6 ms·

Titanic director James Cameron accuses OceanGate of cutting corners

59 points by kasperni 3y ago

civilitty 3y ago
> When OceanGate was founded the goal was to pursue the highest reasonable level of innovation in the design and operation of manned submersibles. By definition, innovation is outside of an already accepted system. However, this does not mean that OceanGate does meet standards where they apply, but it does mean that innovation often falls outside of the existing industry paradigm. [1] Christ they even used the word “paradigm.” Put this down in the list of crazy startup stories that needs to be in the Silicon Valley reboot. Anyone who works in DSVs needs to take the Ballad of James Cameron very seriously: No budget too steep, no sea too deep Who's that? It's him, James Cameron! [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20220812024916/https://oceangate.com/news-and-media/blog/2019-0221-why-titan-is-not-classed.html https://web.archive.org/web/20220812024916/https://oceangate...
pavlov 3y ago
It’s unclear to me what the “63 years without a fatality” track record refers to. Private submarines?
- mathgeek 3y ago
  Same here. There have been hundreds of documented fatalities on lost subs since 1960.
  - gjadi 3y ago
    I think he's referring to subs diving specifically to the Titanic.
    - lern_too_spel 3y ago
      The Titanic wreck wasn't found until 37 years ago, so that doesn't make sense either.
- quasarsunnix 3y ago
  Deep sea submersibles such as the Alvin.
- Xylakant 3y ago
  I think he's referring to the Trieste, which reached the Challenger Deep in early 1960. All losses since then are military submarines, AFAICT. German Wikipedia loves lists, so here's one https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_von_U-Boot-Ungl%C3%BCcken_seit_1945 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_von_U-Boot-Ungl%C3%BCcke...
nucleative 3y ago
>It (OceanGate) added that the classification agencies "slowed down innovation… bringing an outside entity up to speed on every innovation before it is put into real-world testing is anathema to rapid innovation". As a private pilot who is considering building a kit aircraft, this is certainly true. It can be exceedingly expensive to prove safety standards have been met for new designs, which is why so few new certified aircraft are on the market and old designs are so expensive. This leads to the whole industry slowing to a crawl. But that absolutely doesn't mean safety standards haven't been met with new designs. However, if I build a kit plane, the FAA will require it be emblazoned "Experimental" and commercial activity - such as paying passengers - is forbidden. I hope the paying customers of this sub were well aware of the level of risk they were taking. All that being said, I'm supportive of anyone's right to go and build a contraption that may end their life, so long as they don't take anybody or anyone else's property with them.
- notwhereyouare 3y ago
  >However, if I build a kit plane, the FAA will require it be emblazoned "Experimental" and commercial activity - such as paying passengers - is forbidden. unless you're a big company https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/ono50t/ever_see_a_major_airline_running_passenger_ops_as/ https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/ono50t/ever_see_a_m...
  - noirscape 3y ago
    Reading the comments, that plane was actually fully certified, they just forgot to remove the sticker.
  - tekla 3y ago
    Ignorant response. Just because you see a sticker doesn't mean anything. The aircraft is certified to fly commercially. Its the same as people freaking about speed tape.
  - TheDesolate0 3y ago
    [dead]
TazeTSchnitzel 3y ago
The hull was made from 5-inch thick carbon fibre. Carbon fibre is very lightweight for such a strong material, which makes it attractive, but it has a few critical downsides: • it tends to fail catastrophically, without warning, after repeated stress • it's very difficult to predict how many stress cycles it can endure • it's very difficult to detect stress cycle damage Considering every dive and resurface is a huge stress cycle, and the fact OceanGate didn't seem to have any sort of independent certification of their submersible's endurance, this kind of hull implosion event seems inevitable. Their real-time hull monitoring system was a boondoggle, n Edit: In another interview, Cameron elaborated on these exact concerns: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-yu_wixdgE&t=1m20s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-yu_wixdgE&t=1m20s
- ksaj 3y ago
  An important note is that an employee was (allegedly) fired for making a point that the carbon fiber was two inches too thin. They also apparently didn't even report it until 8 hours after noticing it didn't resurface once communications stopped. If that's true, James Cameron's assessment rings true.
- avisser 3y ago
  What's the benefit of carbon fiber's strength-to-weight ratio when making a submersible? I guess you can have smaller motors to drive you around on the bottom, but the vast majority of the travel is controlled via ballast/buoyancy. To me, planes and cars have much more obvious gains from lighter materials. Not so much for the sub.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - TazeTSchnitzel 3y ago
    I'm not sure why I highlighted that because indeed that wouldn't be useful, though as a proxy for density it is (apparently they picked it for its buoyancy).
  - 83 3y ago
max_ 3y ago
> "I knew that sub was sitting exactly underneath its last known depth and position. That's exactly where they found it," he continued.
Simulacra 3y ago
Dupe. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36445855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36445855
dpio 3y ago
Just him? I thought that was the general consensus.

