Titan Submersible Vessel

[Sam the Centipede]

Rush grumbled that getting a class certificate for his toy would be time-consuming, expensive and hinder progress. He mentioned DNV-GL (the merger between two marine classification societies: Norway's Det Norske Veritas and Germanischer Lloyd).

DNV certifies a lot of offshore engineering vessels and structures and is not against innovation, as Rush seemed to imply. The way their codes work is effectively in the stages: the most foundational documents define the required level of safety and how it is to be demonstrated in general terms. Standards specify the requirements for general classes of structure (e.g. a pipeline or a concrete platform). Recommended Practices (RPs) give guidance on what will work well, meet the appropriate Standards and be approved by the society.

For most ordinary projects the RPs cover the designer's needs. As a design becomes more unconventional, it's back to the standards, and when those are not directly applicable the designer must demonstrate an equivalent level of safety. The designer does that in discussion with the society's experts. Are those experts hostile to novelty? No! They might be appropriately skeptical, "why do you want to do it this way rather than the usual way?", but many of the staff welcome novelty, something to get their engineering teeth into.

As soon as I heard about the construction of the Titan involving carbon fiber I wondered "isn't that risky for delamination?" Maybe that wasn't the problem with Titan, but DNV (or ABS, the American Bureau of Shipping) would have asked the same question and demanded evidence.

And plenty of uncrewed test dives, both of test pieces to check specific issues and of the emotions vessel.

[W. Kevin Vicklund]

Just in the last month or two (2), my state instituted an Ethics requirement for Continuing Education of Professional Engineers. (This has me scrambling a bit, since my renewal date changed to mid-August and I don't get grandfathered ). I fully expect the Titan will be prominently featured in next cycle's ethics courses.

[Sam the Centipede]

James Cameron talked about the multiple systems and failsafes in "his" submersibles. His descriptions reminded me of NASA's approach to Apollo systems engineering (as described by flight director Gene Krantz): Krantz described how they had to adjust their contractors' approach so they didn't answer the question "what happens when it fails?" with "oh, it can't fail, it has enough redundancy/backup". Instead the contractors were pushed into the mindset that the system must be built on the basis that everything can fail.

Cameron's description of the backups for discarding the ballast weights to force their submersible to the surface was a good example: two or three controls on board (manual and automatic), a remote control from the surface, and, if there is no communication from the surface and the crew are incapable, a wire will corrode in the seawater and release the weights after a few hours with no human intervention at all. (Or something like that!)

[noblepa]

Poplove, thanks for sharing.

Sounds like the CEO of OceanGate had done the same another another infamous CEO (can you say Elizabeth Holmes) had done. In many of her written materials given to prospective investors she had logos from highly reputable companies and even made statements that some of them were involved in verifying her equipment worked. So, OceanGate CEO claimed that several companies, Boeing, and even NASA had helped with the design of their submersibles. Turns out not to be true at all. Boeing put out a statement this morning that they had no part in design or any other aspect of OceanGate submersibles. I bet OceanGate is scrubbing their YouTube and website of all the advertisement videos where they make these kinds of claims.

And Elie Honig explained that despite having signed waivers, no, as I suspected, the families still can and probably will sue. And they will most likely win. I bet OceanGate will not be solvent for much longer anyway, they probably will get nothing.

IANAL, but it is my understanding that no waiver can absolve a party of liability in the event of gross negligence.

If I am going skydiving (or diving to the Titanic) and I sign a waiver acknowledging that "I am going to die", and the flight school is negligent in packing my parachute, then my loved ones can hold the school liable for my death, despite the waiver.

It is also my understanding that waivers protect the party in the event of unforeseen/unforeseeable events or circumstances. Catastrophic implosion at 13,000 feet deep would seem to be emminently foreseeable.

The lawyers here can correct me if I'm wrong, of course.

As for OceanGate being solvent, if the families prove fraud, can the court not pierce the corporate veil and go after the investor/officer's personal assets?

[northland10]

James Cameron talked about the multiple systems and failsafes in "his" submersibles. His descriptions reminded me of NASA's approach to Apollo systems engineering (as described by flight director Gene Krantz): Krantz described how they had to adjust their contractors' approach so they didn't answer the question "what happens when it fails?" with "oh, it can't fail, it has enough redundancy/backup". Instead the contractors were pushed into the mindset that the system must be built on the basis that everything can fail.

