Titanic tourist sub missing

[Tanya1982]

I too have been on ferries that didn't sink.

When that helicopter crashed at Leicester City, my stepdad's mum was living in Leicester.

Mrs Frank was once in a car that stopped to avoid hitting a cat. The car that overtook hers was then destroyed by a roadside bomb a hundred yards up the road.

I have too.

But again, there seems to be a bit of stickiness around the understanding of ‘personal aversion’.

Frankly, my mother was a Pan Am stewardess in the 80’s and was signed off sick for pretty much all of 1989 because she couldn’t face it, so I’m well aware of things that happen to aircraft. I’m just not, personally, afraid of flying or dying that way. Never have been.

I don’t go on ferries much, because I don’t like them. I don’t feel safe on them. I can’t relax on them. Where at all possible, I take other forms of transport. Whether that’s a flight over, or a tunnel under, or the long way round to access a bridge, that’s what I’ll do. It has nothing to do with statistical safety, or roadside bombings of vehicles, or helicopters crashing in Midland towns.

I remember the Herald of Free Enterprise very clearly. Being trapped in a freezing sinking ship is my personal vision of hell. That’s why when I’m on a boat, I don’t sleep below deck in cabins. I remain up top in sight of the exit. People who like them can do whatever they like.

Have I cleared that up so we don’t have to revisit the subject or explore it any further in a thread that isn’t about this or me?

 

[Cid]

What prospect of the people who built/operated this bought-on-wish sardine can facing manslaughter charges?

Probably none, as there will be watertight (sorry) waivers involved. The company will dust itself off and rebrand as a luxury burial-at-sea experience for CEOs who think their money somehow makes them a fucking viking.

Been mentioned somewhere on the thread, but UK law you can't really exclude liability for death or serious injury. I have a vague memory that US law is more er... 'liberal', but not sure. Also not sure which jurisdiction applies here, didn't they sail from Canada or something?

The company is gone I think. It was run on a budget in any case and their only other asset is a fairly ropey old ship.

 

[Bingoman]

I hope they found alive but sadly I cant see it somehow

I guess this could be the last sub going to see the titanic for quite some time after this

 

[blairsh]

Been mentioned somewhere on the thread, but UK law you can't really exclude liability for death or serious injury. I have a vague memory that US law is more er... 'liberal', but not sure. Also not sure which jurisdiction applies here, didn't they sail from Canada or something?

The company is gone I think. It was run on a budget in any case and their only other asset is a fairly ropey old ship.

Sailed from Newfoundland i hear.

 

[planetgeli]

All this 96 hours of oxygen stuff (from which a time scale is now being extrapolated) comes from OceanGate's own specifications. A vehicle whose testing and certifications had been deemed 'insufficient'.

They're dead.

 

[maomao]

I guess this could be the last sub going to see the titanic for quite some time after this

I don't see why it would affect properly built and equipped vehicles. Probably the last jumped up coke can to go down for a while though.

 

[LDC]

Channel 4 news was absolutely damning of the company and its safety record, years of advice and concerns ignored it seems.

 

[pbsmooth]

well, at least the CEO won't have to answer any questions. perhaps it was sabotage...

 

[kebabking]

The bloke seems - from what I read - to be some kind of anti-regulation, hyper-capitalist nutjob.

He's probably the kind of twat who thinks that a Navy spends a billion dollars developing a deep water submersible because it's so inefficient and some immersed in 'pork', where as he can do it for $30k with gaffer tape and a Screwfix catalogue.

I read an interview he did where he said there are hazards down there - fishing nets, the Titanic wreck, debris field etc, but he won't have an accident, because (and wait for it) he'll be careful.

It doesn't need to be over-enginered, it doesn't need redundancies, and no single points of failure for critical systems because he'll be careful...

Interesting tweet from Maz - that links to the article - she's a RAAF P-3 Sqn Cmdr, who's done an exchange tour as a test pilot with the USAF.

 

[Flavour]

I want a Leonardo Dicaprio and Kate Winslet reunión in the film, as two unlikely rescue workers brought in at the last minute on two different search ships, and they fall in love despite coming from different backgrounds. Then the search is called off cos the titan is obvz fucked and Leo and Kate are sadly separated forever

 

[T & P]

All this 96 hours of oxygen stuff (from which a time scale is now being extrapolated) comes from OceanGate's own specifications. A vehicle whose testing and certifications had been deemed 'insufficient'.

They're dead.

Even if the quoted range of oxigen is accurate, I suspect they might have used average human oxygen consumption whilst at rest. It's probably safe to assume five people in an elevated state of stress and anxiety are going to consume the available air at a far faster rate

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Also not sure which jurisdiction applies here, didn't they sail from Canada or something?

Could be ‘international waters’ so no jurisdiction?
Although they had to sell the tickets somewhere. There was also massive wavers that were signed. Not sure how they would stand up in court though.

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

So to add to the nightmare thoughts.in what should just be a philosophical thought experiment but isn’t.

Given they may be alive, and the experience of at least two (Rush and Nargeolent) means there woukd be an excellent understanding of the search and rescue operation and the issues faced, would you, in Shahzada Dawood’s place suggest/request one of the others kill you to decrease oxygen consumption/ increase the window for rescue by 20% or about 8 hours, to increase the odds of your son surviving?

What about the others, as captain does Rush have a responsibility to the others to do this and give them extra time?

This is basically the people tied to the railway moral question reframed.

Five people tied to a railway track and there's a train approaching and their deaths are pretty much inevitable, if you do nothing.

