4 ms·

I am blown away that there is any overlap between HN readers and people getting gotten by this clickbait. The controller is sending control signals to the comp

I am blown away that there is any overlap between HN readers and people getting gotten by this clickbait. The controller is sending control signals to the computer which controls the motors. The controller itself is basically irrelevant. It’s not actually doing the control, the motor controllers are. Using off the shelf stuff like this is also common since it’s extremely well tested and usually very physically robust.

Solvency 3y ago
Robust? Neither my Xbox controller, or a third party alternative, are rated and proven to work in submarine conditions. My two controllers don't even work flawlessly from my couch.
- KeplerBoy 3y ago
  submarine conditions aren't different than living room conditions, otherwise the crew is dead.
dagmx 3y ago
I’m not surprised at all. It’s common on pretty much every rage bait post here. People think they’re technical enough to understand everything and want their hot takes heard.
pbourke 3y ago
> The controller itself is basically irrelevant. It's irrelevant until it fails with no backup mechanism when maneuvers are needed.
- mrtksn 3y ago
  Why wouldn’t there be a backup? In an old video, the CEO explains that there are 2 more backup controllers on board “just in case ”. Also, considering that the controller is just a dumb interface for controlling a computer I would assume that this computer also has a screen and a keyboard. My only gripe with this is that the controller has a battery in it, which may cause a fire and smoke but those are well commercialized items made to be used by kids, so I find it unlikely to have design flaws to cause that and would expect to be quite a robust piece of equipment. I would be very surprised if the incident has anything to do with the controller.
  - kioleanu 3y ago
    It’s all fun and games until the Bluetooth _receiver_ fails and no amount of controllers would save you
    - mrtksn 3y ago
      It's not a bluetooth based, it has a receiver that you plug to the computer.
      - bloqs 3y ago
        Have you seen the bit where they cant get the 2005 logitech controller to re-pair over 2.5ghz? Or when there was a mapping issue with the driver stack so they were stuck on one trip spinning around in circles before having to use the controller backwards to finish the trip?
        mrtksn 3y ago
        Nope, do you have a link?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
chinchilla2020 3y ago
hackersnews is pretty much reddit at this point
- bloqs 3y ago
  As has been said for over 12 years
malwarebytess 3y ago
Not only that but they claimed to have multiple backup controllers onboard.
zerocrates 3y ago
Of course it's not directly controlling anything. It doesn't "directly" control your video game characters either by this standard. Who could possibly think differently, it's wireless for cryin' out loud. This is a "this submersible seems like it was cobbled together out of whatever was lying around" story, a "hmm, that's funny/interesting/worrying" story from a source that has a big video-gamer audience, and a little bit a "this thing could have run out of batteries when they needed to turn" story. It's almost certainly not the cause of their issues but it does give people pause. I wouldn't be worried about using a COTS part that people are familiar with, and I agree that's the "juicy" part of this story that gets reactions unfairly, but is it really unreasonable for people to look askance at the apparently sole method of controlling the vehicle relying on Bluetooth and AAs?
topspin 3y ago
> since it’s extremely well tested Logitech tests products under these conditions? Sea water? I've had considerable experience with Logitech products and I can't imagine employing a consumer grade Logitech controller for any life-critical purpose. It's built-to-a-price e-waste from which you hope to get a couple years of service under near ideal indoor residential conditions.
- vanattab 3y ago
  For what it's worth us nuclear subs use cots game controllers for periscope control. It has other benefits to like being super intuitive for new young soldiers to use.
  - dharmab 3y ago
    They use the Microsoft controllers which have literally 7 digit R&D budgets, and have non-gaming use cases in mind. Not cheap off brand Logitech controllers.
    - bloqs 3y ago
      This specific detail seems to be completely amiss for a lot of the old farts takes in this thread. It demonstrably breaks and fails to pair in the damn documentary!
      - johnwalkr 3y ago
        Even worse, it depends on janky key mapping, too.
turzmo 3y ago
I don't think game controllers are considered to be well tested and physically robust. Look at the reviews for the product on amazon, it seems to not be very reliable. While this probably wasn't the part that failed, it shows an incredible lack of judgment.
- bloqs 3y ago
  Microsoft controllers, specifically the x360, very much was, other than a decade of real world testing they also tipped millions of other application R&D into it. Logitech rip off from 2005, that would unpair frequently? Completely different fucking ball game.
NoPicklez 3y ago
Lucky, because for a second I thought that moving the joystick was physically responsible for actuating the motors...
moondev 3y ago
We should just use Logitech steering wheels in most cars then, after all they are just irrelevant input devices https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive_by_wire https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive_by_wire I do get what you are saying, and there is a "feel" difference when driving a car with a mechanical linkage. But I wouldn't go as far to say that makes the DBW input irrelevant. Ergonomics, materials and tactility could even be seen as more significant in these cases
LASR 3y ago
People take issue with the controller thing because it is in the intersection of what common hackernews readers know/understand and related to this situation. So the conclusion could be that if the controller is a bad / cheap, everything else is also similar, hence the reason for this situation. But from what I can tell, the pressure vessel + multiple levels of redundant safeties for surfacing all seem pretty well-done. The fact that the CEO and sub designer is down there tells me this wasn't some entirely sloppy cost-cutting solution they hobbled together. Also, one of the "passengers" they call "Mr Titanic" is also down there - so not a clueless person looking for an adrenaline rush as some other comment mentioned. These people understand the risks first-hand and have deemed it acceptable to go on it - game controller or not.
johnwalkr 3y ago
First of all, the controller setup was seen in previous video to fail during testing so it is not in fact robust as a system even though I agree the controller by itself is probably physically robust. I work in a robotics field and have an academic background in it as well. The controller and the other related information we know (that its input is mapped to keypresses, that in a previous test a controller failed and the only solution was troubleshooting of the controller, that a thruster was installed backwards in a previous test) is absolutely relevant. I will add that you can also see what are basic office monitors and the windows taskbar in the images. Yes, motor controllers are involved somewhere, and I don't know all of the details, but all of this strongly implies to me that a commercial PC is the core system, with this controller connected via some keymapping software, and motor controllers probably connected by usb-serial converters or something similar. All of that looks like an undergrad project. It's common and acceptable for a student project's first test in a swimming pool. By the time humans are inside and depth is concerned, formal design and validation of something more robust should be seen. You'd want to see something much more robust with redundancies. At a very bare minimum I would expect something like an industrial or marine joystick and industrial or marine display connected to PLC. That's like a few thousand dollars and still really falls short of what I would be comfortable with. But at least it could be rigorously tested and doesn't depend on windows, drivers, keymapping software and who-knows-what in terms of development environment, libraries, compilers etc.

