What I don't understand is that I have a Bluetooth card in my wallet and can use my phone to find it but yet a craft travelling 2.5m below sea level hasn't got a tracker
throw your wallet 2.5 miles down to the bottom of the ocean and see how easy it is to track
The point I was trying to make is there must be technology available to track craft at that depth. Why isn't it mandatory that craft be fitted with this
i might be wrong here but my understanding is that the craft wasn't fitted with any tracking devices
Why can’t they just get a really big magnet and drop it in on a rope and hoist it out that way?
Well firstly they need to locate it. Secondly if it’s on the bottom the rope (cable) would need to be something like 4 miles long.
Plus strong enough to pull it up, something that big and heavy but 4 miles long would weigh too much to get anywhere quickly and easily.
What I don't understand is that I have a Bluetooth card in my wallet and can use my phone to find it but yet a craft travelling 2.5m below sea level hasn't got a tracker
throw your wallet 2.5 miles down to the bottom of the ocean and see how easy it is to track
The point I was trying to make is there must be technology available to track craft at that depth. Why isn't it mandatory that craft be fitted with this
i might be wrong here but my understanding is that the craft wasn't fitted with any tracking devices
It’s too deep for any tracking device to work. Even nuclear subs use transmitter buoys that they release to the surface to make contact. Radio waves do not function under water. Sound waves. Sonar is effective but has massive limitations. Not useful for communication.
Safety on a submersible isn't my area of expertise but to have nothing to help them be found seems very negligent, as you've said twice, why wasn't a buoy used.
They are now very likely to be out of air and rescuers have 0 clue where they are. They are in trouble even if they are on the surface. At least a buoy would have slightly improved their odds
What I don't understand is that I have a Bluetooth card in my wallet and can use my phone to find it but yet a craft travelling 2.5m below sea level hasn't got a tracker
throw your wallet 2.5 miles down to the bottom of the ocean and see how easy it is to track
The point I was trying to make is there must be technology available to track craft at that depth. Why isn't it mandatory that craft be fitted with this
i might be wrong here but my understanding is that the craft wasn't fitted with any tracking devices
Because there's no one to mandate it. Planes have to have tracking devices, so do ships (at least above a certain size) because there are regulatory bodies in charge of those.
This is just one private individual deciding to build a submersible more or less because he can. There's not any authorities in charge of that business.
Although as a result of this it’s possible that a new law or regulation will be enforced so that it is mandatory in future.
At the risk of labouring the point.there is no tracking underwater. Tracking in the term we use it is done by satellite. No satellite GPS can penetrate under the water. Radio waves don’t travel very far in water either.
The black box technology works under water as I am sure I remember reports stating they have located the BB when a plane has crashed in the sea
What I don't understand is that I have a Bluetooth card in my wallet and can use my phone to find it but yet a craft travelling 2.5m below sea level hasn't got a tracker
throw your wallet 2.5 miles down to the bottom of the ocean and see how easy it is to track
The point I was trying to make is there must be technology available to track craft at that depth. Why isn't it mandatory that craft be fitted with this
i might be wrong here but my understanding is that the craft wasn't fitted with any tracking devices
Why can’t they just get a really big magnet and drop it in on a rope and hoist it out that way?
Sorry but I don't understand the context of this in relation to my post?
my post was about lack of detection, not how to recover it.
Anyone else surprised that a rescue attempt from the bottom of the ocean is such a difficult/practically impossible task?
Certainly not to undermine the harshness of the environment involved, but in 2023 it seems as though humans are capable of practically anything.
It still bends my mind sometimes that we can have airplanes that move 30,000 feet in the air whilst someone serves you drinks, and you can log onto Wi-Fi, all without feeling a thing. Not to mention the fact we can send enormous structures up into space for years at a time.
Call me naive, but I’m surprised to hear that this sort of task is seemingly beyond us as a species considering all the other outrageous technological achievements we’ve made.
Obviously, I am not a deep diving expert but one thing I can not get my head around is the fact the main controls are via Bluetooth connection ( I am VP of Technology so I'm not saying this without any knowledge)
Why on earth, would the main connection not be hardwired in. Bluetooth connections in that environment are going to be a struggle, whereas you will have next to no problems with a wired connection in terms of connectivity. We are talking 30 dollars for a wireless controller when in fact wired, is even cheaper and has a better connection.. Mind-blowing.
Because the CEO is a moron, and ignored all advice at every turn by experts, I even watched an interview on the design process where he said "other companies hire ex military submariners to help design but I didn't do this cause they're all 50 year old white guys and they're not inspirational to younger people"
those older white (no doubt heterosexual) men and their years of experience. what do they know??... at least a fuck more than you do mate.
