Oceangate Sub Missing

I’m really hoping they got no warning signs the sub was in trouble

Unfortunately not, from the article:

McCallum, who was leading an expedition in Papua New Guinea at the time, knew the outcome almost instantly. “The report that I got immediately after the event—long before they were overdue—was that the sub was approaching thirty-five hundred metres,” he told me, while the oxygen clock was still ticking. “It dropped weights”—meaning that the team had aborted the dive—“then it lost comms, and lost tracking, and an implosion was heard.”

would the world scramble all those resources for some asylum seekers in dinghys?

Unfortunately we know the answer to this.

Unfortunately we know the answer to this.

There are regular stories of migrants being saved by RNLI etc.

As I’m sure its been alluded to, there are so many lessons to be learnt here in totally different areas in life. When people are demanding to get rid of red tape for a start. Like it’s always an inherently good goal. Best to check why that tape was put they’re in the first place!

I find the ‘elf and safety gorn mad types’ don’t tend to frequent the places where this stuff is needed although are very vocal.

This had regulations but under the guise of ‘mission specialists’ and ‘experimental’ was circumnavigated as a passenger service.

You need both regulation and the ability to innovate and that was in place but was misused.

There are regular stories of migrants being saved by RNLI etc.

Yep not disagreeing with this but I’m thinking of the most recent

From air and by sea, using radar, telephone and radio, officials watched and listened for 13 hours as the migrant ship Adriana lost power, then drifted aimlessly off the coast of Greece in a slowly unfolding humanitarian disaster.

As terrified passengers telephoned for help, humanitarian workers assured them that a rescue team was coming. European border officials, watching aerial footage, prepared to witness what was certain to be a heroic operation.

Yet the Adriana capsized and sank in the presence of a single Greek Coast Guard ship last month, killing more than 600 migrants in a maritime tragedy that was shocking even for the world’s deadliest migrant route.

Winston

Yeah course he has, yeah totally played me – just Like Stockton played the Dawoods.

I’ve actually moved my position on this. Earlier on in the thread (much earlier on) I suggested that overall everybody could make their own decisions but that I was angry the kid had been dragged into it. Now the more people like stevextc ramble on about individual choice without having any skin in the game or literally any idea about anything it shows clearly to me that there should be even more protection, even for billionaires who should know better – .

Why? What is it gives someone else the right to determine what other people do for their leisure?
There is/was a whole load of testing and certification … people on the Titan made their own mind up if they think its important to them or ignore it.
My objection is in legislation preventing them choosing to ignore the certification and disclimer in their leisure activity.

basically to shield them from the clearly ever increasing march of the self assured well funded idiot

but where does that stop ? It’s all a slippery slope and those obsessed by controlling the safety of others don’t stop at shonky subs.

I share the distaste for the 19yr old…. but he’s old enough to vote and affect the lives of others
Superficial

1) Stockton Whatsisface is a narcissistic lunatic who pursued an unwise and deeply irresponsible programme of exploration against all advice, and persuaded / lured / tricked people into taking trips with him.

2) People should be free to do / explore what they want (in international waters) without being beholden to some hypothetical world police force.

It’s possible to hold those two views simultaneously, which I think is SteveXTC’s position. I’m not saying I agree with it – just that it’s a reasonable position to hold – depending on one’s position on the auth / lib spectrum. So no need for name-calling.

That is exactly my position put better than I did.

and persuaded / lured / tricked people into taking trips with him

Perhaps or obviously except these were people with the means to check.

I thought it odd that the expert/guide would put his name to this.

Then that article references his late wife & comments that “I’ve had a good life/ what a place to go out/ it’ll be quick”

it’s almost like he had a death wish, and Rush used his name/ experience to persuade the passengers, sorry “mission specialists”, it’s all ok.

Again 2 separate things… if he has a death wish it’s noone else’s business. If his name is being used without saying “but he doesn’t really care about dying” that’s another.

There is/was a whole load of testing and certification

have you told the authorities of this new information regarding the sub.

if he has a death wish it’s noone else’s business

Well it is actually, in the case of the Titan quite a few other people’s business, and many millions of dollars.

There are less disruptive and costly ways of ending your own life. Plus society has a limited but recognised duty of care towards those who want to end their lives.

I doubt many people would want to live in a society that didn’t.

If you have the time to spare this quite interesting.

There are regular stories of migrants being saved by RNLI etc.

Ah well if there’s “regular stories” humanity must be doing a bang up job of protecting the most vulnerable and definitely not prioritising a handful of society’s mega-wealthy leaches…

https://www.rescue.org/article/greek-shipwreck-everything-you-need-know

There’s an ocean of differences between the two cases. In the case of the Titan, almost all of the initial effort was to search for it. In the migrant case it was known where it was. In the case of the Titan, there was a very fixed timeline to find and rescue a vessel in an unknown location and without communication.In the migrant case, it was a vessel without power, adrift in the sea in a known position and in communication. In the case of the Titan, crew rescue could happen by almost any size of vessel, in the migrant case you needed capacity for several hundred souls. For the Titan there were no legal questions, but for the migrants, this is far more complex.

I fervently believe wealth and fame had nothing to do with it, people who live and work at sea don’t usually dick about with this stuff.

There is/was a whole load of testing and certification … people on the Titan made their own mind up if they think its important to them or ignore it.

but… there quite obviously wasn’t. Whatever you may feel about peoples rights to make there own choices in this instance Steve,  there simply wasn’t informed consent, and that is a crucial point that is completely escaping you

There’s an ocean of differences between the two cases.

I agree and I think that those drawing parallels between them are mostly just indulging in lazy, predictable point scoring.

but where does that stop ? It’s all a slippery slope and those obsessed by controlling the safety of others don’t stop at shonky subs.

Steve, can you explain how this slippery slope is actually a thing?

maybe complete the sentence… “first they came for our experimental deep water subs, and we did nothing. then….”

There is/was a whole load of testing and certification …

The CEO was selling it as a plus point that there wasn’t. Innovation and all that.

As I’ve said before, no one is stopping folk from trying to get themselves to the bottom of the sea. What they are doing is trying to stop dreaming chancers from being wreckless (in more ways than one, lulz) with other peoples (customers) lives.

The CEO and Oceangate themselves mis sold their safety and capabilities.  They continually stated that the craft was developed and tested using U Washington and Boeing Composites, but this wasn’t the case.  The work completed by both was for sub-scale demonstrators at very reduced mission requirements.  Later packages of work which weren’t paid for or completed were supposed to test and develop for Titan.  OG didn’t continue this research and instead pressed ahead seemingly assuming that the results of subscale testing were directly projectable to the full scale product/mission and told prospective customers, that their product had been developed using those partners, which, in a sense it had, but the Devil’s in the detail and that detail is what was either lied about directly or was a lie of omission on the part of OG and its CEO.

have you told the authorities of this new information regarding the sub.

but… there quite obviously wasn’t. Whatever you may feel about peoples rights to make there own choices in this instance Steve, there simply wasn’t informed consent, and that is a crucial point that is completely escaping you

Perhaps I need to clarfy that: There is/was extensive certification available but Oceangate/CEO decided to ignore it (or say it doesn’t apply) but those on the sub and others offered the chance had the opportunity and resources to find this out and make their own decision EITHER/OR because they have the financial resources or because they are part of what Cameron called “the community”.

This isn’t a scheduled ferry/plane/train etc. it’s not even a private charter of the type “uninformed people” might do as a one off balloon trip/aerobatic flight or driving the Nuremberg ring etc. its 4000m/13100′ which puts it in the same sort of exclusive risk as a flight in a SR71 or land/water speed record / space shuttle
As Spin (I think) said earlier it’s the classic black adder “nautical opinion is divided” to put that in OceanGate .. “everyone else thinks its an uncertified death trap”…

I was going to answer this separately but it seems to illustrate the difference …
Jonnyboi

Steve, can you explain how this slippery slope is actually a thing?

maybe complete the sentence… “first they came for our experimental deep water subs, and we did nothing. then….”

Waverley council recently stuck their uniformed noses into bulldozing a jump…. (Pure Darkness) on health and safety grounds. Anyone who knew it (whether they rode it or not) would have to honestly say you couldn’t accidentally roll in… it wasn’t round some blind bend and a 20′ gap you couldn’t see you had to stare right down the roll-in.

no-one ever rolled into it uniformed …

Ernielynch

There are less disruptive and costly ways of ending your own life. Plus society has a limited but recognised duty of care towards those who want to end their lives.

I doubt many people would want to live in a society that didn’t.

