Live data from Hacker News

Debris found came from missing Titan sub, says friend of passengers

bbc.com

701–710 of 1001 posts

Re: Debris found came from missing Titan sub, says friend of passengers

#701
post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess would be that the window wasn't the failure point, assuming that pressure hull was indeed found in many pieces. If the window did go first, the pressure delta on the rest of the hull immediately begins to equalize, so the amount of force the hull is under immediately goes down, making failure of the hull instantly less likely. The inertia of all the water rapidly entering the vessel might do some damage, but…

https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/titan-could-have-vulnerabilitie... > the submersible was designed to reach depths of 4,000 metres, but Lochridge said the passenger viewpoint (window) was only certified for depths of up to 1,300 metres

The window had worked fine for dozens of past dives - just because something isn't "certified" doesn't mean it won't work reliably.

The carbon fiber hull was a much bigger concern.

Re: Debris found came from missing Titan sub, says friend of passengers

#702
post #26

Probably better to go away in an instant rather than sitting and waiting for the inevitable to happen.

In an interview with James Cameron, he mentions[1] that he and other submersible industry experts believe that they did in fact have warning, as they had dropped the weights (which were found far away from the debris field) and were attempting to resurface before the implosion:

[1]: "This Oceangate sub had sensors on the inside of the hull to give them a warning when it was starting to crack [...] they probably had warning that their hull was starting to delaminate. [...] It's our belief - as we understand from inside the community - that they had dropped their ascent weights and they were coming up trying to manage an emergency." https://youtu.be/rThZLhNF_xg?t=472

Re: Debris found came from missing Titan sub, says friend of passengers

#703

What really bothers me about the coverage of this, and I'm not totally anti media etc, was that nobody mentioned on the fact that the tracking system lost contact also. It was only mentioned that the communications was lost, if there had of been media mentioning that the tracking device also lost contact, I think a lot of people would have recognised straight await that it was a critical collapse. No deep gauge devic…

More than that, one report mentioned the US Navy notified the search teams that they heard an explosion Sunday night and used it to limit the search area. The US Navy has literally has experience detecting underwater explosions (see project Azorian). It's not guaranteed of course, but any loud sound near the point of contact loss seems pretty open shut. Imo, it made a more interesting story in a slow news cycle. How…

There's a difference between knowing that a certain number of people are statistically dying right now vs knowing that 5 specific people are currently dying in a specific way.

Re: Debris found came from missing Titan sub, says friend of passengers

#704
post #699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Add an eccentric CEO operating against everyone's advice, some rich passangers, and it's a dream for the media.

[flagged]

You don't have to bring politics into every piece of news that happens.

Re: Debris found came from missing Titan sub, says friend of passengers

#705

What really bothers me about the coverage of this, and I'm not totally anti media etc, was that nobody mentioned on the fact that the tracking system lost contact also. It was only mentioned that the communications was lost, if there had of been media mentioning that the tracking device also lost contact, I think a lot of people would have recognised straight await that it was a critical collapse. No deep gauge devic…

> I feel bad for the families given some false hope

And for the general public. The headlines I saw implied that they were hearing sounds and these people could be rescued. Turns out it was a lost cause from the get go.

Re: Debris found came from missing Titan sub, says friend of passengers

#706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do, but not the depths we're talking about (12,500 feet) https://navalpost.com/how-deep-can-a-submarine-dive/ The depth limits of the most known nuclear powered submarines’ depth limits, as follows; Typhoon-class: Test depth 900 m (3,000 ft) Astute-class: Over 300 m (984 ft 3 in) Akula-class: 480 m (1,570 ft) test depth for Akula I and Akula I Improved, 520 m (1,710 ft) for Akula II and III, 600 m (2,000 ft) max…

Russia has a Losharik nuclear submarine that was tested up to 2500m (8200ft) if Wikipedia is to be believed. It got in the news when it had a fire that killed half a dozen decorated officers. USA probably has something similar.

No doubt, depth capability is one of the big features you go after when building a combat submarine. The deeper you go, the faster you can go while retaining stealth (cavitation is the limiting factor which decreases with the added hydrostatic pressure), and, if you can go significantly deeper than your adversaries, you're more or less invulnerable to attack because they can't shoot at you.

That's also why military specs on things like this are always lies, you don't want anyone knowing how deep you can actually go, which likely includes most of the crew.

Re: Debris found came from missing Titan sub, says friend of passengers

#707

Here are a couple of quotes I pulled from the USCG press release: > "debris is consistent with a catastrophic implosion of the vessel" > "1600 feet (487 meters) from the wreck of the Titanic" > "it is a smooth bottom", "there is no wreckage of the Titanic in the area" > "size of the debris field is consistent with an implosion in the water column" > "there doesn't seem to be any connection between the noises and the…

I'm really curious about the carbon fibre design, I'm not a material expert but I do dive and for tanks they work because of the internal pressure of tank. The 'weaving' is supposed to be link connecting your two hands together interlocking fingers, in one direction you will meet a full resistance, but in the opposite direction your fingers will unlock. I have no idea but seems to me if there is external pressure the…

The looking glass was only rated for 4,000 feet. Implosion happened around 9,000 feet, which would suggest the glass handled over twice its rated depth.

