6 ms·
Pressure hull >> ballast control >> thrusters >> everything else I'm not sure why everyone is taking potshots at a company for trying something crazy with will
by ethbr0 3y ago
Pressure hull >> ballast control >> thrusters >> everything else
I'm not sure why everyone is taking potshots at a company for trying something crazy with willing passengers.
Everyone involved knew what they were getting into.
Kudos to them for trying, even if they're dead.
> See: the fact that they lost their diving vehicle.
That's an awful lot of keyboard engineering, given nobody knows what happened yet.
- giantg2 3y ago"Everyone involved knew what they were getting into." Did they? I might have missed that part.
- ethbr0 3y ago>> OceanGate says it is an experimental vessel, and when CBS travelled onboard the correspondent had to sign a waiver accepting that it "has not been approved or certified by any regulatory body, and could result in physical injury, disability, emotional trauma or death". https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65960217 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65960217 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=29co_Hksk6o https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=29co_Hksk6o
- metabagel 3y agoWhen you get right down to it, the people who boarded this submersible on Sunday probably didn’t want to die. No matter what waiver they signed.
- chii 3y agonobody wants to die ('cept for people looking to suicide). The waiver is an acknowledgement that what they're doing is dangerous, and could cause them to die. As an adult, you have the right to accept this risk, if the reward for doing so is worth it in your eyes. Unless, of course, if those signing the waivers were mislead.
- jacquesm 3y agoYes, but the waiver probably didn't say 'you have at least a 10% chance of dying'.
- ethbr0 3y agoYou're going almost 4000m underwater. What percent should it have said? 10%? 5%? 30%? 90%? Anything other than "We've tried to make it safe, but there's a lot higher than 0% chance of death" would seem a lie. People die climbing Everest regularly, and I don't see anyone claims the climbing industry is under-disclosing. Because these are inherently lethal activities, that a reasonable participant engages in despite knowing the risks.
- kamaal 3y ago>>Because these are inherently lethal activities, that a reasonable participant engages in despite knowing the risks. One can as far as say they indulge in it for the 'kick' this sort of risk brings. The ordinary is boring for most of these people. They don't want to have fun the same some one making $90K/yr does.
- giantg2 3y agoThere's a difference between a well prepared Everest expedition and someone selling a submarine experience in a poorly designed craft. There is a difference between inherently dangerous activity and wanton stupidity.
- bandrami 3y agoActually there's a huge backlash to guided "adventure" tours bringing rich tourists who have zero business being above 7000m into the death zone. Everest was bad enough (it's at least not a technically difficult climb) but now they've expanded to K2, which is absolutely insane to send an amateur to.
- CaptainZapp 3y agoWhen I go scuba diving I also need to sign a waiver and acknowledge the inherent risk of the activity. It doesn't mean that the regulator provided by the dive center is McGivered with duct tape and chewing gum. Which seems like the equivalent of the construction and the components quality of that vessel.
- kamaal 3y agoI had a colleague who went scuba diving in Los Angeles. Newly wed. Husband and Wife, decide to spend their 4th of July weekend doing water sports. So they go scuba diving, the wife's mask breaks down, he comes up, she panics she doesn't. She died by drowning. He was totally broken, the wife knew the risks and he knew it too. Nevertheless he wanted her to try because he thought it was fun. He lived with the trauma for years. Probably now as well. People don't know how bad these things can get. This sort of fun, is definitely not worth anyones life. Just go sight seeing, and have Sundae at Ghirardelli. There are many safe ways of having fun, that don't involve death as a risk factor.
- CaptainZapp 3y agoWas he just taking his wife down without training and certification? This just seems insane. While losing a mask or having it break down is very inconvenient that's exactly one of the scenarios you train for. Even when doing the Open Water certification one of the skills you must do to get certified is to remove your mask, put it on again and remove the water from it. > This sort of fun, is definitely not worth anyones life. I agree. And that's the exact reason why you train for extraordinary situations and get certified. Scuba diving is a safe sport as long you adhere to the rules and your personal limitations.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- otikik 3y agoYour story is probably incomplete. I am no scuba diving expert but I know people who do it regularly. You never do it alone. And you constantly check others in case they need help. There's a whole sign language around just checking status. And protocols for things like sharing oxygen etc.
- giantg2 3y agoI'm pretty sure you can't have people sign away your reasonable duty of care, only inherent risks.
- dmonitor 3y ago> That's an awful lot of keyboard engineering, given nobody knows what happened yet. Unless I'm mistaken, the subject article starts with the words "Submarine missing". The fact that the whole thing was jury rigged and double checked by nobody with certifications is enough to start pointing fingers at the engineers. This isn't the company's first trip either. They've taken multiple trips down and have almost lost the submarine multiple times. This time they actually managed to lose it for good. The reason people are mad at the company is because their negligence killed 4 people for no good reason.
- venusenvy47 3y agoI'm also annoyed at the company for all the public emergency resources being forced to help rescue this contraption.
- kbos87 3y agoBudgets are unfortunately a zero sum game, and I have to wonder if there are much more obvious ways to save lives more efficiently with the amount of money it’s costing the US government to undertake a massive and technically complex search for 5 people.
- emsixteen 3y agoIf you're going to go down that route, please direct it at the cost of the US military's unfathomably high spending.
- ethbr0 3y agoThere's capital and then operational costs. If a Coast Guard ship heads out of St. John's or a Navy aircraft/ship/submarine transits to the area, they burn fuel but already existed with all their trained personnel. So most of the cost is moving things into position. Expensive, but the asset probably would have been moving somewhere anyway.
- Robin_Message 3y agoI thought about this, and came to the conclusion that the coastguard and especially military see it as a good opportunity to test their equipment and procedures for real. And seafarers have a strong code of ethics about helping other seafarers. As long as they aren't brown.
- ncallaway 3y ago> Everyone involved knew what they were getting into. Did they?
- toofy 3y agomy guess is no. purely speculation on my part, but my suspicion is that the dangers were downplayed and the sales/marketing people paid the bare minimum attention to how close this was to a backyard project. “we wouldn’t charge you $250,000 if we weren’t serious.”
- neither_color 3y ago>Everyone involved knew what they were getting into. Not necessarily. For extreme sports like skydiving, bungee jumping, hang-gliding scuba and the like customers still expect a high level of adherence to safety and quality products and certifications exist. Would you want to parachute off an uncertified plane with an un-licensed pilot and inexperienced jumper?
- finitemonkey 3y ago[flagged]
- concordDance 3y agoThose situations are really not comparable. Jumping off a cliff has a near 100% death rate. This sub on the other hand has done this before. A better comparison might be climbing mount everest in the 80s.
- ClumsyPilot 3y agoOkay maybe betteer to compare diving in a janky sub to jumping oit of a plane with a tablecloth for parachute
- adql 3y ago> Everyone involved knew what they were getting into. I'm sure everyone involved was expert on industrial design and were clued into what exact costs were cut /s