Here is some footage of how they compress, obviously much smaller diameter, so ratios will be quite different.
2 Likes
Just end to end, which is not really the problem set in question.
1 Like
That’s failing in end bearing. No buckling which is the normal failure mode for a column and quite suprising.
I personally feel that it might crush somewhere along its centre (as if you would stand on the side of a pipe) and then the side blow outward and the whole thing folds up. This could also happen if it sunk to the bottom, hit nose first and introduced bending into the tube. It crushes, burst outward and then folds over.
1 Like
And so the ‘curse’ of the Titanic claims another 5 lives.
The ill fated submersible’s name of Titan turned out to be ominous.
Yes, that is what I was alluding to, almost no buckling except though splitting near the end of the process. Not at all what I expected.
1 Like
Wow! No idea it was that controversial!
1 Like
We have a local couple here who had sued him a while back to get their fee back from an earlier expedition that never happened. What it sounds like is they are desperately late due to technical issues and now facing huge bills and law suits from people who had already paid for their trip he decided to say “now or never”
3 Likes
Now it’s clear the U.S. Coast Guard knew all along that the thing had probably imploded. Sound caught by Navy sensors. Navy notified the Coast Guard commander leading the search almost immediately. I also read such an implosion would register on seismic sensors. Yet they allowed the charade about banging sounds and the race against 96 hours.
4 Likes
Tbf, it’s 100% confirmed only after the debris field was discovered and positively identified.
The Navy’s data was not definative at the time it was analysed and shared with the Coast Guard. It was at that point only considered highly likely.
The latter had to play safe and err on the side of hope. It’s human lives at stake after all.
Are all the “wasted” SAR efforts in time and resources expended worth it? Opinions will obviously be divided on this though I suspect most will in hindsight say no, it’s not.
4 Likes
An interesting read on the related costs of marine SAR ops, especially on private tourist-focused high risk activities.
2 Likes
Pretty expensive way to get a burial
Imagine dying from an implosion while listening to My Heart Will Go On
What a horrible way to go.
Still can’t get my head around the fact this bloke felt the way to get ahead of the game was to actively erode safety margins and processes.
1 Like
And the fact that those billionaires didn’t have the brains to see all those red flags.
2 Likes
He cut corners and took risks. Passengers must have known that. No certification, no guarantee. I would imagine that doing it “properly” certifying / testing / rigorous safety etc would make it unviable financially. Long may it continue that people are allowed to do things like this, just don’t involve hundreds of people and millions of pounds when it goes wrong.
The Right Brother’s flyer didn’t have a manual.
Sorry, no.
It is one thing to take personal risk upon yourself when pushing at frontiers. It’s quite another to put other people at risk when you are offering them a commercial service.
If you can’t guarantee safety to a reasonable standard and remain commercially viable, then you are not commercially viable. You don’t get to make yourself viable by ignoring safety.
5 Likes
I was wondering about that and maybe they did, I honestly couldn’t say.
I was wondering when we’d come to this and I’m sorry but I find your view ignorant. There’s innovation and pushing boundaries and then there’s a flagrant disregard for understanding risk and the design process and how the two are related. Guess which one this is?
Imagine if CERN had his attitude.
4 Likes
The same CERN that have tried to recreate a black hole or was it the big bang ?
Sorry just remember the stories printed a few years back😂
1 Like
No, that was Liz Truss 
4 Likes