Who pays for the rescue efforts of idiots who ignore all warnings and go into the sea on inflatables? Or fall down cliffs due to their stupidity? Or the idiots who get caught out by the fact the tide comes in ?
A hundred people from a different background, including children, could go missing and there wouldn’t be half the effort made to rescue them nor even a tiny fraction of the interest surrounding these 5 people. In fact there would be plenty actively celebrating it. Now that’s tasteful.
I’ve no idea of the politics involved in the deep sea, under no countries jurisdiction. But fortunately in this country regardless of the circumstances, all our services including charities without any government funding will do their best to rescue and treat you without obligation.
No accompanying back-up submersible with the ability to dock/provide any sort of emergency help/provide immediate communications to surface & beyond of stricken vessels exact location. A mothership with no capability of knowing where the submarine is should electrical systems fail onboard the sub. A vessel coloured white - making it very difficult to visually find should it have to make an emergency ascent to the ocean surface. A hull composed of a material with no database history in terms of longevity/ stress fatigue - used principally to facilitate production of a larger internal space than more conventional materials - and therefore a larger number of paying tourist passengers. Previous incidents of loss of communication and maneuverability issues. No compliance with recognized safety regulatory requirements - company splurge stating the pioneering technology being too advanced for current regulations - wow, we don't comply with safety standards because ours is a progressive experimental next generation craft!!! The firing of employees who raised safety concerns. The Titanic itself being a hazard for entanglement with strong unpredictable undersea currents making visits quite dangerous - acceptable for serious scientific research using proven technology with back-up submersible nearby. Should a standalone maverick tourist vessel be allowed to operate there? Above is just what I have gleaned watching the media - not trying to pretend I have any personal real insight or knowledge. But it just seems like a very very scary vessel to be aboard when descending to those depths. The notion of getting into a cramped space that is bolted from outside with no possibility to escape from, even when on the ocean surface, is the stuff of supreme nightmares.
Just one other thing - some commentators querying will it be possible to return the bodies - all you physicists out there - would an implosion at the pressure levels experienced at that depth not smash bodies to smithereens?
Almost certainly, if you want to know more, investigate sub sinkings on the net. Sorry dont want to be too brutal.
You do have to question why someone would take the risk and more astonishingly take your son with you. Clearly, one UK guy after paying a deposit to go pulled out as he was not happy with the safety measures.
Azmeh Dawood — the older sister of Pakistani businessman Shahzada Dawood — told NBC News that her nephew, Suleman, informed a relative that he "wasn't very up for it" and felt "terrified" about the trip to explore the wreckage of the Titanic. But the 19-year-old ended up going aboard OceanGate's 22-foot submersible because the trip fell over Father's Day weekend and he was eager to please his dad, who was passionate about the lore of the Titanic, according to Azmeh. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/titanic-submersible-shahwood-suleman-family-tragedy-rcna90678
Nah, they would’ve been turned into red mush in milliseconds as a result of the rapid change in pressure from 1 atmosphere inside the sub to 380 outside the sub.
Well I don’t think that should be the case when those involved themselves have almost limitless financial resources, and the mission is utterly reckless.