I have hear'd snippets from the CEO and you're right he is a moron. On top of that he could become even worse than that if they are not found. well, he's in their with them but he is accountable.
I'm surprised there's no one monitoring this industry to make sure its health and reg's are up to scratch.
Strange thing to mention, even the moron CEO didn't go there. Whether they are or aren't I'm sure they admire Alan Turing.
What I don't understand is that I have a Bluetooth card in my wallet and can use my phone to find it but yet a craft travelling 2.5m below sea level hasn't got a tracker
throw your wallet 2.5 miles down to the bottom of the ocean and see how easy it is to track
The point I was trying to make is there must be technology available to track craft at that depth. Why isn't it mandatory that craft be fitted with this
i might be wrong here but my understanding is that the craft wasn't fitted with any tracking devices
Because there's no one to mandate it. Planes have to have tracking devices, so do ships (at least above a certain size) because there are regulatory bodies in charge of those.
This is just one private individual deciding to build a submersible more or less because he can. There's not any authorities in charge of that business.
Although as a result of this it’s possible that a new law or regulation will be enforced so that it is mandatory in future.
At the risk of labouring the point.there is no tracking underwater. Tracking in the term we use it is done by satellite. No satellite GPS can penetrate under the water. Radio waves don’t travel very far in water either.
The black box technology works under water as I am sure I remember reports stating they have located the BB when a plane has crashed in the sea
Now that’s something I do know about. black boxes in aircraft generally work whereby a sensor will detect if it comes into contact with water and start pinging sounds designed to be easily detected by sonar ) every few seconds ( think of 2 submarines pinging each other, that’s how the surface ship and the black box find each other ). Much like the sonar buoys.this would work but as stated the CEO surrounded himself by yes men and many normally used within the industry failsafes ( electromagnetically attached ballasts for example) were not incorporated into the design.
I think the apparently cavalier attitude to safety of the company operating the module would defeat any any rescue technology. You cant legislate for stupid.
Anyone else surprised that a rescue attempt from the bottom of the ocean is such a difficult/practically impossible task?
Certainly not to undermine the harshness of the environment involved, but in 2023 it seems as though humans are capable of practically anything.
It still bends my mind sometimes that we can have airplanes that move 30,000 feet in the air whilst someone serves you drinks, and you can log onto Wi-Fi, all without feeling a thing. Not to mention the fact we can send enormous structures up into space for years at a time.
Call me naive, but I’m surprised to hear that this sort of task is seemingly beyond us as a species considering all the other outrageous technological achievements we’ve made.
There's more money to be made in travelling in the air than underwater which is why we're further ahead on that front. I may be wrong but I believe we know more about the surface of the moon than the surface at the bottom of the sea.
Anyone else surprised that a rescue attempt from the bottom of the ocean is such a difficult/practically impossible task?
Certainly not to undermine the harshness of the environment involved, but in 2023 it seems as though humans are capable of practically anything.
It still bends my mind sometimes that we can have airplanes that move 30,000 feet in the air whilst someone serves you drinks, and you can log onto Wi-Fi, all without feeling a thing. Not to mention the fact we can send enormous structures up into space for years at a time.
Call me naive, but I’m surprised to hear that this sort of task is seemingly beyond us as a species considering all the other outrageous technological achievements we’ve made.
We know more about the far side of the moon than we do the bottom of the ocean. There are estimated to be more undiscovered plant and animal species in the depths of the oceans than there are species on land. Its really the great frontier that we haven't conquered.
Anyone else surprised that a rescue attempt from the bottom of the ocean is such a difficult/practically impossible task?
Certainly not to undermine the harshness of the environment involved, but in 2023 it seems as though humans are capable of practically anything.
It still bends my mind sometimes that we can have airplanes that move 30,000 feet in the air whilst someone serves you drinks, and you can log onto Wi-Fi, all without feeling a thing. Not to mention the fact we can send enormous structures up into space for years at a time.
Call me naive, but I’m surprised to hear that this sort of task is seemingly beyond us as a species considering all the other outrageous technological achievements we’ve made.
All of those things are in the air where where radio waves for example are capable of travelling almost infinite distances. We are land based creatures looking up and consequently the technology has developed to cope with that air based environment, including search and rescue missions. As a species we never have looked at the deep as the environment is just so harsh.
Obviously, I am not a deep diving expert but one thing I can not get my head around is the fact the main controls are via Bluetooth connection ( I am VP of Technology so I'm not saying this without any knowledge)
Why on earth, would the main connection not be hardwired in. Bluetooth connections in that environment are going to be a struggle, whereas you will have next to no problems with a wired connection in terms of connectivity. We are talking 30 dollars for a wireless controller when in fact wired, is even cheaper and has a better connection.. Mind-blowing.
