Forum menu
Highly unlikely given the size of the ocean, but I wonder whether a collision could have happened? Either with another sub. Or… the KRAKEN.
Borrowed from a mate's FB. Just about sums it all up.
Black Mirror Season 7: While ghoulishly exploring a famous shipwreck, a group of billionaires become trapped in a small submersible. As the air runs out, news channels fight it out in an amphitheatre of rolling coverage, progressing the story on a minute-by-minute basis, splurging expert opinion, personal details or maritime facts, suffocating their audience in a soulless vacuum... until it is revealed that WE are the submersible's passengers...
Orca attacks.
You have to question the mental faculties of anyone who hops into an ‘experimental’ plastic tube to go to twice the depth as anybody would dare to attempt in one of these…
I wouldn't question their sanity as I assume that is at least in part the appeal - the danger.
And after all no doubt that is also part of the appeal of climbing Everest or swimming the Channel. Only climbing Everest or swimming the Channel represents a huge personal achievement, unlike sitting as a passenger in a small submarine.
I am not a billionaire seeking a meaning to my life but on reflection I can sort of understand the appeal of doing something highly dangerous which involves other people doing all work.
Certainly if they were to actually survive this, as originally intended, it might well add new extra value, and greater appreciation, to their lives.
This was a claim, which wasn’t backed up by testing.
Uh ok. The compositesworld article had this - "Spencer says initial assessment of the cured cylinder shows that it has porosity of <1%." so I took that as 'tested' to some extent. But if there's no way to repeat check the structure properly and see what's happening after each compression cycle it seems risky, more so every dive.
So that means I have to be upset about them? I don’t know them, even if I now know of them. I’m afraid I have no more sympathy of feeling towards them than anyone else who I don’t know about. Sorry if that offends.
Sounds more a lack of empathy than sympathy.
Sounds more a lack of empathy than sympathy.
Whatevs. 🤷♂️
At least I'm being honest rather than undulging in the festival of mawkish faux-compassion.
So that means I have to be upset about them? I don’t know them, even if I now know of them. I’m afraid I have no more sympathy of feeling towards them than anyone else who I don’t know about. Sorry if that offends.
At least I’m being honest rather than undulging in the festival of mawkish faux-compassion.
Sometimes I'm so impressed by how places can bring people together to help another, like this place clubbing together to get a car fixed and delivered to a total stranger like Gunsmas.
And other times I'm reminded quite why that's special.
There is a difference between not showing sympathy/not personally giving a shit, and appearing to be slightly gleeful about their predicament..
At least I’m being honest rather than undulging in the festival of mawkish faux-compassion.
You are not actually being particularly honest. As far as I am aware no one has engaged in "mawkish faux-compassion".
Expressing the hope that they are successfully rescued, and also the belief that dying under particular circumstances must be deeply unpleasant, does not imo represent "faux-compassion", just fairly human emotions.
I regularly watch "Saving Lives At Sea", it is one of my very favourite programmes, the emotions it triggers are very similar to those I am experiencing in connection to this story. There is nothing false about them.
And I tend not to pass judgement on those who are rescued.
while it’s not a nice way to go, lack of oxygen makes suffers Euphoric, so they wouldn’t have been to concerned about their peril. Skip to around 3 mins
That's not entirely true in this case, the build up of CO2 may not be pleasant. Read back a couple of pages for the science.
So hypothermia or Hypoxia first? Assuming they're on the sea floor and haven't imploded?
Horrid thought and dont mean to sound too mawkish.
That’s not entirely true in this case, the build up of CO2 is not pleasant. Read back a couple of pages for the science.
Really depends on the limiting factor of their atmosphere management - it'll have a component to scrub CO2 and a supply of O2 to top up the fraction that's used by the passengers and either of those could be the reason for a 96h timescale. If the O2 runs out while the CO2 scrubber is still working then the fraction of O2 will drop until they become hypoxic, but the CO2 level won't be sufficient to cause discomfort so they'll pass out relatively peacefully. If the CO2 scrubber is the limit then the fraction of CO2 will start to increase which (from personal experience) is extremely unpleasant - I had a partially flooded rebreather at ~40m depth so I was getting CO2 buildup in the breathing loop and it's the closest I ever came to ripping my kit off and bolting for the surface - not a good idea!
