431–440 of 649 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jesus. This sounds like this group is just taking billionaires' money while running a death trap. How the hell do you lose your sub for five hours? This should have stopped all trips until they fixed this problem through a combination of technical and procedural changes.
when you put it like that i'm suddenly pro death trap
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If the actual risk are close to BASE jumping then you’ve failed. The myriad BASE jumping businesses would probably like a word. Risk tolerance varies.
There’s also business supporting people climbing Mount Everest, but their profits are severely limited by the number of people with means willing to take such risks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m getting Virgin Galactic vibes. They’ve cut a lot of corners over there and they’re starting commercial flights this summer despite not having I’m convinced the most-safe aircraft. They’re out of money and they’re out of time. That’s what it always seems to come down to, not so much “time vs money” but “safety vs money”.
A reminder to everyone that corners cut included having a control lever, which if pulled during re-entry, would immediately cause destruction of the craft, and for which there were no interlocks. That lever was pulled by the pilot and did indeed almost immediately cause the destruction of the ship. Also, when Branson was aboard, they had a failure during launch that put them off-course and violated their flight plan…
So you have all these I assume twenty-somethings working on VMS Eve, the prototype aircraft that takes the Spaceship craft to their launching point 30,000 feet up or whatever it is... Eve is basically two airplanes riveted together by their wings, and it's been why Virgin Galactic is years behind schedule on starting commercial operations. It's still probably going to be a maintenance nightmare, and if it decides to split in-air, they're certainly going bankrupt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People are perfectly happy to accept some risk. However you can’t expect normal people to take on extreme risk and expect a profitable long term business. If the actual risk are close to BASE jumping then you’ve failed.
> If the actual risk are close to BASE jumping then you’ve failed. The myriad BASE jumping businesses would probably like a word. Risk tolerance varies.
Adventure trips like Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, and these OceanGate tours are passive experiences. Exhilarating, but you're not really expected to have any skill or do anything. I think a better analogy would be African Safaris - exotic, exclusive, and extremely expensive "adventures" for the wealthy. There's a powerful illusion of danger, but no one buying a package actually thinks there's a real chance they won't come home.
If these ultra-expensive, high-tech space and deep-sea adventures don't turn out to be as safe as, say, theme park rides, I wonder if there will be enough wealthy, risk-seeking adrenaline junkies to keep them in business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People are perfectly happy to accept some risk. However you can’t expect normal people to take on extreme risk and expect a profitable long term business. If the actual risk are close to BASE jumping then you’ve failed.
All the dead frozen bodies on Mount Everest are a testimony to risk hand-waving. But I short-circuit trying to figure which is more stupid, visiting Everest or Titanic. People want an "adventure" and to learn useful things about themselves? Okay train to run a marathon. Now train to run it faster.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s also business supporting people climbing Mount Everest, but their profits are severely limited by the number of people with means willing to take such risks.
It's a pretty robust and long-lasting industry, so the idea that their profits are "severely limited" doesn't pass the sniff test. They no doubt just increase their unit cost accordingly. Anyway, although fewer than 1000 people summit Everest each year, 500 people per day reach Everest Base Camp, so there's plenty of room for profits.
That’s a tiny market, and yes companies do get involved but it’s not the sole source of income for any significant business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s a matter of scale, right? 500/day sounds pretty low, if you’re trying to start a new airline or taxi company. But if I could sell 500 books per day that’s a huge slamdunk success.
Sure. A guided trek to Base Camp is, at a minimum, a few thousand dollars, and there's a good chance that's not the only tourist dollars you're spending while in Nepal.
If your business model is running a cruise ship where a few people take extreme risks and 98% are doing a normal holiday then sure that’s reasonable. Building a business on 3k customers/ year worldwide might survive but it’s lucky to make the same money as a single decent restaurant location.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If the actual risk are close to BASE jumping then you’ve failed. The myriad BASE jumping businesses would probably like a word. Risk tolerance varies.
A big difference is things like BASE jumping / cave diving / mountain climbing require active participation and skill from the people experiencing them. I assume most fatalities in these sports are because of mistakes made by those participants (or health issues), not equipment failure by the companies facilitating them. Adventure trips like Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, and these OceanGate tours are passive experien…
If a tour to the Titanic could be sold in a holiday package deal you're going to get people who don't understand the risks.
You do see it in holiday scuba diving destinations, where people are led to believe it is perfectly safe, and it's marketed to everyone. The reality of a dive is that you are just a couple of mistakes away from fatal consequences and the dive masters must know that as they strap a bottle onto a newbie and send 8 of them down at once.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m getting Virgin Galactic vibes. They’ve cut a lot of corners over there and they’re starting commercial flights this summer despite not having I’m convinced the most-safe aircraft. They’re out of money and they’re out of time. That’s what it always seems to come down to, not so much “time vs money” but “safety vs money”.
A reminder to everyone that corners cut included having a control lever, which if pulled during re-entry, would immediately cause destruction of the craft, and for which there were no interlocks. That lever was pulled by the pilot and did indeed almost immediately cause the destruction of the ship. Also, when Branson was aboard, they had a failure during launch that put them off-course and violated their flight plan…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
@2:40 reading contract: “[…] an experimental submersible vessel that has not been approved or certified by any regulatory body and could result in physical injury, disability, emotional trauma, or death. Where do I sign?”
Oh it keeps going at 3:30: [CEO gestures at interior lighting] “I got these from… Camper World.” “We run the whole thing from this game controller.” [shows some knockoff controller]