Titanic tourist sub goes missing in Atlantic Ocean, June 2023 #3

[imstilla.grandma]

A debris field from the submersible Titan was found at the bottom of the North Atlantic on Thursday by a robotic diving vehicle deployed from a Canadian search vessel, ending an intense five-day international rescue effort.

Fragments of Titan, which lost contact with its surface support ship about one hour and 45 minutes into a two-hour descent on Sunday, littered the seabed about 1,600 feet (488 meters) from the bow of the Titanic wreck, about 2-1/2 miles (4 km) below the surface, U.S. Coast Guard Rear Admiral John Mauger said.

In a statement on Friday, Canada's Transportation Safety Board (TSB) said it was launching a "safety investigation regarding the circumstances" of Titan's operation because its surface support vessel, the Polar Prince, was a Canadian-flagged ship.

A TSB team was dispatched to St. John's, Newfoundland, about 400 miles north of the accident site, to gather information and conduct interviews, the agency said.

Canadian safety regulators open probe into fatal loss of Titan submersible

Fragments littered the seabed about 1,600 feet from the Titanic's bow.

www.reuters.com

 

[Sundog]

It also seems that it matters where the ship is registered in regards to what laws apply to it. In this case, would something like that apply to the mother ship? From what I understand, even though the company was “based” in the Bahamas, the ship wasn’t.

<snipped for focus>

The mother ship wasn't part of the Ocean Gate enterprise. The mothership, the Polar Prince, was chartered as a support vessel to help with the launch of the Titan submersible. The Polar Prince is owned by Miawpukek Horizon Maritime Service Ltd. and is likely registered in Canada, probably Newfoundland, or at least one of the Maritime provinces. The owner is a member of the First Nations, the Miawpukek (or in Nova Scotia known as M'iq Maq and pronounced like "Micmac").

So I doubt the mothership could be sued, unless it could be shown that some members of the chartered crew performed their duties in a negligent manner? I wonder how many of the crew members aboard the Polar Prince were employees of Polar Prince and how many crew members were employees of OceanGate.

It's a fairly large ship, it used to be a Coast Guard ship, so I assume the charter came with many of the ship's crew, so I would imagine that most of the crew are employees of Polar Prince. OceanGate would likely have it's own launch team and specialists, of course, but not sure how many employees that would be.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

One of the "innovations" of Titan was that it didn't need a specialist mothership. Any ship capable of towing Titan's launch platform could be quickly configured for the role.

Polar Prince and its owners and crew likely had little do with it, other than being chartered for the job. I feel incredibly sorry for them.

 

[Sundog]

One of the "innovations" of Titan was that it didn't need a specialist mothership. Any ship capable of towing Titan's launch platform could be quickly configured for the role.

Polar Prince and its owners and crew likely had little do with it, other than being chartered for the job. I feel incredibly sorry for them.

I feel incredibly sorry for them, too.

 

[ch_13]

So basically, it seems that because the CEO is also dead, there may really be no one to hold legally liable? That’s honestly really a shame, because Rush was only one player in this. He definitely didn’t pull this off on his own.

Is it possible that other individuals could still be sued? It seems to me like the dissolution of OceanGate wouldn’t protect former employees from being held responsible. But I realize that’s more tricky than it sounds.

From what I can skim, certain crimes (e.g. murder, human trafficking) are still prosecutable by any authority, even when committed in international waters. But this does seem like a grey area that may not qualify for criminal charges. It’s horrific what happened, but unfortunately not clear what laws were broken, if any.

It also seems that it matters where the ship is registered in regards to what laws apply to it. In this case, would something like that apply to the mother ship? From what I understand, even though the company was “based” in the Bahamas, the ship wasn’t.

I would honestly hope that someone can be sued. Even settling out of court, IMO is better than nothing at all for the families of the deceased.

I would hope that at least one outcome of this is that the law is changed to make it harder for unregulated submarines to just do whatever they want when deployed in high seas. Something like this just shouldn’t be able happen.

MOO

The lawsuit that OceanGate filed against their ex-employee, David Lochridge, referenced the company's 'engineering director'. I wonder who this person was and if they were actually a licensed engineer. If so, I could see some kind of action--whether civil or criminal--against them.

As for the rest of the employees, I doubt very many had the knowledge or experience to judge if the craft was dive-worthy.

 

[10ofRods]

Don’t know if this has been mentioned, but some of the talking heads were saying that the change to using the Polar Prince meant that the Titan was towed, rather than carried, to its dive destination. Other submersible users questioned whether this was safe, as it meant the Titan was subject to more wear and tear on the oceans. Instead of treating it delicately (as they did with the Horizon ship), the Titan stayed in rough seas for days and even weeks at a time. Experts (I can’t find the link) mentioned that this should have triggered more NDT/scanning of the craft for damage.