Because the CEO is a moron, and ignored all advice at every turn by experts, I even watched an interview on the design process where he said "other companies hire ex military submariners to help design but I didn't do this cause they're all 50 year old white guys and they're not inspirational to younger people"
those older white (no doubt heterosexual) men and their years of experience. what do they know??... at least a fuck more than you do mate.
I have hear'd snippets from the CEO and you're right he is a moron. On top of that he could become even worse than that if they are not found. well, he's in their with them but he is accountable.
I'm surprised there's no one monitoring this industry to make sure its health and reg's are up to scratch.
Strange thing to mention, even the moron CEO didn't go there. Whether they are or aren't I'm sure they admire Alan Turing.
it was kind of a joke. going alone the lines of what the CEO said. white, older, male.. I could of added class but i didn't.
edit: who doesn't admire Alan Turing?? I'm one and and i use what he visioned/created right now.
What I don't understand is that I have a Bluetooth card in my wallet and can use my phone to find it but yet a craft travelling 2.5m below sea level hasn't got a tracker
throw your wallet 2.5 miles down to the bottom of the ocean and see how easy it is to track
The point I was trying to make is there must be technology available to track craft at that depth. Why isn't it mandatory that craft be fitted with this
i might be wrong here but my understanding is that the craft wasn't fitted with any tracking devices
It’s too deep for any tracking device to work. Even nuclear subs use transmitter buoys that they release to the surface to make contact. Radio waves do not function under water. Sound waves. Sonar is effective but has massive limitations. Not useful for communication.
Safety on a submersible isn't my area of expertise but to have nothing to help them be found seems very negligent, as you've said twice, why wasn't a buoy used.
They are now very likely to be out of air and rescuers have 0 clue where they are. They are in trouble even if they are on the surface. At least a buoy would have slightly improved their odds
What I don't understand is that I have a Bluetooth card in my wallet and can use my phone to find it but yet a craft travelling 2.5m below sea level hasn't got a tracker
throw your wallet 2.5 miles down to the bottom of the ocean and see how easy it is to track
The point I was trying to make is there must be technology available to track craft at that depth. Why isn't it mandatory that craft be fitted with this
i might be wrong here but my understanding is that the craft wasn't fitted with any tracking devices
Because there's no one to mandate it. Planes have to have tracking devices, so do ships (at least above a certain size) because there are regulatory bodies in charge of those.
This is just one private individual deciding to build a submersible more or less because he can. There's not any authorities in charge of that business.
Although as a result of this it’s possible that a new law or regulation will be enforced so that it is mandatory in future.
At the risk of labouring the point.there is no tracking underwater. Tracking in the term we use it is done by satellite. No satellite GPS can penetrate under the water. Radio waves don’t travel very far in water either.
The black box technology works under water as I am sure I remember reports stating they have located the BB when a plane has crashed in the sea
Black boxes underwater use sonar pings that start when the box touches water. I mentioned earlier that I couldn’t understand why the sub was unable to ping a sonar beacon.
Obviously, I am not a deep diving expert but one thing I can not get my head around is the fact the main controls are via Bluetooth connection ( I am VP of Technology so I'm not saying this without any knowledge)
Why on earth, would the main connection not be hardwired in. Bluetooth connections in that environment are going to be a struggle, whereas you will have next to no problems with a wired connection in terms of connectivity. We are talking 30 dollars for a wireless controller when in fact wired, is even cheaper and has a better connection.. Mind-blowing.
Because the CEO is a moron, and ignored all advice at every turn by experts, I even watched an interview on the design process where he said "other companies hire ex military submariners to help design but I didn't do this cause they're all 50 year old white guys and they're not inspirational to younger people"
those older white (no doubt heterosexual) men and their years of experience. what do they know??... at least a fuck more than you do mate.
I have hear'd snippets from the CEO and you're right he is a moron. On top of that he could become even worse than that if they are not found. well, he's in their with them but he is accountable.
I'm surprised there's no one monitoring this industry to make sure its health and reg's are up to scratch.
Strange thing to mention, even the moron CEO didn't go there. Whether they are or aren't I'm sure they admire Alan Turing.
it was kind of a joke. going alone the lines of what the CEO said. white, older, male.. I could of added class but i didn't.
edit: who doesn't admire Alan Turing. I'm one and and i use what he visioned/created right now.
What I don't understand is that I have a Bluetooth card in my wallet and can use my phone to find it but yet a craft travelling 2.5m below sea level hasn't got a tracker
throw your wallet 2.5 miles down to the bottom of the ocean and see how easy it is to track
The point I was trying to make is there must be technology available to track craft at that depth. Why isn't it mandatory that craft be fitted with this
i might be wrong here but my understanding is that the craft wasn't fitted with any tracking devices
Because there's no one to mandate it. Planes have to have tracking devices, so do ships (at least above a certain size) because there are regulatory bodies in charge of those.
This is just one private individual deciding to build a submersible more or less because he can. There's not any authorities in charge of that business.
Although as a result of this its possible that a new law or regulation will be enforced so that it is mandatory in future.
I think it’s quite possible that the submersible may never be located. Once it is beyond any doubt that the passengers are deceased I’m sure the search will continue for a while but the cost of the surface and submarine search and rescue will be enormous. Certainly too much to justify.
I wouldn't be too surprised if it is never found...If a Boeing 777 can disappear - never to be found - then what chance a small, basically, tin can. No idea on the currents involved or sea movement but it sounds like it could be anywhere in a 20,000 square Km area - either below or above the water...
I think it’s quite possible that the submersible may never be located. Once it is beyond any doubt that the passengers are deceased I’m sure the search will continue for a while but the cost of the surface and submarine search and rescue will be enormous. Certainly too much to justify.
unfortunately it’s might be similar to the 747 Maylasian plane that disappeared some years ago and still not found. No one knows what happened and I expect this will be a similar scenario.
If anyone has an hour to spare, I strongly recommend this BBC two parter that followed a 2022 dive in this craft. Really gave me an appreciation for the whole thing, what could motivate someone to go etc.
What I don't understand is that I have a Bluetooth card in my wallet and can use my phone to find it but yet a craft travelling 2.5m below sea level hasn't got a tracker
throw your wallet 2.5 miles down to the bottom of the ocean and see how easy it is to track
The point I was trying to make is there must be technology available to track craft at that depth. Why isn't it mandatory that craft be fitted with this
i might be wrong here but my understanding is that the craft wasn't fitted with any tracking devices
Because there's no one to mandate it. Planes have to have tracking devices, so do ships (at least above a certain size) because there are regulatory bodies in charge of those.
This is just one private individual deciding to build a submersible more or less because he can. There's not any authorities in charge of that business.
Although as a result of this its possible that a new law or regulation will be enforced so that it is mandatory in future.
Proven to work really well, see the MH370 thread
Numerous planes have crashed into the oceans and been found, so perhaps citing the one that is infamous for disappearing - because the pilot turned nearly all of the tracking equipment off - isn't quite the best example for reviewing the effectiveness of tracking technology. I'd also add that technology that wasn't intended to be used for tracking STILL managed to track that plane.
As for not knowing much about what's in the ocean, we do actually have a pretty good idea. While much of the ocean floor hasn't been touched by mankind other than plastic particles, and there are myriad species that we have yet to discover, we do have a pretty good idea of what's down there. It's basically the same as what we have looked at. Just lots more of it. We might not have set eyes on it but there's not much reason to assume - varying species of fish not included - that there's much to discover in the vast majority of it.
Did wonder why they weren’t able to triangulate, didn’t figure it would be another thing to add to the list of reasons why carbon shouldn’t be used on a sub.
If you are interested in a comparison in terms of depth of water vs saving a submarine / the people in it, have a read of this - terrible tragedy, and it’s only 83 metres down - this craft is probably 3,800 metres down ……
Comments
my post was about lack of detection, not how to recover it.
Certainly not to undermine the harshness of the environment involved, but in 2023 it seems as though humans are capable of practically anything.
Call me naive, but I’m surprised to hear that this sort of task is seemingly beyond us as a species considering all the other outrageous technological achievements we’ve made.
black boxes in aircraft generally work whereby a sensor will detect if it comes into contact with water and start pinging sounds designed to be easily detected by sonar ) every few seconds ( think of 2 submarines pinging each other, that’s how the surface ship and the black box find each other ). Much like the sonar buoys.this would work but as stated the CEO surrounded himself by yes men and many normally used within the industry failsafes ( electromagnetically attached ballasts for example) were not incorporated into the design.
edit: who doesn't admire Alan Turing?? I'm one and and i use what he visioned/created right now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001d2ml
As for not knowing much about what's in the ocean, we do actually have a pretty good idea. While much of the ocean floor hasn't been touched by mankind other than plastic particles, and there are myriad species that we have yet to discover, we do have a pretty good idea of what's down there. It's basically the same as what we have looked at. Just lots more of it. We might not have set eyes on it but there's not much reason to assume - varying species of fish not included - that there's much to discover in the vast majority of it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Affray_(P421)
Search abandoned. Very sad.