21–30 of 302 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Highly innovative! Instead of their sudden death being a complete surprise, they may have had a few awful moments of warning.
Wouldn't they have communicated that back if they had? There wasn't even an "Uh-oh", as far as we know.
> No other submersible currently utilizes real-time monitoring to monitor hull health during a dive. We want to know why. Classed subs are only required to undergo depth validation every three years, whereas our RTM system validates the integrity of the hull on each and every dive.
Completely, completely bizarro in my opinion. I'll take the hull that is proven to actually withstand the pressures it was designed for over some system that gives me a heads up before I get crushed to death.
Related question for those more knowledgeable. I always thought the primary benefit of carbon fiber was tensile strength. I don't even understand how it could sufficiently resist the compressive pressures at the bottom of the ocean - it is a fiber after all. Edit: After seeing the comments below about James Cameron, apparently I'm not alone. From James Cameron's Wikipedia page: "He was also critical of the use of carbon-fiber composite in the company’s Titan submersible, stating that the material has “no strength in external compression” when withstanding the pressure in deep sea environments."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The engineer who worked on it said it would provide only milliseconds of warning before the hull collapsed. He was promptly fired.
Source? (the story does sound plausible, but having a source would be helpful)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The engineer who worked on it said it would provide only milliseconds of warning before the hull collapsed. He was promptly fired.
Source? (the story does sound plausible, but having a source would be helpful)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/katherinehamilton/2023/06/21/oc...
> 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. > No other submersible currently utilizes real-time monitoring to monitor hull health during…
Whether it can do it reliably / survive fatigue accross repeated cycles is a different question. Imagine we'll find out as the investigation progresses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The engineer who worked on it said it would provide only milliseconds of warning before the hull collapsed. He was promptly fired.
Source? (the story does sound plausible, but having a source would be helpful)
>Lochridge also questioned OceanGate’s plans to install a monitoring system on the vessel to detect the start of hull breakdown. His court filing argued “this type of acoustic analysis would only show when a component is about to fail—often milliseconds before an implosion—and would not detect any existing flaws prior to putting pressure onto the hull.”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The engineer who worked on it said it would provide only milliseconds of warning before the hull collapsed. He was promptly fired.
Source? (the story does sound plausible, but having a source would be helpful)
It's been in most media on the past few days.
And yes, one has to wonder about a warning system that does not warm in advance and which operates in situations where no-one can do anything about it, anyway...
[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/katherinehamilton/2023/06/21/oc...
Edit: oh dear flood of replies!
Patent for their hull monitoring system: https://patents.google.com/patent/US11119071B1/en
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Highly innovative! Instead of their sudden death being a complete surprise, they may have had a few awful moments of warning.
Wouldn't they have communicated that back if they had? There wasn't even an "Uh-oh", as far as we know.
None of this validates using the audio sensor as a warning system because whether you have milliseconds or as much as a couple of minutes warning prior to rapid decompression makes no difference at the depth it occurred, but it does suggest the passengers knew they were doomed prior to the actual decompression.