Ignore all the warnings
Warnings over the safety of OceanGate’s Titan submersible were repeatedly dismissed by the CEO of the company, email exchanges with a leading deep sea exploration specialist show. In messages seen by the BBC, Rob McCallum told OceanGate CEO Stockton Rush that he was potentially putting his clients at risk and urged him to stop using the sub until it had been classified by an independent body.
Mr Rush responded that he was “tired of industry players who try to use a safety argument to stop innovation”.
Right on. Who cares about safety? Full speed ahead.
(I don’t know why the BBC quotes this Rob McCallum fella without saying who he is.)
The tense exchange ended after OceanGate’s lawyers threatened legal action, Mr McCallum said.
“I think you are potentially placing yourself and your clients in a dangerous dynamic,” he wrote to the OceanGate boss in March 2018. “In your race to Titanic you are mirroring that famous catch cry: ‘She is unsinkable'”.
In the messages, Mr Rush, who was among five passengers who died when the Titan experienced what officials believe was a “catastrophic implosion” on Sunday, expresses frustration with the criticism of Titan’s safety measures. “We have heard the baseless cries of ‘you are going to kill someone’ way too often,” he wrote. “I take this as a serious personal insult.”
How trumpish. “Dangerous things are dangerous” is not a personal insult. Taking true statements about risk personally is so trumpish.
Mr McCallum told the BBC that he repeatedly urged the company to seek certification for the Titan before using it for commercial tours. The vessel was never certified or classed.
What?!
Throughout the exchange, Mr Rush defended his credentials and questioned the existing framework around deep sea expeditions.
He said “industry players” were trying to stop “new entrants from entering their small existing market”.
Yeah see items like this shouldn’t be a “market” at all.
“The industry has been trying for several years to get Stockton Rush to halt his programme for two reasons,” Mr McCallum, a specialist who runs his own ocean expedition company, told the BBC on Friday.
Whew, we finally learn who he is.
“One is that carbon fibre is not an acceptable material,” he said. “The other is that this was the only submersible in the world doing commercial work that was unclassed. It was not certified by an independent agency.”
Free ennerprise, baby.
“Stockton fancied himself as somewhat of a maverick entrepreneur,” Mr McCallum said. “He liked to think outside the box, didn’t like to be penned in by rules. But there are rules – and then there are sound engineering principles and the laws of physics.”
He maintains that nobody should have travelled in the Titan sub. “If you steer away from sound engineering principles, which are all based on hard won experience, there is a price to pay, and it’s a terrible price,” he said. “So it should never be allowed to happen again. It shouldn’t have been allowed to happen this time.”
It will be allowed to happen again.
As I understand it, carbon fiber weakens under compression. Sort of the opposite of what one wants in a deep-sea submersible. And I’m astonished at his use of a game station controller as the primary means of controlling the craft–those cheap plastic things break if you look sideways at them. The number of bad design decisions with this craft are almost too many to list; I imagine that lawsuits are going to be forthcoming rather soon.
At the risk of making light of a tragedy in which five persons have lost their lives: it’s too bad that the craft could not have just identified as being safe.
I think it catches some people off guard when they really look at how the engineering and materials challenges of building a spacecraft are easier than building a deep diving submersible. Ignoring the thousands of pounds of explosive fuel you have to ride on for a bit and the effectiveness of heat shields, a space craft only has to hold a bit less than one atmosphere inside it’s structure against a vacuum instead of keeping 400+ atmospheres out. The air inside the sub would combust like the fuel/air mixture in your car’s engine cylinders if subjected to that pressure. It’s a very unforgiving world.
“It will be allowed to happen again.” — It will, and ‘space tourism’ isn’t free from a horrifying aftermath either. Not that many other things aren’t also risky, but some things are more inevitable than others. Compound risks.
It’s too bad that the craft could not have just identified as being safe.
the main tragedy I see is that a certain American politician and pseudo billionaire was not on board?
To put it simply: how on earth was OceanGate allowed to sail Titan as an uncertified craft?
Having seen first hand how rigorous and thorough the Coastguards of Canda and USA are at inspecting merchant ships, regardless of Flag State or inspection body (classifciations are issued by several worldwide, such as Lloyds of London), I am really surprised they got away with this. Even private yachts/motor cruisers are inspected, with all licences, test certificates and crew comptency licences are checked. The Titan was either delibrately hidden from tests or there has to be something very dubious beforehand. Sailing without certification of seaworthiness or even a classification is just asking for disaster. Clearly Stockton Rush was either just too arrogant, or too greedy or just plain reckless. Remind us of anyone?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65998914
The only positive to come out of this (just like with the sinking of Titanic in 1912) is that it shows how not to build a DSV, and force proper controls and regulations on the rest. It took the 1912 tragedy to really force proper international safety laws for the sea, SOLAS. Ironically, the same ship could do it for its visitors.
Reminiscent of the Challenger, with the O-ring failure.
Yes, it reminded me of that, especially of the way management overruled the engineers’ warnings because NASA really really really wanted to launch. As if strong desire somehow negates the way O-rings behave below a certain temperature. Never mind warnings, we want to go!!
Fineman’sFeynman’s book on the Challenger is an eye-opener.@OB #7
Feynman?
Ugh, derp, yes.
Knowing that the maximum depth of a naval sub is 800′ (1500 theoretically, but 800 for safety margin,) I would check safety and inspection logs before going to 12k feet. I’m not laying blame on the passengers, I’m just saying that I would have some questions before subjecting myself to such depths.
Seems the submersible was built of carbon fiber bought at a discount from Boeing because it was past its shelf life for aircraft use. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/06/23/titanic-submersible-ceo-carbon-fiber-rush/
Oh good god.
on the bright side, the short list for this years Darwin Awards is now clearly defined . . .
does OceanGate pick up the tabs from the various government agencies who went to try and save these clowns?
https://times.newsprints.co.uk/39732802-all-out-international-effort-to-save-lives-peter-brookes-cartoon-for-the-times-22-06-2023/
Now there’s a question. It must have been one hell of an expensive little joy ride, expensive to the citizens who pay for all those government agencies.