Missing Titanic Submersible

New conspiracy is the wreath he threw in the ocean got sucked into the submersible engine and that’s what sunk them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muted reborn

New conspiracy is the wreath he threw in the ocean got sucked into the submersible engine and that’s what sunk them.

---

Definitely was the wreath’s fault it was built from substandard material

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supermoon

Definitely was the wreath’s fault it was built from substandard material

---

Perfect!

Attachment 463126

Not to speak too harshly of the dead, but the guy did pretend to be a pilot.

DH Comet 1

Aloha 243 B-737/2

Pressure vessel cycle fatigue is no mystery. Nor is Materials Science Engineering. Hell, even geometry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KQ

The guy was a billionaire. Couldn't he have built something more civilized? Are all deep submersibles like this?

---

They are likely all like that. Imagine a tube cut in half lengthwise - pressing the two halves together, the tube wall at the two cuts is what resists the pressure. Doubling the diameter doubles the surface area acted on by the pressure, so the wall needs to be twice as strong/thick. Doubling the diameter quadruples the area of the endcaps, so now there's 4 times the force acting axially on the tube, but the wall "ring" area also doubled, so the wall still needs to be twice as thick. The end caps work similarly. If you track all the doublings, the volume of material is 8x. So there's a cost tradeoff*. And the 8x weight increase makes handling more difficult. There might be a question of how large can you get a chunk of titanium. Given that titanium's primary use is for light, strong things, it may be difficult to get a large thick (heavy) piece as no one's set up to make it. idk.

Maybe OceanGate's investor materials say something about their plans to build a larger 20 seat tourist ship after proving the concept with their prototype.

After skimming this titanium manufacturer website https://www.toho-titanium.co.jp/en/products/ingot/, and this book chapter, Imma guess getting a bigger, say 2m diameter, thick piece of titanium is difficult, but what do I know? And maybe the end caps can be milled from multiple ingots.

*Looks like titanium goes for $6000/ton ($9000 in 2018), compare $1000 for steel (poorly sourced prices). My WAG says they used 10-20 tons. So maybe material cost isn't that important. One article said they burned a million dollars in fuel per trip. I can't see the one time titanium cost being a huge design factor.

So maybe it's difficult to get large pieces of titanium? Maybe it's tough to lay up that much carbon fiber? Maybe it's hard to find more than 4 passengers? After this goose chase, I'm going to guess it comes down to the size and weight that's easy to move via standard shipping practices. A 20 ton sub can go on a regular truck, probably fits in a regular cargo plane, can be handled by port equipment, etc. Twice the diameter - 8x the weight, and now you need specialized equipment to ship your ship. Might be the max size or weight that fits in a shipping container.

That's a lot of words for idk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KQ

It wasn't even a vessel. It was a tube with electronics attached to it. I mean WTF? Five people crammed into something the size of a bathtub. You sit on a metal floor. You can't stand up. You can't crawl. You can't even stretch your legs and the "bathroom" is a hole.

The guy was a billionaire. Couldn't he have built something more civilized? Are all deep submersibles like this?

Looks like Buck Rogers' space ship.

---

Stockton wasn’t a billionaire, two of his passengers were.

Attachment 463151

The bud light of submarines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LongShortLong

They are likely all like that. Imagine a tube cut in half lengthwise - pressing the two halves together, the tube wall at the two cuts is what resists the pressure. Doubling the diameter doubles the surface area acted on by the pressure, so the wall needs to be twice as strong/thick. Doubling the diameter quadruples the area of the endcaps, so now there's 4 times the force acting axially on the tube, but the wall "ring" area also doubled, so the wall still needs to be twice as thick. The end caps work similarly. If you track all the doublings, the volume of material is 8x. So there's a cost tradeoff*. And the 8x weight increase makes handling more difficult. There might be a question of how large can you get a chunk of titanium. Given that titanium's primary use is for light, strong things, it may be difficult to get a large thick (heavy) piece as no one's set up to make it. idk.

Maybe OceanGate's investor materials say something about their plans to build a larger 20 seat tourist ship after proving the concept with their prototype.

After skimming this titanium manufacturer website https://www.toho-titanium.co.jp/en/products/ingot/, and this book chapter, Imma guess getting a bigger, say 2m diameter, thick piece of titanium is difficult, but what do I know? And maybe the end caps can be milled from multiple ingots.

*Looks like titanium goes for $6000/ton ($9000 in 2018), compare $1000 for steel (poorly sourced prices). My WAG says they used 10-20 tons. So maybe material cost isn't that important. One article said they burned a million dollars in fuel per trip. I can't see the one time titanium cost being a huge design factor.