So do you pull the lever and divert the train onto the alternative track? There is one person tied to that railway track.

Do nothing, five people die.
Do something, one person dies, but you're responsible for their death (and also saving five other lives).

Play around with the numbers. Would you save 30 by killing one? A hundred? What if you wouldn't kill anyone no matter how many lives you might save? What if the one person is Hitler and you could save millions?

 

[NoXion]

Now here's an interesting story from all the way back in 2001, courtesy of Reddit: BBC News | AMERICAS | Titanic couple take the plunge

The couple went down in the Russian Mir sub and it only cost them $36,000. So not only was this OceanGate venture using an incredibly shitty design, they were doing so while charging multiple times the rate one could do it in a proper submersible.

This whole story just gets worse and worse for OceanGate the more I hear about it.

 

[Flavour]

Now here's an interesting story from all way back in 2001, courtesy of Reddit: BBC News | AMERICAS | Titanic couple take the plunge

The couple went down in the Russian Mir sub and it only cost them $36,000. So not only was this OceanGate venture using an incredibly shitty design, they were doing so while charging multiple times the rate one could do it in a proper submersible.

This whole story just gets worse and worse for OceanGate the more I hear about it.

Inflation is mad innit

 

[AverageJoe]

This is basically the people tied to the railway moral question reframed.

Five people tied to a railway track and there's a train approaching and their deaths are pretty much inevitable, if you do nothing.

So do you pull the lever and divert the train onto the alternative track? There is one person tied to that railway track.

Do nothing, five people die.
Do something, one person dies, but you're responsible for their death (and also saving five other lives).

Play around with the numbers. Would you save 30 by killing one? A hundred? What if you wouldn't kill anyone no matter how many lives you might save? What if the one person is Hitler and you could save millions?

Are you Sarah Connor?

 

[weltweit]

Article on the BBC

The search for the missing Titanic sub and how it might be found

Maps and graphics showing how rescue teams are racing against time as they scour a huge search area.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Cid]

Tangent... the first expedition to Challenger deep in the bathyscaphe Trieste took place in 1960. They used a large tank of gasoline for buoyancy because the steel sphere was so heavy (127mm thick, with a plexiglass viewport). Took 4.5 hours to descend and one of the viewports cracked on the way down. They even had voice coms via sonar/hydrophone (no idea), with a 7 second delay (not bad, apparently because the speed of sound is 5x faster in water). Also you get to go down with these two hot bois (Don Walsh and Jacques Piccard) instead of a brace of billionaires:

 

[Magnus McGinty]

This is basically the people tied to the railway moral question reframed.

Five people tied to a railway track and there's a train approaching and their deaths are pretty much inevitable, if you do nothing.

So do you pull the lever and divert the train onto the alternative track? There is one person tied to that railway track.

Do nothing, five people die.
Do something, one person dies, but you're responsible for their death (and also saving five other lives).

Play around with the numbers. Would you save 30 by killing one? A hundred? What if you wouldn't kill anyone no matter how many lives you might save? What if the one person is Hitler and you could save millions?

The one person who should die is the only one who can operate the sub. Quite the dilemma.

 

[Flavour]

Can you imagine if they find it and get them and they're all alive though it would be so epic, the bidding war for the film rights would be mental. No film if they're all dead

 

[Magnus McGinty]

No hope now unless they’re on the surface. Not much hope there either.

 

[Cid]

Could be ‘international waters’ so no jurisdiction?
Although they had to sell the tickets somewhere. There was also massive wavers that were signed. Not sure how they would stand up in court though.

Rusty as the titanic itself on this, but bear in mind we're talking about exclusions for negligence. So possibly you could exclude liability for something where the risks are plainly understood and the equipment verifiably within legal specifications. Thinking a ski trip, skydiving or something. But if you can show that the operators were negligent, no amount of waivers will get them out. Again, UK law, no idea what applies here.

 

[NoXion]

Inflation is mad innit

It would be about $62k nowadays I reckon.

 

[Raheem]

No hope now unless they’re on the surface. Not much hope there either.

On the surface, you would think the US military could find them with satellites and some sort of software.

 

[blairsh]

On the surface, you would think the US military could find them with satellites and some sort of software.

You'd think a drone strike in that case, seeing as they're innocent civillians.

 

[Yossarian]

A poet's take on the Titan:

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

and on the surface rescue orange is a nice colour, just like all lifeboats, life rings, almost all lifejackets (SOLAS type) etc...

Isn't the so-called 'black box' flight recorder on aeroplanes actually orange?

 

[Raheem]

That's the epitaph for one headstone sorted then.

 

[agricola]

Rusty as the titanic itself on this, but bear in mind we're talking about exclusions for negligence. So possibly you could exclude liability for something where the risks are plainly understood and the equipment verifiably within legal specifications. Thinking a ski trip, skydiving or something. But if you can show that the operators were negligent, no amount of waivers will get them out. Again, UK law, no idea what applies here.

Absolutely. The legal framework they set up to prevent lawsuits when things went wrong is almost certainly as badly designed as the submarine was - all they'll have to prove (if there is anything worth suing afterwards) is that they knew or should have known the thing was manifestly unsafe and all those waivers won't matter a damn. The court will find they had no business putting people in it, and that will be that.

 

[weltweit]

Did the sub have an umbilical cable to the surface? Is that what comms were routed through? If so then it may have been a cable break that cut the comms.

But also assuming there was an umbilical, the surface ship might know at what depth the sub was when comms were lost from the amount of cable that had been let out.

I warrant that that does not indicate where they are now and what problems they may have presently, unfortunately.