ErnieW
Trail Wise!
I want to backpack
Posts: 9,930
|
Post by ErnieW on Jun 23, 2023 10:00:57 GMT -8
I was just reading about some other submersibles. DSV Limiting Factor is a serious submersible. I also read about the carbon fiber based DeepFlight Challenger and found this quote: "DeepFlight Challenger was acquired by Richard Branson's Virgin Oceanic, which had announced plans to conduct a series of five dives to the deepest points of the oceans; DeepFlight refused to endorse the plan, as the craft had been designed to dive only once. Adam Wright, the president of DeepFlight, stated in 2014 "The problem is the strength of the [DeepFlight Challenger] does decrease after each dive. It is strongest on the first dive."
|
|
gabby
Trail Wise!
Posts: 4,539
|
Post by gabby on Jun 23, 2023 11:27:36 GMT -8
For the public expense of the search and rescue, the multinational effort gets a heartfelt thanks. Never mind the expense. If billionaires go to great pains to avoid paying taxes, why would they volunteer to reimburse the search parties? I guess we settle for whatever the Navy and Coast Guard will learn from the investigation and of course the heartfelt thanks from the families of men who were willing to risk their lives in a hazardous vehicle that had received a lot of criticism as unsafe for years. Again, "Never mind the expense." is ridiculous. Those guys who paid $250K to go down there knew it was risky. Similarly, those guys who go to the ISS (or elsewhere in space) know it's risky. In fact, the prevailing opinion was that it was too risky.
"Why would they volunteer to reimburse the search parties?" Indeed. So there needs to be a sort of "insurance" to protect the public from foolhardy rich guys. As private individuals, they may go on whatever risky adventure they desire. Anyone who wants to climb a remote mountain may do so. But, if it's risky enough, and they expect to be rescued, there should be a mechanism for paying for that rescue. A lot of sources seem to have believed that the Titanic expedition was a mite risky. ("a hazardous vehicle that had received a lot of criticism as unsafe for years") Given that, those millionaires (or billionaires) who insist on undertaking such risky adventures despite such commentary should be made to deposit a "return/rescue" guarantee before going by the public funded entities who will potentially be forced to go out and rescue them. If they don't take that "insurance" precaution, then there's no moral necessity for intervening on their behalf. Yeah, some would say it's "government overreach" or some other pet phrase. But, I say the "millionaires/billionaires' have a clear choice. Do they want a potentially one-way ticket or are they willing to ensure their own return?
Possibly irrelevant Aside: My eyes are, with aging, getting ever more problematic. Letters swim and dodge about the screen. My difficulties remind me of the days when my own lengthy posts would get a "TLDR" response, but I want to read what people post, especially when my blurry perusal indicates something well-composed and relevant. As many of you probably are aware, there are alternatives, however: www.naturalreaders.com/online/ Just copy the text you wish to read and drop it in the box at the website. Then, I have the option of dictating my response, though it will, more often than not, still be "TLDR". :^{
|
|
Travis
Trail Wise!
WYOMING NATIVE
Posts: 2,589
|
Post by Travis on Jun 23, 2023 13:35:09 GMT -8
Indeed. So there needs to be a sort of "insurance" to protect the public from foolhardy rich guys. As private individuals, they may go on whatever risky adventure they desire. Anyone who wants to climb a remote mountain may do so. But, if it's risky enough, and they expect to be rescued, there should be a mechanism for paying for that rescue. The story in the news is that the Titantic wreckage is in international waters, so there is no enforcement mechanism in place to enact those assurances. However, news today is that the Canadian government is investigating. And since the support-launch ship is flagged Canadian, that country may be able to restrict the support ship's activity with legislation. So we have a US company partnering with a Canadian ship to launch an "un-certified" vehicle in international waters. Time will tell what can be done there.
|
|
gabby
Trail Wise!
