rickair7777

Could have been any part of the system, although carbon fiber is especially problematic... failure mode is to shatter with no warning, only regular NDT using imaging tech could have reliably seen the signs coming although this application is so extreme who knows. Metal is more predictable and will tend to show signs in advance which you can inspect for.

Rumor in submarine circles is that the front window was a commercially available submarine window but not rated for anything like the depth in question.

The USN DSV Alvin is a good example of how to do this right, IIRC it's pressure hull is titanium and it's made thousands of deep dives over many decdes. It was used to survey the Titanic initially, although that whole operation was a smokescreen for a classified inspection of both sunken US nuclear attack subs... so vastly different cost constraints with Uncle footing the bill. Similar to Glomar Explorer.

SonicFlyer

Exactly. Government lulls people into a false sense of safety causing complacency on the part of consumers.

LAXtoDEN

The CEO, Stockton Rush, added that “expertise was unnecessary” because “anybody can drive the sub” with a $30 video game controller.

“When I started the business, one of the things you’ll find, there are other sub-operators out there, but they typically have, uh, gentlemen who are ex-military submariners, and they — you’ll see a whole bunch of 50-year-old white guys,” Rush told Teledyne Marine in a resurfaced interview.

“I wanted our team to be younger, to be inspirational and I’m not going to inspire a 16-year-old to go pursue marine technology, but a 25-year-old, uh, you know, who’s a sub pilot or a platform operator or one of our techs can be inspirational,” said Rush.

https://www.outkick.com/trapped-ocea...ry-experience/

A guy’s whose first name is Scott and last name Kirby has a lot in common with Stockton Rush.

https://nypost.com/2023/06/21/why-st...sub-tours/amp/

JohnBurke

A larger problem than the component failure mode, which by nature assumes a failure point, is that whether the materials involved ever get there (structural failure), the interface between the two (metal and carbon fiber is inherently incompatible; metal and carbon fiber under the conditions imposed have vastly different expansion and temperature properties, in a place where fit and seal are critical. Once that fit is compromised, even if the individual components don't fail, the structure may fail, because it relies upon the tight, waterresistant fit.

The components separated, according to reports, along the lines of their base components, as opposed to a simple carbon fiber collapse.

Also notable is that the original design specification was for a hull two inches thicker in carbon fiber, but which was available in a reduced thickness. Due to off the shelf component availability and cost, strength was compromised.

John Carr

But at least their DEI was on point and the people were “inspirational”

rickair7777

Yes likely the failure occurred at an interface, as opposed to the sidewall of a carbon-fiber wrapped metal vessel... the later is pretty well established technology and hard to screw up at this point. Well at least for experienced engineers.

John Carr

I'll wait till Juan does a video before drawing any conclusions.....

rickair7777

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_a7oNnfKXPQ

John Carr

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/b0291ce...5-d769ea021b6f

SonicFlyer

Apparently one of the victims, Hamish Harding, was quite the aviation pioneer:


https://www.facebook.com/jes31324/po...DQUK2da9zohFGl