The Lemon Fool

Tedx wrote:Dont you just go to sleep due to the increase in the C02 levels?

Hopefully.

A debris field has been found near the wreck - not identified as yet

AiY(D)

Tedx wrote:

BullDog wrote:A secret stash of cyanide pills on board might have been handy for such a nasty outcome. Chances of survival ebbing away by the minute.

Dont you just go to sleep due to the increase in the C02 levels?

Good question.

Having seen a few clips of Stockton Rush, the OceanGate CEO, he is not a man whose judgement I would trust given the nature of such a voyage. Quotes such as:

People say that you cannot safely mate titanium with fibreglass, but we've done it.

It seems that he has paid the price for his own hubris, as have those who were prepared to take the risk in an unregulated craft. The fact that the viewport was only considered safe for depths of 1300m, for example, despite being only a third of the depth and pressures required to reach the Titanic should have made prospective passengers give OceanGate a wide berth. I wonder what the cost of the rescue\retrieval will be, it must be many millions.

RC

I wouldn't want to trust my life to a game controller. No doubt it's pretty reliable but it's also built to a cost. How would it hold up if you dropped it on a hard surface?

I suspect though, this was the least of the problems with this sub design.

Well they seem to have found bits of it anyway.

BullDog wrote:

Tedx wrote:
Dont you just go to sleep due to the increase in the C02 levels?

Good question.

It's not like Carbon Monoxide which does make you sleepy. An excess of Carbon dioxide in the air breathed, is more distressing I would imagine from this description : https://www.fsis.usda.gov/sites/default ... ioxide.pdf

The instant death of a structural failure sounds preferable to me.

Sorcery wrote:It's not like Carbon Monoxide which does make you sleepy. An excess of Carbon dioxide in the air breathed, is more distressing I would imagine from this description : https://www.fsis.usda.gov/sites/default ... ioxide.pdf

The instant death of a structural failure sounds preferable to me.

I seem to recall a documentary where they looked for the least distressing form of capital punishment and they decided carbon dioxide was the way.

This is a good summary of the Elon Musk levels of bad engineering in that sub.
https://twitter.com/LadyDoctorSays/stat ... 9115300864

Sorcery wrote:
The instant death of a structural failure sounds preferable to me.

If the passengers were never going to make it, then that's got to be the 'least worst' way for things to have happened, I think.

And I don't even just mean that for the passengers to be honest, as my thoughts during the rescue-phase, for a craft that was unable to be opened from the inside but with a quite limited supply of oxygen to sustain life inside it, kept returning to the possibility of those poor people searching for the craft eventually finding it intact, but with an asphyxiated cargo, and that type of search-outcome must be a really difficult one to live with for any of the diverse rescue parties involved, as there must naturally be some tendency to think 'if only we'd have done things differently in the time we had available'...

This way, it hopefully allows the rescuers to know that it looks like from the outset there was absolutely nothing they could have done differently once the initial catastrophic issue occurred...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

MrFoolish wrote:

Sorcery wrote:It's not like Carbon Monoxide which does make you sleepy. An excess of Carbon dioxide in the air breathed, is more distressing I would imagine from this description : https://www.fsis.usda.gov/sites/default ... ioxide.pdf

The instant death of a structural failure sounds preferable to me.

I seem to recall a documentary where they looked for the least distressing form of capital punishment and they decided carbon dioxide was the way.

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

Tedx wrote:

MrFoolish wrote:
I seem to recall a documentary where they looked for the least distressing form of capital punishment and they decided carbon dioxide was the way.

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!

Lanark wrote:This is a good summary of the Elon Musk levels of bad engineering in that sub.
https://twitter.com/LadyDoctorSays/status/1671704319115300864

Umm, ok, so how do we know that "LadyDoctorSays" is an expert in such matters? Or are we just to be impressed by the structural integrity shown in her profile photo ... ? https://twitter.com/LadyDoctorSays/photo

mc2fool wrote:

Lanark wrote:This is a good summary of the Elon Musk levels of bad engineering in that sub.
https://twitter.com/LadyDoctorSays/status/1671704319115300864

Umm, ok, so how do we know that "LadyDoctorSays" is an expert in such matters? Or are we just to be impressed by the structural integrity shown in her profile photo ... ? https://twitter.com/LadyDoctorSays/photo

Point taken although assuming that a chick is thick because she looks good in underwear is a bit not PC.