59 points by kasperni 3y ago

> When OceanGate was founded the goal was to pursue the highest reasonable level of innovation in the design and operation of manned submersibles. By definition, innovation is outside of an already accepted system. However, this does not mean that OceanGate does meet standards where they apply, but it does mean that innovation often falls outside of the existing industry paradigm. [1] Christ they even used the word “paradigm.” Put this down in the list of crazy startup stories that needs to be in the Silicon Valley reboot. Anyone who works in DSVs needs to take the Ballad of James Cameron very seriously: No budget too steep, no sea too deep Who's that? It's him, James Cameron! [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20220812024916/https://oceangate.com/news-and-media/blog/2019-0221-why-titan-is-not-classed.html https://web.archive.org/web/20220812024916/https://oceangate...

pavlov 3y ago

It’s unclear to me what the “63 years without a fatality” track record refers to. Private submarines?

mathgeek 3y ago
Same here. There have been hundreds of documented fatalities on lost subs since 1960.
- gjadi 3y ago
  I think he's referring to subs diving specifically to the Titanic.
  - lern_too_spel 3y ago
    The Titanic wreck wasn't found until 37 years ago, so that doesn't make sense either.
quasarsunnix 3y ago
Deep sea submersibles such as the Alvin.
Xylakant 3y ago
I think he's referring to the Trieste, which reached the Challenger Deep in early 1960. All losses since then are military submarines, AFAICT. German Wikipedia loves lists, so here's one https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_von_U-Boot-Ungl%C3%BCcken_seit_1945 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_von_U-Boot-Ungl%C3%BCcke...

nucleative 3y ago

>It (OceanGate) added that the classification agencies "slowed down innovation… bringing an outside entity up to speed on every innovation before it is put into real-world testing is anathema to rapid innovation". As a private pilot who is considering building a kit aircraft, this is certainly true. It can be exceedingly expensive to prove safety standards have been met for new designs, which is why so few new certified aircraft are on the market and old designs are so expensive. This leads to the whole industry slowing to a crawl. But that absolutely doesn't mean safety standards haven't been met with new designs. However, if I build a kit plane, the FAA will require it be emblazoned "Experimental" and commercial activity - such as paying passengers - is forbidden. I hope the paying customers of this sub were well aware of the level of risk they were taking. All that being said, I'm supportive of anyone's right to go and build a contraption that may end their life, so long as they don't take anybody or anyone else's property with them.

notwhereyouare 3y ago
>However, if I build a kit plane, the FAA will require it be emblazoned "Experimental" and commercial activity - such as paying passengers - is forbidden. unless you're a big company https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/ono50t/ever_see_a_major_airline_running_passenger_ops_as/ https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/ono50t/ever_see_a_m...
- noirscape 3y ago
  Reading the comments, that plane was actually fully certified, they just forgot to remove the sticker.
- tekla 3y ago
  Ignorant response. Just because you see a sticker doesn't mean anything. The aircraft is certified to fly commercially. Its the same as people freaking about speed tape.
- TheDesolate0 3y ago
  [dead]

TazeTSchnitzel 3y ago

The hull was made from 5-inch thick carbon fibre. Carbon fibre is very lightweight for such a strong material, which makes it attractive, but it has a few critical downsides: • it tends to fail catastrophically, without warning, after repeated stress • it's very difficult to predict how many stress cycles it can endure • it's very difficult to detect stress cycle damage Considering every dive and resurface is a huge stress cycle, and the fact OceanGate didn't seem to have any sort of independent certification of their submersible's endurance, this kind of hull implosion event seems inevitable. Their real-time hull monitoring system was a boondoggle, n Edit: In another interview, Cameron elaborated on these exact concerns: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-yu_wixdgE&t=1m20s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-yu_wixdgE&t=1m20s

ksaj 3y ago
An important note is that an employee was (allegedly) fired for making a point that the carbon fiber was two inches too thin. They also apparently didn't even report it until 8 hours after noticing it didn't resurface once communications stopped. If that's true, James Cameron's assessment rings true.
avisser 3y ago
What's the benefit of carbon fiber's strength-to-weight ratio when making a submersible? I guess you can have smaller motors to drive you around on the bottom, but the vast majority of the travel is controlled via ballast/buoyancy. To me, planes and cars have much more obvious gains from lighter materials. Not so much for the sub.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- TazeTSchnitzel 3y ago
  I'm not sure why I highlighted that because indeed that wouldn't be useful, though as a proxy for density it is (apparently they picked it for its buoyancy).
- 83 3y ago

max_ 3y ago

> "I knew that sub was sitting exactly underneath its last known depth and position. That's exactly where they found it," he continued.

Simulacra 3y ago

Dupe. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36445855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36445855

dpio 3y ago

Just him? I thought that was the general consensus.