Re: Debris found came from missing Titan sub, says friend of passengers

#708
post #348

> OceanGate’s submersibles are the only known vessels to use real-time (RTM) hull health monitoring. With this RTM system, we can determine if the hull is compromised well before situations become life-threatening, and safely return to the surface. This innovative safety system is not currently covered by any classing agency. Given that Stockton Rush risked and lost his own life, he must have believed these words. He…

In an interview with James Cameron, he mentions[1] that he and other submersible industry experts believe that the system worked and that they did in fact have warning, as they had dropped the weights (which were found far away from the debris field) and were attempting to resurface before the implosion: [1]: "This Oceangate sub had sensors on the inside of the hull to give them a warning when it was starting to crac…

Just fucking insane. In aerospace everyone knows that when a crack starts, IT'S OVER. Crack propagation is extremely rapid after that once nucleation has occurred. Your only hope is to prevent nucleation sites in the first place. Except it's extremely hard to characterize fatigue limits without tons of testing and even for metals there is wide variation for identical parts, not even getting into composites. Which of course we all know they did not do.

Re: Debris found came from missing Titan sub, says friend of passengers

#709
post #191
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Hopefully future subs will have more safety features. From an engineering standpoint, Titan didn't have any safety features at all. What any sane engineer would recommend as a last-ditch backup system Oceangate relied on as a single-point-of-failure. No phone. No beacon. Budget bluetooth controller and touchscreens. Electronics you'd expect to find in an RV. All from a CEO who flaunted his corner-cutting and apathy…

Yet, there still are Teslas with comparable issues on the road, maiming unsuspecting people.

What comparable issues? I thought Teslas had good safety.

Re: Debris found came from missing Titan sub, says friend of passengers

#710

The most likely first failure is the window. At that instant a rapid turbulent fill event would occur. The outside pressure and the hole diameter will provide a calculable interval for the internal volume to fill. At 12,000 feet = 800 atmospheres, this would be on the order of 1/20th of a second, with intense crush/shear forces = instant death as perceived. That interval can be related to the speed of sound and wavel…

This is a very interesting comment. You seem to have a firm grasp on the physics of this situation. Out of curiosity, beyond common sense, does adding pressure internally on something with a significant load of external pressure create a compounding/exponential amount of force/pressure on the material overall?

You may have heard 'nature abhors a vacuum' stated. Most solid materials are almost incompressible, either in solid or liquid form. solid steel, liquid oil, etc only gets smaller when subjected to enormous pressure. To make it smaller you need to reduce the interatomic distances that are dominated by the electromagnetic force. Gasses on the other hand are compressible and a gas volume will steadily get smaller as you squeeze it. At a high enough pressure you can create a liquid or solid that is then not compressible. All gasses can be charted in a 'phase diagram' that shows the pressure/density relationship. Some gasses do not solidify or liquify - a whole complex area here. This submersible was a vacuum into which air was added to ~~15 pounds per square inch. It was then surrounded by a wall to keep that gas in. In a normal room - all you need is a balloon, blow up with your lungs. Down at 12,000 feet underwater = 400 Atmospheres of pressure or ~~6,000 psi. One can think of this as a wall, with you on one side holding it from falling over with your hands at 15 pounds per square inch(psi) and on the other side is this gorilla at 6000 psi = gorilla wins. Now a thick walled sphere with you inside at 15 psi and the gorilla outside at 6000 psi is the new balloon. A sphere good at beating gorillas, and most deep sea spheres(called bathyspheres) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathysphere William Beebe went down a few thousand feet in the 1930's - limited by steel cable weight/depth limits as steel cable are only good for about 6000 feet as free hanging cables. Now they use incompressible buoyant solids or liquids to make them neutrally buoyant. His globe in the Wiki has some windows for vision and lights made with thick gasketed quartz - all 100% tested - still risky. They sent it down empty first. some images https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_enCA924CA924&sxsrf...

Getting to your question via this preamble. The bathyscaphe could be pressurised with a helium/oxygen/other gas. The US navy has done many experiments with various gas mixtures - none are good to 6000 psi due to physiological limits. Dissolved oxygen and nitrogen are toxic above certain pressures - look at the Navy stuff for more on that via google. They are between 1000 to 2000 feet more or less - far below 6000 feet and it can take weeks to get the excess gas out of your system via gradual decompression chambers. There have been experiments with inert freon liquids with dissolved oxygen, tested on mice = lived and some Navy experiments with people who breathed the fluid under close medical control - I doubt this has progressed far, as this wiki shows https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_breathing.

So yes, you can make the sphere thinner if you add pressure to the inside. Fish do it, with nothing, but often die unless they are sirfaced under controlled conditions as chemistry varies slightly as they come up, dissolved gasses fizz etc.

This probably failed via the inadequate window = broke = near instant death for all. However, it may have a carbon shell failure?? if they recover the parts more will be known how the failure occurred.

Post reply on HN