They could have recovered the wreckage faster.

All they had to do was tell the feebs there were Jan 6th attendees on it.

Yes, though saying it was glued to gather sounds scary that wasn't what killed them.  The Carbon Fiber tube shit the bed.  De-laminated as Cameron said.

Even before I saw Cameron's interview I thought CF was a bad choice.  My bet is, it was cheaper...

The Navy is always listening.  Been that way for a long time, it how they keep tabs on Russian subs.  Not doubt they heard the implosion but didn't know exactly what it was till the Coast Guard got the call.

Can’t tell if you’re trolling .

You are conveniently ignoring the engineers, third party’s etc that specifically called out issues with the design. The window wasn’t even rated for the depth.

Yes if Elon had engineers saying hey there are inherent issues with this design, and the rocket vendor said hey these are only rated for 25% of the burn time, and then  built the rocket with shit off amazon. After all that Elon then loaded paying people up for a ride and the rocket broke up and stopped accelerating killing them all….yes yes we would be saying the same thing.

The difference is he didn’t, he didn’t can engineers in the name of woke, he did it right. Hell rush was playing down safety in his own videos. This is the definition of negligence

The fact anyone in this thread feels the need to defend his actions is either trolling or outright retarded.

The level of destructive testing, redesigning, engineering breakthroughs, etc say "unlikely".

SpaceX is doing things basically nobody else has done, and is researching and developing the technology as they go along, trying to create the most reliable and safest possible method to get us to another planet.

Trying to cut corners on proven technology, with safe designs and SMEs available everywhere, is pretty much the opposite.

They guys MO was cost cutting, nothing else.

Also been a few USSR subs too.

What's wrong about it?

Not ANY.  Simply pointing out that most human beings don’t operate the way many suggest here.  Once you have decided in your head you want to do a thing you tend to bias your information such that it supports that desire.  Most are not going to go seek out every video they can find of the CEO and what he said in interviews like they do after the catastrophe has occurred.

I agree that they were probably overlooking some obvious high risks because they wanted the bragging rights.  Im just pointing out that almost all humans do that to various degrees.

Ultimately the company that sells a service has a duty to take reasonable precautions to safeguard life.  That is squarely where the legal responsibility lies.  

Is there an article or video about that? I'd watch that.

If he knowingly cut corners, used underrated parts/equipment, ignored established industry standards and practices, fired SMEs who questioned him, and failed to disclose it to the people he was charging then yes, it would be.

However, I don't believe that would be the case in your scenario. Elon at least seems to know when he is outside of his bubble and needs to listen to people smarter than him

Since when is "newsworthy" a metric of any merit?   He wasn't doing anything noble, he wasn't blazing a trail or forwarding any great cause worth lives.

He was monetizing a grave site and doing it recklessly. Killing his customers in the process. After being repeatedly warned of the technical flaws by people with decades of experience, not just ignoring those experts but firing the guy he hired to point out safety issues.

My first career was as a safety engineer for a multinational company that did dangerous stuff. There is nothing to be admired in this company or this CEO.  His biggest contribution will forever be as a lesson of what not to do and how not to balance risk.

Risk cannot be eliminated but there is a smart way to balance it.

The answer depends entirely on the level of engineering sweat that goes into 'what-if' beforehand.

You think so? Name ONE.

We're not talking about the vacuum of Space (minus one atmosphere -15PSI) we're talking pressure in magnitudes 400 times that in which there are no tests of these materials under those conditions.

I used to work in a manufacturing facility that made carbon fiber parts for military jet aircraft (e.g., fan blades).  These were incredibly stiff and strong, about 5 times stronger than steel, and were made with a very arduous process of being impregnated with resin heated to over 500 degrees and under enormous pressure of thousands of pounds per square inch (sorry I can't go into more detail).  The video of the Titan's construction showed them just wrapping a cylinder with some kind of flexible carbon fiber tape.  Unbelievable. Every one of those wraps will have a tiny amount of space between them. Even a microscopic amount of flexing (e.g. from repeated trips to 12,000 ft.) will create internal abrasion, leading to eventual disintegration.  Kabooom.  

