I know, right? I’ve been having basically the same thought, but only with a mouse. Would a computer with a GUI that’s navigated by a few mouse clicks somehow be better?
Titanic tourist submarine missing 6-19-2023 (Debris field found, passengers presumed dead. 06-22-23)
…but I don’t want something “comfortable and light.” I want something that is purpose built, solid, durable, reliable, redundant, that is connected to thrusters that won’t accidentally get turned the wrong way.
But again: you bought this up. I’ll just leave it there.
Ergonomics are important. Wires can get tangled and are a potential source of failures. Even weight is important when you might be using it for many hours.
I didn’t write the hundreds of articles with titles like:
The missing submersible was run by a video game controller. Is that normal?
Missing Titanic submersible operated by $30 video game controller
PlayStation controller and acoustic messaging: How the missing Titanic tourist sub works
Logitech’s stock hit by reports its $30 game controller was used to steer missing sub near Titanic
The Missing Titanic Submarine Was Using A $30 Video Game Controller
$30 gaming controller used to pilot Titanic sub received hundreds of complaints since 2010 launch
Missing Titanic sub controlled by Logitech PC, video game controller? What we know so far
And so on and so forth.
I wasn’t even thinking of it in terms of the sub being controlled with WASD or something, but more if there was a computer with a keyboard used to do stuff like type out transmissions to the surface. Would it be seen as absurd that an off the shelf keyboard was used to do keyboard things?
As was mentioned earlier, if the thrusters and control surfaces (if it had any) are run through a computer, then what you need is a controller that speaks to the computer.
…and I’d STILL rather be using that controller than the one in the Titan.
Well here’s the thing.
Neither did I!!!
This whole episode was tragic, and unnecessary. There are so many more worthwhile things these people could be doing with their money. I’m aware it’s not my money and not my decision, but seriously throwing your money and your life away on this hair brained crap just befuddles me. If they were discovering cures, new species, saving lives, it would have been worth it, but they were just lookie looing a very old accident. I feel awful for the kid. He did not deserve to be dragged down there to his death.
I know they say they do scientific research, but I’m skeptical. It all just seems like a lot of people with too much money and not enough things to fill their time.
As for the controller? I think it’s metaphor for rich men and their toys, and the half cocked, half baked stuff they get up to.
James Cameron just confirmed what I had suspected. This design was obviously problematic. It has a cylindrical carbon fiber composite hull that could not be properly engineered because of the lack of materials testing data under those conditions for a structure of that size. Oceangate claimed that acoustic sensors would detect minute carbon fiber delaminations as an alternative to proper materials testing or non-destructive imaging of the hull. There was no way of knowing how many dives at what depths for how long that submersible would last.
Probably not.
But you know what, for something like that, i don’t want the $30 controller, nor the $30 keyboard. And i don’t want the messy hand-made thing, either. I want the professional-grade mass-produced gadget. The one that costs $100 or maybe even $250, and has been tested for a gazillion cycles, and is environmentally sealed against dust and water (or spilling your coffee on it) and is probably missing a few rarely-used buttons and weighs a little more than the one they sell to budget-conscious teens. It will look just like the $30 one in the photos, though.
More importantly, i want to test that all the parts work, separately and together. But I’m not in the market for “excitement dive”.
Well, there is now.
That’s 7
Not really. With only one submersible tested until failure there is still insufficient data. Especially because any data collected by the sensors is now lost.
I should say that they could perform acceptable testing with another identical craft up to the point of failure using unmanned vehicles and and them implementing a high safety factor. These recently deceased aquanauts actually traveled to Davy Jones Locker in a test sample.
Tiny hijack: I heard a loud bang in my neighbourhood once. I was sitting on the porch late one night at my previous house and heard what sounded like thunder, though not quite the same. The skies were clear and it seemed odd. I went back inside and thought no more about it. I found out what it was the next day. No, not gunfire. It was giant propane tanks exploding at a propane storage facility about ten miles away. A whole neighbourhood was evacuated and a number of homes were destroyed. It precipitated major legislation governing the handling of propane and where bulk storage facilities would be allowed. I guess the connection to the story is: sometimes shit happens. [/hijack]
There’s an entire ecosystem that feeds on whatever falls down to the seabed after death. It’s their calling to consume the implosion victims, as well.
I think you are both right, and you’re talking past one another to some extent.
