- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 6/23/23 at 8:05 am to Koach K
quote:
But was it being inspected as rigorously as an 800 buck used husqvarna riding mower?
Posted on 6/23/23 at 8:17 am to wallowinit
lol, i misspoke, but it definitely imploded prior to reaching the bottom
Posted on 6/23/23 at 8:23 am to stout
quote:
James Cameron said he knew Monday they were toast and apparently they were at 3500 feet down when it happened
Have to wonder if the hull was compromised between dives. That's only around 1600 psi while they were reaching up to near 6000 on the dives to depth.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 8:26 am to redstick13
I think Cameron said 3500m, not feet.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 8:29 am to bigpapamac
Makes more sense. They would have been slightly above 5000 psi at that depth.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 9:16 am to redstick13
A sub descending to the depths of the wreckage of the Titanic is under enormous pressure from the water outside. If the submarine were to implode, the hull would be crushed at unimaginable speed.
A former submarine expert explained what this might be like. Dave Corley, a retired Navy Captain, said: "When a submarine hull collapses, it moves inward at about 1,500 miles per hour - that's 2,200 feet per second.
"A modern nuclear submarine's hull radius is about 20 feet. So the time required for complete collapse is 20 / 2,200 seconds = about 1 millisecond. A human brain responds instinctually to the stimulus at about 25 milliseconds. Human rational response is at best 150 milliseconds.
"The air inside a sub has a fairly high concentration of hydrocarbon vapors. When the hull collapses it behaves like a very large piston on a very large Diesel engine. The air auto-ignites and an explosion follows the initial rapid implosion Sounds gruesome but as a submariner I always wished for a quick hull-collapse death over a lengthy one like some of the crew on Kursk endured."
John Jones, a former member of the US Navy Submarine Force, added: "Implosion events occur within milliseconds, far too quickly for the human brain to comprehend."
A former submarine expert explained what this might be like. Dave Corley, a retired Navy Captain, said: "When a submarine hull collapses, it moves inward at about 1,500 miles per hour - that's 2,200 feet per second.
"A modern nuclear submarine's hull radius is about 20 feet. So the time required for complete collapse is 20 / 2,200 seconds = about 1 millisecond. A human brain responds instinctually to the stimulus at about 25 milliseconds. Human rational response is at best 150 milliseconds.
"The air inside a sub has a fairly high concentration of hydrocarbon vapors. When the hull collapses it behaves like a very large piston on a very large Diesel engine. The air auto-ignites and an explosion follows the initial rapid implosion Sounds gruesome but as a submariner I always wished for a quick hull-collapse death over a lengthy one like some of the crew on Kursk endured."
John Jones, a former member of the US Navy Submarine Force, added: "Implosion events occur within milliseconds, far too quickly for the human brain to comprehend."
Posted on 6/23/23 at 9:18 am to AlumneyeJ93
Posted on 6/23/23 at 11:17 am to baldona
quote:
But it’s not like anyone was paying attention to this on a large scale until AFTER they went missing.
Once while working we dropped a small SUS (source, underwater sound) without notifying anyone. Within 20 minutes there was a fighter jet circling. They pay attention.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 11:31 am to hob
On a previous dive, the crew of the Titan discovered a thruster was installed backwards 13,000 feet below the sea
This post was edited on 6/23/23 at 11:32 am
Posted on 6/23/23 at 11:48 am to LegendInMyMind
quote:
he FACT that supports it being an issue of monitoring and maintenance rather than that of carbon fiber not being a viable submersible material?
FWIW I believe James Cameron said last night a deep sea sub should NEVER be made of this kind of material
Just throwing it out there
Posted on 6/23/23 at 11:49 am to stout
quote:
He also said they shouldn't have been doing what they were doing. Said a composite sub-material instead of contiguous material like steel was a horrible idea.
Again, if the reports that this sub made at least a dozen dives to that depth with everyone making it back fine, how can anyone say the composite material wasn't a viable material? They literally have real world proof that it was.