And so, the world continues turning around its axis..................

You offended a sensibility.

No more, no less.

If Elon ignored other experts, fired employees that pointed out flaws, put paying customers on the unproven rocket, used components not rated for the expected conditions of the flight, gave interviews that where he stated safety was pure waste, yes I'd call Elon irresponsible and arrogant and stupid. That is irresponsible arrogant and stupid.

Yeah, of course. Nobody was going to say, "hey, that sounded like an implosion, so let's just call it off and go home."  They had to keep searching.

Go back and read my first post.  All I said, is he believed in something enough to die for it.  And that I felt that was a fading quality.

UW stated the only connection they had to OceanGate was allowing the company to use their pressure testing facilities after hours with the Titan prototype hulls, for which UW was paid on a contractural basis. Apparently the deal was for $5M but OceanGate only used $600k worth of time and abandoned the contract.

During testing there was a catastrophic failure of the scale prototype Titan hull and damage to the UW facility for which OceanGate had to pay for repairs/replacement of equipment. After that, they stopped testing.

Crazy to think people willingly boarded that piece of shit. Stockton Rush was a helluva salesman, and epic grifter.

I think it would be safe to assume that the separation of the fiber from the end caps would have happened whether the breach occurred at the window or in the hull itself.

I heard it described as "like being an ant between a couple of hammers."

Exactly. SpaceX was built by failing forward and failing fast. They learned what failed and fixed that part and tested again until it worked. Then they kept testing them to see how many times they could re-use it. Best I can tell this assclown cobbled together some parts, most of which weren't even rated for what he wanted the vessel to do, did a 1/3 scale test and made some changes after that failed, and then just YOLO'd from there. If he was trying to be "innovative" he should have been following a similar trajectory with testing full scale systems until failure until it could reliability get to the titanic *and* they knew how many times they could safely reuse the vessel. They didn't do that and now they're dead.

I generally can't stand Cameron, but he DOES seem to know his shit here and I did see an interview with him and Ballard yesterday and Ballard agreed with him on this point and the time frame of the loss.

I give anything Ballard says on stuff like this a lot of attention. His reputation stands for itself.

I'm sure that everyone is wondering:
Plexiglass port or CF tube
Edit...I'm curious after reading this thread.

The thread continues to deliver.  I got to learn something interesting to start my morning.

Thank you, gentlemen.

Nasa and Boeing have denied this. Nasa says only they were "consulted"

Boeing, UW and NASA deny design partnerships with OceanGate

Rush's death, Bart, shouldn't preclude plaintiff's from going after his assets, right?  Agree that if Oceangate's various entities are likely not as wealthy as the plaintiff's would like, but Rush's estate might have a few things worth attaching.

I'm glad you would've been able to research Rush and Oceangate sufficiently to warn yourself not to do business with them.

Watching them seat the dome into the CF tube it looked like it only set inside a couple of inches. Obviously the joint is a weak point. Should have inserted way more than that, I would think. Obviously there were a lot of issues, just something I noticed.

Exactly.  You still have a responsibility to MINIMIZE that risk.  What Rush did was like being in the Indy 500 without a roll bar and chirping, "aww, so what, there's always risk...."

The FAA/NTSB has very specific rules about commercial aircraft flying with paying passengers. To my knowledge, there are no hard set rules/regulations regarding submersibles carrying passengers. But rest assured, fellow gun enthusiasts, there will be rules soon.

Where is the delineation between believing in something enough to die for it and just being a dumbass and ending up dead?

I see no indication that the decisions he made were in pursuit of some lofty goal.  If he was fully aware of the risks and was willing to risk his life in pursuit of whatever...a good person wouldn't take passengers, and they certainly wouldn't charge $250K.  He was fully aware of the risks and ignored them.  Did they communicate the risk adequately to their customers?  Did they do the testing and due diligence required to even understand the real risk themselves?

