52
Titanic tourist submersible goes missing with search under way (www.bbc.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/news@beehaw.org
39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 3 years ago (13 children)

One of the other posts in the feed makes it sound like they only do it a handful of times a year, and that cost is covering a multi-day excursion since they have to wait for conditions to be right. Still, no excuse to not have contingencies, but I think their take gets eaten into a fair bit more than the raw math would suggest.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago (11 children)

    I wager they don’t have a recovery vessel because they have people sign contracts only allowing arbitration.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    The CBS guy read aloud part of the thing he had to sign when he rode on it.

    And the video is horrifying on so many levels…

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago (7 children)

    I wouldn't be surprised. But, I suspect there's also a factor of just implausibility. Apparently, the main vessel they use is "experimental", so it may just literally be impossible to have a recovery vessel without being a literal government.

    My money's on this being the result of someone ignoring the "hey, these are not good conditions" warnings.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (6 children)

    Not just 'experimental'. This thing looks like something you'd find on a backyard engineering website. Some of it's functionality is accessed with an offbrand video game controller.

    CBS interview featuring the submersible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago* (4 children)

    The bit with the contract is @ 2:40:

    An experimental submersible vessel that has not been approved or certified by any regulatory body and could result in physical injury, disability, emotional trauma or death.

    At least you can't say they didn't know what they were getting into. Still an awful way to go, if it did implode at depth, at least it'd be quick.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    I think I’d rather implode and go instantly, than be floating on the surface for 4 days and unable to get out while slowly suffocating.

    Neither is my idea of a good time…

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Can they not open a hatch if it's on the surface?

    Water would be a problem still, but not suffocation, if so.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago

    Nope. The hatch is bolted from the outside. They can’t do anything from the inside and are utterly dependent on someone outside with a power socket wrench to unscrew each of the 17 bolts holding the hatch on.

    There are some design flaws with this thing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago*

    According to the CEO the whole business isn't even profitable. They spent over a million on gas alone. At least this jerryrigged contraption sinking is the most effective way for their company to stop shitting up the atmosphere over the whims of a few rich people.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent