49
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

One of the other posts in the feed makes it sound like they only do it a handful of times a year, and that cost is covering a multi-day excursion since they have to wait for conditions to be right. Still, no excuse to not have contingencies, but I think their take gets eaten into a fair bit more than the raw math would suggest.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

I wager they don’t have a recovery vessel because they have people sign contracts only allowing arbitration.

[-] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

The CBS guy read aloud part of the thing he had to sign when he rode on it.

And the video is horrifying on so many levels…

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

"Everything else can fail. Your thrusters can go, your lights can go and you'll be safe."***********

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Aged like milk.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

I wouldn't be surprised. But, I suspect there's also a factor of just implausibility. Apparently, the main vessel they use is "experimental", so it may just literally be impossible to have a recovery vessel without being a literal government.

My money's on this being the result of someone ignoring the "hey, these are not good conditions" warnings.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Not just 'experimental'. This thing looks like something you'd find on a backyard engineering website. Some of it's functionality is accessed with an offbrand video game controller.

CBS interview featuring the submersible.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The bit with the contract starts @2:40. At least you can't say they didn't know what they were getting into. Still an awful way to go, if it did implode at depth, at least it'd be quick.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

I think I’d rather implode and go instantly, than be floating on the surface for 4 days and unable to get out while slowly suffocating.

Neither is my idea of a good time…

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Can they not open a hatch if it's on the surface?

Water would be a problem still, but not suffocation, if so.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Nope. The hatch is bolted from the outside. They can’t do anything from the inside and are utterly dependent on someone outside with a power socket wrench to unscrew each of the 17 bolts holding the hatch on.

There are some design flaws with this thing.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Nope, the ends are bolted on from the outside before they depart.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

And their navigation is dependent on text messages from the support ship they charter. Oh, dear.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

According to the CEO the whole business isn't even profitable. They spent over a million on gas alone. At least this jerryrigged contraption sinking is the most effective way for their company to stop shitting up the atmosphere over the whims of a few rich people.

this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2023
49 points (100.0% liked)

World News

22023 readers
33 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS