This nightmare doesn’t register for me because there’s a 0% chance I’ll ever be on a submarine. For the Navy or as a tourist viewing 110 year old wreckage.
So question; when does it become socially acceptable to visit this wreck in a submarine like they were trying to do with the Titanic? I'm assuming at least 63 hours from now.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to OptimalTates For This Useful Post:
Someone who works for OceanGate is saying that they know where the vessel is and they have a team ready to save it, but paperwork is holding up the process. I think he is probably full of crap. He said if they leave now, they can get it done in 40 hours.
Apparently he was also supposed to be the expert onboard on Sunday but had to bail last minute. Hopefully this wasn't a case of having to substitute him with someone who wasn't qualified.
Also of note, but the CEO Stockton Rush is on the sub apparently.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 06-19-2023 at 10:23 PM.
Dude, I'm going to sound like a smart ass. But so you can buy the T-shirt and brag to your friends over brie and Cavier.
Jonston - "Harumph, I climbed Mount Everest" Dosen't mention that he had 10 sherpa's carrying his ass up the mountain.
Everson - "Oh really . . . how exciting, but I sailed across the Atlantic" Doesn't mention he had a crew of 10 including a chef, a captain and mate, a massage therapist, a wine guy and two hot girls in bikinis.
Spruace III - "hmmm, amateur gentlemen I assure you. I went 3800 meters down and explored the wreckage of the titanic" Doesn't mention that he didn't do anything and didn't really see it because he lost the fight for the window.
Here's my T-shirt.
The parallel of this to the line-ups on Everest struck me as well.
I don't believe its right to tell people how they can or can't spend their money but this does seem like a complete waste to me. Not from an ethical point of view though, most of the coolest historical places I've visited involved sites where many people died at one time. Just in the last two weeks I was at the colosseum and Pompeii, minus the difference in ease of travelling to those places is there really any difference between them and the Titanic? I personally don't think so. I'd really like to go to Auschwitz someday as well, same thing. But for this the cost and the risk of physical safety to see it pushes into the realm of folly for me, same as climbing Everest.
I also like your comparison to a "got the tshirt policy", people do these things and act like it's some big accomplishment when it really isn't anymore. It was when it was first achieved, but not by you in 2023 now. Robert Ballard using cutting edge technology and standing in the face of his funding getting pulled to scour thousands of sq miles of empty ocean to finally find the most famous shipwreck of all time that had been lost for 70 years. Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay finding a way up the world's tallest mountain that had foiled or killed anyone that tried before. These were great accomplishments by great men, but you paying money now to walk in those footsteps doesn't give you .1% of that clout. I have way more respect for someone that trains their ass off and sets a PB time in a marathon than I have for someone that climbed Everest these days, at least I know they accomplished it on their own through will and self improvement, not because they had the cash and spare time.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DiracSpike For This Useful Post:
I dunno. Going to save the laughs for people who go to hunt endangered species and get eaten.
This was a dumb braggart move, but they weren’t hurting anyone. It was a boat ride that coat them their life. One guy apparently was a French Diver and Titanic nut. Maybe he was the driver? The CEO was also on board. So just deserts?
Point being there is worse people to schadenfreude. Hope Putin gets hit by missile for example
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to OldDutch For This Useful Post:
Looking at James Cameron’s sub he had a safety mechanism where seawater would corrode the ballast if the ballast failed to mechanically be dropped and it would drop ballast on power loss.
So in that system as long as nothing is above you you have normal operation, a fail safe system and a secondary fail safe. This sub in one of the articles talks about 7 ways to service but never discussed them.
As a mild thrill seeker I can't judge because I understand where the motive comes from. But the risk outweighs the reward here. You're not even experiencing the wreck, you're just in a ####y can in close proximity to it.
Always good to have one of those custom tear-off pro/con lists handy for times like that. If you want to live long but also do lots of cool things, just make sure you have a reasonable threshold. You can never completely shelter yourself from risk, but make sure the odds of survival are still strongly in your favour.
Do people, or likely in this case, their estates, get billed for costly search and rescue missions? I know part of the coast guard's mission is to help vessels in distress, but in this case, the people were thrill seekers who took a very unnecessary risk in an a very dangerous place, and outside of any government's jurisdiction.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 06-19-2023 at 11:26 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
I guess the thing I find weird is how unpleasant the actual experience would be as compared to going up Everest, trekking through Nepal and climbing a mountain I get, must be beautiful and interesting, the scenery and culture I mean its not my thing but I would enjoy almost everything about it other than the schlepping my arse up the mountain.
