Adventure to the Titanic goes terribly wrong [Staff Warning in OP]

277,857 Views | 1587 Replies | Last: 4 mo ago by Stat Monitor Repairman
DVC2010
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to NukeAg10 • 4:04p, 6/21/23
AG
NukeAg10 said:
bonfarr said:
Doesn't our Navy have an underwater cable all over the Atlantic that was laid during the Cold War to listen for Soviet Nuke subs? I think I read that in a Tom Clancy novel or something.

I wonder if it can pick up acoustics in the search area.


That is true. If you're interested in subs through the cold war, Blind Man's Bluff is an awesome non-fiction book.


I'll second this recommendation. However, to possibly answer your question Blind Man's Bluff tells a few stories about searches for missing subs, and one of the challenges has to do with identifying the right noise. I imagine a carbon fiber hull failing wouldn't even get past the filters, and I doubt anyone really knows what it would sound like.
Reply Quote
3
Joes
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to eric76 • 4:10p, 6/21/23
eric76 said:
Joes said:
eric76 said:
Mathguy64 said:
BadMoonRisin said:
Has it been discussed how many times this thing actually made a successful voyage down to the wreck? I've read expeditions are 5 days and they might only make it down once or twice...or zero. And it apparently was not uncommon for it to get lost for hours at a time.

Has it successfully made it down 5 times? 10? 20?


It's not made it once. This was the first try. The previous "test" only went down to 3000m with only the CEO. So they have never tested the hull integrity beyond 3000m and the Titanic wreck is beyond that.
Wouldn't it make sense to send it, unmanned, to deeper depths than the lowest manned depth it would ever need to handle?
It's been all the way down to Titanic a few times, plus several other unsuccessful attempts. In fact, that's the concern, the repeated strain on the hull. I don't know why anyone would say it's the first try for this particular craft.

The Titan has visited the Titanic wreck site three times, the first of which was in July 2021
It would be nice to have a proven safety margin. I don't think that having gone to the same depth twice before tells you much at all about the safety margin.

Not only on hull depth, but also to make sure that the electronics are highly dependable and aren't defeated by getting damp or wet.

As for not being able to open the hatch from the inside, that reminds me of the Apollo 1 fire. I remember Aaron Cohen telling about how hard it was to make changes to the capsule hatch to allow it to be opened from the inside, but it was clear that it absolutely had to be done.
I'm not commenting one way or the other about what they should or should not have done, I was just correcting the idea that this was its first try. Reading more about it now it actually seems like it's made a whole bunch of successful trips to the Titanic, but evidently three (not sure whether that includes this one or not) trips with tourists.

From today:

How many times has OceanGate been to the Titanic?

OceanGate has taken tourists to the Titanic in the Titan submersible three times in total, once each year from 2021 to 2023.

How many times has OceanGate been to the Titanic? (hitc.com)


From March of 2022:

The OceanGate team completed several successful dives to survey the Titanic aboard Titan, the world's only five-person submersible to reach a depth of 13,000 feet, over the six weeks after our first expedition. The team of renowned experts, researchers, and citizen scientists collected the highest-quality photographs and wreck footage to date, including parts of the wreck never photographed before. OceanGate's Titanic footage is available at youtu.be/oDLzG1W0Cik.

By the end of 2021, the team

By the end of 2021, the team had accomplished 10 successful dives to the Titanic: four at depth along the debris field and six surveys of the wreck. Titan's large viewport allowed three people to simultaneously view and document the Titanic as the pilot and copilot attended to the controls.

Titan Meets Titanic - Divers Alert Network (dan.org)







Reply Quote
2
chase128
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fka ftc • 4:16p, 6/21/23
AG
fka ftc said:
For those poking fun at the controller used, NatGeo supplied this reference to the US Navy using xBox controllers to aim laser cannons and operate periscopes.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/military-contractor-just-went-ahead-and-used-xbox-controller-their-new-giant-laser-cannon-180952647/

https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/19/16333376/us-navy-military-xbox-360-controller



I don't think it's a fair comparison to compare controlling an underwater sub to aiming something.

An underwater sub like the Alvin has multiple motors that can be vectored in an assortment of ways. Moving underwater is more akin to moving in space than air. The pilot of the Alvin can very precisely control what the sub is doing and it seems more complicated than what can be fit on a single game controller. There's a video i linked yesterday that shows their cockpit.

