This tiny submarine 2.4 miles under the sea, visiting the relics of RMS Titanic. Can it be found and the crew saved before the air runs out?

[Profpointy]

 

[Bonefish Blues]

If you're talking of the passengers effectively help fund the science, I don't think there is any doubt that was the claim. I think there are a few questions on the extent of the 'science' though.

I'm had a furtle around.

As far as I can see the proposition was to enable scientists to get down more cheaply - whether on mates' rates or not, I don't know. He wasn't doing science himself.

 

[cougie uk]

I'm going to wager that a cylinder was the cheapest to produce.

Cylinder would give him more space for his tourists. I think that's the only reason for the shape.

 

[markemark]

There is a balance between pushing the boundaries and recklessness. I do not know where this sub sat on that spectrum and will leave it to the investigators to establish. There is a lot of noise from armchair experts however there’s also a lot of noise from actual experts too.

 

[Jameshow]

View attachment 696422

Russian expert... Keep up!!

 

[Profpointy]

Very very unlikely.

The public knows the risks now, so I guess certification will be mandated all across international waters, but even if in future there was an uncertified one, nobody would use it.

How, and more importantly who, will "certify" cutting edge experimental ventures? I would hazard a guess there isn't a British Standard for 5 mile deep submarines

I've already recounted people I know making their own scuba diving rebreathers for specific cave diving projects. presumably this too should be banned and they'd only be able to buy one from an existing supplier. One character had invented some specific feature and was trying to get it incorporated in the official standards, so, regardless of any merit, you'd have to buy his design.

That's not to say mistakes of design, or build, or operation were not made, after all five people are dead, but where do you stop ? Should you have to have a skiing licence to go skiing, a climbing licence to go up ben nevis

Some things are inherently risky, and standards likely won't exist for any cutting edge new thing, so you really can't and shouldn't police this sort of thing. Space Shuttle anyone ?

I concede the "paying passengers" aspect does enter into a grey area, but in this instance I'd see it more as sponsoring and participating in a risk expedition rather
than paying for a bungie jump

 

[ClichéGuevara]

How, and more importantly who, will "certify" cutting edge experimental ventures? I would hazard a guess there isn't a British Standard for 5 mile deep submarines

I've already recounted people I know making their own scuba diving rebreathers for specific cave diving projects. presumably this too should be banned and they'd only be able to buy one from an existing supplier. One character had invented some specific feature and was trying to get it incorporated in the official standards, so, regardless of any merit, you'd have to buy his design.

That's not to say mistakes of design, or build, or operation were not made, after all five people are dead, but where do you stop ? Should you have to have a skiing licence to go skiing, a climbing licence to go up ben nevis

Some things are inherently risky, and standards likely won't exist for any cutting edge new thing, so you really can't and shouldn't police this sort of thing. Space Shuttle anyone ?

I concede the "paying passengers" aspect does enter into a grey area, but in this instance I'd see it more as sponsoring and participating in a risk expedition rather
than paying for a bungie jump

Would you agree to a scheme that effectively made it that if you didn't have equipment up to a recognised standard, then the rescue will be minimal to nil so that others don't foot the bill for recklessness?

 

[Bonefish Blues]

How, and more importantly who, will "certify" cutting edge experimental ventures? I would hazard a guess there isn't a British Standard for 5 mile deep submarines

I've already recounted people I know making their own scuba diving rebreathers for specific cave diving projects. presumably this too should be banned and they'd only be able to buy one from an existing supplier. One character had invented some specific feature and was trying to get it incorporated in the official standards, so, regardless of any merit, you'd have to buy his design.

That's not to say mistakes of design, or build, or operation were not made, after all five people are dead, but where do you stop ? Should you have to have a skiing licence to go skiing, a climbing licence to go up ben nevis

Some things are inherently risky, and standards likely won't exist for any cutting edge new thing, so you really can't and shouldn't police this sort of thing. Space Shuttle anyone ?

I concede the "paying passengers" aspect does enter into a grey area, but in this instance I'd see it more as sponsoring and participating in a risk expedition rather
than paying for a bungie jump

No, do what you like with your own life, but don't do it with paying punters' lives. Make your own sub, rebreather, or whatever for your own use - that's part of the mad inventor culture that occasionally strikes paydirt (I'm looking at you Trevor Bayliss, as an example)

Now as I said, I think the prospects of anyone setting foot in a submersible without doing extensive due diligence are non-existent after this, but this incredibly dangerous endeavour hadn't produced a single fatality in 60 years until Mr Rush thought he knew better. He didn't.

I think this event will result in a set of checks/certification being mandated, although I don't think it really necessary, but hey-ho. The codification of these will be relatively straightforward though - because they are what the entire community do/did already - apart from Mr Rush.

 

[Dogtrousers]

No, do what you like with your own life, but don't do it with paying punters' lives. Make your own sub, rebreather, or whatever for your own use - that's part of the mad inventor culture that occasionally strikes paydirt (I'm looking at you Trevor Bayliss, as an example

But sometimes it goes horribly wrong. Remember the great wind-up radio tragedy that cost so many lives?

 

[Profpointy]

Would you agree to a scheme that effectively made it that if you didn't have equipment up to a recognised standard, then the rescue will be minimal to nil so that others don't foot the bill for recklessness?

What about hospital bill for someone not wearing a helmet, or participating in a dangerous sport like Rugby. How about someone making a mistake hillwalking in Scotland in the winter, or those Thai lads stuck in a cave

 

[ClichéGuevara]

What about hospital bill for someone not wearing a helmet, or participating in a dangerous sport like Rugby. How about someone making a mistake hillwalking in Scotland in the winter, or those Thai lads stuck in a cave

The helmet one is a big red herring, so I'm not even going there. Rugby players have insurance and are unlikely to need millions of pounds and specialist equipment being transported to remote locations. I reckon it's reasonable for hill walkers and cavers to be charged for their rescue, especially if it can be attributed to their on lack of preparation.

Don't forget, we already pay for ambulances and the NHS as it is, and others have specific insurance for high risk activities, so it's not that much of a jump to expect someone trying to get to the bottom of the ocean in a barrel to have insurance to protect themselves.

 

[Bonefish Blues]

But sometimes it goes horribly wrong. Remember the great wind-up radio tragedy that cost so many lives?

The wrist injuries were pretty extensive I can tell you.

 

[Profpointy]

The wrist injuries were pretty extensive I can tell you.

You sure that was the radio ?

(sorry, but someone had to ...

 

[matticus]

The helmet one is a big red herring, so I'm not even going there. Rugby players have insurance and are unlikely to need millions of pounds and specialist equipment being transported to remote locations. I reckon it's reasonable for hill walkers and cavers to be charged for their rescue, especially if it can be attributed to their on lack of preparation.

Don't forget, we already pay for ambulances and the NHS as it is, and others have specific insurance for high risk activities, so it's not that much of a jump to expect someone trying to get to the bottom of the ocean in a barrel to have insurance to protect themselves.

If you go down this road, the easiest win for NHS is to breathalyse every A&E arrival, no matter what activity they were engaged in. (I can tell from a 2-month in-patient stretch that a LOT of minor injuries involve drug/alcohol use or other deliberate "negligence".)

 

[ClichéGuevara]

If you go down this road, the easiest win for NHS is to breathalyse every A&E arrival, no matter what activity they were engaged in. (I can tell from a 2-month in-patient stretch that a LOT of minor injuries involve drug/alcohol use or other deliberate "negligence".)

That may well not be as cut and dried as it initially sounds. You'd have a job linking the alleged cause and apparent effect in a lot of cases. It's also slightly different to people dropping two miles under the sea in a barrel and needing millions in specialist equipment to try to hep them.