Now, like many other subs before it that have gone to similar depths, it probably should have been decommissioned or properly maintained after so many dives. Thorough inspection post-dive has shelved many of these type subs in the past. Those subs worked perfeftly fine once or twice or more. They were weakened by the cumulative effect of multiple dives to depth. James Cameron has said that there were two inches of travel in the hull of his Deep Sea Challenge vessel from the surface to depth. Put anything through those rigors long enough and there will be problems. Ignore those problems and there will be catastrophe.
This post was edited on 6/23/23 at 11:53 am
Posted on 6/23/23 at 11:54 am to LegendInMyMind
quote:
Again, if the reports that this sub made at least a dozen dives to that depth with everyone making it back fine, how can anyone say the composite material wasn't a viable material? They literally have real world proof that it was.
A dozen dives could have been the problem. Materials have fatigue resistance; i.e. stress reversal resistance. Steel is pretty could at resisting stress reversals (push and pull; bending back and forth repeatedly). Carbon fiber is more brittle.
So, basically, those dozen or so dives represent cycles of low to high to low pressure which were cycles of higher and lower compressive stress on the carbon fiber. Fatigue stress degraded the material is my guess, and they never did the testing required to verify the integrity of the material. It started to give on this dive and they couldn't dump ballast quick enough before the compromised hull catastrophically crushed as they went uncontrollably deeper.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 11:56 am to terd ferguson
Posted on 6/23/23 at 11:59 am to DakIsNoLB
quote:
A dozen dives could have been the problem. Materials have fatigue resistance; i.e. stress reversal resistance. Steel is pretty could at resisting stress reversals (push and pull; bending back and forth repeatedly). Carbon fiber is more brittle.
True and inarguable. But even comparable steel subs have been shelved in shorter time and fewer trips than this one.
My only argument is carbon fiber is definitely a viable material. It was proven. If this jackass who cut corners everywhere, reportedly, can build a carbon fiber sub that went to the Titanic a dozen times, imagine what a crew like Cameron's could build with it. Imagine what proper testing and better engineering could do for it.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 12:02 pm to Wishnitwas1998
quote:
FWIW I believe James Cameron said last night a deep sea sub should NEVER be made of this kind of material
He did on that CNN interview with Anderson Cooper (can't seem to find link on mobile). Basically said that it's better for outward pressure than inner pressure, in other words, not a submersible of any kind.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 12:04 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
Again, if the reports that this sub made at least a dozen dives to that depth with everyone making it back fine, how can anyone say the composite material wasn't a viable material? They literally have real world proof that it was.
It might help you to watch Cameron's explanations -- in his own words he said composite material is insidious in that it lulls you into thinking it's "viable material" --
Cameron's Explanation - 4 minutes
You're talking about decommissioning something after 25 dives -- He mentions that contiguous material like steel can last potentially 1000 cycles -- regardless of what the number is -- they have ways of measuring what the yield is and when to decommission.
This post was edited on 6/23/23 at 12:12 pm
Posted on 6/23/23 at 12:08 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
gain, if the reports that this sub made at least a dozen dives to that depth with everyone making it back fine
One of the dives far exceeded the Titanic depth. But I believe it was unmanned.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 12:09 pm to stout
quote:
This is James Cameron's sub that cost $10 million and has been to Titanic 33 times
The ten million dollar sub that Cameron had built to go to Challenger Deep (the inside of which you posted a pic of) never went to Titanic.
ETA: Interestingly enough, on a cross-country trip the trailer it was being hauled on caught fire and the sub was burned to the point that the insurance company deemed it a total loss.
Cameron has stated it is now being repaired. I kind of doubt that it, in anything close to its original form, will ever dive to any great depth again. The hull was heated by fire to a high temp and then quenched in water to put out the fire. That original hull was scrap metal as soon as that happened.
This post was edited on 6/23/23 at 12:16 pm
Posted on 6/23/23 at 12:11 pm to Tiger Khan
quote:
It might help you to watch Cameron's explanations -- in his own words he said composite material is insidious in that it lulls you into thinking it's "viable material" --
Did it go to the Titanic a dozen times or not?
Page 81 of 92
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News