From his Wikipedia entry (Gene's):

Kranz called a meeting of his branch and flight control team on the Monday morning following the Apollo 1 disaster that killed Gus Grissom, Ed White, and Roger Chaffee. Kranz made the following address to the gathering (The Kranz Dictum), in which his expression of values and admonishments for future spaceflight are his legacy to NASA:

Spaceflight will never tolerate carelessness, incapacity, and neglect. Somewhere, somehow, we screwed up. It could have been in design, build, or test. Whatever it was, we should have caught it. We were too gung ho about the schedule and we locked out all of the problems we saw each day in our work. Every element of the program was in trouble and so were we. The simulators were not working, Mission Control was behind in virtually every area, and the flight and test procedures changed daily. Nothing we did had any shelf life. Not one of us stood up and said, "Dammit, stop!" I don't know what Thompson's committee will find as the cause, but I know what I find. We are the cause! We were not ready! We did not do our job. We were rolling the dice, hoping that things would come together by launch day, when in our hearts we knew it would take a miracle. We were pushing the schedule and betting that the Cape would slip before we did.

From this day forward, Flight Control will be known by two words: "Tough" and "Competent". Tough means we are forever accountable for what we do or what we fail to do. We will never again compromise our responsibilities. Every time we walk into Mission Control we will know what we stand for. Competent means we will never take anything for granted. We will never be found short in our knowledge and in our skills. Mission Control will be perfect. When you leave this meeting today you will go to your office and the first thing you will do there is to write "Tough and Competent" on your blackboards. It will never be erased. Each day when you enter the room these words will remind you of the price paid by Grissom, White, and Chaffee. These words are the price of admission to the ranks of Mission Control.

[Maybenaut]

IANAL, but it is my understanding that no waiver can absolve a party of liability in the event of gross negligence.

Civil law isn’t really my thing. But what I recall from law school and studying for the two different State Bar exams I’ve taken is that there are a number of potential issues ripe for litigation, including the enforceability of any arbitration agreements, enforceability of liability waivers, and enforceability of any choice of law provision(which state’s laws apply).

Given that each state’s laws are different on arbitration and liability waivers, the choice of law provision will sometimes decide those issues. I assume OceanGate’s lawyers drafted their contracts to include a choice-of-law provision that is most beneficial to it.

But I suspect in the end there won’t be much to divide up.

[Reality Check]

I saw a video from a materials engineer that I can't put my finger on right now. It said that while carbon fiber has a very high tensile strength, it has a relatively low compressive strength, which is what you really need for a submarine, obviously. Also, she mentioned that carbon fiber can have difficult to find flaws, and that repeated compressive cycles would exacerbate those flaws to the point that they would be likely to fail.

So, yeah.

That's why carbon fiber is used in SCUBA tanks, liquid tanks, airplanes, and spacecraft where it is subjected to internal pressure. In one of the videos I linked James Cameron said the CEO claimed that that testing like ultrasound would not work well on the composite material. Instead they had sensors installed to detect de-lamination when under water, Those may have worked but when they did it was too late.

[RVInit]

Lawyer You Know is looking at the waiver. Interesting.

[Jim]

Anyone looking for a little adventure?

TikTokers are reeling over an OceanGate job posting advertising an 'immediate opening' for a submersible pilot

[Greatgrey]

[Suranis]

Eh, it was probably screwed into insulation that was against the real hull, Anyone that thinks this thing could have survived a single dive with Screws sticking out of it is not really understanding things

[Kendra]

Rep. Troy Nehls says he believes Biden knew the Titan sub imploded days before but withheld it from the public to divert attention away from Hunter’s situation, and that Congress should launch an investigation.

[AndyinPA]

They don't even stop to think. It's just whatever stupid stuff falls out of their mouths.

[Suranis]

Its not stupid if it gets them results, such as getting them on TV.

[Kendra]

They don't even stop to think. It's just whatever stupid stuff falls out of their mouths.

Off Topic

Anything for another investigation, instead of law-making

[neeneko]

They don't even stop to think. It's just whatever stupid stuff falls out of their mouths.

I have also been seeing people claim that this is an example of the destructive power of wokeness, because apparently the CEO said something about too many old white guys in the industry and need for 'diversity', even though his idea of 'diversity' was 'young white guys and people who are not experts'.. the standard antiestbalishment 'we should be in charge' kind.