Maybe some simple motions are done with that Titan controller buts it's hard for me to imagine they have the same level of precision as Alvin.
Reply Quote
3
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:19p, 6/21/23
AG
Jeff is a maritime and admiralty law attorney. Not alot new. But FWIW, his take.



About 27 minutes in length.
Reply Quote
5
NPH-
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:20p, 6/21/23
AG
Here's an interesting thought experiment: At this point knowing what we know in terms of estimated time remaining before all the oxygen is consumed, do you dedicate resources to focusing on the surface of the ocean in the event that the sub has miraculously surfaced and just not been spotted, or do you continue to focus under the ocean knowing full well that you won't reach them in time?

For me, I think focusing on the surface would be the priority as if they are there, there is a chance that they can still be saved. If they are below at the bottom of the ocean, there is no realistic scenario at this point in time that saves them.
Reply Quote
22
agz win
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:35p, 6/21/23
AG
Fascinating interview by Reiss with lots of details of his experience...

'Simpsons' Writer Mike Reiss Reveals Titanic Sub Experience, Tech Issues on Ocean Floor (tmz.com)
Reply Quote
2
Keeper of The Spirits
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to NPH- • 4:52p, 6/21/23
AG
You probably have a set of resources that are only good for top water and some only good for under
Reply Quote
5
JABQ04
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:57p, 6/21/23
AG
If they're banging on the hull why aren't they banging a specific pattern/rhythm that would make it impossible to be an underwater anomaly. Tap out SOS in Morse Code or "shave and a haircut".
Reply Quote
14
dreyOO
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Pumpkinhead • 4:59p, 6/21/23
I've worked around incredibly successful narcissists most my career. I'm pretty familiar with these types of egos.

That said, I knew there would be at least one person taking issue with that comment. Two things can be true at the same time. The adults that signed off are responsible. But none of this happens if the CEO doesn't put on a song and dance about how cool and innovative his approach is. They're all culpable, but he's the primary asshat here. That's all I was trying to say.

Eta: this guy actually reminds me of a financial scam artist. As investors or even gambling degenerates, we all know the risks with any investment. We know we are responsible. But the Bernie Madoffs of the world can still be the main culprits in these fiascos.
Reply Quote
13
2 edits
bonfarr
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BadMoonRisin • 5:00p, 6/21/23
AG
BadMoonRisin said:
Unless they are stuck in the wreckage itself or stuck at the ocean floor almost directly adjacent to the wreckage, I doubt they will ever be found. And this is a boat that would regularly get lost for hours at a time.
Reply Quote
7
Sex Panther
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Pumpkinhead • 5:03p, 6/21/23
AG
Quote:
The Hamish Harding guy had dived 30K feet to the bottom of the Miriana Trench recently, far deeper than the Titanic wreck site.


You can do this??
Reply Quote
3
Guitarsoup
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sex Panther • 5:04p, 6/21/23
AG
Sex Panther said:
Quote:
The Hamish Harding guy had dived 30K feet to the bottom of the Miriana Trench recently, far deeper than the Titanic wreck site.


You can do this??


If you are a billionaire, yes
Reply Quote
23
Fall92
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:05p, 6/21/23
AG
I'm surprised their marine insurers didn't mandate classification as a condition of cover especially when they were carrying passengers.
"I did nothing. I did absolutely nothing, and it was everything that I thought it could be."
Reply Quote
3
bigjag19
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fall92 • 5:06p, 6/21/23
AG
They weren't carrying "passengers." Only crew.
Reply Quote
12
Fall92
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bigjag19 • 5:08p, 6/21/23
AG
Crew don't pay $250k to go to work…
"I did nothing. I did absolutely nothing, and it was everything that I thought it could be."
Reply Quote
22
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fall92 • 5:09p, 6/21/23
AG
Fall92 said:
I'm surprised their marine insurers didn't mandate classification as a condition of cover especially when they were carrying passengers.
I am not altogether convinced they had insurance.
Reply Quote
41
Fall92
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 5:10p, 6/21/23
AG
Me either.
"I did nothing. I did absolutely nothing, and it was everything that I thought it could be."
Reply Quote
4
bmks270
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dreyOO • 5:11p, 6/21/23
AG
dreyOO said:
I've worked around incredibly successful narcissists most my career. I'm pretty familiar with these types of egos.

That said, I knew there would be at least one person taking issue with that comment. Two things can be true at the same time. The adults that signed off are responsible. But none of this happens if the CEO doesn't put on a song and dance about how cool and innovative his approach is. They're all culpable, but he's the primary asshat here. That's all I was trying to say.