Have you even read what you wrote and thought it through?
A majority get to make up the rules for a minority on the only thing in their entire life they should have complete control over and criminalise it .. and we even call this a progressive society.
Have you even considered it is for many this obsession of a larger society with control over what we can and can’t do that makes not wanting to wake up for another day in it more attractive?

Nuremberg doesn’t have a ring road as such but getting to the airport can be tricky at rush hour

Stockton Rush undoubtedly “encouraged” “mission specialists” to part with their money to take a trip on Titan. How much of his sales pitch was true, how much an exaggeration and how much much pure sales pitch isn’t clear but however he couched it, it cost four people their lives.

Daffy
Full Member
There’s an ocean of differences between the two cases. In the case of the Titan, almost all of the initial effort was to search for it. In the migrant case it was known where it was. In the case of the Titan, there was a very fixed timeline to find and rescue a vessel in an unknown location and without communication. In the migrant case, it was a vessel without power, adrift in the sea in a known position and in communication. In the case of the Titan, crew rescue could happen by almost any size of vessel, in the migrant case you needed capacity for several hundred souls. For the Titan there were no legal questions, but for the migrants, this is far more complex.

I fervently believe wealth and fame had nothing to do with it, people who live and work at sea don’t usually dick about with this stuff.

I suppose we’ll just have to disagree then…

I fervently believe money and fame had everything to do with the scale of the Ocean Gate response.

I also believe the lack of resources being thrown at migrant boats has everything to do with the lack of visibility, wealth, influence and media presence wielded by those aboard. It only made a “good Story” after several hundred people had died, and even now press seem to be tip-toeing around attributing liability or motives to the authorities involved.

Unfortunately not, from the article:

McCallum, who was leading an expedition in Papua New Guinea at the time, knew the outcome almost instantly. “The report that I got immediately after the event—long before they were overdue—was that the sub was approaching thirty-five hundred metres,” he told me, while the oxygen clock was still ticking. “It dropped weights”—meaning that the team had aborted the dive—“then it lost comms, and lost tracking, and an implosion was heard.”

Fortunately, Rush had also assured them that there would be plenty of time to abort the dive if the auditory sensors went off, so hopefully they still had a false sense of security up until the final millisecond.

From the article in The New Yorker mentioned above:

Rush was furious; he called a meeting that afternoon, and recorded it on his phone. For the next two hours, the OceanGate leadership insisted that no hull testing was necessary—an acoustic monitoring system, to detect fraying fibres, would serve in its place. According to the company, the system would alert the pilot to the possibility of catastrophic failure “with enough time to arrest the descent and safely return to surface.” But, in a court filing, Lochridge’s lawyer wrote, “this type of acoustic analysis would only show when a component is about to fail—often milliseconds before an implosion—and would not detect any existing flaws prior to putting pressure onto the hull.” A former senior employee who was present at the meeting told me, “We didn’t even have a baseline. We didn’t know what it would sound like if something went wrong.”

I fervently believe money and fame had everything to do with the scale of the Ocean Gate response.

Probably mostly money – because the would be Titan rescuers would be getting paid to be out there, either privately or via insurance.

those on the sub and others offered the chance had the opportunity and resources to find this out and make their own decision

I suppose that’s what you tell your granny when she’s the victim of some scam or fraud.

Your arguments are straw-clutchingly weak. You’ve lost, give up.

I fervently believe money and fame had everything to do with the scale of the Ocean Gate response.

Suspect the rescue response and coverage would have been similar if it was a crew of deep-sea scientists or rig dive specialists etc. I’m sure the money / fame element adds an additional juicy detail to write about though.

Fortunately, Rush had also assured them that there would be plenty of time to abort the dive if the auditory sensors went off, so hopefully they still had a false sense of security up until the final millisecond.

That’s my take too. Must have been scary but perhaps not completely terrifying. Either way I’m not sure it matters too much, it sounds like it was a few moments (a minute?) of fear before they were instantly crushed. That seems to me better than spending days contemplating your inevitable asphyxiation.

I suppose that’s what you tell your granny when she’s the victim of some scam or fraud.

Your arguments are straw-clutchingly weak. You’ve lost, give up.

FYI that’s not a rebuttal.

Comparing this to a scam of vulnerable people is very different, for the very reason that elderly people may not have the wherewithal to make informed decisions. Do you have the same sympathy for people who fall for the daft get-rich-quick BitCoin scams on TikTok? Perhaps the government should take everyone’s money and keep it safe so they can’t fall prey to such scams?

cookea

I suppose we’ll just have to disagree then…

I fervently believe money and fame had everything to do with the scale of the Ocean Gate response.

However much you or anyone else separates them or not it highlights the difference not only of the response but the media attention and how the two are intertwined. Whatever you think about legislation against extreme sports I can’t see how people can’t see a difference between doing something dangerous through sheer desperation and for shits and giggles.

but where does that stop ? It’s all a slippery slope and those obsessed by controlling the safety of others don’t stop at shonky subs.

There’s no slippery slope here, look at climbing and mountaineering for example. The professional guiding/instruction side of it is regulated in a number of ways but there are no moves to stop individuals engaging in risky behavior themselves.

I suppose that’s what you tell your granny when she’s the victim of some scam or fraud.

My granny, were she alive didn’t have a whole security staff whose job it was to inform her of risks.

Your arguments are straw-clutchingly weak. You’ve lost, give up.

What is the other argument? I haven’t seen any other argument than some self appointed people wish to impose their rules on others.

Steve, am I reading it right that you think regulating the safety requirements for paying passengers on deep sea submarines is the sort of slippery slope that means a landowner may decide to remove mountain bike trails?

Spin

There’s no slippery slope here, look at climbing and mountaineering for example. The professional guiding/instruction side of it is regulated in a number of ways but there are no moves to stop individuals engaging in risky behavior themselves.

Yes and no … which is saying directly and indirectly.

https://www.climbers-club.co.uk/sport-climbing-banned-in-france/

Whereas the legislation in France as in the UK is some backwards liability of landowners for what people choose to do on their land it is the same arguments.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/clifton-suspension-bridge-warning-base-7103879

https://www.hcn.org/issues/47.12/deaths-renew-calls-for-national-parks-to-rescind-base-jumping-bans

The irony being that making extreme sports illegal not only makes them more popular amongst some but increases the danger.

Sympathy isn’t the issue. Whether such scams should be illegal is. Not all grannies (or other scam victims, such as those who get ripped off on eBay, as seen regularly enough here) are vulnerable. And it’s not about banning the victims from spending their money, but banning the scam artists from ripping them off.

Poly

Steve, am I reading it right that you think regulating the safety requirements for paying passengers on deep sea submarines is the sort of slippery slope that means a landowner may decide to remove mountain bike trails?

I’m saying classing these as “fare paying passengers” in the same was as those on the 07:34 from Piccadilly is an extreme stretch. If I turn up at Ambleside for the ferry that’s different to turning up at Coniston to have a go in Bluebird whether I pay or not.

One I have an expectation it’s safe, the other a reasonable expectation I’m going to die.

that means a landowner may decide to remove mountain bike trails?

Not only the landowner, as far as I know Pure Darkness was not on council owned land but Waverley council involved itself for example because people who are not riding it complained .

the other a reasonable expectation I’m going to die

Rush lied to his passengers and told them it was all super dooper wooper safe because they could just toodle on up to the surface if owt went wrong.

He was a narcissistic scumbag who killed his passengers with unchecked arrogance and ego.

theCaptain

Sympathy isn’t the issue. Whether such scams should be illegal is. Not all grannies (or other scam victims, such as those who get ripped off on eBay, as seen regularly enough here) are vulnerable. And it’s not about banning the victims from spending their money, but banning the scam artists from ripping them off.

Surely the scam aspect is already illegal?

If not then I’m 100% behind that… what I’m against is legislation preventing people perfectly capable of performing due diligence deciding they are going to ignore it.

Everyone on that sub (possibly with the regrettable exception of the 19yr old) had bells, sirens and flashing lights and chose to hit the buttons that need to be pressed in a specific order to silence them.

what I’m against is legislation preventing people perfectly capable of performing due diligence deciding they are going to ignore it.

How exactly? Ok so the people who happened to be on this dive could have afforded to pay for a investigator who probably would have dug up this dirt seeing how quickly the papers did (although that said considering oceangate were apparently a bit sue happy thats possibly not the case) but thats not always going to be true.
Do you want an equivalent of the financial industries certified investors where if you have enough case you are assumed to be able to look after yourself?

dissonance

How exactly? Ok so the people who happened to be on this dive could have afforded to pay for a investigator who probably would have dug up this dirt seeing how quickly the papers did (although that said considering oceangate were apparently a bit sue happy thats possibly not the case) but thats not always going to be true.

