Tourist submarine missing!

[AsleepInYorkshire]

Top Secret US Navy Heard Titan Implode


AiY(D)

[stevensfo]

If it was the Michael Portillo documentary, it was nitrogen hypoxia.

Yes, I think it was. Best they don't let me buy in the gases then!

Our bodies are very sensitive to oxygen and carbon dioxide levels and I imagine that high Co2 would be rather unpleasant - a lot of gasping and struggling for breath.

Nitrogen has been considered a few times as a method of execution. As an inert gas, the body would not react to the gas itself but simply go to sleep as the oxygen levels went down. This once happened at a research lab when liquid N2 containers leaked and the technicians just slipped away.

In theory, you could use Helium. I believe that you can buy it in small cylinders for filling up party balloons. It should work the same way as Nitrogen.

The advantage is that, as you utter your last words, you will at least die giggling!

Steve

PS As a young, naive technician, I was asked by my boss to bring samples in liquid nitrogen from Oxford uni to the MRC in London. It was very heavy and I had to take a few trains.

It was only a few days later that a colleague told me that what I'd done was completely illegal.

Our boss was a genius, but not only very scary, was three times my weight and resembled Jabba the Hutt from Star Wars. I kept my mouth shut.

[Mike4]

Our bodies are very sensitive to oxygen and carbon dioxide levels and I imagine that high Co2 would be rather unpleasant - a lot of gasping and struggling for breath.

Yes I've read that involuntary hyperventilation occurs as CO2 levels rise in the atmosphere being breathed. Must be very distressing.

I believe it's the same reflex that forces you to eventually start breathing when you hold your breath, or when drowning.

[XFool]

Gone off air: https://www.oceangate.com/

SSL handshake failed Error code 525
Visit cloudflare.com for more information.
2023-06-23 16:41:53 UTC

[AsleepInYorkshire]

Titan sub CEO dismissed safety warnings as 'baseless cries', emails show

Warnings over the safety of OceanGate's Titan submersible were repeatedly dismissed by the CEO of the company, email exchanges with a leading deep sea exploration specialist show.

In messages seen by the BBC, Rob McCallum told OceanGate CEO Stockton Rush that he was potentially putting his clients at risk and urged him to stop using the sub until it had been classified by an independent body.

Mr Rush responded that he was "tired of industry players who try to use a safety argument to stop innovation".

I think we'll be hearing a lot more about Stockton Rush as the lawyers gather.

AiY(D)

[ReformedCharacter]

Gone off air: https://www.oceangate.com/

SSL handshake failed Error code 525
Visit cloudflare.com for more information.
2023-06-23 16:41:53 UTC

Error code 525 = server imploded.

RC

[Mike4]

Titan sub CEO dismissed safety warnings as 'baseless cries', emails show

Warnings over the safety of OceanGate's Titan submersible were repeatedly dismissed by the CEO of the company, email exchanges with a leading deep sea exploration specialist show.

In messages seen by the BBC, Rob McCallum told OceanGate CEO Stockton Rush that he was potentially putting his clients at risk and urged him to stop using the sub until it had been classified by an independent body.

Mr Rush responded that he was "tired of industry players who try to use a safety argument to stop innovation".

I think we'll be hearing a lot more about Stockton Rush as the lawyers gather.

AiY(D)

\


On the other hand pick a subject, and the internet will be awash with people "warning" about it. Every so often one of them will turn out to be right. Bound to, statistically.

Even so, Mr Rush's refusal to get the hull independently assessed looks foolhardy in retrospect, as does getting in it for a deep sea dive. But all the occupants knew what they were getting into, in every sense of the phrase.

[Tedx]

Well at least it was quick.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65934887

[88V8]

I think we'll be hearing a lot more about Stockton Rush as the lawyers gather.

I imagine the lawyers will be weighing the cost of fetching up more of the debris against the possibility of proving culpable negligence. Not cheap, killing billionaires.

V8

[Lootman]

I think we'll be hearing a lot more about Stockton Rush as the lawyers gather.

I imagine the lawyers will be weighing the cost of fetching up more of the debris against the possibility of proving culpable negligence. Not cheap, killing billionaires.

It would be an interesting case, especially since it would no doubt be held in the US, where civil cases are heard before juries, substantial awards are common, as are punitive damages awards.

The passengers knew the risks, or should have done. They signed a waiver of liability. They knew that no insurance applied. And that going to any extreme place (bottom of the ocean, top of a high mountain, into space) is inherently risky.

If I were on that jury, I might favour acquittal.