Eta: this guy actually reminds me of a financial scam artist. As investors or even gambling degenerates, we all know the risks with any investment. We know we are responsible. But the Bernie Madoffs of the world can still be the main culprits in these fiascos.


He honestly seems like a conman. I can never tell if these types believe their own bull**** . I guess they were warned in the waiver death was a possibility, but the CEO clearly drove unsafe engineering practices.
Reply Quote
11
2 edits
W
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:16p, 6/21/23
AG
good video

I had wondered about carbon dioxide buildup / purging in the sub
Reply Quote
1
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fall92 • 5:17p, 6/21/23
AG
Fall92 said:
Me either.
Even if they did, I'd wager the underwriter denies any claims related to this incident. Seems there's enough gross negligence to void the policy, to me at least.
Reply Quote
13
Joes
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sex Panther • 5:25p, 6/21/23
Sex Panther said:
Quote:
The Hamish Harding guy had dived 30K feet to the bottom of the Miriana Trench recently, far deeper than the Titanic wreck site.


You can do this??
A number of people have reached the bottom of Challenger Deep, in the Mariana Trench, just under 36,000 feet deep. The first was in 1960. James Cameron has done it solo and Austin-based computer game designer Richard Garriott has been to space and also to the bottom of Challenger Deep. The Titanic is only a third as deep.
Reply Quote
11
techno-ag
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Joes • 5:30p, 6/21/23
AG
Trump will fix it.
Reply Quote
1 edit
45-70Ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:38p, 6/21/23
AG
Went down a rabbit hole last night reading about the USS Thresher and Scorpion.

Different circumstances but similar outcomes, potentially. In the end, hell no to all of that.
Reply Quote
8
JABQ04
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 45-70Ag • 5:47p, 6/21/23
AG
45-70Ag said:
Went down a rabbit hole last night reading about the USS Thresher and Scorpion.

Different circumstances but similar outcomes, potentially. In the end, hell no to all of that.


Those are terrible. Knowing your subs going down and not a damn thing you can do and just waiting for the boat to implode. At least (from what I hear) it's over before your brain can even process why last happening

This was a neat if not interesting take on the Thresher. Interesting theory and a bit conspiracy theory.
Reply Quote
2 edits
TXAG 05
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fall92 • 5:57p, 6/21/23
AG
Fall92 said:
Crew don't pay $250k to go to work…


It's complete BS, but they had some training and were titled mission specialists or something like that.
Reply Quote
6
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TXAG 05 • 6:04p, 6/21/23
AG
TXAG 05 said:
Fall92 said:
Crew don't pay $250k to go to work…


It's complete BS, but they had some training and were titled mission specialists or something like that.
Originally, it was suggested that was done for insurance reasons. Maybe. I am not so sure now.
Reply Quote
7
Bonus Hole
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:07p, 6/21/23
I keep saying to myself that this is a publicity stunt and tomorrow morning they will be like

Hey guys!
Reply Quote
6
sam callahan
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:33p, 6/21/23
If I was a billionaire and wanted to fake my own death...
Reply Quote
20
Joes
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Joes • 6:38p, 6/21/23
Joes said:
eric76 said:
Joes said:
eric76 said:
Mathguy64 said:
BadMoonRisin said:
Has it been discussed how many times this thing actually made a successful voyage down to the wreck? I've read expeditions are 5 days and they might only make it down once or twice...or zero. And it apparently was not uncommon for it to get lost for hours at a time.

Has it successfully made it down 5 times? 10? 20?


It's not made it once. This was the first try. The previous "test" only went down to 3000m with only the CEO. So they have never tested the hull integrity beyond 3000m and the Titanic wreck is beyond that.
Wouldn't it make sense to send it, unmanned, to deeper depths than the lowest manned depth it would ever need to handle?
It's been all the way down to Titanic a few times, plus several other unsuccessful attempts. In fact, that's the concern, the repeated strain on the hull. I don't know why anyone would say it's the first try for this particular craft.

The Titan has visited the Titanic wreck site three times, the first of which was in July 2021
It would be nice to have a proven safety margin. I don't think that having gone to the same depth twice before tells you much at all about the safety margin.

Not only on hull depth, but also to make sure that the electronics are highly dependable and aren't defeated by getting damp or wet.

