directed at the company over safety and certification.
Söhnlein left the company 10 years ago but still retains a minority stake.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, he said those commenting on the Titan's safety, including film director James Cameron, were not fully informed.
"People keep equating certification with safety and are ignoring the 14 years of development of the Titan sub," he says.
"Any expert who weighs in on this, including Mr Cameron, will also admit that they were not there for the design of the sub, for the engineering of the sub, for the building of the sub and certainly not for the rigorous test programme the sub went through."
Söhnlein said it had been a "tragic loss for the ocean exploration community" but anyone who operates in the deep ocean "knows the risk of operating under such pressure and that at any given moment... you run the risk of this kind of implosion".
He added that he thought technology and innovation can outpace regulation and developers are in a better position to understand the risks and best minimise them.
All reeks of tech bro "I'm a disruptor so it's fine for me to move fast and break stuff"
Lessons in this outside submarines
Safety regulations are written in blood…
It’s OK to push the boundaries in the cause of development - that’s the way progress is made - but to charge people, billionaires or not, disclaimers or not - to do so isn’t.
Absolutely agree
All reeks of tech bro “I’m a disruptor so it’s fine for me to move fast and break stuff”
Lessons in this outside submarines
Well that is similar to what was said about Theranos after that started to go tits up, the attitude isn't compatible with safety or health related hardware.
But I am not sure this situation is similar to a tech co., it would depend on how the project is financed.
I am surprised that there has been only limited commentary on the use of carbon fibre for the main body of the submersible. Carbon fibre is significantly weaker in compression than in tension. The carbon fibre structure would have been subject to high hoop and axial compressive loading. In general, metals are much better at resisting such loadings; this is probably why they chose to use titanium dome ends. And then there is the issues associated with non-destructive testing of carbon fibre both in manufacture and after use.
Of course, the design may have been mass driven, which in itself would be a concern in such circumstances. As no classification society is involved, I suspect investigations will be limited.
bit more here on construction and breaking the rules
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/ive-broken-some-rules-oceangate-titanic-submarine-window-pressure/
Ironic comment? Dirk Pitt is a Clive Cussler character from the National Underwater and Marine Agency (NUMA), which does exist (now) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Underwater_and_Marine_Agency/blockquote >
@timba I think it might have been aimed at my comments further up.
It’s OK to push the boundaries in the cause of development – that’s the way progress is made – but to charge people, billionaires or not, disclaimers or not – to do so isn’t.
The risk is what they are paying for.
I don't think the Titanic location has any other significance other than being suitably dangerous and in international waters. Take away the risk and it's pointless.
I am surprised that there has been only limited commentary on the use of carbon fibre for the main body of the submersible.
It was mentioned on the radio last night that it was a carbon fibre ceramic material, so not yer usual epoxy resin. I suppose that in compression the material the fibres are potted in is key, the fibres being there to protect against cracking and non symmetrical deformation?
But I am not sure this situation is similar to a tech co., it would depend on how the project is financed.
Sorry I probably didn't explain myself too well. I more meant that the techbro approach has become popularised and somewhat accepted within some aspects of tech development.
Seems OceanGate had completely misapplied that approach to a safety critical situation.
I would also add that it is also possible to misapply techbro approach within IT. Eg. In IT that itself supports safety critical features, or could affect the stability of financial systems, lose consumer' personal data, or affect people's lives significantly negatively (maybe not kill them, but still)
I don’t think the Titanic location has any other significance other than being suitably dangerous and in international waters
Bizarre comment, if it were true then any bit of deep water would have done. Can you imagine people paying a fortune to visit some nondescript bit of ocean floor?
This makes no sense to me
The risk is what they are paying for.
I don’t think the Titanic location has any other significance other than being suitably dangerous and in international waters. Take away the risk and it’s pointless.
Thank goodness… all the HSSE fairies rubbing their hands together for the opportunity to regulate yet something else.
There is a reason why flying in a commercial plane is the safest form of travel. And no it isn't because hurtling through the sky at great speed is inherently safe.
And there is also a reason why travelling in a private plane is considerably more dangerous than travelling in a train or bus.
Can you imagine people paying a fortune to visit some nondescript bit of ocean floor?
apparently the bottom of the Marianas trench doesn’t have a lot going on other than being the deepest..
As no classification society is involved, I suspect investigations will be limited.
Yes unless someone comes into a nice big grant for trying it out I assume the investigation would quickly scan through the 2018 letter and go "that probably covers it".
In terms of future regulations and controls. Although Titanic is in international waters the USA plus Canada can still put a lot of influence on it. US laws about cruise liners being a good example. If you want to dock in the USA and I think even accept payments from there you have to play by their safety rules.
