• ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I would barely trust true to form meticulously engineered and tested military SSBN submarines like the Ohio Class or Delphin Class to take me several thousand feet underwater. Forget a literal welded tin can with a PS2 controller.

    • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      meticulously engineered and tested military SSBN submarines like the Los Angeles Class or Delphin Class

      About that…

      Also, Los Angeles class is SSN, not SSBN. Which Delphin you mean? It has to be most common name for submarines ever.

      • CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        Happens all the time. I used to work in a factory that worked with metal and after the pieces were painted, we were supposed to test the paint’s thickness with a tool. You press sort of a pen on different parts of the piece and the screen gives you the average thickness. It was supposed to be within a certain set of tolerance.

        I test my first piece and notice that the no matter where I test, the average is way above the tolerance limits. I ask around about what we should do and they tell me don’t worry about it, just put whatever number that’s within the tolerance limit.

        Almost none of our pieces were within tolerance. Thankfully it wasn’t for anything as crucial as submarine steel, but still.

          • CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            The metal pieces were made to be the casing to other machines from what I understood (I only worked there a month and didn’t really care about these parts lol, no time to think about that on the production line), I figure at most uneven paint thickness would have made it easier to scrape off and made it a bit more difficult to fit them together.

      • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Delphin as in the Soviet Delta IV series SSBN. I would never much NOT trust the 1903 Imperial Russian Delphin submarine.

        Also dang, I knew that sounded off. I couldn’t remember if Ohio or Los Angeles were the ballistic platform.

        Botched steel aside, something tells me that those submarines would preform leagues better then this decrepit jerryrigged mess. Hell, in a worst case scenario, an Ohio or Los Angeles has dozens of bulkheads, emergency rooms, emergency surface launchers, and safety measures to stay alive until rescue arrives. If this disaster as much as springs a leak… good luck.

        I have no idea why anyone that isn’t deranged would ever trust their life to this contraption. You couldn’t pay me to man that wreck.

        • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have no idea why anyone that isn’t deranged would ever trust their life to this contraption.

          And yet, Elon Musk’s shit tunnel thing is basically the same thing but on land—a subsurface transport system with no escape should something to wrong (which it definitely will, given enough time).

    • StugStig@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      It wasn’t even welded. The sub is so ridiculous that it doesn’t even use steel or titanium alloy like most serious submarines. Contrary to its name it was made out of carbon fiber.

      https://fortune.com/2023/06/21/titan-titanic-missing-sub-david-lochridge-safety-concerns-sacked-oceangate-stockton-rush-hamish-harding/

      Lochridge warned that the constant pressure on the Titan as it traveled deeper underwater would weaken any existing structural flaws, resulting in large tears to its carbon components. It was crucial, he said, to conduct non-destructive testing so that a solid and safe product could be provided for both passengers and crew.

      Diving the submersible “without any non-destructive testing to prove its integrity” would “subject passengers to potential extreme danger in an experimental submersible,” Lochridge said in legal documents.

      However, OceanGate allegedly told Lochridge that instead of carrying out the testing, it would install an acoustic monitoring system in the submersible to detect the start of any potential hull breakdown.

      Lochridge expressed concern that such an acoustic system would not be able to detect existing flaws. It would simply flag components that were about to fail, he warned—which often happened “milliseconds before an implosion.”