First: the bare fact of a game controller being used in a vehicle like this, absent any other context, is meaningless and trivial. It is an input device, period, and taking an off-the-shelf unit has a number of advantages — not just cost, but also reliability and user familiarity. Dr.Strangelove is correct about this.
In fact, this is hardly the first time standard-issue game controllers have been leveraged as pre-existing input/interface devices. For example, here is an article from 2017 which talks about Xbox controllers being acquired and integrated for certain control functions in U.S. military submarines. They’re not used to drive the ship; they’re integrated into the periscope system. But that’s still a critical system which cannot be allowed to fail, and if a game controller all by itself were that cheap and unreliable, there’s no way it would have been chosen for the periscope project.
The specific controller in the submersible also has an additional advantage I haven’t seen much discussed elsewhere: it uses ordinary replaceable AA batteries, instead of the onboard rechargeable lithium-ion batteries that are now commonly embedded in other consumer devices. That’s a very smart choice, because if a lithium-ion battery fails it can create a fire hazard, which you don’t want in an enclosed space. It seems to me that this is actually a pretty smart choice, and indicates that some thought, at least, was put into safety considerations.
So Dr.Strangelove is correct to say that the use of the cheap gamepad, in and of itself, does not warrant criticism.
But Banquet_Bear is talking about the general development and engineering culture which resulted in this obviously half-assed submarine. In that context, where we see a wide variety of cheap off-the-shelf components and materials bodged together with little or no testing, it is correct to note that the gamepad was also integrated in a half-assed way. And with this perspective, it’s entirely reasonable to use the gamepad as a synecdoche for the criminally casual approach to design and construction that wound up dooming the vehicle.
In summary — if the rest of the vehicle had been designed to the standard of Cameron’s Challenger Deep vehicle, it would have been entirely unremarkable if they’d then chosen the Logitech controller as the human interface device. Per other real-world examples, it comes with several advantageous qualities, so if all you need is the input surface for a robust and well-designed sub, then the gamepad is a reasonable, even intelligent, solution. But in the context of a vehicle that appears to have been held together with Gorilla Glue and prayers, the gamepad becomes the instantly recognizable symbol of a long list of terrible decisions. It is not in and of itself a terrible decision, but it can be perceived as symbolic of the project’s culture as a whole.
Can we agree to bridge the disagreement in this fashion, and leave the controller debate alone?
I guess it is like a whale fall, only smaller. Whale overfishing seems to have changed the feeding events in the deep seas, as they are much less frequent. The five tiny bodies will not change that pattern:
Searching for “whale fall” you can also find time lapse clips of such events. Fascinating stuff.
I laughed.
You may be on to something 
…
You’re right, of course. My complaint isn’t really with BB anyway; it’s just that I’ve seen the same basic sentiment from countless sources, legitimate media and otherwise, and they’re all focused on the same wrong thing. Yes, it could be said to be a proxy for the general shoddiness of the operation, but when there are so many real things that went wrong, there’s no reason to even bring it up. Except that it makes a good headline.
On the life insurance question, I wonder if really wealthy people actually consider it worthwhile. Life Insurance is intended to, in some way, compensate your heirs for losing you and your income. There must be a point at which the premiums outweigh the potential benefits.
In the UK (and I suspect the US as well) it is standard practice to spend money on protecting valuable objects and buildings (security, fire patrols etc.), rather than paying someone to cover the cost of loss or damage. In recent times, fires at Hampton Court, Windsor Castle and York Minster, have all caused catastrophic damage, none of which was covered by insurance.
I assume that a billionaire would have sufficient assets to ensure their families would not be queuing up at the local food bank anytime soon after their demise. I am no insurance expert, but it seems likely that to qualify for a payout meaningful to such individuals, the premiums would be eye-wateringly expensive.
I completely agree.
Not intending to protract this argument, but this part I entirely disagree with, and your statements both before and after directly contradict it. You acknowledge that if the sub had been properly engineered with due regard for safety then the choice of the game controller as an input device would not have been contentious. It therefore follows that the game controller is completely irrelevant to the argument and isn’t evidence of anything, which I believe is true for the reasons that @Dr.Strangelove stated. If one wants evidence of rushed engineering and corner-cutting there seems to be lots of genuinely meaningful evidence out there, and that’s where the focus should be, not on irrelevant details that the media is ignorantly sensationalizing.
.
.
.