[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by ajmat

Very sad news, I just hope that their last moment was swift and not the long drawn out scenario as imagined. Except for the poor 19 year old boy, they knew the risks.

My condolences to the families who must have been in agony.

May their souls rest in peace

If indeed the submersible imploded under pressure that is in so many tonnes per square inch then the whole event would have lasted 30 milliseconds as the walls crushed, the temperature of the air inside increased under compression to well over 1000 degrees or much much more and water pressure tore most of the solid matter that was not titanium to shreds. That is the US Navy's assessment via simulations of what happens when a submarine sinks to beneath its absolute crush depth. While a gory death it would have occurred faster than the occupants would have realized.

[Senotrius]

Just like space tourism(Blue origin,space X), these tourists also clearly knew the risks while doing this. But unlike space, the company responsible for the titan had decades of knowledge,protocols,parameters,failures of previous submersibles to fall upon while designing and managing their own. I think this boils down to human error or possibly under-engineering. Unfortunately the souls on board had to pay for this. The same warning goes to the upcoming space tourism industry. Both SpaceX and Blue origin are deep pocketed but it's just not worth paying them(!) to essentially become their test pilots. Let trained astronauts do it first.

[am1m]

Originally Posted by GutsyGibbon

The larger issue is that of safety in adventurous activity. When is it research for those willing to push the envelope, and when is it recreation?
....
I am only asking for regulations framed by people...

Great point and this is never cut-and-dried in adventure sports. Any adventure sport is undertaken mainly for recreation, by people who know (or should know) the risks. Now when should a government body step in for a rescue? Never a straightforward decision.

A friend of mine was called in to rescue a group of young people outside Bangalore a few years ago. He's a professional and the rescue was well within his capabilities, but as with any outdoor activity, conditions matter a lot. They called him in after a long delay, after several departments who were first-responders but were not (and still aren't!) qualified to conduct such rescues tried and failed, and wasted the optimum conditions. So he ended up doing the task at midnight, certainly risking his life. All went well, but should he have been risking his life to rescue a bunch of people who shouldn't have been trying the activity in the first place? They had no idea of the terrain, had no training, no guide, no equipment, no preparation. Not even a torch or a bottle of water between them. Since this was a government decision, he had no choice- and I'm sure he would have gone anyway even otherwise. Also, from the point of view of the government, since this was group of youngsters, the optics certainly wouldn't have looked good, not doing anything.

Second point is who do you trust? I'm not an expert, but knowing some people in the field, and having seen the way a few adventure sports operate in India up close- personally, I'd trust most of the 'amateurs' (defined as those not gaining anything monetarily from the activity) over the majority of the so-called 'professionals' (defined as those making money from the activity)! The per-unit costs we are willing to pay for adventure sports in India is very low. As a consequence, most operators cut-corners in qualified/trained manpower, gear, processes/protocols, and usually run it as a volume business- which is certainly not conducive to safety. An adventure sport is not a zumba class where 30 people can try the activity at the same time!

Yet, if you only go by paperwork/licenses- all these operators are certified by the local/state government. (We all know how that happens.) So, if you impose blanket rules like 'only certified bodies', you actually run the risk of excluding the more safe practitioners of the sport from the activity!

(For those curious about how to identify a good operator- watch them for some time, watch how they work before jumping in to the activity. Are they just pushing groups of people into the activity? Check the gear, does it look new, is it replaced periodically? Does the gear have some certifying/regulatory body identification numbers on it? Read up on the regulatory bodies/manufacturers for the gear used in the sport, so you can ID those. Ask simple questions- where is the nearest hospital, what is the evacuation plan. Good operators work on systems, protocols. Bad ones just try to deal with things as they come up and hope for the best.)

In countries like the US, where the number of amateur practitioners of the sport is significant, they form volunteer rescue organizations. These groups are well-organized and interface well with government authorities. Plus there is very specific (and expensive!) insurance available that covers the cost of a rescue.

So, each situation will be very different and it's never a straightforward decision when it comes to even established adventure sports. In this particular case that the thread is discussing, the activity is so extreme, there are probably more established protocols for a rescue on Everest, than there will be for this case.

[sandeepmdas]

Originally Posted by VwRabbit

The Titanic still haunts us 111 years after it sank.

The men who dreamed up the Titanic and the Titan went down with their ships.

Thomas Andrews was the chief designer of the Titanic. He worked for Harland and Wolff and he was proud of his creation, but he never made it to New York.

Stockton Rush was the co-designer of the Titan, according to OG. He also died in this tragic accident, just like Andrews.

