The moon helped to destroy the titan submersible...

[Skybuck Flying]

At the time of diving there was extra gravitational pull from moon as can be seen here:

https://en.tutiempo.net/astronomy/sun-earth-moon-3d.html#UTC20230618T0326

Bye,
Skybuck

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2023 13:00:14 -0700 (PDT), Skybuck Flying
<skybuckflying@gmail.com> wrote:

At the time of diving there was extra gravitational pull from moon as can be seen here:

https://en.tutiempo.net/astronomy/sun-earth-moon-3d.html#UTC20230618T0326

Bye,
Skybuck

No, it was just a junk design.

There was no reson for people to be down there. Or to walk on the
moon. Robots make much more sense.

 

[three_jeeps]

On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 4:00:20 PM UTC-4, Skybuck Flying wrote:

At the time of diving there was extra gravitational pull from moon as can be seen here:

https://en.tutiempo.net/astronomy/sun-earth-moon-3d.html#UTC20230618T0326

Bye,
Skybuck

OMG....no he forgot his perpetual motion machine on the launch boat..........
Actually, I think he flunked statics and dynamics in engineering school and tried to outsmart physics.

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2023 15:39:35 -0700 (PDT), three_jeeps
<jjhudak@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 4:00:20?PM UTC-4, Skybuck Flying wrote:
At the time of diving there was extra gravitational pull from moon as can be seen here:

https://en.tutiempo.net/astronomy/sun-earth-moon-3d.html#UTC20230618T0326

Bye,
Skybuck

OMG....no he forgot his perpetual motion machine on the launch boat.........
Actually, I think he flunked statics and dynamics in engineering school and tried to outsmart physics.

Imagine making a people-sized carbon fiber tube that can stand 5000
PSI, and has a window and a zillion wire feed-thrus.

Why would anyone want to get bolted into a horror like that? It looks
like their images of the Titanic were mostly on screens, which could
just as well been viewed from their living rooms at home.

 

[Martin Brown]

On 22/06/2023 21:27, John Larkin wrote:

On Thu, 22 Jun 2023 13:00:14 -0700 (PDT), Skybuck Flying
skybuckflying@gmail.com> wrote:

At the time of diving there was extra gravitational pull from moon as can be seen here:

https://en.tutiempo.net/astronomy/sun-earth-moon-3d.html#UTC20230618T0326

Bye,
Skybuck

No, it was just a junk design.

That remains to be seen. But I think you may be right.

It was certainly innovative - every other deep sea exploration vessel
the pressure vessel is as near spherical as they can make it.

I wouldn\'t trust a carbon fibre composite against repeated pressure
cycles. It has too much give when compared to titanium which once
hardened is famously strong (did for Concorde by slicing a wheel).

My money is on a pinhole failure in the bonding between the titanium end
cap and the composite shell leading to a cutting action from inside the
vessel. A jet of high pressure water makes a devastating cutting tool.

But we may never know how it failed - the debris field is large and you
would have to do the equivalent of an aerospace reconstruction from the
bits to find the original point of failure (or be very very lucky).

There was no reson for people to be down there. Or to walk on the
moon. Robots make much more sense.

Explorers like doing crazy dangerous things and always have done.
They are adrenaline junkies first and foremost.

There is no reason for anyone to climb Everest or K2 either.

--
Martin Brown

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 08:11:30 +0100, Martin Brown
<\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

On 22/06/2023 21:27, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2023 13:00:14 -0700 (PDT), Skybuck Flying
skybuckflying@gmail.com> wrote:

At the time of diving there was extra gravitational pull from moon as can be seen here:

https://en.tutiempo.net/astronomy/sun-earth-moon-3d.html#UTC20230618T0326

Bye,
Skybuck

No, it was just a junk design.

That remains to be seen. But I think you may be right.

Apparently the acrylic window wasn\'t adequate for the Titanic depth
and a better one was too expensive. Etc.

It was certainly innovative - every other deep sea exploration vessel
the pressure vessel is as near spherical as they can make it.

That probably has fewer buckling modes. It would be tricky to weave a
sphere from carbon fiber and glue.

I wouldn\'t trust a carbon fibre composite against repeated pressure
cycles. It has too much give when compared to titanium which once
hardened is famously strong (did for Concorde by slicing a wheel).

My money is on a pinhole failure in the bonding between the titanium end
cap and the composite shell leading to a cutting action from inside the
vessel. A jet of high pressure water makes a devastating cutting tool.

The cylinder could have buckled. Or the window cracked. Or one of the
many wire feed-thrus failed in various ways.

But we may never know how it failed - the debris field is large and you
would have to do the equivalent of an aerospace reconstruction from the
bits to find the original point of failure (or be very very lucky).

There was no reson for people to be down there. Or to walk on the
moon. Robots make much more sense.

Explorers like doing crazy dangerous things and always have done.
They are adrenaline junkies first and foremost.

Yes. Risking ones life is a rush for some people. Rock climbing,
parachuting, wingsails, fentanyl, war.

There is no reason for anyone to climb Everest or K2 either.

The views are better than kneeling to peek out of a tiny porthole.
Climbing is better exercize too.

It must have been unpleasant, cramped with four other people bolted
into a tiny cylinder. The intimate details don\'t need to be discussed.
Like being crew in a tank, only worse.

I\'ve toured a few submarines and wondered why anyone would volunteer
to live in one with a bunch of other smelly guys for months at a time.