4 minutes ago, mikemack8 said:

Here's the part I don't understand - it would have taken him 2 minutes to do a quick google search and get the answer.  Why post it on twitter and subject yourself to ridicule?  Is he truly that dumb, or do these idiots view any click/reaction as an overall positive?  

Pretending to be retarded to own the libs!

4 minutes ago, mikemack8 said:

Here's the part I don't understand - it would have taken him 2 minutes to do a quick google search and get the answer.  Why post it on twitter and subject yourself to ridicule?  Is he truly that dumb, or do these idiots view any click/reaction as an overall positive?  

I ask the same question when I read most of this boards posts

14 minutes ago, mikemack8 said:

Here's the part I don't understand - it would have taken him 2 minutes to do a quick google search and get the answer.  Why post it on twitter and subject yourself to ridicule?  Is he truly that dumb, or do these idiots view any click/reaction as an overall positive?  

Probably both.  He may be that dumb but doesn't try to hide it and likes the attention it brings.  He's hardly alone in that regard on social media.

4 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Your second point kinda undermines the first one though. The viewport was obviously part of the same vessel that successfully made that dive and others previously too. But just because the submersible survived 5 dives and then failed on the 6th one doesn't mean the hull was necessarily built with the proper materials.

As an analogy, if a block of flash memory is rated for 10k read/write cycles, but I use it in an application where I'm planning for 50k read/write cycles, the fact that it might last until 20k cycles doesn't mean it "succeeded" for the application I needed it for. From what Cameron has said, basically nobody in the industry uses carbon fiber as a hull material for any submersibles intended for those depths. 

I was addressing the gross negligence and lack of testing comment.  The pressure vessel and material choice was designed to withstand those pressures and did. Where the design may have failed is the viewport (even without knowing how the manufacturer determined the rating and design safety margins this is the most likely failure point).  

 

Second point, they absolutely should have done inspections after every dive given the novel material composition and the exceeding the rated depth on the viewport.  Each pressure cycle could have created defects which would eventually result in failure similar to your drive analogy.  And even if they did do everything above board which is unlikely the potential for catastrophic failure is always present or a secondary failure resulting in hull compromise.  

Another point is that the company refused third party certification.

4 minutes ago, BBE said:

I was addressing the gross negligence and lack of testing comment.  The pressure vessel and material choice was designed to withstand those pressures and did. Where the design may have failed is the viewport (even without knowing how the manufacturer determined the rating and design safety margins this is the most likely failure point).  

 

Second point, they absolutely should have done inspections after every dive given the novel material composition and the exceeding the rated depth on the viewport.  Each pressure cycle could have created defects which would eventually result in failure similar to your drive analogy.  And even if they did do everything above board which is unlikely the potential for catastrophic failure is always present or a secondary failure resulting in hull compromise.  

Another point is that the company refused third party certification.

In choosing carbon fiber, they chose a material that cannot be scanned for changes using existing tools, which is critical in submersibles.

25 minutes ago, BBE said:

I was addressing the gross negligence and lack of testing comment.  The pressure vessel and material choice was designed to withstand those pressures and did. Where the design may have failed is the viewport (even without knowing how the manufacturer determined the rating and design safety margins this is the most likely failure point).  

 

Second point, they absolutely should have done inspections after every dive given the novel material composition and the exceeding the rated depth on the viewport.  Each pressure cycle could have created defects which would eventually result in failure similar to your drive analogy.  And even if they did do everything above board which is unlikely the potential for catastrophic failure is always present or a secondary failure resulting in hull compromise.  

Another point is that the company refused third party certification.

Just because something survives a durability test once, or even a few times, doesn't mean it was the correct design choice. I'm not intimately familiar with these types of vessels, but there's probably a reason why every other submersible uses titanium. 

 

EDIT: re-reading the comment you responded to, I'm guessing you probably took issue with the claim that it wasn't tested at all and that's what you were addressing with your point on it making the dive before. It would've been better for him to say it wasn't tested adequately (which is pretty obvious by now.)

2 minutes ago, Toastrel said:

In choosing carbon fiber, they chose a material that cannot be scanned for changes using existing tools, which is critical in submersibles.

Which apparently was a subject of the lawsuit.   They are Fed.

6 minutes ago, Toastrel said:

In choosing carbon fiber, they chose a material that cannot be scanned for changes using existing tools, which is critical in submersibles.

Bingo! Basic FMEA process says to rate potential failure modes on three criteria: severity, occurrence, and detection. A failure mode that can't be easily detected is a recipe for disaster when the severity rating means death to humans.

2 hours ago, Boogyman said:

He must be an uneducated, white male, matching the profile of a Trump voter. 

6 hours ago, Mike030270 said:

So they knew the people were dead yet let the world do that whole countdown and let it run in the news for the week

I saw an interview with a close friend who said they were informed that the Navy heard what they think was the implosion but they were not going to stop searching on that alone. It didn’t become final until the debris field was found. 

4 hours ago, Mike31mt said:

Whats the date on that report?  I dont think Mike was challenging the US Navy reporting.  I think he was reacting to the allegation--which seems to be true--that Oceangate actually knew the minute it happened and played dumb.

There’s a major difference between belief and knowledge. They are not the same thing. 

6 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I feel for the 19 year old. I have no idea if it's true but my wife read that he didn't want to go, and the dad basically guilted him into it as a father's day gift. 😔

Heard that from the kids aunt. He went to bond with his dad. 

Will House Republicans subpoena Ocean Gate looking for Hillary Clinton's missing 33,000 e-mails. 😀

2 hours ago, paco said:

Will the submersible be made of 100% recycled materials?

It's gonna be water soluble.

21 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said:

He must be an uneducated, white male, matching the profile of a Trump voter. 

That's a bit harsh, the guy was just asking questions.

3 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

That's a bit harsh, the guy was just asking questions.

They taught us in Navy Instructor School that the phrase "there’s not such thing as a dumb question,” isn't true. They are all dumb questions when you know the answer. 

59 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Just because something survives a durability test once, or even a few times, doesn't mean it was the correct design choice. I'm not intimately familiar with these types of vessels, but there's probably a reason why every other submersible uses titanium. 

 

EDIT: re-reading the comment you responded to, I'm guessing you probably took issue with the claim that it wasn't tested at all and that's what you were addressing with your point on it making the dive before. It would've been better for him to say it wasn't tested adequately (which is pretty obvious by now.)

I agree wholeheartedly about insufficient testing.  I read something about them equipping acoustic sensors which detect failure in real time (Cameron also mentions this in an interview).  Detection of a failure condition in real time is patently stupid at extreme depth.  The more I read the lawsuit, the more disregard for design safety norms I see.  

 

All the materials classes from naval nuclear power school are rushing back.  Mind you different load conditions and temperature conditions (tension vs. compression, hot vs cold, etc.)

I feel sorry for the 19 year old kid, who only went because it was Father's Day, and his dad is a Titanic nut, who really wanted to go.

 

RIP

1 hour ago, jsdarkstar said:

He must be an uneducated, white male, matching the profile of a Trump voter. 

 

54 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said:

Will House Republicans subpoena Ocean Gate looking for Hillary Clinton's missing 33,000 e-mails. 😀

Seriously, wtf is wrong with you?

 

Beyond lawsuits, people need to go to prison for this.

Just now, The_Omega said:

 

Seriously, wtf is wrong with you?

I don't think anyone knows.

On the plus side, we don't have to worry about the person chiefly responsible getting away with it. Consequences have already been called due on him. Let the families of his victims get what they can from what he left behind.

It won't work that way, of course.

 

 

This man was apparently warned about this 'sub' for years and he was told that he was going to not only end up killing people, but an entire industry. Had he not been on the sub and also killed, he'd deserve to be prosecuted for those deaths and imprisoned if/when found guilty. 

There were 5 deaths, but only 4 innocent deaths. 

3 minutes ago, VaBeach_Eagle said:

This man was apparently warned about this 'sub' for years and he was told that he was going to not only end up killing people, but an entire industry. Had he not been on the sub and also killed, he'd deserve to be prosecuted for those deaths and imprisoned if/when found guilty. 

There were 5 deaths, but only 4 innocent deaths.