quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
"You steer this sub with an Xbox game controller, some of the ballast is abandoned construction pipes ," Pogue told the BBC.

I wonder if anyone that studied metallurgy was involved in the construction of this sub. As Mars posted, thousands of lbs PSI at that depth is completely disastrous if a pinhole leak or smaller appeared. How many times did the same unit, subjected to tremendous stress and forces, submerge down to the Titanic? How many times did this unit, some of it made from recycled material, had to be rebuilt?

I just read the CEO’s comments on the design and why they went wireless and such.

“We’ve taken a completely new approach to the sub design and it’s all run with this game controller and these touch screens.

‘It’s bluetooth so I can hand it to anybody and it’s meant for a 16-year-old to throw it around and super durable. We keep a couple of spares on board just in case.’”

None of that inspires confidence to me. It sounds like cost savings measures.

The CEO is on the submersible, so at least he puts his money where his mouth is so to speak. Are the ballast tanks subject to and pressure? If they are external, doesn’t any air pressure used to push the water out of the tanks have to equal or slightly exceed the water pressure on the outside?

Going to check Google reviews.

So what? He also brought 4 others with him. Should he get a trophy?

History is filled with people who put their money where their mouth is where they shouldn’t have. That isn’t necessarily a badge of honor.

I will take this bet. The investigation will reveal a myriad of operational and maintenance issues that with actual supervision by any actual regulating body would have shut them down. Of course the customers would not know any of this. That is my prediction. I can’t even call it Monday morning quarterbacking because it’s like having the scores beforehand it is so obvious.

It is a sad thing they are lost. One thing I don't understand is why people do these sorts of "adventures", that can be such a dangerous thing and potentially lose your life for it. After looking at the video of how that "sub" is constructed and the size/condition of that thing, no way I would chance it.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
Don’t go on cruises. I don’t care. Stop pretending though like people are dying by scores on Royal Caribbean. Or Carnival. Or Disney. Or Norwegian. Or whatever, out of American ports. Please enlighten us on the last disaster off American shores. You are talking a bunch of coulda’s and shoulda’s.

Either way no sane person makes the leap from diving in a privately owned mini sub nearly two and a half miles below the surface to taking a cruise to the Bahamas. Be real. Apples and hydraulic fluid. Not even close.

Agreed. Sure, a catastrophe could befall a cruise ship. But the safety record is actually quite excellent, so they seem to have ironed out most of the problems.

Just like air travel.

quote:

Originally posted by patw:
One thing I don't understand is why people do these sorts of "adventures", that can be such a dangerous thing and potentially lose your life for it.

It is quite possible that these folks had no idea of the extreme danger of the operation if things didn't go 100%. Makes you wonder if the owners of this operation actually briefed their clients on the possibilities if things go south. Maybe these clients thought it would be no different than the Finding Nemo submarine ride at Disneyland.

This year I have taken two cruises. One was on the Carnival Freedom. (I think). Anyway, it is the Carnival ship that doesn’t have part of it funnel because of a fire they suffered. Nobody was hurt, fire got put out, ship was back in service pretty quick, no distinctive funnel anymore.

It also was a mediocre cruise. Meh service, meh food, meh just about everything. A month later we did a Royal Caribbean cruise. Everything from, food, entertainment, cocktails was top friggin shelf. Outstanding.

Yup, I bet we will discover the company knew about lots of issues and the paying customers did not. The appearance of safety and not much else.

Did anybody ever answer the question about operating in intl waters? Does any governing body of any sort actually oversee an operation like this since they basically operate in the middle of the Atlantic? Is it the Wild West out there?

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
The CEO is on the submersible, so at least he puts his money where his mouth is so to speak. Are the ballast tanks subject to and pressure? If they are external, doesn’t any air pressure used to push the water out of the tanks have to equal or slightly exceed the water pressure on the outside?

They don’t use submarine type ballast tanks that they can blow out with air pressure on things that go this deep. They use ballast weights that they drop when they want to surface.

quote:

Royal Caribbean cruise. Everything from, food, entertainment, cocktails was top friggin shelf. Outstanding.

But you didn't get to see a wrecked boat at the bottom of the ocean?

Nope. I didn’t get to see a sunken cruise ship. Lol

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
Agreed. Sure, a catastrophe could befall a cruise ship. But the safety record is actually quite excellent, ...

Maybe so, but, you wouldn't catch me on one of them, either.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
So what? He also brought 4 others with him. Should he get a trophy?

History is filled with people who put their money where their mouth is where they shouldn’t have. That isn’t necessarily a badge of honor.

I will take this bet. The investigation will reveal a myriad of operational and maintenance issues that with actual supervision by any actual regulating body would have shut them down. Of course the customers would not know any of this. That is my prediction. I can’t even call it Monday morning quarterbacking because it’s like having the scores beforehand it is so obvious.

Ya, that’s exactly what I’m saying. The people that went with him knew the risks. They saw everything you are talking about and most likely more, first hand. They signed the waiver.

“ Pogue said he was nervous before boarding and revealed some of the contents of the waiver form he was required to sign. This described the submarine as an “experimental submersible vessel that has not been approved or certified by any regulatory body and could result in physical injury, disability, emotional trauma or death.”

Those people were not duped. They were bright people that capable of making their own decisions. Reading about them leads me to believe they were not risk adverse.

quote:

Originally posted by Dwill104:

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
The CEO is on the submersible, so at least he puts his money where his mouth is so to speak. Are the ballast tanks subject to and pressure? If they are external, doesn’t any air pressure used to push the water out of the tanks have to equal or slightly exceed the water pressure on the outside?

They don’t use submarine type ballast tanks that they can blow out with air pressure on things that go this deep. They use ballast weights that they drop when they want to surface.

That’s even better. There’s no reason not to use what they were using then.

quote:

It is quite possible that these folks had no idea of the extreme danger of the operation if things didn't go 100%. Makes you wonder if the owners of this operation actually briefed their clients on the possibilities if things go south. Maybe these clients thought it would be no different than the Finding Nemo submarine ride at Disneyland.

It's my understanding that the passenger crew must sign a lengthy release that delineates in excrutiating detail the various things that can go wrong, and how risky the whole thing is.

quote:

Originally posted by kkina:

quote:

It is quite possible that these folks had no idea of the extreme danger of the operation if things didn't go 100%. Makes you wonder if the owners of this operation actually briefed their clients on the possibilities if things go south. Maybe these clients thought it would be no different than the Finding Nemo submarine ride at Disneyland.

It's my understanding that the passenger crew must sign a lengthy release that delineates in excrutiating detail the various things that can go wrong, and how risky the whole thing is.

And you know how carefully most folks read such lengthy releases.

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:

quote:

Originally posted by kkina:

quote:

It is quite possible that these folks had no idea of the extreme danger of the operation if things didn't go 100%. Makes you wonder if the owners of this operation actually briefed their clients on the possibilities if things go south. Maybe these clients thought it would be no different than the Finding Nemo submarine ride at Disneyland.

It's my understanding that the passenger crew must sign a lengthy release that delineates in excrutiating detail the various things that can go wrong, and how risky the whole thing is.

And you know how carefully most folks read such lengthy releases.

From the promotional video posted on the previous page by sdy, it seems the guests are pretty well aware of what they're getting into, having to perform certain checks personally on the sub.

I'm not defending their decision, but watching that video gives me the impression, the dive is described far more than a joy ride.

Only on a gun forum can you find so many experts on metallurgy , submersibles operation and construction , etc.
This place is awesome !

Yeah, the video does indicate that they market it as an actual research endeavor involving danger and mission critical assignments.