But 200,000 to be squeezed into a cold dank dark smelly shed for 12 hours with 5 or 6 other occasionally farting humans, no windows, nothing to see out of them even if there were just to get to the wreck where you take turns to look out of a 6 inch thick piece of glass onto a dimly lit wreck that would be all but invisible, I mean what the hell is the point of that?
I'm getting slight panic attacks just thinking of being in a metal tube like that and knowing you're probably just waiting for death at the bottom of a vast ocean, and there's nothing you can do about it. What a terrible way to go.
The Following User Says Thank You to The Yen Man For This Useful Post:
Do people, or likely in this case, their estates, get billed for costly search and rescue missions? I know part of the coast guard's mission is to help vessels in distress, but in this case, the people were thrill seekers who took a very unnecessary risk in an a very dangerous place, and outside of any government's jurisdiction.
I assume the Sub company/ their insurance (if anyone) would be on the hook .
The parallel of this to the line-ups on Everest struck me as well.
I don't believe its right to tell people how they can or can't spend their money but this does seem like a complete waste to me. Not from an ethical point of view though, most of the coolest historical places I've visited involved sites where many people died at one time. Just in the last two weeks I was at the colosseum and Pompeii, minus the difference in ease of travelling to those places is there really any difference between them and the Titanic? I personally don't think so. I'd really like to go to Auschwitz someday as well, same thing. But for this the cost and the risk of physical safety to see it pushes into the realm of folly for me, same as climbing Everest.
I also like your comparison to a "got the tshirt policy", people do these things and act like it's some big accomplishment when it really isn't anymore. It was when it was first achieved, but not by you in 2023 now. Robert Ballard using cutting edge technology and standing in the face of his funding getting pulled to scour thousands of sq miles of empty ocean to finally find the most famous shipwreck of all time that had been lost for 70 years. Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay finding a way up the world's tallest mountain that had foiled or killed anyone that tried before. These were great accomplishments by great men, but you paying money now to walk in those footsteps doesn't give you .1% of that clout. I have way more respect for someone that trains their ass off and sets a PB time in a marathon than I have for someone that climbed Everest these days, at least I know they accomplished it on their own through will and self improvement, not because they had the cash and spare time.
Ugh....that is powerful. Fair warning...that will ruin your day, but its fascinating.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans
If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
Do people, or likely in this case, their estates, get billed for costly search and rescue missions? I know part of the coast guard's mission is to help vessels in distress, but in this case, the people were thrill seekers who took a very unnecessary risk in an a very dangerous place, and outside of any government's jurisdiction.
As a mild thrill seeker I can't judge because I understand where the motive comes from. But the risk outweighs the reward here. You're not even experiencing the wreck, you're just in a ####y can in close proximity to it.
Always good to have one of those custom tear-off pro/con lists handy for times like that. If you want to live long but also do lots of cool things, just make sure you have a reasonable threshold. You can never completely shelter yourself from risk, but make sure the odds of survival are still strongly in your favour.
The sub had a 100% survival rate before this trip.
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
Someone who works for OceanGate is saying that they know where the vessel is and they have a team ready to save it, but paperwork is holding up the process. I think he is probably full of crap. He said if they leave now, they can get it done in 40 hours.
Apparently he was also supposed to be the expert onboard on Sunday but had to bail last minute. Hopefully this wasn't a case of having to substitute him with someone who wasn't qualified.
Also of note, but the CEO Stockton Rush is on the sub apparently.
agreed.
he's just getting excuses ready in advance. No way "paperwork" would stop any feasible rescue.
There has been talk of it stuck on the Titanic or something, but that doesn't really fit the facts, since they lost contact before they made it. I guess there is a possibility it continued to descend and eventually get caught up, but that would mean the pilot didn't drop the ballast when coms were lost, and carried on as normal. Which doesn't make sense, because they needed coms to find the Titanic.
So I think that leaves a few possibilities. Least likely, think, is sitting in tact at the bottom. Surfacing is second least, given it hasn't been found on the surface yet. So that leaves catastrophic failure as the most likely.
Hamish Harding mentioned it was rough waters for awhile before they got the OK. Could the sub have been unnoticeably damaged? Perhaps repeated trips have weakened the pressure vessle. It also departed at 4am, which leaves room for human error to have played a part. But I think all of this ignores the most likely explanation, that they were the first to encounter The Krakken.
