Titanic tourist sub missing


Christ! That is damning alright. It was lie after lie, cock-up after cock-up.

Rush's defiant, 'I know better' arrogance led him to refusing to follow the testing protocols laid down by the engineers who designed the parts. His blind refusal to follow standards resulted in he and his unfortunate passengers being crushed into pink mist.
 
At least Rush achieved his ambition, he was the Musk of deep sea diving.

I see that as an unfair comparison. While Musk and Rush seem like similar characters, their ability to take engineering advice is/was vastly different.

Musk has done things which some ill-informed people tried to tell him could never be achieved e.g., re-usable booster stages, reusable cargo and crew capsules, strapping three boosters together to make Falcon Heavy. But when actual engineers told him that his idea to make Falcon 9 second stages re-usable was all but impossible, he took that advice and abandoned the idea.

Rush tried to do things that were, from an engineering standpoint, extremely risky and very dangerous. He was told as such by engineers in the Deep Dive community. His response was to call them limited thinkers. When his chief engineer told him the Titan was an unsafe design, Rush fired him and replaced him with college interns.

Many ill-informed people equate Rush's quote "If you're not breaking things, you're not innovating" with Musk's use of fast iteration. They are not at all equal, and Musk has never put put anyone's life at risk while he was breaking stuff.
 
Last edited:
All of Titans "crew" as they called them signed waivers, although theoretically they could be found void if gross negligence is decided. Still, i doubt they will end up getting much, it would probably be at the end of a bankruptcy proceeding.

Gross negligence seems like a slam dunk to me.
 
All of Titans "crew" as they called them signed waivers, although theoretically they could be found void if gross negligence is decided. Still, i doubt they will end up getting much, it would probably be at the end of a bankruptcy proceeding.

I would like to know what the legal situation there is. Whilst I can believe you could sign away your own right to sue in the event of a mishap, I'm not sure that you can sign away somebody else's right to sue.

Maybe somebody who knows the law could comment.
 
I would like to know what the legal situation there is. Whilst I can believe you could sign away your own right to sue in the event of a mishap, I'm not sure that you can sign away somebody else's right to sue.

Maybe somebody who knows the law could comment.

That's a pretty good point. I don't know what the law says though.

The people who are dead obviously cannot sue anyway, as they are dead. Any waiver they signed should only apply to themselves, not their families.
 
I would like to know what the legal situation there is. Whilst I can believe you could sign away your own right to sue in the event of a mishap, I'm not sure that you can sign away somebody else's right to sue.

Maybe somebody who knows the law could comment.

Short answer is that a waiver does not prevent a lawsuit.

*** Caveat: Assuming a lawsuit is files under US Law ***

As Puppycow inferred, gross negligence is one the thing that cannot be overridden by a signed waiver. There are others...

https://bullucklawgroup.com/can-you-sue-if-you-have-signed-a-waiver/

"You still have a legal case in many situations where you signed a waiver. First of all, if the damage you suffered was due to gross negligence, strict liability negligence, or an intentional tort, said waiver cannot protect the company, even if it directly says you cannot sue for those reasons. Even in situations where your harm was caused by general negligence, there may be situations where you still sue"​
 
All of Titans "crew" as they called them signed waivers, although theoretically they could be found void if gross negligence is decided. Still, i doubt they will end up getting much, it would probably be at the end of a bankruptcy proceeding.

Yeah, waivers cannot absolve you of gross negligence. They will do nothing to protect the company in this case. But as you say, there may be little to take.
 
True that, at least Rush managed to do what he set out to do before his bodged together non-solution (to a problem already solved) collapsed in on itself.

There isn't even anything we can look at and say "Yes, Rush contributed something valuable to the field in which we has participating". All he did was come up with a flawed (and frankly stupid) idea of a bathyscape made of composite materials. It was doomed from the beginning, and its development is a dead-end.


All he achieved for his arrogance was to turn himself and three others into pink mist.
 
Last edited:

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