You have to question the mental faculties of anyone who hops into an ‘experimental’ plastic tube to go to twice the depth as anybody would dare to attempt in one of these…
Thirteen times the depth isn’t it, military submarines go to about 300m don’t they?
I don't know the exact figures (and they're classified anyway) but i'd put 750m out there as an educated guess.
There is a reason NATOs submarine rescue capability can't/doesn't operate below 1000m, and that's because if one of their big subs sinks below that depth there won't be much left worth rescuing.
That’s not entirely true in this case, the build up of CO2 may not be pleasant. Read back a couple of pages for the science.
It's all conjecture as the two systems will be sort-of separate, there'll be an oxygen supply and a CO2 scrubber, although they may be part of the same piece of equipment they work separately. It's not a case of reducing CO2 into solid carbon.
As it's not been mentioned I presume the oxygen is running out first?
[edit - as the purist said]
I was getting CO2 buildup in the breathing loop and it’s the closest I ever came to ripping my kit off and bolting for the surface
I had a CO2 build up in a dive helmet, worse feeling ever. You feel like you are suffocating and can't take enough breaths, all the more producing more CO2. Horrible.
I think I read there was some doubt about whether this dustbin was equipped with a scrubber.
So hypothermia or Hypoxia first?
I would have though that if the vessel is warm for ~9 hours it'll stay warm, i.e. someone's done the maths and insulated it such that 5 peoples body heat keeps it comfortable?
Also, the sea bed isn't freezing, it's 4deg C as both cooler and warmer water are less dense from that point due to hydrogen bonding. Cold, but not a cold as you'd immediately assume.
I am not a billionaire seeking a meaning to my life but on reflection I can sort of understand the appeal of doing something highly dangerous which involves other people doing all work.
Certainly if they were to actually survive this, as originally intended, it might well add new extra value, and greater appreciation, to their lives.
I think many billionaires are not searching for meaning in their life. On the whole to become a billionaire you have to be very intelligent, hard working, resourceful, risk taking etc etc. I can completely see why they want to do this type of stuff. Many get rich yes, but give back huge amounts at the same time.
I think there is a smaller section of the super rich who lack direction in life, they will be the type who have many super yachts, homes, cars etc without any real passion for them.
I dont think you will find any great explorers in history who started off in a shack, with the exception of maybe baby Jesus if you are that way inclined.
On the whole to become a billionaire you have to be very intelligent, hard working,
No doubt some billionaires are as you describe.
However as per my above comments, many are just lucky.
This episode exposes the point that some billionaires probably aren't that intelligent (aren't good at assessing risk)
This one’s a world record setting pilot, so I guess he is well aware of risk, just has a different attitude to it than others.
Successful entrepreneurs may have a different attitude to risk, but we only tend to hear about the ones whose risks paid off. I'm sure a larger number of similarly risk-happy entrepreneurs ended up bankrupt.
EDIT: Who broke the page formatting then?
It looks like it might have failed at depth. BBC reporting debris field found near Titanic wreck.
I think I read there was some doubt about whether this dustbin was equipped with a scrubber.
Me too, on a BBC report. I can't quite see how that works, but there's a few bits on this sub that seem a bit shonky to me.
Former Royal Navy submarine captain Ryan Ramsey says he looked at videos online of the inside of Titan and could not see a carbon dioxide removal system, known as scrubbers.
Whether it's 4C or 0C, as power runs out they'll be getting cold.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65981277
https://twitter.com/USCGNortheast/status/1671907901542211584?s=20
More stuff on the debris field.
Hopefully for them it was a sudden collapse. They wouldn't of known anything about it.
This one’s a world record setting pilot, so I guess he is well aware of risk
See the (excellent) point @martinhutch makes ☝️
He's been taking risks that are relatively low likelihood, but high impact. And they haven't materialised. so it looks to the observer like it paid off with his world records.
