[PSUBS-MAILIST] Titan submersible missing at Titanic site

Sat Jun 24 12:42:34 EDT 2023

 One thing is for sure, when I take people in my Dual DeepWorker, I will have a very clear and open conversation with them.  This really brings to light the need to do so.  Although the sub was classed and I did not do any modifications to the hull, and all add ons are only bolted to the chassis.  It is still modified and has risks.Hank
    On Saturday, June 24, 2023, 10:38:59 AM MDT, hank pronk via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:  

  Sean, I don't think Karl's sub has through bolted ports.  He has conical ports.   I for one don't think classing makes a sub safer that non classed.  It just proves it is safe.  Some of the rules need not be followed for a Psub.  One rule would be to have a light to tell you the hatch is open.  In a multi passenger commercial sub with lots goin on it makes sense.  In my one man sub, it does not.  It would just be an extra system to clutter up the sub.Hank
    On Saturday, June 24, 2023, 10:29:35 AM MDT, Sean T. Stevenson via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:  

 IIRC, I am aware of at least one departure from society rules on Stanley's Idabel that make it ineligible for class, in the form of its through-bolted windows, which are prohibited per ABS & PVHO-1. There may be other issues - I am not sufficiently familiar with the vessel to know. My point was just to point out that nobody appears to be clamoring for Stanley to be shut down, and if the ABS (or DNV-GL) Rules are what we as a community are considering to be the defining arbiter of what is safe, then we are not applying that criteria equitably by giving Stanley a pass on his operation. Also, short of an open community audit that would require complete disclosure on the part of a designer / builder, what mechanism exists to prove compliance with the design rules other than classing? Alternatively, if we can agree that the criteria is perhaps something less stringent (as maybe it should be, given Idabel's record) perhaps we can find a way to articulate it through this discussion?

Sean

-------- Original Message --------
On Jun. 24, 2023, 10:08, hank pronk via Personal_Submersibles < personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

Sean raises a good point.  There is however a big difference.  Karl’s sub is built mostly to ABS rules and at least to standard engineering guidelines.  My issue is not with being classed.  Classing a sub does not make it safer, it just proves it is safe.  The boiler plate waiver would apply and be sufficient in Karl’s case. Hank

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 24, 2023, at 9:03 AM, via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

Hank,Your assumption that somebody-should-have-done-more is flawed. People will do what people will do. The idea that some nameless professional entity could have imposed its will on the free will of free citizens is just hide-your-head-in-the-sand bullshit. I get that you want someone or something to blame. Sadly, such a person does not exist. Not now, and not in the minute before Stockton and his crew were killed. Those people went adventuring. They did it with foreknowledge, because the adventure excited them, and the experience compelled them. And I for one wonder how it is that someone like you, who does EXACTLY the same thing from your home workshop, would think otherwise. Which is pretty much all I have to say on the matter from this point forward. I argued with Stockton, and that changed his mind exactly not one iota. Lesson learned. Does that sound familiar? It should. We are all thick skulled knuckle heads about our passions. Has anyone changed your opinion lately? I'm thinking not. Same here. 'Nuff said.,Vance

-----Original Message-----
From: hank pronk via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
To: Jon Wallace via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
Sent: Sat, Jun 24, 2023 10:09 am
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Titan submersible missing at Titanic site

Jon,Although I do agree with you that they were intelligent people, the waiver is not unlike what you would sign to go white water rafting.There was a false sense of security being the 12th dive or however many.  I am simply not satisfied that the powers that regulate this industry did enough.  I don't believe for a second the passengers understood what was going on with the hull.  The American Bureau Of Shipping is no small entity, and surely could have intervened and certainly found out the passenger list.  They are all running around saying "I told you so".  when they should be saying " I wish we did more".   Hank
  On Saturday, June 24, 2023, 07:49:56 AM MDT, Jon Wallace via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote: 

Hank, how do you find the passengers to warn them?  The waiver passengers signed identified the submarine as "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."  (see link below)  That's a pretty honest and open summary by Ocean Gate itself of what you're up against as a passenger.  If that didn't give the passengers pause what else could an "expert" have told them?  These were highly intelligent successful businessmen who could understand what "experimental" and "certified" meant relative to a submarine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7RwftWrAeo

When trying to understand people's behavior we have to look at things as they were in the moment, not in the now with the benefit of retrospect.  For example, the MTS letter was penned in 2018.  In the subsequent five years time Ocean Gate had raised $18 million for Titan development and performed multiple dives on the Titanic successfully.  Up until June 18, 2023 anyone could have looked at MTS vs Ocean Gate and walked away believing the warnings were unwarranted.
I think the history and events leading up to the Titan loss is very complex and includes everything from investors, finances, performance, and deadlines; to egos.
Jon

  On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 05:22:16 AM EDT, hank pronk via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote: 

Marc, I do agree completely that if you want to get in a barrel and go over Niagara Falls, you should be allowed.  This is different because the paying passengers were Likely not told about the concerns and warnings from industry experts.  That is where my beef with experts lies, they could have done more to insure the passengers knew.  A strongly worded letter to the builder is a let down.  Hank 

  _______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
  _______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
_______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles

_______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
  _______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.whoweb.com/pipermail/personal_submersibles/attachments/20230624/d1cbb4d9/attachment.html>