41–50 of 649 posts
“The Boston Coast Guard […]” As in the American city of Boston? If so, why are they the first responders here?
https://sarcontacts.info/contacts/rcc-boston-1st-district-57...
“The Boston Coast Guard […]” As in the American city of Boston? If so, why are they the first responders here?
> Contacted by CBS News, the Canadian Coast Guard said the rescue operation was being managed by the Boston Regional Coordination Center, and a map showing jurisdictions for the various coastal search and rescue agencies off the North American coast shows the location of the Titanic wreck within the Boston center's area of responsibility.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/titanic-submarine-missing-rescu... https://sarcontacts.info/contacts/rcc-boston-1st-district-57...
“The Boston Coast Guard […]” As in the American city of Boston? If so, why are they the first responders here?
I was curious too. > Contacted by CBS News, the Canadian Coast Guard said the rescue operation was being managed by the Boston Regional Coordination Center, and a map showing jurisdictions for the various coastal search and rescue agencies off the North American coast shows the location of the Titanic wreck within the Boston center's area of responsibility. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/titanic-submarine-missing-rescu…
Edit: they float there https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wea.2...
A CBS article identified this company’s sub as the one involved; https://twitter.com/OceanGateExped
Fascinating theyre relying on starlink for operations. I heard starlink was fairly unreliable from folks who have it in remote areas.
This appears to be the vessel in question: https://oceangate.com/our-subs/titan-submersible.html Pressure hull made from titanium and carbon fiber, capable of diving to 4000m (13,000 ft). I recall that one reason SpaceX switched from carbon fiber to stainless steel pressure vessels (fuel tanks) was the difficulty of detecting structural flaws. Can any engineers comment on whether that task is easier for a vessel expo…
In space the main issue is containing internal pressure - so the skin is all in tension.
While a submersible the pressure is from without - so the skin is all in compression.
This appears to be the vessel in question: https://oceangate.com/our-subs/titan-submersible.html Pressure hull made from titanium and carbon fiber, capable of diving to 4000m (13,000 ft). I recall that one reason SpaceX switched from carbon fiber to stainless steel pressure vessels (fuel tanks) was the difficulty of detecting structural flaws. Can any engineers comment on whether that task is easier for a vessel expo…
The structural problems for space vessels vs submersibles I might believe to be quite different. In space the main issue is containing internal pressure - so the skin is all in tension. While a submersible the pressure is from without - so the skin is all in compression.
This appears to be the vessel in question: https://oceangate.com/our-subs/titan-submersible.html Pressure hull made from titanium and carbon fiber, capable of diving to 4000m (13,000 ft). I recall that one reason SpaceX switched from carbon fiber to stainless steel pressure vessels (fuel tanks) was the difficulty of detecting structural flaws. Can any engineers comment on whether that task is easier for a vessel expo…
Positive pressure (tank vs exterior) is much easier to deal with than negative pressure (vacuum vessel at 1 atm, or bathyscape with 1 atm inside and high pressure exterior). In positive pressure, your stress is mostly in the hoop mode, which is stable. This is why aluminum cans can be so thin. In negative pressure vessels, you have a buckling mode, which is inherently unstable. As soon as it goes, it goes all at once.
I've had a 2L glass vacuum flask implode on me. There is no warning. All it takes is a tiny defect, and once you hit a certain pressure delta, kaboom. Composite is similar in that it's mostly brittle failure vs ductile. I've also imploded a 55 gallon steel vessel. That goes a lot more gradually (though still fast) - maybe enough to detect and abort the trip.
The other main advantage of steel vs composite is you can inspect with X-ray imaging to find defects.
I had no idea that "tourists" visited Titanic. Is this the new thing after Everest became crowded?
[flagged]
>Did it not occur to anyone that it might be a bad idea? It's hard to be sympathetic in the face of such arrogance
The company advertises the safety of their submersible and an active suite of sensors to detect and prevent failures.
Skimming the website, I assume this submersible is using electromagnetically attached drop-weights so that if anything goes wrong and power is lost, the weights drop off and the submersible floats up to the surface again? And 96 hours of life support sounds good, but unless there is another submersible nearby that can dive down, find them AND attach a line, the number of hours of life support will be irrelevant. Of c…
The wreckage site is around 370 miles from Newfoundland, Canada.
Seems like the rescue effort could be unfolding over days.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
That's a particularly crass thing to say about someone while their life is in jeopardy. >Did it not occur to anyone that it might be a bad idea? It's hard to be sympathetic in the face of such arrogance The company advertises the safety of their submersible and an active suite of sensors to detect and prevent failures.
Also, they were there visiting a place filled with dead and probably long decomposed people, can’t say I’m very sympathetic.