the experts want to make bank by testifying for a side!
3 Likes
Yes, it can be lucrative! DH has been working as an expert on a case for over four years now. It’s one of our top-billed projects, ever. He had no idea that would be true when he took the case. And it’s just a disagreement between neighbors. I can’t even imagine what the billing will be like on this one.
You can’t just subpoena random people who have opined on a topic and have no connection to the case. Maybe some of these people are looking to get hired as expert witnesses, but that is not a particularly good way to advertise yourself, lawyers usually prefer someone who has written academic papers about related topics and doesn’t have a record of press or social media comments that they could be asked about (and accused of bias/pre-judging the issue).
I think these commenters are mainly trying to protect their industry (and explain it to the general public): it was remarkable to read that until now there hasn’t been a submersible accident for over 50 years due to the high professional standards that everyone else subscribes to.
When these sorts of things happen the press are very much in search of anyone with expertise who is prepared to help them explain the technical issues to the general public. And of course many people like their 15 minutes of fame. I got involved in explaining a famous aviation incident a few years ago (after making some random blog/Twitter posts) and had non-stop TV/radio/newspaper requests for comment for weeks on end.
3 Likes
Yet another billionaire, James Crown, has died in race car driving at the age of 70. Some people like high risk activity. I won’t help subsidize it.
1 Like
Interesting article on how badly flawed the Titan was:
There’s a longish video embedded. I haven’t watched it, but will do so. It too sounds interesting.
1 Like
Very informative video.
1 Like
The Kursk was lost less than 50 years ago. Or are you excluding Soviet / Russian designed submarines?
The Kursk was a submarine, not a submersible? It was lost 23 years ago (2000).
2 Likes
Sounds like any future regulation is a solution looking for a problem.
Why? Is it ok for any fly-by-night operator to say anything to get a quick buck regardless of the danger posed? By stating NASA, Boeing, and UW were partners? So anything goes?
That is precisely why government intervention is needed. Stockton Rush seems to be precisely the reason why there needs to be regulation.
1 Like
A very good description of the incident (with really down to earth explanation of engineering issues) by an engineer:
It is 21 min long but I really liked the presenter and the way he described things.
4 Likes
As others already said, a submersible is not a submarine. Regarding submarine accidents, this paper has a pretty comprehensive list of such accidents from 2000-2021, including a North Korean one. Many different things went wrong. No implosions though.
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/2130/1/012006
Man… this obscure paper is on fire! Almost 3,000 downloads! 
1 Like
ETA: This article contains a link to the waiver that Titan passengers signed:
2 Likes
According to Christine Dawood, her son wanted to go on the expedition. This is not what his aunt said!
Both can be true. He could have wanted to for a long time and then got cold feet, but didn’t want to back out and confided in his aunt. I’ve wanted to go skydiving forever and sort of planned to do it for my 50th birthday, but as the time drew near, I had second thoughts. It was easy for me to back out since nobody else was crazy about the idea and it was $$$ that I could have better spent elsewhere. But if a family member had been counting on going too, I probably would have done it.
4 Likes
Somewhere else, it said the aunt wasn’t close with her brother, so I don’t see her as a totally reliable source either.
I agree though that he could have thought it sounded scary and wanted to do it. Having his dad there may have tipped the scale toward the latter.
3 Likes
Who really knows but them. My Dad isn’t close to his sister either but I’ve told her things I wouldn’t tell my parents, especially if it would hurt one of their feelings. It’s all just speculation
8 Likes
Of course relatives want answers. (And I woudl too, if my family member was involved, but I would not expect the Canadian Coast Guard and USGS to risk their lives seeking answers for my exploring family members.). But the difference is the the family members have the financial wherewithal to pay for their own investigation. Let them hire some private salvage companies, or offer to reimburse teh USGS for their time.
btw: it’s really rich that family members are now saying they should have more safety checks in place when the passengers knew full well that the OC
did not, and went exploring anyway.
3 Likes
As far as I know, the salvage operation is being performed by two private companies, Pelagic (the owner of the ROV) and another contractor that owns equipment capable of lifting heavy pieces from such depths. USCG leads the investigation. Who gets the bill? I’m sure it is being figured out.
1 Like
One expert who criticized Rush believes the OceanGate CEO was spurred on by criticism and wanted to move fast to prove the critics wrong. There is also a belief that Rush was suicidal (just a pure speculation, of course).