Posts: 4,539
|
Post by gabby on Jun 23, 2023 16:56:11 GMT -8
I just read this after I previously posted the above entry. The article deals with the lack of regulation for "adventures" in international waters, and it speculates that the recent implosion of the Titan sub will stimulate more debate about the issues, but it doesn't exactly give any indication of a response, nor does it take the same position I did in that above post. NY Times: "Money Can Buy a Visit to Space or the Deep Sea, but It Can’t Guarantee Safety"In terms of insurance policies, there may be new calculations about insuring extreme risk, said Mr. Thompson of Covac Global. Old models may no longer make sense for complex rescue efforts whose costs are unprecedented. We are “a long way from anyone saying, ‘I’ll cover the dive down to the Titanic,’” Mr. Thompson said.
The Federal Aviation Administration oversees regulation of commercial space tourism and requires operators to have “insurance, or demonstrate financial responsibility to cover potential damage and injury to the public, public property, and any government personnel and property at risk from the operation,” a spokesperson said in a statement.
Additional policies, such as insurance for participants climbing into capsules for travel into space, are a “matter between the operator and the participant.” But the article does at least mention the chaotic state of the issues at the heart of the rescue and recovery efforts, which, when not provided for adequately by the private companies arranging these trips, are at the expense of the U.S. taxpayer. Given the number of "new billionaires" who think it worth their while to take these kinds of adventures filled with inordinate risks, but which do not provide for the "return trip", it behooves us to rethink the response. In the United States, federal and state agencies, including the National Park Service, will cover the costs of search and rescue efforts, depending on where you are. For water rescues, the U.S. Coast Guard, which led the Titan rescue, is not legally allowed to charge for its operations, an agency spokeswoman said.
Three countries deployed at least nine vessels and multiple aircraft and remotely operated vehicles during the vast rescue effort to save the doomed Titan submersible. Experts estimate the cost will be in the tens of millions of dollars, at least.
Mr. Thompson priced the Titan search and rescue response at around $100 million, adding that R.O.V.s are “very expensive to operate.”
“Ultimately, taxpayers will be responsible because that is where the Coast Guard’s budget comes from,” said Mikki Hastings, president of the National Association for Search and Rescue, a nonprofit that focuses on wilderness rescues.
|
|
|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Jun 23, 2023 17:11:03 GMT -8
I’m not sure OceanGate isn’t responsible directly for at least some costs. They directly requested the company that operates the ROV that discovered the debris field to engage in the search. And they also had requested Magellan, a (iirc) sea floor pipe laying company to deploy its ROV equipped ship to search for the Titan. USCG was the coordinator but undersea seemed to be private sector engaged by OceanGate. Much like if your vessels engine quits and you arrange for an ocean tug to come get you and tow you back to a port? That’s all paid by you. Coast Guard might coordinate the rendezvous, but the bill is yours not the taxpayers. Time will tell: but by then the media will be back to hyperventilating over whether Brad or Angelina will get the winery! Washington Post: What the Titan search could cost — and who will pay for it“One preliminary estimate puts the U.S. taxpayer burden thus far just over $1 million, but the final sum could be higher” “The relatively modest sum may surprise some critics who have argued that the response to the Titan tragedy, involving an international consortium of ships, aircraft and advanced technology, jeopardized others’ lives to hunt for what was widely believed to be a doomed expedition once contact with the craft was lost less than two hours into its two-mile dive to the Titanic. The full, final figure certainly could surpass this initial tally, said Mark Cancian, a senior adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, who produced the estimate at The Post’s request...” www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/23/titan-search-cost/
|
|
Travis
Trail Wise!
WYOMING NATIVE
Posts: 2,589
|
Post by Travis on Jun 23, 2023 19:31:44 GMT -8
What the Titan search could cost — and who will pay for it“One preliminary estimate puts the U.S. taxpayer burden thus far just over $1 million, but the final sum could be higher” “The relatively modest sum may surprise some critics who have argued that the response to the Titan tragedy, involving an international consortium of ships, aircraft and advanced technology, jeopardized others’ lives to hunt for what was widely believed to be a doomed expedition once contact with the craft was lost less than two hours into its two-mile dive to the Titanic. The full, final figure certainly could surpass this initial tally, said Mark Cancian, a senior adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, who produced the estimate at The Post’s request...” www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/23/titan-search-cost/ Reading through that article, the estimate seems to only apply to the US Coast Guard. Most of the US expense will be absorbed by the US military which provided transport. Those costs will likely never be calculated. The Canadians are not even interested in calculating expenses. It's worth noting, however, that the US and Canadian militaries have a vested interest in knowing and investigating what can be achieved in deep waters so near to our own coastlines, international waters or not. And some of what they learn will probably remain secret for reasons (at least supposedly) of national security.
|
|
|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Jun 23, 2023 21:12:11 GMT -8
They noted U. S. transport costs.