Until this risk materialised now...
...and it now looks like he might have been an idiot all along or at least reckless (I'll leave you to judge that)
What is the likelihood that the banging, then the debris, might indicate they sonehow self imploded it when hope was lost? Grim.
What is the likelihood that the banging, then the debris, might indicate they sonehow self imploded it when hope was lost? Grim
Not sure how they could of done it deliberately?
No-one will ever know for sure, unless they can recover some data from the built in hull monitoring system? I wonder if a SD card could survive that pressure?
Don't know how they would do that, unless they had a gun on board.
Another 5 lives added to the number lost to the 111 year old titanic disaster 🙁
Another footnote in history for the Titanic, now they are immortalised in history in way you wouldn't really want to be.
I actually feel relief if this is how it happened. They wouldn't have known a thing. The alternatives are horrifying.
Good news in a really dark way 🙁
What is the likelihood that the banging, then the debris, might indicate they sonehow self imploded it when hope was lost? Grim.
Surely it's more likely that the banging was completely unrelated and they died immediately when communication was lost.
A non certified & unconventional design of sub + seemingly reckless boss + 300bar of pressure, all adds up to a likely catastrophic failure
Whatever waivers they signed, I suspect legal action will be incoming
There looked to be a bit more to the sub than just the main pressure hull. Debris does not automatically mean the whole thing has been destroyed or that the debris is from the sub (though given how extensively this area has been researched I'd imagine the existing debris fields are well known).
That said sadly I think they are likely long dead.
Another footnote in history for the Titanic, now they are immortalised in history in way you wouldn’t really want to be.
And the scattered remains of the OceanGate becomes a point of interest for future sightseeing parties?
That would be ironic.
Don’t know how they would do that, unless they had a gun on board.
Screwdriver or other sharp object on the viewing portal? Unlikely though.
How good do you think the lawyers of dead billionaires are?
There looked to be a bit more to the sub than just the main pressure hull. Debris does not automatically mean the whole thing has been destroyed or that the debris is from the sub (though given how extensively this area has been researched I’d imagine the existing debris fields are well known).
How would a carbon fibre hull collapse? Not being a STW BigHitter ™️, my bikes are not made of carbon so no idea how it fails? You'd imagine a regular sub would just collapse like a coke can in a vacuum.
It's significantly dark at these depths and the search area is huge. The rov has only been on station for a short time and is very slow moving. It's possible that they had an indication of where to look to find the debris. It doesn't sound good but it's possible the debris is from attempts to make the craft buoyant, i.e the jettison components. Which could mean the craft is intact. They haven't mentioned at what point the 30 minute banging stopped, if it has?
How good do you think the lawyers of dead billionaires are?
At suing the dead owner of a company?
The speculation about the debris on the news is maddening, the desperate attempt to be 'first' is predatory.
It's been like that since 9/11.
Twenty-Four hour rolling newsgasm.
How would a carbon fibre hull collapse? Not being a STW BigHitter ™️, my bikes are not made of carbon so no idea how it fails? You’d imagine a regular sub would just collapse like a coke can in a vacuum.
Going by reports, this sub had been downgraded due to structural fatigue, unless they are NDT'ing the structure regular, i.e. hull scanning or the likes, you aren't really sure of the structural integrity, it's all good and well designing something that has passed testing for entry to service, but in-service surveillance is critical, to pick up on damage, corrosion, etc.
It’s been like that since 9/11.
Twenty-Four hour rolling newsgasm.
Aye, was always grateful for Op Minimise on tour, stops the shitehawks leaking names before family were told. The press would have you believe they exercised restraint out of respect.
How would a carbon fibre hull collapse?
From the engineer who sued them after being fired:
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.
So that's one possible reason why it 'might' fail not on the first outing, but after a number of them, with the repeated (and massive) changes in pressure. I suppose they might retrieve a bit of the carbon from the bit that breached, if it was that that failed, rather than the titanium bits, or the window, but it's equally possible that we'll never find out.