Submarine disaster in North Atlantic

[DaveBrown74]

If they remain down there, would the temperature be low enough to preserve the bodies?

I'm guessing not. Certainly not if they're submerged in water. But I don't know.

Once the time is definitely 100% up, I can't see a great deal of effort/resources being put into just finding human remains, in any case.

[Ed Vette]

I'm guessing not. Certainly not if they're submerged in water. But I don't know.

Once the time is definitely 100% up, I can't see a great deal of effort/resources being put into just finding human remains, in any case.

I was rather thinking that someday in a couple of hundred years it may be discovered and was wondering if the cold water would preserve the bodies somewhat. Although 35% doesn't preserve food so I've answered my own question.

[DaveBrown74]

I was rather thinking that someday in a couple of hundred years it may be discovered and was wondering if the cold water would preserve the bodies somewhat. Although 35% doesn't preserve food so I've answered my own question.

Yeah I was thinking the same. I would have thought long term preservation would require a deep freeze. Clearly any non-frozen water does not accomplish that.

[MightyGiants]

Officials still don't know what the "banging" is


https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1671570629022056463

[DaveBrown74]

Officials still don't know what the "banging" is


https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1671570629022056463

I really hate to say this, but at this point in a way I sort of hope it's not them. The odds of a rescue at this stage (if they are indeed still alive) seem like they're basically zero based on everything I have read.

[DaveBrown74]

Not much to say on this topic today, as I think we all know the outcome. Sounds like the authorities have not yet formally pivoted to a "recovery" or "salvage" phase for the operation, but I would imagine that will happen pretty soon. Just terrible all around. If they find that the sub imploded and are somehow able to forensically establish that it happened on Sunday not too long after they initially went down, that will be very good news at this point, sadly.

[MightyGiants]

There were reports this morning of a debris field.  This is a new report.


'Landing frame and a rear cover from the submersible' among the debris
We have just had an update from dive expert David Mearns, who says the debris includes "a landing frame and a rear cover from the submersible".

Mearns is a friend of passengers aboard the Titan.

Mearns has told the BBC that the president of the Explorers Club (which is connected to the diving and rescue community), provided this new information.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-65967464

[DaveBrown74]

There were reports this morning of a debris field.  This is a new report.


'Landing frame and a rear cover from the submersible' among the debris
We have just had an update from dive expert David Mearns, who says the debris includes "a landing frame and a rear cover from the submersible".

Mearns is a friend of passengers aboard the Titan.

Mearns has told the BBC that the president of the Explorers Club (which is connected to the diving and rescue community), provided this new information.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-65967464

I saw this after I made my post but haven't had a chance to read the articles in depth yet today. Assuming this is evidence of an implosion, then that's clearly positive at this point.

[MightyGiants]

I saw this after I made my post but haven't had a chance to read the articles in depth yet today. Assuming this is evidence of an implosion, then that's clearly positive at this point.

A debris field would indicate implosion rather than flooding.   I had sort of bought into the hype of their safety systems.   I suspect that all their safety systems were, was hype.

Then again, here are some comments from the founder of the company.   Although I would venture to say that life lessons suggest one doesn't put one's life in the hands of a man that used "obscenely" to describe safe.

This is from the man who founded this venture:

Second, tourist subs, which could once be skippered by anyone with a U.S. Coast Guard captain's license, were regulated by the Passenger Vessel Safety Act of 1993, which imposed rigorous new manufacturing and inspection requirements and prohibited dives below 150 feet. The law was well-meaning, Rush says, but he believes it needlessly prioritized passenger safety over commercial innovation (a position a less adventurous submariner might find open to debate). "There hasn't been an injury in the commercial sub industry in over 35 years. It's obscenely safe, because they have all these regulations. But it also hasn't innovated or grown—because they have all these regulations."

Personally, I would never put my life in the hands of a man with such an attitude.  It's not that I fear risking my well-being.  I have done so many times over my professional life.   The thing is, there is a difference between risk for matters that are worth it and taking a risk just to take a sightseeing tour.  I believe that risk should always be weighed against reward.

[DaveBrown74]

A debris field would indicate implosion rather than flooding.   I had sort of bought into the hype of their safety systems.   I suspect that all their safety systems were, was hype.

Then again, here are some comments from the founder of the company.   Although I would venture to say that life lessons suggest one doesn't put one's life in the hands of a man that used "obscenely" to describe safe.

This is from the man who founded this venture:

Second, tourist subs, which could once be skippered by anyone with a U.S. Coast Guard captain's license, were regulated by the Passenger Vessel Safety Act of 1993, which imposed rigorous new manufacturing and inspection requirements and prohibited dives below 150 feet. The law was well-meaning, Rush says, but he believes it needlessly prioritized passenger safety over commercial innovation (a position a less adventurous submariner might find open to debate). "There hasn't been an injury in the commercial sub industry in over 35 years. It's obscenely safe, because they have all these regulations. But it also hasn't innovated or grown—because they have all these regulations."

Personally, I would never put my life in the hands of a man with such an attitude.  It's not that I fear risking my well-being.  I have done so many times over my professional life.   The thing is, there is a difference between risk for matters that are worth it and taking a risk just to take a sightseeing tour.  I believe that risk should always be weighed against reward.

Totally agree. I think it's fair to say the CEO of OceanGate had a "cavalier" attitude about risk management and safety measures. And I put the word "cavalier" in quotes because I'm trying to be polite given the ongoing events.

I don't want to judge those who have just perished, but I will just say that I don't fully understand the motivation to do something like this. I mean if you were going down to potentially be the first to ever see the shipwreck, then I could get my arms around it (even though I wouldn't do that myself). But this wreck has been discovered, explored in great deal, photographed, videoed, documented, analyzed, etc for years now. So what is the motivation to go down there now? Why would anyone want to accept that kind of personal risk for what seems (to me at least) to be such a marginal payoff?

I also agree that these people did questionable due diligence on this company and its CEO from a safety perspective. Seems like they did little to none at all. There were all kinds of red flags there (of which you have mentioned some).

[Ed Vette]

If the implosion occurred when contact was first lost, I would speculate the debris field would have been dispersed over miles. I'm wondering if it occurred as oxygen was lost or if they decided to self implode, knowing they were not going to be rescued.

[DaveBrown74]

If the implosion occurred when contact was first lost, I would speculate the debris field would have been dispersed over miles. I'm wondering if it occurred as oxygen was lost or if they decided to self implode, knowing they were not going to be rescued.

I wasn't aware that self-imploding was even an option or possible.

[MightyGiants]

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1672005585615691777

[DaveBrown74]

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1672005585615691777

Yup. All kinds of speculation now as to why this info was not made more public at the time.

[AZGiantFan]

Well, now we know that while all the speculation was going on they were already all dead.  No bodies will be recovered because the implosion would be like a raw egg being crushed by an egg.

The one I feel most bad about is the 19 year old who, I read, didn't want to go and was afraid but accompanied his dad for Father's Day.

The thing I don't understand is what the point of the exercise was?  Manned submersibles have been going down there for decades with a 100% safety record.  And gone even deeper into the Marianis Trench.  What advantage was this novel design supposed to have over the tried and true submersibles?  It can't just be something like Titanic tourism for the super-rich, can it?  I haven't kept up with a lot of the details, and certainly it is a personal tragedy for the crew and their loved ones, but I can't help wondering what was the point?