Titanic tourist submarine
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Bones said in Titanic tourist submarine:
I'm quite surprised that for a commercial consumer operation, they didn't need to have a comprehensive recovery plan signed off.
My guess is international waters means it's a lawless waste land and you can do what you want
-
-
@mariner4life said in Titanic tourist submarine:
@Bones said in Titanic tourist submarine:
I'm quite surprised that for a commercial consumer operation, they didn't need to have a comprehensive recovery plan signed off.
My guess is international waters means it's a lawless waste land and you can do what you want
That instantly popped into my head as what you were going to say when I saw you'd replied, good point. Company will be registered somewhere though right?
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Titanic tourist submarine:
Liberal compassion once again.
Now, I'm pretty far from being a lefty (no way ....) but this was sent to me from a lefty pal and it really has made me think:
Five hundred people drowned trying to reach Europe last week and it was covered but my god contrasting it to the coverage of this Titanic submarine is just appalling to see, so much more focus, experts on, analysis and interest from the public. Certain lives are so cheap to us
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Titanic tourist submarine:
Liberal compassion once again.
That's a remarkably stupid take. Drownings of asylum seekers gets massive amounts of press. How else would they know?
The difference here is they may still be alive and it's unique.
-
Question.
If when I go fishing, a depth sounder can pick up changes in the bottom and fish beneath, why isn't there radar / sonar technology available to pick up a cylindrical shape on the bottom of the ocean? Same applies to MH370.
This seems really straight forwards to me, so what's the problem?
-
@Donsteppa said in Titanic tourist submarine:
All of them are certified except the Oceangate submersible.”
Certified by whom?
-
@MajorRage said in Titanic tourist submarine:
Question.
If when I go fishing, a depth sounder can pick up changes in the bottom and fish beneath, why isn't there radar / sonar technology available to pick up a cylindrical shape on the bottom of the ocean? Same applies to MH370.
This seems really straight forwards to me, so what's the problem?
I would hazard as a guess that the density of water at those depths would compound the complexity.
-
Agree with the sentiment on media coverage - posed it with Mrs Meldrew yesterday - and your pal's comment is OK by me. But the way Toynbee's tweet turns two tragedies into a political statement says more about her than anything else.
-
@antipodean Yeah, obviously pressure/depth changes things somewhat.
But given they can hear the sounds of banging (assuming they come from the sub), then that would suggest that Sonar is still capable.
It's probably fair enough to assume Physicists know better than me, though. Be nice to here a laymans explanation.
-
@Victor-Meldrew The thing is that she's not even correct, is she? The sinking small boats were found pretty quickly.
-
@MajorRage said in Titanic tourist submarine:
@antipodean Yeah, obviously pressure/depth changes things somewhat.
But given they can hear the sounds of banging (assuming they come from the sub), then that would suggest that Sonar is still capable.
It's probably fair enough to assume Physicists know better than me, though. Be nice to here a laymans explanation.
The propagation of the wave at that distance means the echo could be anything. It loses fidelity at that range.
-
-
@NTA said in Titanic tourist submarine:
This is newsworthy for two reasons:
- everyone wishes they were a billionaire
- everyone believes they're not that stupid
- nobody wants to imagine being trapped inside a sub without Internet but with a teenager.
-
4- everyone knows that it will make a great movie one day
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Titanic tourist submarine:
4- everyone knows that it will make a great movie one day
"Snakes in a sub"
