OceanGate submarine disappears at bottom of ocean

It is still a mystery. Why these billionaires wanted to go and see the rest of the Titanic? Maybe there was another objective with their mission. Or maybe it was an ambush, a trap. Reading the article that @Ca. put by George Webb (here) we can see that these billionaires were not nice nice. Anyway, now they are food for the fish. If they wanted more fame, or more money, more billions of $ it is too late. Food for fish. That's a lesson, for we, simple humans.
 
It is still a mystery. Why these billionaires wanted to go and see the rest of the Titanic? Maybe there was another objective with their mission. Or maybe it was an ambush, a trap. Reading the article that @Ca. put by George Webb (here) we can see that these billionaires were not nice nice. Anyway, now they are food for the fish. If they wanted more fame, or more money, more billions of $ it is too late. Food for fish. That's a lesson, for we, simple humans.

Explorers explore. That's what they do. The Titanic is the most famous shipwreck in the world. Billionaires have to do something with their money. They want to go to space, even though the tourist space flights are only technically in space for a very short time.

People want to climb Everest, do parachute jumps, go on rollercoasters.

Yes, based on everything we know about the company, the guy who owned it, and the poor excuse for an underwater vessel these people were in when they died, we could easily nominate them for the Darwin award. But rich people wanting to do something thrilling and dangerous isn't a mystery at all. It's a mystery to me why multiple people in this thread can't see the appeal of going in a submarine down to the wreck of the Titanic.
 
Explorers explore. That's what they do. The Titanic is the most famous shipwreck in the world. Billionaires have to do something with their money. They want to go to space, even though the tourist space flights are only technically in space for a very short time.

People want to climb Everest, do parachute jumps, go on rollercoasters.

Yes, based on everything we know about the company, the guy who owned it, and the poor excuse for an underwater vessel these people were in when they died, we could easily nominate them for the Darwin award. But rich people wanting to do something thrilling and dangerous isn't a mystery at all. It's a mystery to me why multiple people in this thread can't see the appeal of going in a submarine down to the wreck of the Titanic.
You are right. The sad thing is the son of one of the billionaires that die for nothing.
 
I'm thinking they were not just adventure seekers, but potential investors as well, as there are salvage rights ties. So, to convince investment, they appeal to rich peoples sense of adventure, but also the lure of profit.

TITANIC SALVAGE RIGHTS OWNER MOURNS LOSS OF SHIPWRECK EXPERT

RMS Titanic, Inc., the company that owns the salvage rights to the Titanic shipwreck, is mourning the loss of Titanic expert Paul-Henri Nargeolet, who was among five people killed aboard the Titan submersible when it imploded this week.

Nargeolet — known as “PH” — was a long-term employee of the company.


 
They knew it was an experimental ACME submarine and knew the risks and the odds. It's unfortunate but it's a choice they made. What I don't understand is the one who took his son for this experiment. The lessons from this story are: Be very careful of how you name your ship. With DIE (diversity inclusion equity) you may die. Cheap video game controllers are not high tech. Never underestimate nature.
Maybe it's a first incident in many where hubris with reckless hiring strategies will ultimately lead to more and more sheltered lives in safe bubble cities.
 
So, if I understood it corectly, they went to the depth of 4000 meters in a, what is esentially, back yard built mini submarine, which broke? And everyone is puzzled with that outcome? Only proves that we live in a world where knowledge fades out very fast . . .
 
It's a mystery to me why multiple people in this thread can't see the appeal of going in a submarine down to the wreck of the Titanic.
It's because it is not made clear where the appeal is in sitting on the floor of a closed capsule with only a screen to watch. I can imagine the thrill if there was some direct physical experience, a real submarine with some real stuff to watch through a real window and at least some space to stretch your legs out. It looks like one can get the very same experience OceanGates seems to offer by sitting in the same capsule in their living room. Now, that's just me trying to imagine where the thrill in this adventure is other than knowing you might die any minute. At least, when jumping with a parachute you have an amazing direct experience of flying and watching the Earth from above and free falling, the sky is the limit, the Sun is there. Maybe there's just a bunch of things I don't understand about what really drives people's choices of fun.
 
I think this sums it up pretty well.

I Happen to know -indirectly- the pilot of the sub. he was a very old friend of the father of a friend of mine.
They where commando and deep see divers for years together.
He did one of the first dives toward the titanic in 1987 and also with James Cameron too, much later.
The pilot was 76 and it wasn't his first dive in these subs.
 
So, if I understood it corectly, they went to the depth of 4000 meters in a, what is esentially, back yard built mini submarine, which broke?

Yes.

And everyone is puzzled with that outcome?

They are puzzled by the media narrative about it. What actually happened is very simple, the submarine imploded few hours after diving at the depth of 3500 meters.

Only proves that we live in a world where knowledge fades out very fast . . .

Yes, knowledge fades out very fast in this world. Especially in the land of DIE and startup culture. I'm afraid that in the future, somebody might try the same thing with a mission to Mars.
 
It's because it is not made clear where the appeal is in sitting on the floor of a closed capsule with only a screen to watch. I can imagine the thrill if there was some direct physical experience, a real submarine with some real stuff to watch through a real window and at least some space to stretch your legs out. It looks like one can get the very same experience OceanGates seems to offer by sitting in the same capsule in their living room. Now, that's just me trying to imagine where the thrill in this adventure is other than knowing you might die any minute. At least, when jumping with a parachute you have an amazing direct experience of flying and watching the Earth from above and free falling, the sky is the limit, the Sun is there. Maybe there's just a bunch of things I don't understand about what really drives people's choices of fun.
The Titan did have an actual viewing window - about 12" across. Apparently the largest view port of any vehicle that could reach those kind of depths. That was one of the parts that was, according to some, not actually certified to reach the depth of the Titanic. I assume, with the subs lights on, those inside could have looked out and seen something 'in real life' - though I would not have though you could see very far given the darkness and mud down there.
 
This comment was epic:

- James, I want to ask you, though, since you've been down on these dive missions before, for we talked about the safety risks. We've reported on the fact that the people on board signed waivers. They knew that this was dangerous and that there weren't very many other vehicles that could come get them out if something goes wrong. How aware were you of those concerns and those risks before you went down? And is there anything that should be done when it comes to safety in the future?

- Look, it's comparing apples and oranges here. I went with a very proven system when I dove at Titanic with the Russian submersibles. They used very, very well understood design methodologies.

 
Back
Top Bottom