[Dod101]

Titan sub CEO dismissed safety warnings as 'baseless cries', emails show

Warnings over the safety of OceanGate's Titan submersible were repeatedly dismissed by the CEO of the company, email exchanges with a leading deep sea exploration specialist show.

In messages seen by the BBC, Rob McCallum told OceanGate CEO Stockton Rush that he was potentially putting his clients at risk and urged him to stop using the sub until it had been classified by an independent body.

Mr Rush responded that he was "tired of industry players who try to use a safety argument to stop innovation".

I think we'll be hearing a lot more about Stockton Rush as the lawyers gather.

AiY(D)

Not sure that there will be much in it for the lawyers. Who will they go after? I have no idea what the assets of OceanGate will be but probably not that much. There is unlikely to be any insurance since most or all underwriters would run a mile from this sort of risk since the vessel is unclassified by any of the Classification Societies it would seem.

Presumably that is why OceanGate got clients to sign the waiver they apparently did before boarding. Rush sounds like an arrogant sh*t but he must have had something to get the three/four paying passengers on board.

Dod

[mc2fool]

It would be an interesting case, especially since it would no doubt be held in the US, where civil cases are heard before juries, substantial awards are common, as are punitive damages awards.

The passengers knew the risks, or should have done. They signed a waiver of liability. They knew that no insurance applied. And that going to any extreme place (bottom of the ocean, top of a high mountain, into space) is inherently risky.

Yeah but waivers etc don't remove the requirement for a duty of at least reasonable care, especially when you're a paying customer (rather than a joint explorer/adventurer). The question will be whether the equipment (and staff) provided were inherently up to the job or not.

To take an analogy, if you go for a bungee jump or zip wire run and the providers use ropes or tackle etc that's not designed for at least your weight (or is but is frayed from over use) then it won't matter what waivers they've had you sign, if the ropes etc break it'll be their fault -- and predictably so.

Interesting interview on Ch4 News tonight with the chair of a peer-review committee on manned submersibles who was one of the signatories of a 2018 letter to OceanGate raising concerns about the Titan. "OceanGate ‘didn’t cut corners, they drove past the whole block’"

[Lootman]

It would be an interesting case, especially since it would no doubt be held in the US, where civil cases are heard before juries, substantial awards are common, as are punitive damages awards.

The passengers knew the risks, or should have done. They signed a waiver of liability. They knew that no insurance applied. And that going to any extreme place (bottom of the ocean, top of a high mountain, into space) is inherently risky.

Yeah but waivers etc don't remove the requirement for a duty of at least reasonable care, especially when you're a paying customer (rather than a joint explorer/adventurer). The question will be whether the equipment (and staff) provided were inherently up to the job or not.

To take an analogy, if you go for a bungee jump or zip wire run and the providers use ropes or tackle etc that's not designed for at least your weight (or is but is frayed from over use) then it won't matter what waivers they've had you sign, if the ropes etc break it'll be their fault -- and predictably so.

Interesting interview on Ch4 News tonight with the chair of a peer-review committee on manned submersibles who was one of the signatories of a 2018 letter to OceanGate raising concerns about the Titan. "OceanGate ‘didn’t cut corners, they drove past the whole block’"

Sure, it can be endlessly argued, and probably will be. But this is not like getting on a bus, train or plane, with a reasonable expectation of arriving safely. This was an extreme venture to a very dangerous place undertaken by informed people.

[Mike4]

Yeah but waivers etc don't remove the requirement for a duty of at least reasonable care, especially when you're a paying customer (rather than a joint explorer/adventurer). The question will be whether the equipment (and staff) provided were inherently up to the job or not.

To take an analogy, if you go for a bungee jump or zip wire run and the providers use ropes or tackle etc that's not designed for at least your weight (or is but is frayed from over use) then it won't matter what waivers they've had you sign, if the ropes etc break it'll be their fault -- and predictably so.

Interesting interview on Ch4 News tonight with the chair of a peer-review committee on manned submersibles who was one of the signatories of a 2018 letter to OceanGate raising concerns about the Titan. "OceanGate ‘didn’t cut corners, they drove past the whole block’"

Sure, it can be endlessly argued, and probably will be. But this is not like getting on a bus, train or plane, with a reasonable expectation of arriving safely. This was an extreme venture to a very dangerous place undertaken by informed people.

Totally agree. I also wonder how much OceanGate is worth today, to make it worth suing them. Peanuts I suspect so not worth the effort. They can only be a busted flush, surely?

[mc2fool]

Yeah but waivers etc don't remove the requirement for a duty of at least reasonable care, especially when you're a paying customer (rather than a joint explorer/adventurer). The question will be whether the equipment (and staff) provided were inherently up to the job or not.

To take an analogy, if you go for a bungee jump or zip wire run and the providers use ropes or tackle etc that's not designed for at least your weight (or is but is frayed from over use) then it won't matter what waivers they've had you sign, if the ropes etc break it'll be their fault -- and predictably so.

Interesting interview on Ch4 News tonight with the chair of a peer-review committee on manned submersibles who was one of the signatories of a 2018 letter to OceanGate raising concerns about the Titan. "OceanGate ‘didn’t cut corners, they drove past the whole block’"

Sure, it can be endlessly argued, and probably will be. But this is not like getting on a bus, train or plane, with a reasonable expectation of arriving safely. This was an extreme venture to a very dangerous place undertaken by informed people.

Informed people? The guy & his son were structural engineers?

A dangerous place is one thing but by all the accounts appearing on the news it sounds like the truly dangerous thing was the attitude of the CEO and, consequently the equipment he built. And it's not after-the-fact know-it-alls, it's experts in the field that were raising warnings well beforehand. This is sounding less and less like misadventure and more and more like a slapdash cowboy operation.

[Lootman]

Sure, it can be endlessly argued, and probably will be. But this is not like getting on a bus, train or plane, with a reasonable expectation of arriving safely. This was an extreme venture to a very dangerous place undertaken by informed people.

Informed people? The guy & his son were structural engineers?

A dangerous place is one thing but by all the accounts appearing on the news it sounds like the truly dangerous thing was the attitude of the CEO and, consequently the equipment he built. And it's not after-the-fact know-it-alls, it's experts in the field that were raising warnings well beforehand. This is sounding less and less like misadventure and more and more like a slapdash cowboy operation.

A (US) court will decide. But as a juror I would have a hard time buying into the idea that the passengers thought they were on a fun fair ride.

[Mike4]

Sure, it can be endlessly argued, and probably will be. But this is not like getting on a bus, train or plane, with a reasonable expectation of arriving safely. This was an extreme venture to a very dangerous place undertaken by informed people.

Informed people? The guy & his son were structural engineers?

A dangerous place is one thing but by all the accounts appearing on the news it sounds like the truly dangerous thing was the attitude of the CEO and, consequently the equipment he built. And it's not after-the-fact know-it-alls, it's experts in the field that were raising warnings well beforehand. This is sounding less and less like misadventure and more and more like a slapdash cowboy operation.

On the other hand, one would imagine that people smart enough to have become billionaires would have also been smart enough to recognise a "slapdash cowboy operation" and dipped out of the venture. Unless they were willing to knowingly take the risk.

[mc2fool]

Informed people? The guy & his son were structural engineers?

A dangerous place is one thing but by all the accounts appearing on the news it sounds like the truly dangerous thing was the attitude of the CEO and, consequently the equipment he built. And it's not after-the-fact know-it-alls, it's experts in the field that were raising warnings well beforehand. This is sounding less and less like misadventure and more and more like a slapdash cowboy operation.

On the other hand, one would imagine that people smart enough to have become billionaires would have also been smart enough to recognise a "slapdash cowboy operation" and dipped out of the venture. Unless they were willing to knowingly take the risk.

Get real here, you really think the billionaire father would have taken down his 19 year old son believing it was a cowboy operation and knowingly taking the risk that Stockton Rush might have done a slapdash job in building the sub?

I don't know if it'll ever get to any court but the question is not whether it was a dangerous place to go per se but whether Rush had acted reasonably to mitigate the risks. It's certainly not sounding like it.

[UncleEbenezer]

Titan sub CEO dismissed safety warnings as 'baseless cries', emails show

Hmm. Is there a bit of a trend for people on a Mission being tired of experts telling them there might be a problem?

[Dod101]

Sure, it can be endlessly argued, and probably will be. But this is not like getting on a bus, train or plane, with a reasonable expectation of arriving safely. This was an extreme venture to a very dangerous place undertaken by informed people.

Totally agree. I also wonder how much OceanGate is worth today, to make it worth suing them. Peanuts I suspect so not worth the effort. They can only be a busted flush, surely?

I agree and said so above. I doubt that there will be any point in anyone suing OceanGate. Those taking part must have known what the risks involved (ie the risk of death) but unless they were all truly on a suicide mission, they must have trusted Stock. Obviously he was a strong character; couldn't have been otherwise and it must have been such as to convince the passengers that the risks were worth taking. Group thinking and all that; we see it all the time on these boards.

Dod