Solvency 3y ago

Robust? Neither my Xbox controller, or a third party alternative, are rated and proven to work in submarine conditions. My two controllers don't even work flawlessly from my couch.

KeplerBoy 3y ago
submarine conditions aren't different than living room conditions, otherwise the crew is dead.

dagmx 3y ago

I’m not surprised at all. It’s common on pretty much every rage bait post here. People think they’re technical enough to understand everything and want their hot takes heard.

pbourke 3y ago

> The controller itself is basically irrelevant. It's irrelevant until it fails with no backup mechanism when maneuvers are needed.

mrtksn 3y ago
Why wouldn’t there be a backup? In an old video, the CEO explains that there are 2 more backup controllers on board “just in case ”. Also, considering that the controller is just a dumb interface for controlling a computer I would assume that this computer also has a screen and a keyboard. My only gripe with this is that the controller has a battery in it, which may cause a fire and smoke but those are well commercialized items made to be used by kids, so I find it unlikely to have design flaws to cause that and would expect to be quite a robust piece of equipment. I would be very surprised if the incident has anything to do with the controller.
- kioleanu 3y ago
  It’s all fun and games until the Bluetooth _receiver_ fails and no amount of controllers would save you
  - mrtksn 3y ago
    It's not a bluetooth based, it has a receiver that you plug to the computer.
    - bloqs 3y ago
      Have you seen the bit where they cant get the 2005 logitech controller to re-pair over 2.5ghz? Or when there was a mapping issue with the driver stack so they were stuck on one trip spinning around in circles before having to use the controller backwards to finish the trip?
      - mrtksn 3y ago
        Nope, do you have a link?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

chinchilla2020 3y ago

hackersnews is pretty much reddit at this point

bloqs 3y ago
As has been said for over 12 years

malwarebytess 3y ago

Not only that but they claimed to have multiple backup controllers onboard.