There was an incident where the raft that the Titan uses as its “trailer” became tilted and both the Titan and the raft were partially underwater and there was nearly a day-long drama of trying to figure out how to get it back up. IOW, they had changed some procedures recently, was my point.

SPECULATION. Seems like there are a lot of cascading, small events that will have to be investigated, as far as they can be, at this point.

 

[Sundog]

The lawsuit that OceanGate filed against their ex-employee, David Lochridge, referenced the company's 'engineering director'. I wonder who this person was and if they were actually a licensed engineer. If so, I could see some kind of action--whether civil or criminal--against them.

As for the rest of the employees, I doubt very many had the knowledge or experience to judge if the craft was dive-worthy.

Many states don't require that engineers become PE's (Professional Engineers) which is the term used if they are licensed. In many states engineering firms need to be licensed and are required to have certain employees in their firms be licensed, but licensing boards of many states do not require that an individual be licensed to call him or herself an engineer, or engineering director, engineering manager, etc. (Unless required for work they do on some government and private contracts.)

So that alone, I don't think, would be necessarily meaningful in any way in a civil or criminal lawsuit.

JMO.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

https://www.detroitnews.com/in-depth/news/michigan/2023/06/23/oceangate-titan-submersible-titanic-wreck-deep-sea-exploration-michigan-man/70347602007/

Joseph Wortman traveled into the deep in the Titan submersible two years before the catastrophic implosion on its last dive.​

Warren — When one of the weights on OceanGate Inc.'s Titan submersible failed to drop from the craft so it could ascend, Joseph Wortman feared he'd be spending a night with the lost at the bottom of the North Atlantic.

"I started getting scared that if I have to wait here for 24 hours ... it's uncomfortable," the CEO of a Metro Detroit heating components company told The Detroit News on Friday. "I did not want to spend the night at the bottom with the Titanic."

In July 2021, Wortman helped crew the first OceanGate dive that found the shipwrecked Titanic. It was the same journey that this week ended in the deaths of five passengers, including OceanGate's CEO Stockton Rush, after the Titan submersible imploded for still unclear reasons, its debris found not far from the Titanic's bow.

In an interview on Friday, Wortman described the harrowing dive down 12,700 feet to see the famed 111-year-old shipwreck, one of nine days on the mission aboard the Horizon Arctic ship seeking to improve deep-sea navigation and exploration. More than 80% of the ocean remains unmapped, unobserved and unexplored, according to the National Ocean Service...

 

[crhedBngr]

Alas, WFLA, Channel 8's posted article, linked below, includes the second half of Mr. Martin's remarks. I watched the livestream and he is responding to his own claim that Titan was trying to jettison ballast when communications were interrupted.

5 aboard Titan sub presumed dead after ‘catastrophic implosion’

The pilot and four passengers aboard OceanGate’s Titan submersible were presumed dead Thursday after a remote operated vehicle discovered pieces of the vessel over two miles deep on the sea f…

www.wfla.com

“If you’re descending too fast, that can cause excess stress on certain parts of the vehicle,” Retired U.S. Navy Submariner Mark Martin told WFLA’s J.B. Biunno. “The reason you descend in a controlled manner is so that everything in the vehicle has the ability to acclimate to the increased pressure.”

Martin said it had been shared around the small, deep sea community that the Titan was trying to drop ballast at the time communications were lost. I wasn't the one who brought it up here, but I know I wouldn't be offended if you choose not to believe the report until it is more widely confirmed. But, to me, Martin seemed to know what he was talking about.

I definitely choose to wait until more information on this incident is confirmed.

JMVHO.

 

[musicaljoke]

Many states don't require that engineers become PE's (Professional Engineers) which is the term used if they are licensed. In many states engineering firms need to be licensed and are required to have certain employees in their firms be licensed, but licensing boards of many states do not require that an individual be licensed to call him or herself an engineer, or engineering director, engineering manager, etc. (Unless required for work they do on some government and private contracts.)

So that alone, I don't think, would be necessarily meaningful in any way in a civil or criminal lawsuit.

JMO.

If it makes any difference, in Canada, one cannot call themself an engineer unless they are licensed by the college of engineers.

"In Canada, only those licensed by a provincial or territorial engineering regulator may practise engineering and refer to themselves as an “engineer”. The exclusive use of this title by licensed engineers helps assure the public that only qualified individuals are practicing in the profession."