So maybe it's difficult to get large pieces of titanium? Maybe it's tough to lay up that much carbon fiber? Maybe it's hard to find more than 4 passengers? After this goose chase, I'm going to guess it comes down to the size and weight that's easy to move via standard shipping practices. A 20 ton sub can go on a regular truck, probably fits in a regular cargo plane, can be handled by port equipment, etc. Twice the diameter - 8x the weight, and now you need specialized equipment to ship your ship. Might be the max size or weight that fits in a shipping container.

That's a lot of words for idk.

---

puregravity would approve of this post… where is the dude when we need him most?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LongShortLong

They are likely all like that. Imagine a tube cut in half lengthwise - pressing the two halves together, the tube wall at the two cuts is what resists the pressure. Doubling the diameter doubles the surface area acted on by the pressure, so the wall needs to be twice as strong/thick. Doubling the diameter quadruples the area of the endcaps, so now there's 4 times the force acting axially on the tube, but the wall "ring" area also doubled, so the wall still needs to be twice as thick. The end caps work similarly. If you track all the doublings, the volume of material is 8x. So there's a cost tradeoff*. And the 8x weight increase makes handling more difficult. There might be a question of how large can you get a chunk of titanium. Given that titanium's primary use is for light, strong things, it may be difficult to get a large thick (heavy) piece as no one's set up to make it. idk.

Maybe OceanGate's investor materials say something about their plans to build a larger 20 seat tourist ship after proving the concept with their prototype.

After skimming this titanium manufacturer website https://www.toho-titanium.co.jp/en/products/ingot/, and this book chapter, Imma guess getting a bigger, say 2m diameter, thick piece of titanium is difficult, but what do I know? And maybe the end caps can be milled from multiple ingots.

*Looks like titanium goes for $6000/ton ($9000 in 2018), compare $1000 for steel (poorly sourced prices). My WAG says they used 10-20 tons. So maybe material cost isn't that important. One article said they burned a million dollars in fuel per trip. I can't see the one time titanium cost being a huge design factor.

So maybe it's difficult to get large pieces of titanium? Maybe it's tough to lay up that much carbon fiber? Maybe it's hard to find more than 4 passengers? After this goose chase, I'm going to guess it comes down to the size and weight that's easy to move via standard shipping practices. A 20 ton sub can go on a regular truck, probably fits in a regular cargo plane, can be handled by port equipment, etc. Twice the diameter - 8x the weight, and now you need specialized equipment to ship your ship. Might be the max size or weight that fits in a shipping container.

That's a lot of words for idk.

---

If the choices had been made based on engineering concerns these would be very pertinent questions to ask. But they weren't. They picked titanium and carbon fiber because that's what the boss wanted in his marketing materials. I wonder if he had to be talked out of nanotubes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ted Striker

Not to speak too harshly of the dead, but the guy did pretend to be a pilot.

DH Comet 1

Aloha 243 B-737/2

Pressure vessel cycle fatigue is no mystery. Nor is Materials Science Engineering. Hell, even geometry.

---

https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...Cg&oe=649D974E

Attachment 463181

Luv it^^^^^^

Watched Titanic last night for perspective. They got invited to the party.

Yeah that's good

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SumJongGuy

https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...Cg&oe=649D974E

---

yes exactly

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Nuytten

this guy ^^ was the real thing pretty much in on the ground floor of diving, self taught as I understand it with no engineering degree

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ted Striker

Not to speak too harshly of the dead, but the guy did pretend to be a pilot.

DH Comet 1

Aloha 243 B-737/2

Pressure vessel cycle fatigue is no mystery. Nor is Materials Science Engineering. Hell, even geometry.

---

Does anyone really know how geometry works?

Magnets?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rideit

Magnets?

---

Magnets, bitches

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supermoon

Definitely was the wreath’s fault it was built from substandard material

---

I think he said the florist used "organic" materials. So this checks out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ticketchecker

Magnets, bitches

---

https://youtu.be/HQj5fW-Xlkk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MontuckyFried

Full disclosure: Haven't watched the video, BUT seems a few here who had some secondhand knowledge of sub stuff along with James Cameron (who absolutely DOES know his shit when it comes to this stuff), knew damn well by Monday what the heck was up. Surely the experts on the scene knew as well, BUT at least had to display they were making a diligent effort and not give up until all was visually confirmed. KINDA seems like the Feds were lying, but maybe it's more of a white lie. I can't blame them in this case. Don't think it was anything nefarious or anything.

---

A friend works in the ocean engineering field. The Navy is notorious for not sharing important info until it fully gets through their bureaucracy. In a lot of places we recreate the wheel on things like ocean mapping because the Navy does not share that intel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rideit

Magnets?

---

Seems more likely than all the other fancy assplainations of those liberals.

Problem was, one of the magnets was backwards

The market for submarine rides is sinking. Deals are popping up!

https://www.groupon.com/deals/catali...iMPu0r9jJlvct0