Insofar as this is “they were fare paying passengers/pilot” … a couple of whom were part of “the community” and a couple were at the point of …

Do you want an equivalent of the financial industries certified investors where if you have enough case you are assumed to be able to look after yourself?

assuming you mean cash….

Assuming they didn’t already know what happens to a tin can (or carbon fibre/titanium) one of it implodes at 4000m that’s not an expert type question for a subject matter expert – anyone with a science or engineering background can work that out. They would also have a professional security detail… who again may not be experts in subs but again we aren’t talking about “is it a bit risky” here or “general public”… and in any case would know someone to call as a first step.

Just to give an example for what I’d personally expect…
Lets say I book a ballooning trip (already many many times safer) in the UK fromt he UK with a UK company I pretty much expect their are some certificates and such and probably assume so… HOWEVER should I name the company on here and you and everyone else warns me “they are uncertified cowboys” I’m going to do a due diligence.

If I booked a Thomas Cook vacation to Egypt and I then ask them to book me a ballooning trip over the pyramids… and they say “sure” I think I’d still expect them to choose something safe but I’d check up all the same. If they told me “sorry, there are no safe balloon flights in Egypt according to our criteria and by the way your travel insurance will be invalid” and I say “sod it i’ll just book one anyway” I’m ignoring the bells, sirens and flashing lights.

To put this in scam language it’s more Nigerian Prince needs your account details and copies of your passport and birth cert so they can transfer some money they are going to split with you vs “I’ll send a courier with cash”

edit:
Just rushing out but didn’t answer the “not always the case”
I think this is just SO FAR off “the general public” or even an “adventure holiday with moderate risk”… and I did draw the parallel pages ago with financial investments.

I fervently believe money and fame had everything to do with the scale of the Ocean Gate response.

I also believe the lack of resources being thrown at migrant boats has everything to do with the lack of visibility, wealth, influence and media presence wielded by those aboard. It only made a “good Story” after several hundred people had died, and even now press seem to be tip-toeing around attributing liability or motives to the authorities involved.

Do you truly believe that it was because they were wealthy nobodies (had anyone really even heard of them or could relate to them?) that “the world” rushed to save them?  FYI – a total of 8 assets were involved in the search for the titan.  2 aircraft, 6 vessels including its own support ship.  Of those, 1 was a deep sea pipe layer that happened to be in the area, 1 was a French deep sea exploration vessel diverted specifically for its capabilities, 3 were Canadian navy vessels again, in the area.

Most of these ships are like fire engines, they have a single specialist job, when that job is required, they go to where the fire is.

I think the lack of resources being thrown at the migrant boats has more to do with legality and responsibility than it does with money.

Compare US policy WRT to Cuba.  The US intercepts and transports migrants back to Cuba, but if they reach US shores or need medical attention which can’t be provided on-ship, they become refugees.  They have a vested interest in patrolling the waters.  In Europe there is almost no policy, no responsibility.  In both cases, there are few ethics, but at least in the US case, there are rules.

Surely the scam aspect is already illegal?

But isn’t it your position that it shouldn’t be? The customer can do their due diligence. Who are we to tell them not to spend their money on helping out a Nigerian prince in a tight spot. Or buying tickets for their Russian girlfriend to fly over and meet them.

Steve, can you explain how this slippery slope is actually a thing?

maybe complete the sentence… “first they came for our experimental deep water subs, and we did nothing. then….”

Waverley council recently stuck their uniformed noses into bulldozing a jump…. (Pure Darkness) on health and safety grounds. Anyone who knew it (whether they rode it or not) would have to honestly say you couldn’t accidentally roll in… it wasn’t round some blind bend and a 20′ gap you couldn’t see you had to stare right down the roll-in.

no-one ever rolled into it uniformed …

Fair play, I genuinely LOL’d at that analogy.

those on the sub and others offered the chance had the opportunity and resources to find this out and make their own decision EITHER/OR because they have the financial resources or because they are part of what Cameron called “the community”.

Oh **** off! You could say the same for any scam victim, that’s why they call it a **** scam!

This is victim blaming pure and simple, just because they have money doesn’t make them immune to human error.