The Titanic was supposed to be unsinkable. It had the latest technology and luxury. But it also had some flaws. The designers didn't put enough lifeboats and life jackets on board. They wanted to save space and make the ship look sleek.

The Titan was also a product of state-of-the-art engineering, no one can deny that. It had a composite hull and off-the-shelf components like PC monitors and PS5 controllers, agreed. Maybe the hull wasn't strong enough or its lifecycle hours was much less than their estimate, or maybe someone (including BUT not limited to the pilot) might have made a mistake.

I don't know whether TBHpians would roast me or not, but I think using off-the-shelf components is a good idea. I trust LG and PS5 more than some custom-made stuff. But I would be careful about the wiring, the backup systems, and the whole structure of the submarine.

[srini1785]

RIP To those five who lost their lives.

For those interested in a more technical discussion :

https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=508005

[V.Narayan]

Hope fully my last post on this sad episode {can't promise though :-) }. A few points I'd like to table:

1. Military submarines that go down to but a fraction of the Titanic's depth - 500 metres vs 3800 metres are always, but always, built of the same material - typically a steel alloy and only welded never fused together by glue as was the case here with a composite -cum- titanium pressure hull. Gluing weakens structural integrity under pressure.

2. Military submarines are subject to X-ray style examination once or twice or thrice in the subs life across the entire pressure hull to identify microscopically thin fractures not visible to the eye. I assume they are treated in some way. Was this vessel ever checked like this? It had done multiple dives over a few years. At 380+ atmospheres of pressure it can be safely assumed microscopic cracks would have occurred.

3. Carbon fibre when under stress does develops hairline and microscopic fractures. So do the metal parts BTW. We see it in airliners and airliners do not deal with even a fraction of the stress that this submersible was subject to.

I don't know if this inventor/owner was conducting X-ray checks on the pressure chamber? Given his inclination to sack employees who questioned, likely not.

Member @adi.mariner has live experience with commercial deep diving submersibles. Would love to hear his views on this.

Originally Posted by adi.mariner

I work on a Diving Vessel which carries out subsea inspections, maintenance and repair of the offshore pipelines and structures. All the equipment related to the Diving department is classed by a Classification Society and regular inspections are carried out. All this is done for a system which is rated for a maximum of 300 metres below the sea level. To devise a system for a such a depth (where the Titanic lies) is extra ordinary and needs multiple fail safes to function properly. However it doesn't look so after reading the article. Feel really sorry for the people stuck inside and it is going to be a gruesome ending if not rescued in time (which looks highly unlikely).

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by sandeepmdas

The Titanic was supposed to be unsinkable. It had the latest technology and luxury. But it also had some flaws. The designers didn't put enough lifeboats and life jackets on board.

Some very fundamental difference in design approach between the Titanic and the titan.

The Titanic complied with all the relevant (safety) regulations of its time. Being unsinkable, (I.e. multiple watertight compartments) was actually considered an over-engineering at the time. It wasn’t required perse!

They did not carry sufficient life boats for all passengers and crew, because, remarkably, in those days, that was not required!

Being unsinkable meant there was no need for all those life boats. Virtually all passenger ships of that era sailed with serious short falls on things like life boats and rafts. But those were the rules in those days. And all those ships were properly classified, registered and insured.

Titan did not comply with any known rule or practice.

Jeroen

[adi.mariner]

1.

typically a steel alloy and only welded never fused together by glue as was the case here with a composite -cum- titanium pressure hull.

Diving Chambers (which are on the ship and the Divers stay in it under pressure) and the Diving Bell (which is lowered into the sea at the Dive location) are made of steel alloys. All the penetrations for life support pipelines, portholes (windows) for viewing/food/laundry are stiffened to compensate for the loss of integrity of the pressure vessel. The structure is only welded and no other method of repair is permitted. This welding has to be carried out by a qualified welder only and in the presence of a Classification Society Surveyor.

2.

Military submarines are subject to X-ray style examination once or twice or thrice in the subs life across the entire pressure hull to identify microscopically thin fractures not visible to the eye. I assume they are treated in some way.

The Diving Chambers are at sea level onboard the ship and hence there is no chance of an implosion like in the case of a submarine. However there are chances of a leakage which could cause a sudden drop in the pressure and be catastrophic for the Divers inside. A thorough leak test is carried out prior to the project beginning to ensure the integrity of the Chambers and the Diving Bell. The Chambers are maintained at the same pressure where the job location is. The Divers enter the Diving Bell from the Chamber and the Bell is lowered to the job site. The Divers exit the Bell from the bottom and carry out the work.

The article below about an underwater rescue of Divers (in Mumbai High) makes for an interesting read.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8313767/ (credit to the respective writers)

[dragracer567]

Just realised that the Titan uses the exact same Logitech controller that I use for gaming.

Perhaps if does make sense? I’ve owned two of these and the first one lasted for 6 years after which I lost the USB stub. Probably better than making a unproven one from scratch?

[Dry Ice]

Condolences to the families and may the departed souls rest in peace.

They had uploaded this amazing 20-min film from last year’s expedition.

https://youtu.be/UCwg2h7i4Ac

[Samba]

What literally irks me on this mishap is-
People and their sense of humour have stooped down to such an extent that people are literally happy & making memes in social media on those 5 people who lost their lives in an unfortunate accident of the Titan.

Some countries are happy because of USA’s failure to make it fail-safe.
Some people are happy because the rich died! Had it been a loss of 5 lives from the lower economic strata, people would have reacted differently!

[thanixravindran]

Sad that lives are lost in this mis-adventure. RIP.

For all the comparisons and regulations discussion about Titanic or military submarines, isn't this particular one more like a recreational/experimental sub that is neither military nor commercial.

If I remember correctly, some time back, one Indian boy died trying to make a helicopter after he got cut by the blades. Though not a direct comparison but here I see a group of enthusiastic folks attempting a dive gone wrong. I understand 250K USD is charged but are these type of things regulated in the west as doing things in own backyard is different from a public place (Is Ocean comes under this definition?)

[Thad E Ginathom]

Humans: we are a very imperfect bunch of beings. I was really hammered with that fact, when I read this article yesterday:

The Greek shipwreck was a horrific tragedy. Yet it didn’t get the attention of the Titanic story

Five deaths; maybe over five hundred deaths. Yes, I know which story I was glued to.

I'm not saying (neither is the author) that the interest is in any way wrong, but I think she's right to make us look in that mirror.

Anyway. Refocusing on the topic, one thing has been bugging me. Information from the better-informed, please...

There is such a thing as an EPIRB (Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon). It is released from a boat in case of sinking, or carried in a lifeboat/liferaft. Could Titan not have had one, externally, that would be released in case of emergency/disaster?

This is my thinking as a possible why-not:- Being a sealed box containing a radio transmitter, it could not withstand the pressures and would implode on decent or explode on ascent. Is there an engineering way around that? could it be filled with oil or some other fluid/solid less dense than water?

[NomadSK]

Went through an introductory diving course with the professionals in my early career days when we were supposed to carry out offshore inspections and realized one simple fact. To start, it was fun but It's totally unforgiving underwater. Ears kept pounding, felt disorientated and nauseated even after few meters of the dive. It was scary to have the regulator yanked from my mouth and struggle to find it and put it back in the right way. It's ridiculous how you can make simple mistake when you start to run out of breath, forget your hand signals and panic. Luckily it was just a course for me.
All respects to professionals, underwater inspectors and combat divers!

I remember, We were shown a clip of “Byford Dolphin” accident for the underwater hazards involved. That was scary enough to go underwater. I have never imagined that such thing can happen to human body at extreme depths, that the blood will start to boil.

RIP the poor soul, their deaths must have been quick and painless, the only silver lining.

Here’s the link for the Byford dolphin accident.

https://https://history.howstuffwork...n-accident.htm

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

There is such a thing as an EPIRB (Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon). It is released from a boat in case of sinking, or carried in a lifeboat/liferaft. Could Titan not have had one, externally, that would be released in case of emergency/disaster?

What I read in the news, the fail safe mechanism was, that the ballast would detach itself after certain fixed hours and the sub Would come to the surface of the water. I guess implosion, simply means either poor design or poor inspections of either the weld or the material of construction. I won’t see any failsafe mechanism for that at those depths. Moreover, some safety issues were already flagged earlier which probably fell on deaf ears.

[Gannu_1]

/OT

Originally Posted by NomadSK

Went through an introductory diving course with the professionals in my early career days when we were supposed to carry out offshore inspections and realized one simple fact. To start, it was fun but It's totally unforgiving underwater. Ears kept pounding, felt disorientated and nauseated even after few meters of the dive. It was scary to have the regulator yanked from my mouth and struggle to find it and put it back in the right way. It's ridiculous how you can make simple mistake when you start to run out of breath, forget your hand signals and panic. Luckily it was just a course for me.
All respects to professionals, underwater inspectors and combat divers!

I hope you didn’t copy-paste this part from your post from this YouTube comment from a year back?



Unless of course you are indeed Vince M.

https://youtu.be/PW5ewM77LL0