[deleted]
Why isn't Titan classed? (2019)
211–220 of 302 posts
Re: Why isn't Titan classed? (2019)
#212TLDR: "The entire shipping industry is doing it wrong, so we're doing it differently."
Also:
> 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.
So I guess that system didn't work? All the accounts I've heard suggest that the hull collapsed instantly.
Re: Why isn't Titan classed? (2019)
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
The first space shuttle launch was crewed. It ended up with a ~2% failure rate. The Titan made about 50 dives. So, from a reliability perspective, on par with the shuttle. I posit that half the people on HN would volunteer for a hypothetical next shuttle flight without thinking twice.
The shuttle did something nobody had done before and was viewed as a genuine step forward in human capability. It was also over 50 years ago and had to rely on technology of the time - uncrewed tests were much harder to perform. This wasn't a particularly ground breaking vehicle in terms of capability and was taking paying tourists...
> The shuttle did something nobody had done before
Put spy satellites into orbit and then later retrieve them? That's not to be critical, but we could have done much of the scientific and space station work with a different platform and likely had a much lower mission failure rate. The design of the shuttle wasn't solely about this criteria, though.
Re: Why isn't Titan classed? (2019)
#214It sounds like a reasonable explanation. I'm glad other people are willing to make these experiments and I think it is quite reasonable that they would put all these things out in public so we know what their stance is. It sounds like informed consent was quite available in this situation.
It's also worthwhile to be able to experiment with breaking the rules. All said, as someone who jumps from bridges and rides his motorcycle, I support the right of people to take risks and die in the process. Even Russian roulette! Do as you will with your life. You are a pure free agent. Things will happen as a consequence, but that is for you to account for.
It takes all kinds to make this world, and just as we learned from the guys who shoved their head in particle beams, and who over-reflected the demon core, and who mishandled FOOF, and from Carrion's disease, we will learn from this - yep Chesterton's fence was there for a reason.
And on the other side we've got cardiac catheterization, a cure for h. pylori, neurotrophic electrodes. People tried in all cases to tell people not to do things and they keep doing them! I love it. Personally, I, as my part in the human composite organism do all sorts of dangerous things, and it's just part of the process of humanity learning and growing.
Re: Why isn't Titan classed? (2019)
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've heard the same argument against unit testing and strong typing.
If I recall correctly, even NASA found unit testing to be of limited value, finding a small fraction of software bugs. That's not to say "don't do it" but my stance is that the developer should do some ad-hoc testing for everything they write, just don't formalize and document it or you'll land on the wrong end of cost/benefit. I can point to some subtle logic bugs that no sane unit test would have caught.
Isn’t unit testing redundant when also using formal verification (e.g., coq)?
Re: Why isn't Titan classed? (2019)
#216TLDR: "The entire shipping industry is doing it wrong, so we're doing it differently." Also: > 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.…
It’s possible that it did work flawlessly, but the signal that the hull was compromised failed to change the pixel color on a monitor before the monitor was destroyed by the imploding hull.
Re: Why isn't Titan classed? (2019)
#217> They [inspections] do not ensure that operators adhere to proper operating procedures and decision-making processes – two areas that are much more important for mitigating risks at sea. As a former tall ship captain: No Shit. Ships stopped sinking when we started requiring inspections and design rules around stability and watertight compartments. We largely eliminated a common failure mode, designer error, through…
Their reasoning is fundamentally flawed. > The vast majority of marine (and aviation) accidents are a result of operator error, not mechanical failure. As a result, simply focusing on classing the vessel does not address the operational risks. Aka "classing doesn't mitigate all problems, so we're not going to do it at all"
It's an argument I encounter way too often in discussions (politics, climate, evolution even) with people who have an "alternative" view of how things work: it doesn't address everything, therefore it doesn't address anything.
There's probably a name for that fallacy. People take all the issues that have been solved/addresses for granted, and pretend the unsolved issues are the only ones that matter. And because current methods don't fix those, they're clearly worthless and should be thrown out.
Re: Why isn't Titan classed? (2019)
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their reasoning is fundamentally flawed. > The vast majority of marine (and aviation) accidents are a result of operator error, not mechanical failure. As a result, simply focusing on classing the vessel does not address the operational risks. Aka "classing doesn't mitigate all problems, so we're not going to do it at all"
Also: the reason most accidents are due to operator error and not mechanical failure is because the requirements exist in the first place. "Why do we have laws against slavery? It's not like anyone actually owns slaves. Seems pretty superfluous, so let's just get rid of it!"
Wasn't that the argument the SCOTUS used to undo the Voting Rights Act?
Re: Why isn't Titan classed? (2019)
#219> 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…
The epoxy in carbon fiber makes it stiff. Stiffness helps reduce buckling loads.
The buckling load is the load at which a structure buckles. I think you mean that stiffness helps resist buckling.
Re: Why isn't Titan classed? (2019)
#220> The vast majority of marine (and aviation) accidents are a result of operator error, not mechanical failure. Could that be because the vast majority of mechanical designs go through processes designed to validate them and catch flaws? They also use SpaceX as an example. SpaceX ran a large number of unmanned launches to prove out the design before putting people on board. Several of those ended in loss of the vehicl…
That's spot on - it's like survivorship bias. If the majority of fighter planes returned with bullet holes on their tops, Oceangate would have armoured the tops.
That reminded me of this story which might have been the one you were thinking of:
https://medium.com/@christian.dobbert/the-missing-bullet-hol...