“ To date, much of the known costs to the U.S. government derive from flight operations. Three C-17 cargo planes delivered equipment from Buffalo, to staging ports in Newfoundland, officials said. Those flights cost an estimated $491,000 round trip. At least one other C-17 departed Germany for England on its way to deliver a remote operated vehicle, but it is unclear if it reached its destination in Canada, officials said.”
Evenso far below the numbers I’ve seen thrown around for what taxpayers will pay. And OceanGate engaged those multiple private companies with deep dive ROV capability. Those C-17 costs could look tiny in comparison. $20k per day was normal ship time a very long time ago for a modest SIO vessel. And OceanGate, rightly, would be billed.
|
|
ErnieW
Trail Wise!
I want to backpack
Posts: 9,930
|
Post by ErnieW on Jun 24, 2023 5:32:19 GMT -8
I'm guessing OceanGate is essentially no more. No more CEO and who would want take a ride on an OceanGate sub now?
|
|
|
Post by marmotstew on Jun 24, 2023 6:25:31 GMT -8
Feel bad for their families. Glad they died instantly. But just like all the other thrill seekers, adrenaline junkies out there, the douche bags with the crappy cars that put a $2000 tailpipe on so they can be fast and furious(Paul Walker),have to say you kinda had it coming.
|
|
Travis
Trail Wise!
WYOMING NATIVE
Posts: 2,589
|
Post by Travis on Jun 24, 2023 6:26:29 GMT -8
I'm guessing OceanGate is essentially no more. You mean you don't think the company will hold on long enough to pay their bills? I'm shocked.
|
|
rebeccad
Trail Wise!
Writing like a maniac
Posts: 12,685
|
Post by rebeccad on Jun 24, 2023 7:28:36 GMT -8
I'm guessing OceanGate is essentially no more. You mean you don't think the company will hold on long enough to pay their bills? I'm shocked. They are apparently based here in the Seattle area, and reportedly have closed their doors “indefinitely.” There will undoubtedly be claims on whatever assets the company has, but I get the impression the sub was their main asset. The million dollars collected from the passengers on this trip are no doubt already vanished.
|
|
|
Post by Sleeping Bag Man! on Jun 24, 2023 8:02:35 GMT -8
Glad they died instantly. Perhaps OceanGate could stay alive by changing their target market to terminally ill people. 6000 pounds per square inch - a Ford F-250 on every inch of your body - from all directions at once. Pulverized into a cloudy soup in 30/1000's of a second. That does sound better than 6 months in hospice...
|
|
|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Jun 24, 2023 13:22:21 GMT -8
I'm guessing OceanGate is essentially no more. No more CEO and who would want take a ride on an OceanGate sub now? The company had an interesting financial model from interviews with the founder. He was interested in ocean research and viewed the tours as a way to kick start that effort. Even this trip they had piggybacked some research goals, collecting samples for dna surveying, a technique that’s yielded good and interesting data in the past on ocean microbial life that’s not possible to get from classic, sample and grow the bugs techniques given the extreme conditions of the environment they’re sampled from. Tara Oceans has led in this. fondationtaraocean.org/en/expedition/tara-oceans/The OceanDNA MAG catalog contains over 50,000 prokaryotic genomes originated from various marine environmentswww.nature.com/articles/s41597-022-01392-5Since the Titanic is being “eaten” by a variety of marine microorganisms that area would yield an interesting collection of that sort of bug.
|
|
|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Jun 24, 2023 13:27:41 GMT -8
I'm guessing OceanGate is essentially no more. No more CEO and who would want take a ride on an OceanGate sub now? It did have all the earmarks of a passion project based on the founder so I expect so. Musk without the other income streams to subsidize his interests.
|
|