zerocrates 3y ago

Of course it's not directly controlling anything. It doesn't "directly" control your video game characters either by this standard. Who could possibly think differently, it's wireless for cryin' out loud. This is a "this submersible seems like it was cobbled together out of whatever was lying around" story, a "hmm, that's funny/interesting/worrying" story from a source that has a big video-gamer audience, and a little bit a "this thing could have run out of batteries when they needed to turn" story. It's almost certainly not the cause of their issues but it does give people pause. I wouldn't be worried about using a COTS part that people are familiar with, and I agree that's the "juicy" part of this story that gets reactions unfairly, but is it really unreasonable for people to look askance at the apparently sole method of controlling the vehicle relying on Bluetooth and AAs?

topspin 3y ago

> since it’s extremely well tested Logitech tests products under these conditions? Sea water? I've had considerable experience with Logitech products and I can't imagine employing a consumer grade Logitech controller for any life-critical purpose. It's built-to-a-price e-waste from which you hope to get a couple years of service under near ideal indoor residential conditions.

vanattab 3y ago
For what it's worth us nuclear subs use cots game controllers for periscope control. It has other benefits to like being super intuitive for new young soldiers to use.
- dharmab 3y ago
  They use the Microsoft controllers which have literally 7 digit R&D budgets, and have non-gaming use cases in mind. Not cheap off brand Logitech controllers.
  - bloqs 3y ago
    This specific detail seems to be completely amiss for a lot of the old farts takes in this thread. It demonstrably breaks and fails to pair in the damn documentary!
    - johnwalkr 3y ago
      Even worse, it depends on janky key mapping, too.

turzmo 3y ago

I don't think game controllers are considered to be well tested and physically robust. Look at the reviews for the product on amazon, it seems to not be very reliable. While this probably wasn't the part that failed, it shows an incredible lack of judgment.

bloqs 3y ago
Microsoft controllers, specifically the x360, very much was, other than a decade of real world testing they also tipped millions of other application R&D into it. Logitech rip off from 2005, that would unpair frequently? Completely different fucking ball game.

NoPicklez 3y ago

Lucky, because for a second I thought that moving the joystick was physically responsible for actuating the motors...

moondev 3y ago

We should just use Logitech steering wheels in most cars then, after all they are just irrelevant input devices https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive_by_wire https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive_by_wire I do get what you are saying, and there is a "feel" difference when driving a car with a mechanical linkage. But I wouldn't go as far to say that makes the DBW input irrelevant. Ergonomics, materials and tactility could even be seen as more significant in these cases

LASR 3y ago

People take issue with the controller thing because it is in the intersection of what common hackernews readers know/understand and related to this situation. So the conclusion could be that if the controller is a bad / cheap, everything else is also similar, hence the reason for this situation. But from what I can tell, the pressure vessel + multiple levels of redundant safeties for surfacing all seem pretty well-done. The fact that the CEO and sub designer is down there tells me this wasn't some entirely sloppy cost-cutting solution they hobbled together. Also, one of the "passengers" they call "Mr Titanic" is also down there - so not a clueless person looking for an adrenaline rush as some other comment mentioned. These people understand the risks first-hand and have deemed it acceptable to go on it - game controller or not.

johnwalkr 3y ago

First of all, the controller setup was seen in previous video to fail during testing so it is not in fact robust as a system even though I agree the controller by itself is probably physically robust. I work in a robotics field and have an academic background in it as well. The controller and the other related information we know (that its input is mapped to keypresses, that in a previous test a controller failed and the only solution was troubleshooting of the controller, that a thruster was installed backwards in a previous test) is absolutely relevant. I will add that you can also see what are basic office monitors and the windows taskbar in the images. Yes, motor controllers are involved somewhere, and I don't know all of the details, but all of this strongly implies to me that a commercial PC is the core system, with this controller connected via some keymapping software, and motor controllers probably connected by usb-serial converters or something similar. All of that looks like an undergrad project. It's common and acceptable for a student project's first test in a swimming pool. By the time humans are inside and depth is concerned, formal design and validation of something more robust should be seen. You'd want to see something much more robust with redundancies. At a very bare minimum I would expect something like an industrial or marine joystick and industrial or marine display connected to PLC. That's like a few thousand dollars and still really falls short of what I would be comfortable with. But at least it could be rigorously tested and doesn't depend on windows, drivers, keymapping software and who-knows-what in terms of development environment, libraries, compilers etc.