[Greatgrey]

Eh, it was probably screwed into insulation that was against the real hull, Anyone that thinks this thing could have survived a single dive with Screws sticking out of it is not really understanding things

That ain’t insulation, you can see the warp & weft of the carbon fiber fabric.

[somerset]

Eh, it was probably screwed into insulation that was against the real hull, Anyone that thinks this thing could have survived a single dive with Screws sticking out of it is not really understanding things

That ain’t insulation, you can see the warp & weft of the carbon fiber fabric.

Agree, but I think it may be an inner liner. If you look at the very bottom of the image, it looks like it cuts off and some cables are running underneath.

[keith]

There are several great interviews with James Cameron on YouTube. I will link a couple below. He and his deep submersible community colleagues knew Monday that the Titan had imploded with almost near certainty. He based his conclusion on the fact that they lost communication simultaneously on both voice and tracking systems. He said those systems are independent and that would imply something catastrophic had occurred. He also heard rumors that hydrophones had picked up the sound of an implosion.

The media probably at hyped up the idea that there was a good chance they were still alive and running out of oxygen. This makes for a better news story just as when they play up as a horse race an election they know isn't close.
http s://youtu.be/5XIyin68vEE
http s://youtu.be/e9YB31ElEFQ

Yeah, well they wanted to make sure. I figured it was a lost cause, but I wouldn't to tell the families without proof.

[bill_g]

I've had some experience with atmospheric pressure changes at different altitudes. Take test equipment packed in a heavy duty weathertight plastic travel case to a mountain top, and the lid opens itself when you pop the latches. But! When you return to the shop you can't pry it open with a crowbar.

Drink half a water bottle while on site. Place the bottle in the truck cup holder, and on the downhill trip it will slowly collapse into a water filled plastic fist.

A similar thing happens to fuel cans for the generator. Never tighten the cap to the fuel can. Snug it down, and then back it off a part turn. Tie a shop rag over the cap to capture any fuel that leaks out as it slops around in the can.

[RTH10260]

Titan submersible: why was its implosion not announced sooner?
Key questions about the circumstances surrounding the loss of the underwater craft and the search and rescue operation

Kevin Rawlinson
Fri 23 Jun 2023 14.49 BST

After the discovery of the wreckage of the submersible Titan, the fate of its crew is now known. But many more questions remain.

If the underwater implosion was heard on Sunday, why are we only learning about it now?

The

information was handed to the US Coast Guard immediately,

according to the Wall Street Journal (WSJ). Yet it was decided to continue the search and rescue operation to “make every effort to save the lives onboard”, the US navy said.

The key to the decision-making is probably in the details. First, the rescue operation: analysts could not be 100% sure that what they detected was Titan’s implosion. If there was a chance lives could be saved, it was important to try everything possible.

Second, the delay in revealing the information. The US navy, according to the WSJ, wanted to keep its sub detection capabilities secret. This possibly explains why nothing was initially said publicly – and why there were few details about exactly what was detected and how.

According to experts, Titan’s operators got around what regulations there are partly by operating in international waters.

The vessel was not registered with international agencies, nor was it classified by a maritime industry group that sets basic engineering standards. Its operator OceanGate has said this is because it believed Titan’s design was so innovative it would take years for inspectors to understand it.

Bart Kemper, a forensic engineer who works on submarine designs, and who signed a 2018 letter imploring OceanGate to operate within established norms, said it avoided having to abide by US regulations by deploying in international waters, beyond the reach of national agencies such as the US Coast Guard.

Salvatore Mercogliano, a history professor who focuses on maritime history and policy, said companies running deepwater operations were perhaps underscrutinised because of where they operated.




https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/ ... ced-sooner

[andersweinstein]

Found this an interesting thread on interpretation of the implosion sound.

[tek]

If the underwater implosion was heard on Sunday, why are we only learning about it now?

information was handed to the US Coast Guard immediately,

What is this bullshit that everybody needs to know everything immediately? The information got to the people who needed it.

"we heard a noise" would have been spun into a thousand tales in the first hour.

[Slim Cognito]

[Sam the Centipede]

What, tek? You think that the US Navy's soupy seakrut long range hydrophone system shouldn't be plugged into Twitter to report any anomalies in seconds?! That delays generation of inappropriate meme images by hours! It's a disgrace!