Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 16 submissions in the queue.
posted by hubie on Monday October 07, @01:18AM   Printer-friendly
from the move-fast-and-implode-things dept.

Eyebrow-raising revelations come to light as hearings into Titan sub's loss wrap up

The tragic tale of OceanGate's Titan submersible took on a few added twists today as the U.S. Coast Guard concluded two weeks of public hearings into last year's catastrophic loss of the sub and its crew.

[...] OceanGate CEO Stockton Rush, the sub's pilot, was among the five who died as Titan made its last descent to the wreck of the Titanic in the North Atlantic. The others were veteran Titanic explorer P.H. Nargeolet; British aviation executive and citizen explorer Hamish Harding; and Pakistani-born business magnate Shahzada Dawood and his son, Suleman.

Rush's determination to dive to the Titanic, despite the warnings he received from OceanGate employees and outside engineers, emerged as a major theme during this month's hearings in South Carolina. Matthew McCoy, a Coast Guard veteran who worked as an operations technician at OceanGate for five months in 2017, reinforced that theme today.

McCoy said that when he started the job, OceanGate "seemed to be pretty well-run," but then he learned that the company was breaking off its ties with Boeing and the University of Washington's Applied Physics Laboratory.

He was even more distressed when he found out that OceanGate's business model depended on taking paying clients on deep-ocean dives as "mission specialists." That didn't square with what he knew about Coast Guard regulations relating to passengers for hire. He discussed his qualms during a lunch with Rush and Scott Griffith, who was then OceanGate's director of quality assurance.

When McCoy brought up OceanGate's lack of Coast Guard clearances for its subs, he said Rush replied that regulations were "stifling the ingenuity" in the submersible industry. "He tried to explain the 'mission specialist' aspect to it. I talked about the 'receiving any sort of compensation' aspect," McCoy said. "He said that they were going to flag the Titan in the Bahamas and launch out of Canada, so that they wouldn't fall under U.S. jurisdiction."

McCoy said he continued to talk about how U.S. regulations could spoil Rush's plans. But he said Rush told him "if the Coast Guard became a problem, that he would buy himself a congressman and make it go away."

"I was aghast," McCoy said. "Basically after that, I resigned from the company. I couldn't work there anymore."

Earlier sessions have traced how OceanGate first developed a carbon-fiber hull for Titan that cracked during deep-sea testing in the Bahamas in 2019, and then commissioned a second hull that was used for dives to the Titanic starting in 2021.

The rest of today's hearing focused on the Coast Guard's response after authorities learned that the sub had gone missing a year ago. Capt. Jamie Frederick, who was one of the leaders of the search effort and is now the commander of Coast Guard Sector Boston, recapped the effort to find Titan.

[...] Other highlights from the hearing:
OceanGate has permanently wound down its operations, an attorney for the company told the investigative board. "The company's primary task has been to cooperate fully with the investigations conducted by the Coast Guard and the NTSB, including in connection with this public hearing," said the attorney, Jane Shvets. "Our law firm, Debevoise & Plimpton, was engaged by OceanGate shortly after the tragedy to assist with that process."

Just after the Titan sub implosion, OceanGate said it was suspending all exploration and commercial operations, but Shvets' comments made clear that the Everett-based company's shutdown is permanent.

The Coast Guard doesn't have the resources needed for conducting a subsurface search-and-rescue operation on its own, said Scott Talbot, a search-and-rescue specialist at the Coast Guard.."We only have the capability to do surface search and rescue," Talbot told the board. He is part of a team that reviewed the Titan case to determine how the Coast Guard's capabilities could be improved.

"This is a field that, obviously, the DOD [Department of Defense] is an expert in, but even they don't operate at some of these depths that these commercial companies are doing exploration at," Talbot said. "So to say the Coast Guard is going to effect subsurface search and rescue at these depths ... I don't see it happening."


Original Submission

 
This discussion was created by hubie (1068) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Monday October 07, @05:56PM (2 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 07, @05:56PM (#1376125) Journal
    Musk happens to be right though. For a glaring example, there's been a lot of talk over the years about man-rating launch vehicles over the years. It finally happened for the first time [nasa.gov] in 2020 with the Falcon 9. Before that, it was just an ambiguous rhetorical obstacle [transterrestrial.com] to selectively apply to disfavored launch platforms. For example:

    Rand, Jon, unless one is contemplating a different type of launch vehicle for each of the pieces of the CEV vehicle, then your scenario leaves out one fact. A launch failure of--say--a Delta IV is going to ground the fleet for a period of time while the cause is assertained. So it seems to me that the mission is still blown, unless you've designed the various pieces to survive and function in LEO for however time it'll take to fix the problem. Maybe that would be the way to make EOR work. I'm not sure.

    You've also haven't addressed the Griffin objection that it would actually cost more to "man rate" an EELV than it would to buid an SDV. I'm rather anxious to find out why you think he's all wrong.

    Short glossary: CEV (Crew Exploration Vehicle), Delta IV [wikipedia.org] (Falcon 9-scale rocket that used to be operated by Boeing and then by United Launch Alliance), LEO (Low Earth Orbit), Griffin (then NASA Director Michael Griffin) EELV (a member of the Evolutionary Expendable Launch Vehicle program run by the US Department of Defense in the late 1990s and early 2000s), and SDV (Shuttle-derived vehicle like the Ares rockets or the current Space Launch System that depend on components that used to fly on the Space Shuttle - common components are the solid rocket motors, the hydrogen/LOX fueled rocket motors, and sometimes the big orange tank as a central core of the rocket).

    The background to this is that four years later, it was found that NASA had deliberately ignored several big flaws of the Shuttle Derived Vehicle while deliberately exaggerating the problems with alternate launch systems (particularly the Atlas 5 which was a competitor). Bottom line is that defenders of the Shuttle-derived approach exaggerated the problems of man-rating working systems while simultaneously pushing a system that couldn't be man-rated at all due to the various dangers of the system (harder to escape failure modes due to the solid propellant, high vibration in use, and higher max Q, for example). Man-rating was just a sham to back the favored rocket not actually make anything safer. That's the sensibility that NASA has brought to manned space flight in the not so distant past.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 09, @01:35AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 09, @01:35AM (#1376297)
    The shuttle was good for stuff like stealing/bringing satellites down. Other stuff couldn't do that (still can't practically?).

    The US military wanted that.
    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday October 09, @03:21AM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday October 09, @03:21AM (#1376306) Journal

      The shuttle was good for stuff like stealing/bringing satellites down.

      Only if you didn't mind spending a few billion just to get one of your own satellites down. An enemy satellite that's still under their maneuvering control would be too dangerous to steal.

      The US military wanted that.

      And they finally got it with the X-37. Space Shuttle couldn't deliver for a variety of reasons.