Wreckage is from Missing Titan Sub - If sub imploded 'death would have been instantaneous'

The remark came after the BBC was told by a friend of passengers aboard the Titan that the debris discovered includes "a landing frame and a rear cover from the submersible".

Dale Mole, former US Navy physician, said the claim was "indicative of an implosion".

AiY(D)

mike wrote:

mc2fool wrote:But possibly worse is it survives the first few trips, giving a false sense of confidence, and then fails as a consequence of it being strained during those first few....

Yes, a bit like the Comet in the 1950's that had metal fatigue due to the pressurisation from earlier flights.

Three fatal Comet 1 crashes due to structural problems, specifically BOAC Flight 783 on 2 May 1953, BOAC Flight 781 on 10 January 1954 and South African Airways Flight 201 on 8 April 1954, led to the grounding of the entire Comet fleet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Comet#Accidents_and_incidents

But, the significant fact was not the pressure cycling, but the fact that the design had stress concentraters (square windows) that accelerated and mulpied the fatigue effects.

Equally there's an expert referenced elsewhere in the thread who is scornful that the end rings are simply glued onto the carbon pressure vessel. Idiot!
Even in 1654 they knew that if the pressure inside the vessel is lower than the pressure outside even draught horses cannot pull them apart ( Magdeburg hemispheres). So at 30 ft the end rings are effectively inseperable from the hull. The only reason for the adhesive is to stop the ends falling off when the vehicle is in the air! Equally, the pressure of the water compresses the carbon hull onto the inner flange of the end ring, making the seal even more resistant to leaks.

Someone else wonders why no CO2 recycling. The replacement chemical was "Oxygen", being added at a partial pressure (ie lower thqn atmospheric to maintain the correct balance in the lungs. The duration of oxygen was 20 times the intended mission duration, and CO2 buildup isn't significant in that duration because the amount of CO2 being added is minimal when on O2 (yes it is more complicated than that, but CO2 in the atmosphere is less than 1%, but on O2 one can breathe CO2 at 5%) The problem is that after 96 hours the supply of O2 runs out and scrubbing CO2 then doesn't prolong life.
( It's different in a submarine where one is breathing "Air" and extracting Oxygen from that Air and breathing out extra CO2)
. Submarine communications are a problems. Military submarines uses Extra Long Frequencies to get radio reception under water, Yes one can mitigate the problem when simply using 'local comms, where the surface station and submerged station are close but the compromise is between the need for 'real time communication and the range of the usable frequencies underwater for that amount of data.
We have yet got whale speech down to the same fine art they have (assuming they in fact are sending massive amounts of data and not just "Hallo World" taking five minutes)


Nor is catastrophic failure the only risk. An electrical failure to the motors could leave them drifting in the current, a leak in the Petrol filled bouyancy tank could leave them unable to ascend. Possibly the failure of a mobile phone, The inability to post (or get) the "Me at Titanic" tweet they expected was enough for a passenger to go crazy and kill the pilot, a Newfoundland version of Nottingham?

Why should facts get in thew way of a media frenzy?

So much for GB News claiming they had insider information that SOS was being banged out. I think Ofcom should investigate this.

I have no interest in the technicalities. Simply that they had more money than common sense and they chose to spend it that way. An utter waste even if they had returned to the surface intact. Proved nothing of any value for the future and just would have bought them bragging rights.

They must of course have known that so their fate is up to them. Better by far to have spent the funds on scientific endeavour. I cannot understand why the western world is spending so much time and energy on this.

Dod

MrFoolish wrote:So much for GB News claiming they had insider information that SOS was being banged out. I think Ofcom should investigate this.

I was really hoping the banging wasn't them. I'd hope they'd have gone more peacefully than that.

MrFoolish wrote:So much for GB News claiming they had insider information that SOS was being banged out. I think Ofcom should investigate this.

There could be another lost sub in the area