Who can use the title “engineer”? | Engineers Canada

Within the engineering community there are a number of titles, roles, and responsibilities – some of which are restricted.

engineerscanada.ca

 

[imstilla.grandma]

Key Employees and Officers	Compensation
DAVID WILLIAMSON (PRESIDENT)	$0
STOCKTON RUSH (TREASURER)	$0
STEVE PHELPS (SECRETARY)	$0
WENDY RUSH (DIRECTOR)	$0
CHRIS BECHHOLD (DIRECTOR)	$0

TYM CATTERSON (PRESIDENT)$0

Oceangate Foundation - Nonprofit Explorer - ProPublica

Since 2013, the IRS has released data culled from millions of nonprofit tax filings. Use this database to find organizations and see details like their executive compensation, revenue and expenses, as well as download tax filings going back as far as 2001.

projects.propublica.org

*eta: Oceangate Foundation - Nonprofit Explorer - ProPublica

Oceangate Foundation - GuideStar Profile

To support research into ocean exploration, marine science, and underwater archaeology.

www.guidestar.org

 

[gitana1]

The truth is that very few manned submersibles go down to the Titanic anymore. It was common from the 80s through to the early 2000s, but from about 2005 until about 2019 (my dates might be slightly off) there wasn't a single known manned visit to the wreck. Everything was done with Remotely Operated Vehicles aka ROVs.

For people who desperately want to visit the wreck, options are limited--the Titan was pretty much the only sub that still went down there. That means no matter how high the risk, there are some who would have chosen to take it.

Oh! Thanks for that info. That surely explains a lot.

 

[Lauri_]

I've been reading all of this and my heart breaks! The families of these people suffering everyday and knowing that their loved ones were probably dead or dying. smh This is a tragedy to happen to anyone and for their loved ones.

 

[JDG]

<snipped for focus>

The mother ship wasn't part of the Ocean Gate enterprise. The mothership, the Polar Prince, was chartered as a support vessel to help with the launch of the Titan submersible. The Polar Prince is owned by Miawpukek Horizon Maritime Service Ltd. and is likely registered in Canada, probably Newfoundland, or at least one of the Maritime provinces. The owner is a member of the First Nations, the Miawpukek (or in Nova Scotia known as M'iq Maq and pronounced like "Micmac").

So I doubt the mothership could be sued, unless it could be shown that some members of the chartered crew performed their duties in a negligent manner? I wonder how many of the crew members aboard the Polar Prince were employees of Polar Prince and how many crew members were employees of OceanGate.

It's a fairly large ship, it used to be a Coast Guard ship, so I assume the charter came with many of the ship's crew, so I would imagine that most of the crew are employees of Polar Prince. OceanGate would likely have its IRC, there were 24 own launch team and specialists, of course, but not sure how many employees that would be.

IIRC, there were 24 people onboard, 17 crew.

With 5 going on the sub, 2 non crew onboard.

I would not be surprised to hear that they were the wife and daughter of Mr. Dawood.

The family had been travelling in Canada for a month before the expedition.

Bet they were together on the Polar Prince.

 

[JDG]

Don’t know if this has been mentioned, but some of the talking heads were saying that the change to using the Polar Prince meant that the Titan was towed, rather than carried, to its dive destination. Other submersible users questioned whether this was safe, as it meant the Titan was subject to more wear and tear on the oceans. Instead of treating it delicately (as they did with the Horizon ship), the Titan stayed in rough seas for days and even weeks at a time. Experts (I can’t find the link) mentioned that this should have triggered more NDT/scanning of the craft for damage.

There was an incident where the raft that the Titan uses as its “trailer” became tilted and both the Titan and the raft were partially underwater and there was nearly a day-long drama of trying to figure out how to get it back up. IOW, they had changed some procedures recently, was my point.

SPECULATION. Seems like there are a lot of cascading, small events that will have to be investigated, as far as they can be, at this point.

Well, if it was *soaking* in sea water that would certainly weaken the lamination of the hull.

Not sure why this dude (Rush) ignored the fact that multiple dives would wear out the hull structure.

Its very well known that planes eventually get metal fatigue and need ongoing maintenance.

Hubris must be his middle name! IMO, MOO, JMO

 

[mickey2942]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/24/world/ocean-exploration-science-newsletter-wt-scn/index.html

Isn't it interesting that "we" have spent more time and money exploring space, and the moon, rather than the ocean, right here, in front of us?

 

[wary]

Great post. And..it’s that 250 that dropped to 150 for this last trip. I do wonder if all will be revealed.

Maker of the lost Titanic sub once told a reporter that 'at some point, safety is just pure waste'

OceanGate CEO Stockton Rush told CBS journalist David Pogue that his Titanic tourist trips could operate "just as safely while breaking the rules."

www.insider.com

He said there was a "limit" to safety, telling Pogue: "You know, at some point, safety is just pure waste. I mean, if you just want to be safe, don't get out of bed, don't get in your car, don't do anything. At some point, you're going to take some risk, and it really is a risk-reward question."
View attachment 430892


JMO but hard sell is a major red flag. As others have compared it to E. Holmes.