As for not being able to open the hatch from the inside, that reminds me of the Apollo 1 fire. I remember Aaron Cohen telling about how hard it was to make changes to the capsule hatch to allow it to be opened from the inside, but it was clear that it absolutely had to be done.
I'm not commenting one way or the other about what they should or should not have done, I was just correcting the idea that this was its first try. Reading more about it now it actually seems like it's made a whole bunch of successful trips to the Titanic, but evidently three (not sure whether that includes this one or not) trips with tourists.

From today:

How many times has OceanGate been to the Titanic?

OceanGate has taken tourists to the Titanic in the Titan submersible three times in total, once each year from 2021 to 2023.

How many times has OceanGate been to the Titanic? (hitc.com)


From March of 2022:

The OceanGate team completed several successful dives to survey the Titanic aboard Titan, the world's only five-person submersible to reach a depth of 13,000 feet, over the six weeks after our first expedition. The team of renowned experts, researchers, and citizen scientists collected the highest-quality photographs and wreck footage to date, including parts of the wreck never photographed before. OceanGate's Titanic footage is available at youtu.be/oDLzG1W0Cik.

By the end of 2021, the team

By the end of 2021, the team had accomplished 10 successful dives to the Titanic: four at depth along the debris field and six surveys of the wreck. Titan's large viewport allowed three people to simultaneously view and document the Titanic as the pilot and copilot attended to the controls.

Titan Meets Titanic - Divers Alert Network (dan.org)







Here's more clarity from that CBS reporter that did the feature last year.

Watch from 1:30 to 1:50. He says at the time he got on last year he wasn't worried because it had been to Titanic successfully not 3 times as people have said but 20 times and it's been down even more times since then.

'Too terrifying to contemplate:' former passenger on missing Titanic sub | Elizabeth Vargas Reports - YouTube
Reply Quote
2
txags92
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fka ftc • 6:49p, 6/21/23
AG
fka ftc said:
TexAg1987 said:
fka ftc said:
For those poking fun at the controller used, NatGeo supplied this reference to the US Navy using xBox controllers to aim laser cannons and operate periscopes.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/military-contractor-just-went-ahead-and-used-xbox-controller-their-new-giant-laser-cannon-180952647/

https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/19/16333376/us-navy-military-xbox-360-controller

Probably has had more testing and real-life abuse than anything the military could design.

#truth

I would think on an experimental machine you would want simple backups for things like the controller. For instance, is the ballast release mechanical and operable with no power? Or does it rely on a circuit that becomes inoperable due to power failure.

Complete power failure would mean no modem for comms and potential no ability to resurface. Nothing I have seen yet shows what redundancy they had or did not have in place.
The problem with that is that it requires a through hill connection to make it accessible from inside, and every through hull penetration is another point of potential weakness. I would rather see a ballast release that is held closed as long as the communications circuits are active, but automatically opens if the circuit connection is lost for longer than xx minutes.
Reply Quote
10
AggieBaseball06
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sam callahan • 6:50p, 6/21/23
AG
sam callahan said:
If I was a billionaire and wanted to fake my own death...


...I wouldn't hatch a plan requiring 4 other people to permanently disappear as well...
Reply Quote
19
sam callahan
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:52p, 6/21/23
Quote:
...I wouldn't hatch a plan requiring 4 other people to permanently disappear as well...

and that's what makes it such a good plan!
Reply Quote
35
BQ78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 6:55p, 6/21/23
AG
Another excellent video even though he rambles and repeats but that is the first mention of the letter I posted about yesterday.
Reply Quote
2
fka ftc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to txags92 • 7:13p, 6/21/23
txags92 said:
fka ftc said:

#truth

I would think on an experimental machine you would want simple backups for things like the controller. For instance, is the ballast release mechanical and operable with no power? Or does it rely on a circuit that becomes inoperable due to power failure.

Complete power failure would mean no modem for comms and potential no ability to resurface. Nothing I have seen yet shows what redundancy they had or did not have in place.
The problem with that is that it requires a through hill connection to make it accessible from inside, and every through hull penetration is another point of potential weakness. I would rather see a ballast release that is held closed as long as the communications circuits are active, but automatically opens if the circuit connection is lost for longer than xx minutes.
Magnets are your friend here. Particularly with carbon fiber you could either avoid the through hull connection... or you could have the ballast secured by electrified magnets that dropped in total power loss.
Reply Quote
11
Whirligigs
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:18p, 6/21/23
I guess it would be best if the craft just imploded making it a swift death then slowly suffocating. Unless they are found.
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.