Don’t take my word for it - ask the guy who built the thing.
Titanic tourist submarine missing 6-19-2023 (Debris field found, passengers presumed dead. 06-22-23)
I seem to be missing the part where he says that if the PlayStation controller fails, they’re fucked.
Probably because there are at least two backup computer backup devices available including two visible in the very photograph to which you are referring.
How’d those “backups” work out for them, then?
Sincere question: How would a hatch that can be opened from the inside help in this situation?
If they managed to operate the ballast and make it to the surface, they still have no way of getting fresh air into the vessel. They’d still suffocate waiting for a rescue ship to find them.
I don’t understand. You complained they were using a playstation controller for computer input. I pointed out they had at least two other computer input devices available, visible in your own photo. Are you saying that you know it was the playstation controller that failed and that the backups didn’t work? I thought no one knew yet why the sub has gone missing. If you have inside intel, please let us know.
Why is this? Seems likely that on the surface they’d be able to radio or there would be an external EPIRB and they would be rescued quickly. Was the sub not equipped with either possibility?
Apparently they have a system that allows sending and receiving text messages between the submersible and the mother ship. Presumably, “lost contact” means no one is responding to message sent from the surface.
Nope.
So that story says they could communicate with the sub.
Do you have a cite for your “nope”? Because your cite says “yep”.
According to the BBC, the five people on the sub are:
Pakistani businessman Shahzada Dawood and his son, Suleman
Hamish Harding, a 59-year-old British billionaire businessman and explorer
French explorer Paul-Henry Nargeolet
and Stockton Rush, chief executive of OceanGate
“This submersible does not have any kind of beacon like that. On my expedition last summer, they did indeed get lost for about 5 hours, and adding such a beacon was discussed…”
My cite is my cite.
Your cite says that they could communicate, and that they found them within five hours. Whatever way you choose to spin it. It also says they were considering improvements, and does not say those improvements weren’t made.
So your “nope” was pretty hollow.
It says the mothership could send messages to the sub.
NOT that they knew if the messages were being received or that the sub could send messages back.
Your cite doesn’t say that. You are just assuming that anything you don’t know about doesn’t exist. Same as with the PlayStation controller.
I investigate maritime incidents for a living. My experience is that in the aftermath everyone’s a frickin’ expert, anything the public doesn’t know about they assume doesn’t exist, and 90% of everything reported is wrong.
You are assuming that anything you don’t know about does exist, all statements by the people who built the sub or have been aboard it be damned.
Where’s your cite that the sub has an EPIRB or a radio or backup piloting mechanisms or any of the things the guy who built it says it doesn’t have?
Oh, and re: those “backups”, here’s an entire video, partially taken onboard the sub (starting at 7:30) where for several minutes they’re completely unable to move the sub because the Playstation controller isn’t mapped correctly.
The air pressure inside the sub is the same as at sea level, right? In other words, if rescued, the occupants wouldn’t have to go to a depressurization chamber?
I don’t need to prove anything. I’m not the one throwing the brickbats. All I’m doing is assuming a level of basic competence unless proven otherwise, which seems to me to be the decent thing to do.
For all the spin you’ve put on it, your cites show that (a) the vessel has at least three computer input devices even if I have to hold your hand and point them out to you (b) the last time there was an issue with locating the vessel at the surface the vessel was found within about five hours (c) there is short message communication at the surface (d) when they did have a problem with a controller they fixed it in five minutes and (e) they were looking at improving that system.
Yet somehow you spin this into a tale of incompetence.
You haven’t provided any cite that the pilot says it has no backup piloting system (you just assume that since he doesn’t explicitly say it does have that, it doesn’t). And you’re now saying it has no radio - how do you think they send or receive short messages? Carrier pigeon? And you don’t know that it now has no EPIRB - only that it used not to.
Assumes facts not in evidence.
And yet, the observable evidence currently indicates that they’re lying on the ocean floor slowly asphyxiating and will likely not be found any time in the foreseeable future.
Yes. Assuming some basic competency till proven otherwise seems a decent thing to do.
Every dangerous and difficult exercise in the history of humanity has had failures. Some of the smartest people in the USA work at NASA. Do I need to list out the fatalities?
The failures don’t automatically mean those behind it are incompetent fools as you so strongly wish to imply.
And what exact difficult and dangerous exercise have you competently completed lately? Or is quarterbacking from an armchair about the extent of it?