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?

[matticus]

I completely understand the public and press fascination, no argument from me there!

It's just rather bizarre the amount of effort/money/attention given to preventing a repeat of this awful tragedy. Isn't it terrible, 5 deaths already this century in unregulated deap-sea exploration?!?

 

[Mike_P]

Apart from it being pretty obvious in hindsight something was liable to result in what happened, the whole thing has similarities to Comet 1 which was only resolved by constant pressurisation and depressurisation of one plane. In the absence of a twin vessel to test in a controlled situation this investigation may be more awkward and possibly not conclusive as to what failed first.

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

It's just rather bizarre the amount of effort/money/attention given to preventing a repeat of this awful tragedy. Isn't it terrible, 5 deaths already this century in unregulated deap-sea exploration?!?

I think mainly because it should never have happened in the first place?

 

[Dogtrousers]

I fully understand why lots of resources are put into investigating air accidents, as there can be significant learnings from them that affect millions of people travelling by air.

I can't even see why they need to investigate this. There's no suspicion of foul play is there? It was an experimental craft. It failed. Case closed.

Who will benefit from knowing exactly why it failed - was it the glue? was it the window? was it repeated stress on the CF hull? Would improved procedures have made a difference? And so on.

Now the underwater industry boffins, the aquatic versions of @Reynard will be interested. But there's nothing stopping them from doing their own research on materials at their own expense.

 

[icowden]

I completely understand the public and press fascination, no argument from me there!
It's just rather bizarre the amount of effort/money/attention given to preventing a repeat of this awful tragedy. Isn't it terrible, 5 deaths already this century in unregulated deap-sea exploration?!?

Not really. It's a frontier. Huge amounts of effort / money /attention were given to space flight after the Challenger disaster. This is similar scientific discovery but going down instead of up. In this case, tourism happening a bit early and in defiance of some sense by the look of it.

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

Because

https://tenor.com/bkGuI.gif

Also because it'll be boiled over again and again by people until they find out and I can't be doing with endless speculation in documentaries.

It's there, they can fish it out, so... Why not?

If it somehow prevents someone else from making the same mistake, then good.

I also suspect it will be vital evidence for the (probable) trial of a few people.

 

[FishFright]

I fully understand why lots of resources are put into investigating air accidents, as there can be significant learnings from them that affect millions of people travelling by air.

I can't even see why they need to investigate this. There's no suspicion of foul play is there? It was an experimental craft. It failed. Case closed.

Who will benefit from knowing exactly why it failed - was it the glue? was it the window? was it repeated stress on the CF hull? Would improved procedures have made a difference? And so on.

Now the underwater industry boffins, the aquatic versions of @Reynard will be interested. But there's nothing stopping them from doing their own research on materials at their own expense.

It will be investigated because of insurance companies and their wish never to pay out unless absolutely necessary.

 

[Dogtrousers]

It will be investigated because of insurance companies and their wish never to pay out unless absolutely necessary.

Whose insurance? Claiming for what? And why isn't the claimant (whoever they are) paying for the recovery of the wreckage?

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

Not investigating would be negligent towards the victims, their families and anyone else involved, besides, can you really see them not finding out? Really?

 

[Dogtrousers]

Not investigating would be negligent towards the victims, their families and anyone else involved, besides, can you really see them not finding out? Really?

What? That just makes no sense at all to me.

The guy who attached Jatos to his car and launched himself into a cliff wall springs to mind. Unfortunately he was entirely mythical so there was no investigation.

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

What? That just makes no sense at all to me.

The guy who attached Jatos to his car and launched himself into a cliff wall springs to mind. Unfortunately he was entirely mythical so there was no investigation.

Hmmm, being a troll today methinks? 🤔😆

Of course they are bloody well going to find out, there are too many interested parties, you know it, I know it, everyone knows it 😆

To not would be a dereliction of duty by the investigators, etc anyway.

 

[Dadam]

What? That just makes no sense at all to me.

The guy who attached Jatos to his car and launched himself into a cliff wall springs to mind. Unfortunately he was entirely mythical so there was no investigation.

Do you not think that a company that takes money to provide an experience to tourists owes a duty of care to said tourists?

 

[lazybloke]

Preservation of evidence for expected legal processes, presumably.
Understanding failure modes will be important for future regulatory frameworks.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Do you not think that a company that takes money to provide an experience to tourists owes a duty of care to said tourists?

Waivers were signed....

 

[Jameshow]

Whose insurance? Claiming for what? And why isn't the claimant (whoever they are) paying for the recovery of the wreckage?

I'm sure it's covered by Abta?!🤣