Titanic tourist submersible gone missing

boogieman · June 2023

digitalscream said:

The only thing I wonder is...why even go down there? It's not like the submersible had windows so they could see the Titanic with their own eyes - near as I can tell, it was all based on cameras through screens on the interior.

Maybe I'm completely missing the point...? Just seems an awful lot of risk (obviously) for the same experience you'd get staying on the ship piloting an unmanned craft down there.

Bragging rights, sadly.

VimFuego · June 2023

Devil#20 said:

digitalscream said:

The only thing I wonder is...why even go down there? It's not like the submersible had windows so they could see the Titanic with their own eyes - near as I can tell, it was all based on cameras through screens on the interior.

Maybe I'm completely missing the point...? Just seems an awful lot of risk (obviously) for the same experience you'd get staying on the ship piloting an unmanned craft down there.

Actually it had powerful lights and a perspex end cap to look through. The perspex end cap was the bit that experts said was a weak point that could cause the vessel to implode but Stockton Rush arrogantly dismissed that.

so it could be said that the last thing to go through his mind was the perspex end cap?

Too soon?

Devil#20 · June 2023

rogd said:

The litigious shit'll hit the fan now.
Thank the Lord they went quickly.
RIP.

Yes. Manslaughter by culpable negligence with a term or 15 years. Plenty of evidence to support that with Stockton's video declaring he broke rules. If he hadn't been on board he'd have been hung by his own petard.

Devil#20 · June 2023

tone1 said:

Just because you can, doesn’t mean you have to…..but a life without risk ain’t a life at all….

I understand that but the risks weren't managed properly, if at all in fact. That's the issue. The hull hadn't been rigourously tested. They did a sonic test on it but no x-ray. I doubt whether the hull was tested after each expedition either. Cowboy outfit.

Devil#20 · June 2023

JezWynd said:

Now that a detailed 3D map has been created there's no reason to visit again save perhaps for occasional updates on how the structure is degrading. Tourism to the site is in bad taste even if they dress the visitors up as 'mission specialists'. Perhaps it's time to leave Titanic to rest in peace.

I feel the same about Auschwitz and cannot understand why that is run as a tourist attraction. I was once asked to go and refused. Do they charge to visit the camp. If they don't it's a place of pilgrimage and reflection. If they do then it's a tourist attraction.

littlegreenman · June 2023

Devil#20 said:

I feel the same about Auschwitz and cannot understand why that is run as a tourist attraction. I was once asked to go and refused. Do they charge to visit the camp. If they don't it's a place of pilgrimage and reflection. If they do then it's a tourist attraction.

They do charge, because it still costs money to preserve historic sites.

And I can totally say that when I went, despite the charge (mainly to pay the tour guide, who was a child of an Holocaust survivor, and an amazing orator and educator), it was a place of pilgrimage and reflection. Without doubt the most harrowing experience of my life. Walking through a gas chamber, or seeing the collection of children's shoes or the women's hair was not an act of "tourism" by any stretch. I'm still affected by it, almost daily.

I think everyone should visit, just to know what "we" can become, so very easily. Not an attraction, but a lesson.

beed84 · June 2023

James Cameron has beem interviewed for his thoughts on the situation. Given that he’s been down there in a submersible he designed and actually directed Titantic, I’d say he’s pretty qualified. And because of that I guess this story must smack fairly hard for him:

https://youtu.be/rThZLhNF_xg

VimFuego · June 2023

littlegreenman said:

Devil#20 said:

I feel the same about Auschwitz and cannot understand why that is run as a tourist attraction. I was once asked to go and refused. Do they charge to visit the camp. If they don't it's a place of pilgrimage and reflection. If they do then it's a tourist attraction.

They do charge, because it still costs money to preserve historic sites.

And I can totally say that when I went, despite the charge (mainly to pay the tour guide, who was a child of an Holocaust survivor), it was a place of pilgrimage and reflection. Without doubt the most harrowing experience of my life. Walking through a gas chamber, or seeing the collection of children's shoes or the women's hair was not an act of "tourism" by any stretch. I'm still affected by it, almost daily.

I think everyone should visit, just to know what "we" can become, so very easily. Not an attraction, but a lesson.

