top 96 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 127 points 1 year ago

Unfortunately it only had older still photos and videos, nothing from the last dive. Looks like they had the camera configured to send the data to the onboard computers and those were smashed into a soild mass, of which, no data was able to be recovered from.

  • source
  • [–] 146 points 1 year ago

    "Somewhat disappointingly, the images and videos shared in the report were taken in the vicinity of the ROV shop at the Marine Institute"

    There, saved you a long read

  • source
  • [–] 71 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (16 children)

    Tragic?

    Try "predictable"

    Please watch the Netflix documentary if you havent.

    The sub was never meant for that depth and they knew it.

    They could literally hear the carbon fibers snapping every dive.

    They had to retire an entire chassis because it failed at similar depths.

    Nahh, the tragedy is rich people think they are better than physics itself.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    The tragedy is that more of these rich people don't test that belief against reality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    At least two billionaires keep firing rockets into space as a hobby. It's only a matter of time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Trying to do extreme engineering on the cheap.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    it was DIY from start o finish on the craft. as opposed to spending 5-10mil on a spherical TITATANIUM sub. instead he used carbon fiber which was defective airplane parts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    So his goal was to make a deep sea taxi of sorts. Rich guy affordable and capable of carrying more than 1 or 2 people at a time. Based on what I've read and seen he had two main reasons for the design:

    1. Titanium/steel would've been too heavy and required a different design.
    2. A sphere has too little volume to carry the number of passengers he wanted so he used a cylinder.

    His use of CF was not only mostly untested but where it had been tried it was found lacking. It is strong in one direction but not others. The manufacturing process was very difficult and fraught with issues. Making such a large component that thick meant many many wrappings that had to be precisely done. For instance, they would get bulges that had to be reduced immediately or they'd amplify with more wrappings. So they would grind down those spots and wrap over them. The problem here is now you've broken the fibers and created end points and fracture initiation points. Things like the junction between the metal end caps and the CF tube were also an issue.

    He was very cocky about how often you could reuse the vessel and tried to be cheap on testing which would involve sacrificing vessels. At 5,600 PSI small things that you could ignore in, say, an airplane structure, become wildly amplified.

    Personally I didn't see the point of the whole trip except for bragging rights. You'd be watching most things on a monitor anyway and your porthole was this little, very thick, acrylic hole. You might as well send a robot down and watch on a screen on the ship.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    being a cylinder there was also greater surface area for pressure points too. i read the articles after it imploded, he reused the sub, after it already has been too deep.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 244 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    It originally was an SSD drive

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 175 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    These compression methods are getting out of hand

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Not surprising, the card was filled with... UNCOMPRESSIBLE DATA!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 102 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (11 children)

    "and you can buy that exact SD card model for the low, low price of $62.99 on Amazon RIGHT. NOW!!!"

    That might not be the weirdest, most awkward product placement I ever saw, but close.

    EDIT : for those not seeing it, yeah, the article actually mentions that price and has a direct link to Amazon.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    tbf, finding your product still working after the implosion is already amazing publicity

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    The SD card was from inside a titanium cased underwater camera that was mounted outside the hull. It wasn't actually in the implosion, it just survived the shockwave (which was probably 1000s of Gs, so still impressive)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    funny how you downplay it all the way till the end, and anything surviving 1000s of Gs is incredibly impressive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    Well, it's an order of magnitude less force than the "server room" experienced, considering the whole rack of computers was compressed into a solid mass.

    SanDisk SD cards are actually rated for up to 500Gs, and with how light the SD card is, it can survive these indirect impacts more easily. "1000s of Gs" is just a completely random estimate considering how some of the other heavier internal camera parts were damaged (a circuit board connector sheared off).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Ads are getting insane. Youtuber making skits in the middle of their video to promote some garbageis dystopian as fuck to me. Mentioning product and where to buy it to what price, what is this shit, war of the worlds?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago

    That sticker "pressure tested" on the camera housing is not lying

  • source
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    There's probably an expensive helium mechanical drive somewhere down there that suddenly found itself to be considerably smaller than it started out.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 42 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    They should have built the hull out of SanDisk cards.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 14 points 1 year ago*

    Spoiler: Nothing about the big boom or that trip was on it (as designed, lol), but it's cool that it survived.

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Gotta love that SD technology. Now if only we could build a sub with it.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    I would never have gone in a submarine called the Tragic anything.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I want to call mine "the five" but in spanish

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    Be funnier for a surface boat

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    let's be honest the biggest boat i'll ever have is a 7 foot tin dinghy

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    In this context Tragic was a title earned for their efforts. It's like King Charles knighted the Titan, but since it was neither a Sir or Dame, it joined Titanic with the pronoun Tragic

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Damn, that’s promotional material that SanDisk would probably not want to have.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Why? It wasn't there submersible, their product wasn't responsible for its destruction and frankly there is very little in the way of public sympathy.

    The product is not even rated as waterproof and yet it's survived months at the bottom of the ocean after having survived a destructive implosion.

    That's hella marketing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The marketing is more for the submersible camera that survived, just like it was designed to do, the SD card was just inside the camera and no water even touched it. I don't think the SD card should be getting any credit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Yeah I know but marketing is marketing. It doesn't really have to make any sense.

    If the Xbox controller had survived I'm sure Microsoft would have made big of that even though it's basically irrelevant to the product.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Scott Manley has a one hour video going over all of this, including the ridiculous redaction of James Cameron providing expert testimony by first saying he directed The Abyss

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    James Cameron is genuinely a world expert on submersibles. He made The Abyss and Titanic because he loves the deep sea

    He made Titanic solely as an excuse to go down to the Titanic and film the wreck. He didn't even have an idea for the story when he pitched the movie

    Then he became the first person to ever design and dive his own submersible to Chellenger Deep, and only the second ever submersible to reach that depth (after the US Navy's Trieste)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 45 points 1 year ago (18 children)
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    Kinda seems like it was the right call if it survived an implosion

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (16 children)
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago* (15 children)

    What sensors do you think this was recording data from?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 1 year ago (14 children)
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    And what do you think that polling rate was to fill up a 512 GB SD card? It's all speculation but this isn't a super collider, we shouldn't need sub second polling of a vehicle that can only move 5.6 km/h.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago

    And even if you sampled at 10 sps, and did 50 sensors at 10b, you would still only be looking 5000bps or 5.8x10^-7^ GBps, meaning that it would take roughly 26 years to fill up a 512GB SD card.

    While I don't know for how long the sub had been submerged, I doubt it was close to a quarter of a century. If that was the case, I believe that we would have been talking about that as well. Even if it was 500 sensors, at 100sps at 12b we'd be looking at 79days.

    IMHO there's only a few things a 512GB SD card would be used for. And I hope it was music, because I don't think we should watch the final moments of these people's lives.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    It's not going to have location data. GPS doesn't work under even very shallow water.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    Ok, so tell me how you are going to get a location fix underwater, in the dark, with no landmarks to orient yourself, in constantly shifting currents?

    Even the Navy's most advanced nuclear submarines have to surface to get their location. This thing was a carbon fiber tube with an Xbox controller and an idiot designer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Dead reckoning which is usually hit or miss on the surface but better than nothing. Probably worse under the water. It's why all these subs that dive to Titanic have to drop down until they hit the floor and then swim around until they find a landmark that points to the ship. They only have a rough idea of where they are when they get to the bottom.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    17 comments in c/hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.se view that post
    2 comments in c/datahoarder@selfhosted.forum view that post