I’ll admit that I think the fear of a giant squid or sperm whale is silly—so low on the list of possible issues—but it’s ironic that the CEO counters with the idea that the pressure is far too great for a whale to survive, down where they’re going.

 

[MsMarple]

So basically, it seems that because the CEO is also dead, there may really be no one to hold legally liable? That’s honestly really a shame, because Rush was only one player in this. He definitely didn’t pull this off on his own.

Is it possible that other individuals could still be sued? It seems to me like the dissolution of OceanGate wouldn’t protect former employees from being held responsible. But I realize that’s more tricky than it sounds.

From what I can skim, certain crimes (e.g. murder, human trafficking) are still prosecutable by any authority, even when committed in international waters. But this does seem like a grey area that may not qualify for criminal charges. It’s horrific what happened, but unfortunately not clear what laws were broken, if any.

It also seems that it matters where the ship is registered in regards to what laws apply to it. In this case, would something like that apply to the mother ship? From what I understand, even though the company was “based” in the Bahamas, the ship wasn’t.

I would honestly hope that someone can be sued. Even settling out of court, IMO is better than nothing at all for the families of the deceased.

I would hope that at least one outcome of this is that the law is changed to make it harder for unregulated submarines to just do whatever they want when deployed in high seas. Something like this just shouldn’t be able happen.

MOO

I agree with you and I do believe lawsuits will be filed. IMO the outcome will have more relevance to what you said at the end - changing laws regarding the regulation of deep sea submersibles - than any monetary award.

Uprhread it was noted that OceanGate was recently valued at 60 million. That doesn’t begin to compensate the families of the four men lost. For example, how would a court even begin to calculate lifetime lost income of a billionaire?

Many lawsuits are brought mainly to make changes that will prevent others from suffering the same fate; I hope the families of the dead will fight for changes too. JMO

 

[somequestions]

The part that makes me wonder about the submersible Titan is the acrylic viewing port. I found an interview with CEO Stockton Rush where he describes the acrylic viewing port. He said that it was 7 inches thick and that if something did go wrong with it and it started to fail, you would definitely know because many spider cracks would start to form in it letting you know that something was definitely wrong.

This acrylic viewing port was not certified as being safe for the depth he planned on taking the sub.

But the carbon fiber hull is another potential point of failure as well. It will interesting to find out what structurally led to this accident.

 

[Cool Cats]

Don’t know if this has been mentioned, but some of the talking heads were saying that the change to using the Polar Prince meant that the Titan was towed, rather than carried, to its dive destination. Other submersible users questioned whether this was safe, as it meant the Titan was subject to more wear and tear on the oceans. Instead of treating it delicately (as they did with the Horizon ship), the Titan stayed in rough seas for days and even weeks at a time. Experts (I can’t find the link) mentioned that this should have triggered more NDT/scanning of the craft for damage.

There was an incident where the raft that the Titan uses as its “trailer” became tilted and both the Titan and the raft were partially underwater and there was nearly a day-long drama of trying to figure out how to get it back up. IOW, they had changed some procedures recently, was my point.

SPECULATION. Seems like there are a lot of cascading, small events that will have to be investigated, as far as they can be, at this point.

Your Quote:

"There was an incident where the raft that the Titan uses as its “trailer” became tilted and both the Titan and the raft were partially underwater and there was nearly a day-long drama of trying to figure out how to get it back up."

Yesterday I posted a photo of this exact thing. Here:

Crew on a dinghy reach for equipment that might help raise the nose of the platform. OceanGate CEO Stockton Rush, in a black scuba suit, sits at the rear.

Just found this also:

The front of the platform holding the submersible Titan went underwater for unknown reasons during an OceanGate Expedition mission last month. A crew, including OceanGate's CEO, Stockton Rush, prepared to dive under it to raise it.

Mission Titanic, Part 1: Preparing to dive

Editor in chief Arnie Weissmann was on an OceanGate Expeditions mission to the Titanic in May. Things didn't go as planned. The first installment of his experiences.

www.travelweekly.com

Mission Titanic, Part 2: Delays and an unsettling statement from the OceanGate CEO

Editor in chief Arnie Weissmann this past week has thought a great deal about a conversation in May with OceanGate CEO Stockton Rush, one of five people missing on the submersible in the North Atlantic.

www.travelweekly.com

Mission Titanic, part 3: Trouble ahead, trouble behind

A week at sea with OceanGate Expeditions in an attempt to take the Titan submersible to see the Titanic.

www.travelweekly.com

The front of the platform was so far under water that the buoy could not be forced under it and only the edges of the flotation bags could provide minimal lift.
The divers went under the platform and got the water out and the air back in, and it was once again level. The entire process took more than half the day.