In my opinion this was a flawed decision making process motivated by a desire to elevate himself to the ranks of great explorers or innovators in this field.   Space X in other words.  The issue is Space X spent billions doing the engineering, testing and due diligence.  The truth is space is easy compared to deep sea. It is more forgiving.   SpaceX moves fast and fails fast, but they don't take irresponsible risk with human lives. They will kill people at some point, rockets are dangerous, but if they keep the philosophy of engineering and risk management that they have used so far, they will minimize the risk as much as they can.  

The pattern of known facts in this situation so far presents as a CEO consumed with ego and hubris, actively removing dissent from his path.

There's a lot of what happens inside that vessel that is speculation. If the hull didn't yield but instead began to shrink under pressure, we know it would likely shrink down almost instantly by a factor of ~380, crushing everyone inside before it ignited like a diesel engine cylinder. When the hull breaks, water is rushing in, the mass of air is almost instantly subdivided into many smaller masses that are rapidly being squeezed, and the bodies on board get similarly squeezed and probably so violently that they are flattened like pancakes, bones crushed, etc, before the pressures inside the tissues has time to equalize. So a body could, in theory, a few minutes after the event, look halfway normal-ish, at least in overall size, once equilibrium had been reached, if it stayed together through the initial pressure excursion. But it's unlikely to stay together, because as the water rushed in you'd experience little subdivisions of the atmosphere, with a (shrinking!) glob of air here and a (shrinking!) glob of air there and a wedge of water separating them and yanking apart body parts in the process.

IOW, a diesel engine cylinder with a blender running inside it.

It's hard to model these things. It's even harder to predict which bodies, or body parts, or pieces of parts, would survive intact, when hit with a wall of water (at at that depth/speed it's very much like a wall, not little drops of morning dew) in such a fashion.

I suspect that most of the innards of that sub (meaning ANYTHING inside the hull) were obliterated to the point that what was left 15 seconds later was slightly pink water, and that was gone with the wind, errr, current, seconds later.

But to get back to your question about the temperature of the air:

Air, at any pressure level, has a given amount of heat energy in it. Even when it's bitter cold outside, the air is chock full of heat energy relative to absolute zero. The equations for temperature of a gas relative to its pressure (already posted in this thread) account for this. So, you have a volume of air with X amount of heat in it, and that amount of heat 'feels' cold to your skin. You compress that air by a factor of ~380 times (because that's roughly the pressure differential between inside and outside pressure, ~5600psi vs 15psi is ~380x), and the same amount of heat is still present but in a much smaller volume, so the air that remains (same air, just in a much smaller space) now has 380x the heat in it (relative to absolute zero) so it feels hotter. Much hotter. I haven't done the calculation but suffice to say that the resultant temperature is so hot that literally anything inside the sub would ignite just as surely as diesel fuel ignites in a cylinder, and it would do so long before final compression was finished taking place - so you'd get a great deal of compression of the stuff inside the vessel, then it would ignite (pretty much all of it - most everything in there is flammable if heated enough), meaning the implosion would trigger an explosion. Or, likely, thousands of smaller explosions, simultaneously. Followed a millisecond later by a giant fire extinguisher.

A gas engine might run a compression ratio of 8-12:1.
A diesel engine might run a compression ratio of 15-25:1.

A squished submarine at 12,500 feet 'engine' would run a compression ratio of ~380:1.

Why was the CEO on that voyage? Did someone else pull out and he went to reassure the other people?

I took his post to mean there are no epoxy systems which are used to bond domes to barrels in pressure vessels under fatigue.

Which is untrue because I work with rockets who do exactly that every day.

also, rocket pressure vessels are not pressurized to the vacuum of space they are pressurized to much higher pressures than that, although still well below the pressure at the depth of the submarine, by about 40x.

