Court documents reveal a former OceanGate employee had several safety complaints over the tourist submersible—and then he was fired.

    • Kerb@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Huh, thats new to me.

      And i couldn’t find it in the linked article,
      am i blind or are you referencing a different article?

        • Kerb@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Thanks, Oh wow.

          After reading all the articles,
          about how it was clear to the company that the sub was an obvious deathtrap,
          im genuinely supprised the ceo was dumb / bold enough to actually board it himself.

          Thats an almost biblical level of
          “fuck around and find out”

          • aegisgfx877@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            one thing we’ve learned about most billionaires is they arent very smart and surround themselves completely with ‘yes people’. And they also seem to have almost no ability to assess risk, like buying business that they personally know almost nothing about, like twitter and submarines.

          • floofloof
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            One thing I’ve noticed from working at several tech companies is that people who present themselves as “entrepreneurs” are often just deficient in their appreciation of risk, but lucky so far. Risk is a kind of blind spot for some people, but if it comes with luck others will perceive them as bold rather than a bit deficient. To those who work with them, however, the truth is often obvious.

    • floofloof
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      If they ever find his body they can put “safety just is pure waste” on his headstone.

    • darcy@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well oceangate is now toast.

      Regardless of whether the people on board are found, they’re going to be facing expensive lawsuits from both the billionaires’ estates.

    • niktemadur@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      With an attitude like this, what could possibly go wrong?

      The ol’ All Or Nothing approach!

      “At some point, safety just is pure waste.”

      Cool. Let’s have each and every person on the planet draw their own subjective, arbitrary line on what “unnecessary safety” is for oneself AND OTHERS.
      So go ahead, FILL your house with asbestos! I mean… it’s not like you’re going to live forever anyway, amirite!

      It’s precisely because of idiots like these why we need government watchdogs. He’s the one-millionth greedy impatient miser millionaire to try and make a point, yet ended up proving the exact opposite.

  • Izzgo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    the submersible was only built to a certified pressure of 1,300 meters, although OceanGate intended to take passengers down to depths of 4,000 meters.

    • sensibilidades@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fry: How many atmospheres can the ship withstand?

      Professor: Well, it’s a spaceship, so I’d say anywhere between zero and one.

  • ChillChillinChinchilla@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh…I didn’t realize until now that there were actual people on board. All the headlines said the submarine itself was missing and I wasn’t interested enough to click.

    • derf82@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Supposedly there is oxygen for 4 days, so it it is in tact and they can get it to the surface by early Thursday, maybe.

      But more likely there was a structural failure and they are all dead, crushed by the extreme depth.

        • Freeman@lemmy.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          It wasn’t really sudden. Best they had was text messages that were occurring at a 15 minute interval. They stopped 1:45 into the dive.

          They waited until 30 minutes after they were supposed to be back to report it missing (which I think is standard)

          • moneygrowsontrees@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            They had two communication systems. They had the text messaging and an automated “ping” that went every 15 minutes. Both stopped suddenly at 1:45.

            Quote from apnews

            “There are only two things that could mean. Either they lost all power or the ship developed a hull breach and it imploded instantly.”

    • StaggersAndJags@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I read an analysis of scenarios for the sub, and the best case is that they had a power failure but managed to surface. This is plausible because if something went wrong they would just need to drop their weights and float up naturally.

      In that case, they’re floating somewhere on the surface without communications and just need to be spotted.

      But even that isn’t a good situation because the ocean is ginormous and the sub is locked from the outside, so they’re still limited to another day and a half of air supply.

      If they’re alive but under the surface, the search is nearly hopeless.

      • VoxAdActa@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I read an analysis of scenarios for the sub, and the best case is that they had a power failure but managed to surface. This is plausible because if something went wrong they would just need to drop their weights and float up naturally.

        I’m not sure dropping the weights would help from that depth. There’s a point at which the pressure of the water above you cancels out any buoyancy lifting you up. It’s not even that super deep for divers; I don’t know what it is for a duct-tape-and-zip-tied backyard-crafted submarine, though.

      • Nomecks@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If that were the case they would have some sort of emergency transponder on board. They are 100% crushed.

    • Izzgo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      the submersible was only built to a certified pressure of 1,300 meters, although OceanGate intended to take passengers down to depths of 4,000 meters.

      I think it’s too late before they reached the Titanic.

      • floofloof
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        OceanGate refused to pay for the manufacturer to build a viewport that would meet the required depth of 4,000 meters.

        Well at least they saved some money.

    • Girlparts@kbin.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it depends on what depth they are at. You have to depressurize and you need time to do that.

      • hurp_mcderp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        If it’s still water-tight, occupants wouldn’t need to decompress since the interior is still near atmospheric pressure. If it leaked at 13,000 ft… the bends are the least of their worries.