Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pardon me if this has already been answered, but didn’t this vessel survive previous dives to the Titanic? How many trips had it been on? I’m surprised an accident had not happened sooner. What made this trip different where the materials were insufficient to handle the pressure that it was able to handle on previous dives?

This was its third trip. Any number of things could have gone wrong, and it had experienced problems on previous trips. With every dive, the protective materials get weaker from the pressure.

No, not third. I think at least 5th.
It’s called materials fatigue, or simply wear and tear from the immense water pressure so deep in the ocean on a material that was not safe to spend many hours there.

This is what I find most staggering about this entire situation. Rush and especial PH had to know the physics behind the sub and that the materials wouldn't hold up after so many dives. Why would he deny testing of the hull to find # x failure rate? Saving money? Seems having a certification would have garnered him more respect in the diving community and more business.

Science is about probabilities.

Most of the community thought this material was too risky (based upon earlier work). This guy disagreed, and took great pride in "breaking rules."

So, that hubris made him think he could defy physics I guess.

As a real engineer, whatever that means, I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with carbon fiber. However, as far as I know, this is a rather novel application. How you measure fatigue and defects would be a huge unknown. As mentioned earlier in the thread, the carbon fiber was too thick to ultrasonically scan for internal defects.

No, the material had been tried under pressured (undersea) conditions and failed. Decades ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pardon me if this has already been answered, but didn’t this vessel survive previous dives to the Titanic? How many trips had it been on? I’m surprised an accident had not happened sooner. What made this trip different where the materials were insufficient to handle the pressure that it was able to handle on previous dives?

This was its third trip. Any number of things could have gone wrong, and it had experienced problems on previous trips. With every dive, the protective materials get weaker from the pressure.

No, not third. I think at least 5th.
It’s called materials fatigue, or simply wear and tear from the immense water pressure so deep in the ocean on a material that was not safe to spend many hours there.

This is what I find most staggering about this entire situation. Rush and especial PH had to know the physics behind the sub and that the materials wouldn't hold up after so many dives. Why would he deny testing of the hull to find # x failure rate? Saving money? Seems having a certification would have garnered him more respect in the diving community and more business.

Science is about probabilities.

Most of the community thought this material was too risky (based upon earlier work). This guy disagreed, and took great pride in "breaking rules."

So, that hubris made him think he could defy physics I guess.

As a real engineer, whatever that means, I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with carbon fiber. However, as far as I know, this is a rather novel application. How you measure fatigue and defects would be a huge unknown. As mentioned earlier in the thread, the carbon fiber was too thick to ultrasonically scan for internal defects.

How would you attach the titanium cap to the carbon fiber body? An epoxy of some sort is all I can think of. Not great for going to an environment with 6,000 psi!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pardon me if this has already been answered, but didn’t this vessel survive previous dives to the Titanic? How many trips had it been on? I’m surprised an accident had not happened sooner. What made this trip different where the materials were insufficient to handle the pressure that it was able to handle on previous dives?

This was its third trip. Any number of things could have gone wrong, and it had experienced problems on previous trips. With every dive, the protective materials get weaker from the pressure.

No, not third. I think at least 5th.
It’s called materials fatigue, or simply wear and tear from the immense water pressure so deep in the ocean on a material that was not safe to spend many hours there.

This is what I find most staggering about this entire situation. Rush and especial PH had to know the physics behind the sub and that the materials wouldn't hold up after so many dives. Why would he deny testing of the hull to find # x failure rate? Saving money? Seems having a certification would have garnered him more respect in the diving community and more business.

Science is about probabilities.

Most of the community thought this material was too risky (based upon earlier work). This guy disagreed, and took great pride in "breaking rules."

So, that hubris made him think he could defy physics I guess.

As a real engineer, whatever that means, I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with carbon fiber. However, as far as I know, this is a rather novel application. How you measure fatigue and defects would be a huge unknown. As mentioned earlier in the thread, the carbon fiber was too thick to ultrasonically scan for internal defects.

Anonymous wrote:James Cameron is saying he knew since Monday (when he first heard this news) that the submersible definitely imploded.

