Titanic tourist sub missing

That certainly struck me as a bit weird too. I would presume (ha ha) that they had some sort of "flight plan" to measure things against and no one said anything about the rate when it was first reported? Not even, "OH goody. We are going faster than expected and should be there in 15 minutes"?

Some possibilities:

- The Titan had been regularly diving the wreck at or near this rate, so it didn't stand out as anomalous to the operators

- A company culture problem; e.g. Rush was the pilot on this dive and the boss gets to do whatever the boss wants

- Rush and Nargeolet were considered to be the company's top experts on the submersible and the dive, so it was left to them to decide whether things like the rate of decent were "wrong".
 
Could be they were just trying to push things and it got out of hand. What exactly are the safe limits of an untried pressure hull construction? Cutting corners for the bottom line seems to be the only consistent tenet held to. Faster rates mean quicker turnaround time. As other reports indicate, from pervious dives where they had other passengers onboard the support vessel waiting for their turn.
 
Wait, I’m missing or confusing something here. I seem to recall they recovered part of the craft with a bit of the landing frame still attached. If they had dropped the frame that wouldn’t be the case, if they tried to drop it and it only partially detached that could have been problematic and might have imparted a roll or yaw momentum to the craft. Depending on where it was still attached.


ETA: Must just be me, just saw a picture of the recovered landing frame and it looks mostly intact but hard to see the one corner. I could have sworn I read and saw a graphic showing a leg and what looked like part of a skid still attached.
 
Last edited:
.....

If I were designing the sub, I would make it so that it would be able to descend and ascend without thrusters, not just because it's a fail safe mode, but also because you don't need to use so much electrical charge running the thrusters.

I keep referring to Deepsea Challenger because it is so much more sophisticated than this thing.

It's thrusters are only intended for maneuvering when they reach the target area, never for ascent descent..

For descent the following method was used:

The buoyancy of the DSC increased with depth because its net volume changed less with hydrostatic compression than seawater. Therefore, the vehicle is ballasted on the ship to be neutrally buoyant at the target depth of the given dive.

An adjustable-trim system using steel-shot held by an electromagnet is incorporated to allow the vehicle to maintain neutral buoyancy when taking on samples or exploring up a slope or a rising feature.


I seem to remember in one of the videos I saw about Deepsea Challenger, they did release some steel shot to slow the descent.
 
Let's not forget that the transscript about fast descent is unconfirmed. What strikes me as fishy is that neither topside nor sub crew reacted to the first or at least the second report indicating too fast descent. A reasonable reaction would be to immediately try to slow the descent and if unsuccessful, abort the mission and make for the surface.

Hans

A few things spring to mind about that transcript.

Firstly while it is not an official release, it looks plausible and seems to align with the known timeline as well as previous comments by other deep sea people, such as James Cameron.

The transcript has been available for a couple of weeks, and yet OceanGate and those involved in the investigation of the accident have not called it out as a fake. IMO, there can only be a limited number of realistic reasons why they are not saying anything...

1. The transcript is not the official one, but whoever made it has enough inside knowledge to make it very close to what actually happened, so they (OG and the investigators) don't see any point getting into an argument over semantics.

2. The transcript is genuine - and if they were to release a statement saying its a fake, it could come back later to bite them if/when the actual transcript is released.

3. OG and the investigators simply choose to make no comment and do not wish to enter the debate.

I think one of the first two is most likely. Investigators were very quick to come down on the release of the so-called audio clip of the Titan implosion that turned out to be fake, but they are remaining silent on this one. Why?
 
The transcript has been available for a couple of weeks, and yet OceanGate and those involved in the investigation of the accident have not called it out as a fake.
. . .

Investigators were very quick to come down on the release of the so-called audio clip of the Titan implosion that turned out to be fake, but they are remaining silent on this one. Why?

That does weigh in favor of it being genuine. It's a "dog not barking" sort of evidence (there was a famous Sherlock Holmes story where Holmes deduced what happened in part because a dog hadn't barked where it would normally bark if a suspicious stranger were lurking around.)

If it is fake, why haven't the people who know what the real transcript actually says come out and said so?
 
That does weigh in favor of it being genuine. It's a "dog not barking" sort of evidence (there was a famous Sherlock Holmes story where Holmes deduced what happened in part because a dog hadn't barked where it would normally bark if a suspicious stranger were lurking around.)

If it is fake, why haven't the people who know what the real transcript actually says come out and said so?

OceanGate doesn't seem to have a professional PR person, just a sales staff. Judging by their lack of contingency planning on just about every level, whoever the poor person is who has to deal with the press is...well...in over their heads.

As for the rate of descent, odds are they encountered a swift downward current. Titan lacked important backup systems for ballast and cutting weight, and even then it might not have made a difference. I doubt they were using thrusters, that's a waste of battery power for something gravity will do for free.
 
OceanGate doesn't seem to have a professional PR person, just a sales staff. Judging by their lack of contingency planning on just about every level, whoever the poor person is who has to deal with the press is...well...in over their heads.

Yeah, I understand why they might not want to comment, but I was thinking it would come from the investigators, either Canadian or US, not OceanGate itself.

As for the rate of descent, odds are they encountered a swift downward current. Titan lacked important backup systems for ballast and cutting weight, and even then it might not have made a difference. I doubt they were using thrusters, that's a waste of battery power for something gravity will do for free.

Maybe. I hadn't thought about the possibility of a vertical current. I was thinking maybe there was more weight in the sub than they had accounted for.
 
OceanGate doesn't seem to have a professional PR person, just a sales staff. Judging by their lack of contingency planning on just about every level, whoever the poor person is who has to deal with the press is...well...in over their heads.

As for the rate of descent, odds are they encountered a swift downward current. Titan lacked important backup systems for ballast and cutting weight, and even then it might not have made a difference. I doubt they were using thrusters, that's a waste of battery power for something gravity will do for free.

A downward current caused by what?
 
That certainly struck me as a bit weird too. I would presume (ha ha) that they had some sort of "flight plan" to measure things against and no one said anything about the rate when it was first reported? Not even, "OH goody. We are going faster than expected and should be there in 15 minutes"?

Don’t forget this is not a transcript of a human conversation but of a sequence of text messages, allegedly. You wouldn’t expect to see any chit chat because it would have to be typed. The ignoring of the descent rate fits with what we have all heard about Stockton Rush, but then again, somebody faking the transcript is going to play to our biases.
 
Nah - the thermohaline circulation is something like a few inches per hour, right? I don't think it would be a contributing factor in this case.

I've no idea. Somebody questioned the idea of a downward current, so I just posted an article that shows that such things exist.

If the transcript is genuine, I'd say the most likely cause is that the submersible was overweight for some reason.
 
A downward current caused by what?

That's an area where you have cold water mixing with the edge of the Gulf Stream. It's June, warmer waters moving up from the Carolinas cool, and the continental shelf juts out from St. Johns, Newfoundland which - could - influence water movement at certain depths intermittently. This phenomenon happens in other places, Hawaii comes to mind, but I think we run into them here on the Central California coastline once in a while.

Keep in mind, we don't send people this deep very often, and I don't think down currents are a big issue with ROVs. Think down-draft with airplanes. Any time you have different temperate masses circulating, cold wants to go down, warm wants to go up. At the ocean's surface this can cause rouge waves, we discovered this off South Africa. The issue is Marine Science doesn't go deep as often as it can in shallower waters due cost in equipment, fuel, access to vessels, etc compared to studying coral reefs, or intertidal regions that are close to shore. There's still so much to learn about how the water column works in the open ocean, but my money would be on a down-current. That or the ballast on Titan was not properly set. I know that even on a quality submersible that sometimes the ability to surface is not an automatic even in good conditions. I'll wait until an official report is completed, I don't like speculating to the extent I already have with this case.:thumbsup:
 
That's an area where you have cold water mixing with the edge of the Gulf Stream. It's June, warmer waters moving up from the Carolinas cool, and the continental shelf juts out from St. Johns, Newfoundland which - could - influence water movement at certain depths intermittently. This phenomenon happens in other places, Hawaii comes to mind, but I think we run into them here on the Central California coastline once in a while.

Keep in mind, we don't send people this deep very often, and I don't think down currents are a big issue with ROVs. Think down-draft with airplanes. Any time you have different temperate masses circulating, cold wants to go down, warm wants to go up. At the ocean's surface this can cause rouge waves, we discovered this off South Africa. The issue is Marine Science doesn't go deep as often as it can in shallower waters due cost in equipment, fuel, access to vessels, etc compared to studying coral reefs, or intertidal regions that are close to shore. There's still so much to learn about how the water column works in the open ocean, but my money would be on a down-current. That or the ballast on Titan was not properly set. I know that even on a quality submersible that sometimes the ability to surface is not an automatic even in good conditions. I'll wait until an official report is completed, I don't like speculating to the extent I already have with this case.:thumbsup:

Bold - Unless the salinity of the warm water makes it denser than the cold.

While I wouldn't call myself an expert on ocean dynamics, my work is as a research technician on projects investigating North Atlantic currents. So, I know the basics.

My question was more, how can there be a strong vertical current in that location.
 
Yeah, I understand why they might not want to comment, but I was thinking it would come from the investigators, either Canadian or US, not OceanGate itself.



Maybe. I hadn't thought about the possibility of a vertical current. I was thinking maybe there was more weight in the sub than they had accounted for.

Hmm...

I'm only familiar with aircraft investigations, but generally they don't do a lot (or any) press.

Sometimes you'll see a government appointed spokesperson making statements to the press, but investigators generally don't do much other than investigate, analyse and write a detailed, technical report. Sometimes an investigation team will do a press conference when the report is published, but again, I think that is quite rare.
 
The United States' National Transportation Safety Board is investigating the accident. They stated:
The NTSB will gather information, analyze the facts, determine a probable cause and issue any necessary safety recommendations. An NTSB investigator was on scene in St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada during recovery efforts. The NTSB will issue a final report in 12 to 24 months. NTSB link

NTSB reports are released to the public when completed usually in PDF format. Marine accident reports are available here.
Accident Reports are one of the main products of an NTSB investigation. Reports provide details about the accident, analysis of the factual data, conclusions and the probable cause of the accident, and the related safety recommendations.

They're a public agency, essentially working on the public's behalf. NTSB makes it clear they are committed to "transparency, participation, and collaboration." NTSB Open Government Commitment
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom