Originally Posted by cockerpunk (Post 12041437)

in one of he marketing videos for ocean gate they talked about how exciting and innovative and involved the "mission specialists" are with an example of how when they got to wreck, the controls for forward would spin the sub.

and they established, oh yeah, we put on of the thrusters in backwards, so instead of both thrusters firing, and moving the sub forward, they would fire in opposite directions and spin the sub.

after looking into how to re-map the controller, and all sorts of things they figured out that actually with such a configuration of thrusters, you can just turn the controller 90 degrees, so that left is now forward, and old forward is now right, and it works.

seems clever and exciting right? involved! exploration! edge of technically possible right?

wrong.

whats the first you do you when you hook up a motor to a controller ... make sure it spins the right direction.



this example is telling on themselves, its incompetence masquerading as a technical challenge.

there was a suggestion of a rocket example ... its closer to this than challenger:

https://static.timesofisrael.com/www...66-640x400.jpg

Originally Posted by Zeke (Post 12042206)

Only 400 to go....

Originally Posted by fisher22 (Post 12041873)

An OceanGate sub is for sale — and the yacht broker who has spent 5 years trying to sell the vessel now wants nothing to do with it

https://www.insider.com/oceangate-submersible-for-sale-broker-wants-get-rid-of-it-2023-7

Originally Posted by fanaudical (Post 12042587)

Something I realized this morning (very late and maybe discussed already): I don't remember seeing anything about non-destructive examination of the mini sub during construction. Did I miss that? Or did they just not do it?

Originally Posted by fanaudical (Post 12042587)

Something I realized this morning (very late and maybe discussed already): I don't remember seeing anything about non-destructive examination of the mini sub during construction. Did I miss that? Or did they just not do it?

Originally Posted by David (Post 12042641)

It sounds like they had some sort of acoustic emission monitoring system on the carbon fiber hull but with everything else on the sub being substandard, I expect their system wasn't calibrated properly and/or wasn't tracking history.

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey (Post 12043225)

I got the impression that it was done mostly "by feel"

With every dive cycle it made less noise and they convinced themselves once it was not making any more noise it was "broken in" and since it didn't implode it was safe.

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey (Post 12043225)

I got the impression that it was done mostly "by feel"

With every dive cycle it made less noise and they convinced themselves once it was not making any more noise it was "broken in" and since it didn't implode it was safe.