He believes the Coast Guard, Navy, etc. knew as well & that it was wrong of them to not let the public know this at the time.
He says it was wrong for them to string the public along with false hope.

I think as outspoken as James Cameron is (and always has been!) if this were true he would have said something on Mon.
But he never did so I am not inclined to believe him.

He said he felt it would be wrong to have engaged in speculation, going against the hopeful story that was already being put out there. Anyone with any basic engineering knowledge knows this ship had multiple obvious failure points, and that all signs pointed to a catastrophic implosion. But no one wants to be the guy saying this while everyone wants to believe they'd be found alive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you think of James Cameron speaking about this? Is he an exert because he filmed the movie Titanic?

No.

He’s an expert because he has dived to Titanic 33 times and has co-designed the sub that went the deepest anyone has ever gone, 7 miles down in the Mariana Trench. Which he went into alone because he is not an idiot willing to risk others’ lives.

READ SOMETHING. Stop just tossing out links without attempting to learn something.

I don't believe that makes James Cameron an expert engineer. If someone has taken more than 33 Royal Caribbean cruises, does that make him qualified to be an engineer shipbuilder? And co-designing a submersible is not the same as being the engineer who designs it. It's like having a ghost writer who writes everything for you. And a submersible is not the same as a submarine.

Want to parse some more? You’ve got to be kidding me. You think a bunch of people just tossed James Cameron in a submersible without any relevant knowledge? Do you know ANYTHING about him at all? Of course not, because you lack any curiosity. That much is obvious.

Why don’t you try watching the link. Then please show me the engineers who vehemently disagree with him. I’ll wait.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why why why would Nageolet get on this thing?

I was wondering this as well. The other 4 I understand, sort of, but seems like Nageolet would know better.

A lot can go wrong with one’s judgment at 77.

Anonymous wrote:James Cameron is saying he knew since Monday (when he first heard this news) that the submersible definitely imploded.

He believes the Coast Guard, Navy, etc. knew as well & that it was wrong of them to not let the public know this at the time.
He says it was wrong for them to string the public along with false hope.

I think as outspoken as James Cameron is (and always has been!) if this were true he would have said something on Mon.
But he never did so I am not inclined to believe him.

I mean I “knew” it imploded too (and said so in the first few pages here) and I’ve been to the Titanic zero times. But don’t you have to actually investigate and confirm? If that’s your family member in there?

Anonymous wrote:James Cameron is saying he knew since Monday (when he first heard this news) that the submersible definitely imploded.

He believes the Coast Guard, Navy, etc. knew as well & that it was wrong of them to not let the public know this at the time.
He says it was wrong for them to string the public along with false hope.

I think as outspoken as James Cameron is (and always has been!) if this were true he would have said something on Mon.
But he never did so I am not inclined to believe him.

That is a harsh criticism of the Coast Guard & Navy. It would undermine people's faith if they announced on Monday it was simply a recovery mission without any type of proof other than the Navy tracking a noise on Sunday. The Coast Guard is relied upon for so many search & rescue missions and people would never trust them if they threw in the towel before oxygen ran out and absent physical evidence. It's a tough position to be in since they may well have assumed the worst, but they are constantly in a position to hope against the odds.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:James Cameron is saying he knew since Monday (when he first heard this news) that the submersible definitely imploded.

He believes the Coast Guard, Navy, etc. knew as well & that it was wrong of them to not let the public know this at the time.
He says it was wrong for them to string the public along with false hope.

I think as outspoken as James Cameron is (and always has been!) if this were true he would have said something on Mon.
But he never did so I am not inclined to believe him.

I don't think they knew it "definitely" imploded, but they might have had strong suspicions. Other explanations for the noise could have included military and the sort of banging noises that occur undersea and which were reported in the following days. So they were looking at probabilities, and whether they assessed implosion at 75% or 99%, who knows. They had a tough decision: stop searching on Sunday and the public hates on them for giving up too soon, or keep searching and armchair quarterbacks like Cameron hate on you.

+1

They have to keep looking until it could be confirmed.

Anonymous wrote:James Cameron is saying he knew since Monday (when he first heard this news) that the submersible definitely imploded.

He believes the Coast Guard, Navy, etc. knew as well & that it was wrong of them to not let the public know this at the time.
He says it was wrong for them to string the public along with false hope.

I think as outspoken as James Cameron is (and always has been!) if this were true he would have said something on Mon.
But he never did so I am not inclined to believe him.

Navy already said they heard the implosion.

Anonymous wrote:James Cameron is saying he knew since Monday (when he first heard this news) that the submersible definitely imploded.

He believes the Coast Guard, Navy, etc. knew as well & that it was wrong of them to not let the public know this at the time.
He says it was wrong for them to string the public along with false hope.

I think as outspoken as James Cameron is (and always has been!) if this were true he would have said something on Mon.
But he never did so I am not inclined to believe him.

I don't think they knew it "definitely" imploded, but they might have had strong suspicions. Other explanations for the noise could have included military and the sort of banging noises that occur undersea and which were reported in the following days. So they were looking at probabilities, and whether they assessed implosion at 75% or 99%, who knows. They had a tough decision: stop searching on Sunday and the public hates on them for giving up too soon, or keep searching and armchair quarterbacks like Cameron hate on you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pardon me if this has already been answered, but didn’t this vessel survive previous dives to the Titanic? How many trips had it been on? I’m surprised an accident had not happened sooner. What made this trip different where the materials were insufficient to handle the pressure that it was able to handle on previous dives?

This was its third trip. Any number of things could have gone wrong, and it had experienced problems on previous trips. With every dive, the protective materials get weaker from the pressure.

No, not third. I think at least 5th.
It’s called materials fatigue, or simply wear and tear from the immense water pressure so deep in the ocean on a material that was not safe to spend many hours there.

This is what I find most staggering about this entire situation. Rush and especial PH had to know the physics behind the sub and that the materials wouldn't hold up after so many dives. Why would he deny testing of the hull to find # x failure rate? Saving money? Seems having a certification would have garnered him more respect in the diving community and more business.

Science is about probabilities.

Most of the community thought this material was too risky (based upon earlier work). This guy disagreed, and took great pride in "breaking rules."

So, that hubris made him think he could defy physics I guess.

James Cameron is saying he knew since Monday (when he first heard this news) that the submersible definitely imploded.

He believes the Coast Guard, Navy, etc. knew as well & that it was wrong of them to not let the public know this at the time.
He says it was wrong for them to string the public along with false hope.

I think as outspoken as James Cameron is (and always has been!) if this were true he would have said something on Mon.
But he never did so I am not inclined to believe him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pardon me if this has already been answered, but didn’t this vessel survive previous dives to the Titanic? How many trips had it been on? I’m surprised an accident had not happened sooner. What made this trip different where the materials were insufficient to handle the pressure that it was able to handle on previous dives?

This was its third trip. Any number of things could have gone wrong, and it had experienced problems on previous trips. With every dive, the protective materials get weaker from the pressure.

No, not third. I think at least 5th.
It’s called materials fatigue, or simply wear and tear from the immense water pressure so deep in the ocean on a material that was not safe to spend many hours there.

This is what I find most staggering about this entire situation. Rush and especial PH had to know the physics behind the sub and that the materials wouldn't hold up after so many dives. Why would he deny testing of the hull to find # x failure rate? Saving money? Seems having a certification would have garnered him more respect in the diving community and more business.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pardon me if this has already been answered, but didn’t this vessel survive previous dives to the Titanic? How many trips had it been on? I’m surprised an accident had not happened sooner. What made this trip different where the materials were insufficient to handle the pressure that it was able to handle on previous dives?

This was its third trip. Any number of things could have gone wrong, and it had experienced problems on previous trips. With every dive, the protective materials get weaker from the pressure.

No, not third. I think at least 5th.
It’s called materials fatigue, or simply wear and tear from the immense water pressure so deep in the ocean on a material that was not safe to spend many hours there.