Started By
Message

re: Titanic tourist submarine goes missing

Posted on 6/29/23 at 10:47 am to
Posted by Dick Jacket
Member since Nov 2016
1366 posts
Posted on 6/29/23 at 10:47 am to
quote:

I don’t think it did either. Based on the spotty reporting about them having some issue of too rapid of a descent and an inability to control that through ballast, one reasonable hypothesis (to this layman) is that they made it to the bottom faster than expected, hit bottom too hard, and that force instantaneously compromised the structural integrity of the capsule and caused the catastrophic implosion.


Unsubstantiated info that my hypothesis was correct.
Twitter
This post was edited on 6/29/23 at 10:49 am
Posted by SpartanSoul
Member since Aug 2016
887 posts
Posted on 6/29/23 at 2:09 pm to
It would be strange to have multiple failures that led to no control over decent.

It supposedly had:

The "roll off" ballast

An inflatable bladder ballast with a 10000psi air tank.

A hydraulic release ballast

The ability to jettison the landing skid

The thrusters

Hard to come up with a scenario as to how all of those could fail to overcome a negative ballast problem, but with what we know of the engineering who knows if the "systems" even worked.
Posted by supatigah
CEO of the Keith Hernandez Fan Club
Member since Mar 2004
87573 posts
Posted on 6/29/23 at 2:50 pm to
Cameron said he learned Monday morning it failed on descent at 3500 meters

Surface lost comms and tracking at the same time

The Transponder was separate and self contained from the sub, when the transponder went silent the surface knew the sub was lost

Cameron said the rescue talk was a farce, surface support and gov officials knew what happened immediately

They even knew exactly where it was
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram