Quote:
Originally Posted by Firebot
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Titan-sub.html
This is the window that he could have got fitted and rated for 4000 meters, but cheapened out on and instead opted for the 'good enough' 1500 meter rated one. I bet this window simply got squeezed in and caused the catastrophic failure, it was the weakest element of the sub.
Still...watching the video, I can certainly see why people would want to do this trip, despite the risks. Unfortunately, the person who made this possible cut every corner possible and cheapened out anywhere he could, and thus 5 more people have joined the Titanic.
|
To me the window might have been designed to X rather than certified to X and that might not actually be an issue it could be. To me the crazier thing coming out of that lochridge lawsuit was
Quote:
|
Lochridge was particularly concerned about “non-destructive testing performed on the hull of the Titan” but he was “repeatedly told that no scan of the hull or Bond Line could be done to check for delaminations, porosity and voids of sufficient adhesion of the glue being used due to the thickness of the hull.” He was also told there was no such equipment that could conduct a test like that.
|
That is just nuts to do no testing after your model showed this area was at risk.
https://newrepublic.com/post/173802/...avel-oceangate