I am surprised that there has been only limited commentary on the use of carbon fibre for the main body of the submersible.
Me too. Lots of armchair engineers like me saying they see issues though.
rossw
Free Member
I am surprised that there has been only limited commentary on the use of carbon fibre for the main body of the submersible. Carbon fibre is significantly weaker in compression than in tension. The carbon fibre structure would have been subject to high hoop and axial compressive loading. In general, metals are much better at resisting such loadings; this is probably why they chose to use titanium dome ends. And then there is the issues associated with non-destructive testing of carbon fibre both in manufacture and after use.
I would be amazed if cyclic fatigue of the carbon section doesn’t come out of the investigation as a main cause
apparently the bottom of the Marianas trench doesn’t have a lot going on other than being the deepest..
Which presumably makes it "suitably dangerous". That, according to stevextc, is what would make it attractive.
Can you imagine people paying a fortune to visit some nondescript bit of ocean floor?
This. It is absolutely about the Titanic - there are plenty of other deep wrecks that they don't choose to visit. Most of those other wrecks will have had some sort of significance (usually high value cargo/salvage potential) otherwise people wouldn't have gone to the expense of finding them, but they don't have the mystique of the Titanic.
The aunt of the 19 yo lad that lost his life says he told her he was terrified of the upcoming mission. He went ahead with it to please his dad on Fathers Day over there. Desperately sad.
That really is tragic. I doubt anything that stupid would have been anywhere near the top of my to do list when I was 19. Yeah, that sounds great dad, but can we not just go to a gig or something instead?
Which presumably makes it “suitably dangerous”. That, according to stevextc, is what would make it attractive.
It's quite obviously not just about the danger, that's a common mischaracterisation of any sort of extreme* activity. The danger is an important element but it's not the motivation.
* I hate this term but it will do here.
A nautical expert on a programme earlier said the pressure at that depth is something like 350psi
Hes not much of a nautical expert really, is he?
That's similar order of magnitude to a rear mtb shock.
A quick mental calculation suggests 5,500 is closer to the mark
Seems to have been plenty of hubris to go round here.
A shame that people have unnecessarily lost their lives, especially Suleman Dawood, who seems to have been subject to the billionaire version of rad-dadding.
. I doubt anything that stupid would have been anywhere near the top of my to do list when I was 19
Not being a billionaires son, the risky opportunities available to me were somewhat more recreational but fairly experimental nonetheless.
A nautical expert on a programme earlier said the pressure at that depth is something like 350psi
he may have meant bar. 3500m is ~350 Bar.
Whilst fantastic at irony, i’m only an armchair expert at maritime engineering, so I’m not going to comment on this thread.
he may have meant bar. 3500m is ~350 Bar.
Technically (the best kind of correct after all) 360bar as it's salt water.
I think what annoyed me was that OceanGate didn’t have a remote vehicle with them to use in an emergency, all the safety aspects were designed into the submersible.
I'm not sure what you mean?
For about the 10th time, their system was designed to be operated as cheaply as possible.
To operate an ROV in that location to that depth, would of cost more than the operation in sending that death trap down.
Technically (the best kind of correct after all) 360bar as it’s salt water.
i mean if you want to get technical, you could do the full TEOS10 integration method calculating density from a temperature and salinity water column profile.
but ~350Bar is close enough..
edit: 😉
apparently the bottom of the Marianas trench doesn’t have a lot going on other than being the deepest..
It's more of an Everest, but without the nice view.
This is a great representation of how deep various species can go, and how progressively low-effort the naming process gets.
but they don’t have the mystique of the Titanic.
there are a number of things and events that happened around the time of the dawn of mass media that have implanted themselves because they were amongst the first experiences that were shared globallly. That seems to have put those events or objects in a place that nothing before or since can occupy
the Mona Lisa is a great example - largely unimportant for most of its history it was stolen just at the point where newspapers started printing pictures for the first time- so it was the first painting that people would recognise without having actually seen it in real life. So by accident it became a celebrity artwork - it’s the most famous painting in the world now for no real reason than it’s famously the famous painting - and probably always will be even though there’s no one alive still that will remember that theft and it’s reporting.
the titanic will never stop being the most famous shipwreck
people will never forget the words to ‘Happy Birthday to You’ because it appeared at the dawn of Hollywood and even featured in films set decades and even centuries before it was written.
Someone will always be searching for the Loch Ness monster
they all stem from a time of shared experience that’ll probably never be repeated. Somehow events and stories from that era ‘stick’ in away nothing really has since.
I do wonder if they had announced on sunday that a implosion was detected shortly after losing comms, whether the same amount of resources would have been mobilised and the same media interest would have been generated.