Finally external loading does not necessarily directly translate into stress in the parts themselves, just cause the outside pressure is 400atm or so instead of 10 or 20 doesn’t meant that the stress in the bond line is linearly related and is a whole order of magnitude higher.

It is almost certainly true that they lacked any sort of testing to characterize the behavior and especially long term behavior of their design elements.

The computer knows what the subs sounds like, down to the individual sub. Some random out of the blue sound or implosion takes some investigation.

Making a profit by serving the masses some thing that they'd like to have, is a lofty goal.

It's the reason every product is for sale.

I freely admit to struggling with the morality of that statement. But I'm a capitalist. Dude was trying to make deep-sea travel feasible. For a profit. Same reason you and I will go to work next week: for a profit.

*shrug*

There's plenty to criticize here. Tons. But I'm fine with a profit motive per se.

Maybe someone with more knowladge can help me understand the problem with carbon fiber (obviously it failed in this situation). But there are SCBA tanks and those high pressure tanks for air guns made out of carbon fiber that hold up to 4000psi. Is external preassure that much mor different then internal?  

And barring that would it have been a better design with a titanium sleeve with carbon fiber wrapped around it similar to how the carbon fiber barrels are made?

There was a video posted some pages back of the mythbusters showing what happens when a pressurized diving suit loses pressure.  Within a couple minutes the test body was squished into the helmet.  Pretty gross.  I think they said the external psi was near 200.  What is it at 12500'?   5000psi. horry shit.
So what happened to the sub was violent and fast.

And some mentioned the endcaps blowing off or outward during the implosion.
Under that much pressure, if the capsule failed first, the end caps would just be forced inward towards the center.  They would not be forced outward.  The crushing force is coming from all directions.

Elementary conclusion based on all the info posted here of course.

I don’t even like carbon fiber rifle stocks because I’ve seen them chip and gouge easily.  So I’m kind of an expert on the subject.

The autoclave adds pressure, along with the heat and vacuum.

This math is linear. Who knows how linear the sub was traveling to the Titanic? I am guessing not a straight line due to variations in water temperature and current.

Internal pressure pushes outward, against the CF's tensile strength, attempting to stretch and expand it, but the CF fibers are too strong, up to 50% stronger than steel.  External pressure tries to compress it, creating a internal, crushing, friction and abrasion, eventually leading to failure.  Try to mentally visualize it.

Think of a woven straw basket. You put some pretty heavy stuff in it and you can carry it around with no problems. But try pushing in on that basket from the outside; what happens? Same thing with CF, which is actually a woven material, albeit stiffened with some resin.

I don't know Rush's motivation but my gut feeling is that he just wanted his own way of seeing the Titanic a lot.  He wraps that up with his "documentation" of the wreck decay.   The same applies to the French guy who was on at least one other trip to the Titanic in the OceanGate coffin.   There was no need for him to be in the submersible.  They had video.  All his "insight" could be done on the surface ship before the trip down.  That frees up one space for a paying customer.

I now run a business, if I make decisions that kill my employees in pursuit of a profit that's not just morally indefensible, it's criminal.

So don't struggle with your statement too much.

Ethics in safety is a bitch, I've done far more than my fair share of thinking about it.  The reality is you cannot eliminate risk, any asshole safety guy that thinks he can deserves to get cock punched by every person he says that to.  

But what you must do is take responsibility for safety and only take the risks where the odds are strongly in your favor, or change the situation until they are.   Fuckin send it!  Is not the right approach with human life.

CF is pretty awesome in tension, containing pressure, apparently resisting pressure is has some issues, or at least it does when constructed this way and cycled repeatedly.  I think the expert objections revolved around the cyclic fatigue of the hull and the inability to inspect it between dives.  

They were in untested territory. Nobody knew what CF would do in this situation over multiple dives. The greatest thing that could come out of 5 lost lives would be to recover the wreck and do the analysis the should have been done before they put people in this sub.

CF is great under tension I.E. inside pressure pushing out.  Not so good under compression I.E. outside pressure trying to crush it.