IMO, as WW2 and the holocaust become just another part of history, we do need a physical and tangible reminder of what tyranny can be. Somethings are too important, too horrendous to be relegated to the pages of history.

octatonic · June 2023

Devil#20 said:

JezWynd said:

Now that a detailed 3D map has been created there's no reason to visit again save perhaps for occasional updates on how the structure is degrading. Tourism to the site is in bad taste even if they dress the visitors up as 'mission specialists'. Perhaps it's time to leave Titanic to rest in peace.

I feel the same about Auschwitz and cannot understand why that is run as a tourist attraction. I was once asked to go and refused. Do they charge to visit the camp. If they don't it's a place of pilgrimage and reflection. If they do then it's a tourist attraction.

LOL.
It isn't like it is a destination for a stag do.

As others have mentioned- it costs money to run.

Devil#20 · June 2023

littlegreenman said:

Devil#20 said:

I feel the same about Auschwitz and cannot understand why that is run as a tourist attraction. I was once asked to go and refused. Do they charge to visit the camp. If they don't it's a place of pilgrimage and reflection. If they do then it's a tourist attraction.

They do charge, because it still costs money to preserve historic sites.

And I can totally say that when I went, despite the charge (mainly to pay the tour guide, who was a child of an Holocaust survivor), it was a place of pilgrimage and reflection. Without doubt the most harrowing experience of my life. Walking through a gas chamber, or seeing the collection of children's shoes or the women's hair was not an act of "tourism" by any stretch. I'm still affected by it, almost daily.

I think everyone should visit, just to know what "we" can become, so very easily. Not an attraction, but a lesson.

I get that. It's different from a tragedy like the Titanic. It was a deliberate act and one of the most inhumane things that one people could inflict on another. Maybe I will visit one day, and it would be to pay respect, but at the time and even now it just feels wrong to me. I know I wouldn't feel good after seeing it first hand. Maybe that's the point though. I do know it's a different situation though.

Devil#20 · June 2023

octatonic said:

Devil#20 said:

JezWynd said:

Now that a detailed 3D map has been created there's no reason to visit again save perhaps for occasional updates on how the structure is degrading. Tourism to the site is in bad taste even if they dress the visitors up as 'mission specialists'. Perhaps it's time to leave Titanic to rest in peace.

I feel the same about Auschwitz and cannot understand why that is run as a tourist attraction. I was once asked to go and refused. Do they charge to visit the camp. If they don't it's a place of pilgrimage and reflection. If they do then it's a tourist attraction.

LOL.
It isn't like it is a destination for a stag do.

As others have mentioned- it costs money to run.

Germany should pay for its upkeep then and anybody should be allowed to pay respect. It wouldn't put much of a dint in their GDP and it would go some way to absolve the current generation that they are not responsible for the sins of their fathers. We get accused of that going back a lot longer.

Timcito · June 2023

LionAquaLooper said:

Pretty much, except you wouldn't blow up but rather implode down in those depths.

How exactly would that happen? Does it mean they were likely crushed by the sub as it caved in?

stickyfiddle · June 2023

Devil#20 said:

octatonic said:

Devil#20 said:

JezWynd said:

Now that a detailed 3D map has been created there's no reason to visit again save perhaps for occasional updates on how the structure is degrading. Tourism to the site is in bad taste even if they dress the visitors up as 'mission specialists'. Perhaps it's time to leave Titanic to rest in peace.

I feel the same about Auschwitz and cannot understand why that is run as a tourist attraction. I was once asked to go and refused. Do they charge to visit the camp. If they don't it's a place of pilgrimage and reflection. If they do then it's a tourist attraction.

LOL.
It isn't like it is a destination for a stag do.

As others have mentioned- it costs money to run.

Germany should pay for its upkeep then and anybody should be allowed to pay respect. It wouldn't put much of a dint in their GDP and it would go some way to absolve the current generation that they are not responsible for the sins of their fathers. We get accused of that going back a lot longer.

Of course because current German taxpayers did the holocaust…

Emp_Fab · June 2023

Timcito said:

LionAquaLooper said:

Pretty much, except you wouldn't blow up but rather implode down in those depths.

How exactly would that happen? Does it mean they were likely crushed by the sub as it caved in?

Yes... in a millisecond. The implosion would have been incredibly fast - like hitting an empty food can with a sledgehammer. The water pressure outside the sub would have been phenomenal. At the depth of the Titanic, it's 5,800 psi. Given the dimensions of the thing, that works out as roughly 315,000 metric tonnes of pressure outside trying to crush it. Once the hull gave way the slightest bit, it would have collapsed completely and turned everyone inside into pulp instantaneously. They would have had no idea at all.

LionAquaLooper · June 2023

beed84 said:

James Cameron has beem interviewed for his thoughts on the situation. Given that he’s been down there in a submersible he designed and actually directed Titantic, I’d say he’s pretty qualified. And because of that I guess this story must smack fairly hard for him:

https://youtu.be/rThZLhNF_xg

I read excerpts from his interview on BBC News and he's all like "I knew that sub was trouble but i didn't speak up", and "I knew they were dead already". What a flipping know it all.

TheMarlin · June 2023

Emp_Fab said:

Timcito said:

LionAquaLooper said:

Pretty much, except you wouldn't blow up but rather implode down in those depths.

How exactly would that happen? Does it mean they were likely crushed by the sub as it caved in?

Yes... in a millisecond. The implosion would have been incredibly fast - like hitting an empty food can with a sledgehammer. The water pressure outside the sub would have been phenomenal. At the depth of the Titanic, it's 5,800 psi. Given the dimensions of the thing, that works out as roughly 315,000 metric tonnes of pressure outside trying to crush it. Once the hull gave way the slightest bit, it would have collapsed completely and turned everyone inside into pulp instantaneously. They would have had no idea at all.

This episode of Mythbusters was interesting.

The forces this sub was dealing with were 150 times stronger.

https://youtu.be/kM-k1zofs58
Action is at 2:50

rze99 · June 2023

It’s a tragedy and I feel for the families. RIP.

There are other tragedies.

I’m afraid I can’t help but compare and contrast recovery efforts here with what appears to be the deliberate lack of one for the 500 odd Greek island migrants. RIP.

DrCornelius · June 2023

Emp_Fab said:

Timcito said:

LionAquaLooper said:

Pretty much, except you wouldn't blow up but rather implode down in those depths.

How exactly would that happen? Does it mean they were likely crushed by the sub as it caved in?

Yes... in a millisecond. The implosion would have been incredibly fast - like hitting an empty food can with a sledgehammer. The water pressure outside the sub would have been phenomenal. At the depth of the Titanic, it's 5,800 psi. Given the dimensions of the thing, that works out as roughly 315,000 metric tonnes of pressure outside trying to crush it. Once the hull gave way the slightest bit, it would have collapsed completely and turned everyone inside into pulp instantaneously. They would have had no idea at all.

I’m sure I read a quote from someone involved in the ‘rescue’ that they were discussing trying to retrieve the bodies but their first thoughts were that it would be too difficult .

Like you I assumed there wouldn’t be any bodies to retrieve ?

Hattigol · June 2023

VimFuego said:

littlegreenman said:

Devil#20 said:

I feel the same about Auschwitz and cannot understand why that is run as a tourist attraction. I was once asked to go and refused. Do they charge to visit the camp. If they don't it's a place of pilgrimage and reflection. If they do then it's a tourist attraction.

They do charge, because it still costs money to preserve historic sites.

And I can totally say that when I went, despite the charge (mainly to pay the tour guide, who was a child of an Holocaust survivor), it was a place of pilgrimage and reflection. Without doubt the most harrowing experience of my life. Walking through a gas chamber, or seeing the collection of children's shoes or the women's hair was not an act of "tourism" by any stretch. I'm still affected by it, almost daily.

I think everyone should visit, just to know what "we" can become, so very easily. Not an attraction, but a lesson.

IMO, as WW2 and the holocaust become just another part of history, we do need a physical and tangible reminder of what tyranny can be. Somethings are too important, too horrendous to be relegated to the pages of history.

Absolutely this. Calling it a tourist attraction is stupid and demeaning.

It's an essential reminder of the horrors of recent history. It's hardly a fkg theme park.

Gilly · June 2023

LionAquaLooper said:

I read excerpts from his interview on BBC News and he's all like "I knew that sub was trouble but i didn't speak up", and "I knew they were dead already". What a flipping know it all.

Yeah but it turns out he was right. I’m not sure how him speaking up about his hunch would have helped the rescue mission? They weren’t sure that it had imploded, which is why they carried on searching until they found the debris.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

Titanic tourist submersible gone missing

Comments