Reply to Tourist submersible missing on visit to Titanic

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Tourist submersible missing on visit to Titanic"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I can’t stop thinking about this but what does implosion mean? I’m trying to visualize this and the pressure? What does it do to the sub and human body? Is it like a plane explosion mid air?[/quote]

It is the opposite of explosion. In an explosion, an source on the inside of a structure (usually an ignition) drives everything catastrophically out. In an implosion, a pressure source on the outside of a structure (here, water pressure) drives everything catastrophically in.

The end result of both, to the human body, is pulverization.

This is why having a vessel that could withstand water pressure of this intensity was such a high priority, and why having failed to assure that was such a glaring mistake. Almost suicidally in error.[/quote]

Homicidally in error. [/quote]

If the CEO had lived I would definitely have expected charges in this vein, and it would not shock me if there is civil litigation against other Oceangate execs along those lines.

What jurisdiction can they be made in? any lawyers here know?[/quote]
No jurisdiction[/quote]

DP. I would think that there’d be jurisdiction somewhere based on where the advertisements could reach, where the contract was signed, etc. I wonder if there are going to be fraudulent misrepresentations coming out. Sounds like maybe there was some exaggerating in those online videos re: the involvement of Boeing, NASA, etc.

I’m also curious what all is in the waiver although that isn’t going to be ironclad. [/quote]
I have no idea, but I read that Oceangate was saavy in that they purposely operated from this free space if you will, to avoid jurisdiction.[/quote]

Every one on that sub was super wealthy with the possible exception of the 77 year old French pilot. I don’t know what his background and wealth level is.

Which doesn’t mean they don’t deserve or couldn’t get the money, but it might make the families less inclined to deal with suing.[/quote]

Hmm you’d be surprised. That hasn’t been my experience in litigation. Often the wealthier a party is the more inclined it is to sue bc it can have Cravath or some top UK or Canada firm run a litigation on its behalf for years and just pay the monthly firm bill. Families like these thing in generations - sure for the Dawoods, 3-4 generations of their family are set (I have no idea) but if they feel Oceangate/Oceangate’s eventual bankruptcy estate should pay up - eventually 6-8 generations of their fam could be set.[/quote]
Hmmm, it would never even cross my mind to sue for this. Hmmm…such a disgusting litigious society we must endure. [/quote]

On the contrary--the litigation may be the only thing that causes some future idiot to think twice about doing this. [/quote]
How so? If someone willingly signs a waiver and is aware that death is a real possibility, how would litigation stop them? Why would an idiot even care?[/quote]

The only person whose arm was possibly twisted was the 19yo. [/quote]
His arm wasn’t twisted, he chose to ride the amusement ride because Daddy wanted company.[/quote]

How do you know his at wasn't twisted or that he wanted to go? Lots of kids and teens do things in an attempt to please their parents and vice versa [/quote]
He made the decision to go, if he really really didn’t want to go he should have put up a fight, kicking and screaming. He willingly signed the waiver and went, he probably had reservations and fear, but he is as accountable as any other passenger. He wasn’t a child. No one wants to take any personal responsibility at all. They knew the risks. It’s sad, but crap happens. Trying to justify this by suing and having 6 generations set for life is repulsive. [/quote]

It’s like you’re completely unaware that dysfunctional relationships between fathers and sons exist.  You have no idea if he was a controlling, abusive, or dominating father or a loving, accepting, and gentle one.  For all you know, he could have teased him and called him names when he expressed fear. He could have threatened to stop supporting him. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics