Jump to content

The Missing Titanic Sub


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

The thing that concerns me about this accident is it will man yet more regulation, yet more stifling of our society.

Just like when I read about the kids dying in the sea at Bournemouth I thought are they going to start regulating when people can swim in the sea ? I do agree they should keep jet skis and speedboats well away from beaches though....

Just like the law to make all performance venues have an terrorist emergence plan we should ask, how much cost and hassle is all this going to cause for how much gain ?

At the end of the day if people want to do dangerous stuff and sign a contract to that effect (and not many people do, even fewer of them can afford to go down in a submarine), who are we to stop them ? If saving lives is worth any amount of cost and inconvenience, there are other areas where far far more lives could be saved, on the roads for instance.....

Given the worldwide publicity this accident has attracted there should not be the need to introduce  new regulations to prevent an unsafe tiny submarine taking passengers thousands of feet under the sea. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

The thing that concerns me about this accident is it will man yet more regulation, yet more stifling of our society.

Just like when I read about the kids dying in the sea at Bournemouth I thought are they going to start regulating when people can swim in the sea ? I do agree they should keep jet skis and speedboats well away from beaches though....

Just like the law to make all performance venues have an terrorist emergence plan we should ask, how much cost and hassle is all this going to cause for how much gain ?

At the end of the day if people want to do dangerous stuff and sign a contract to that effect (and not many people do, even fewer of them can afford to go down in a submarine), who are we to stop them ? If saving lives is worth any amount of cost and inconvenience, there are other areas where far far more lives could be saved, on the roads for instance.....

You seem to be getting 2 different things mixed up here.

Talking about a person wanting to take his / her,  life into their own hands and signing a contract to that effect,  I could maybe accept that situation.

 

You are also talking about terrorist emergency plans, presumably in stadiums etc and you mention sea swimming.

Most properly run societies have health & safety laws covering numerous situations and they are in place because of happenings in the past which could have been avoided.

This is not at all like a solitary person or small group taking a risk.  This is a matter of mass public safety and is there mostly,  for good reason.  I strongly disagree with you in this instance.

We all know that there are some minor and petty H & S rules which are laughable but the thing to do is to question them and not do away with the whole job lot.

It's quite hard to save more lives on the roads without returning to the days when a man with a red flag preceded cars.

 

  

Edited by Organgrinder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

 

At the end of the day if people want to do dangerous stuff and sign a contract to that effect (and not many people do, even fewer of them can afford to go down in a submarine), who are we to stop them ? If saving lives is worth any amount of cost and inconvenience, there are other areas where far far more lives could be saved, on the roads for instance.....

It’s not quite as simple as that. Let’s not forget that the 19 year old on Titan didn’t want to do that trip and only agreed to please his dad apparently.   It’s desperately sad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

The thing that concerns me about this accident is it will man yet more regulation, yet more stifling of our society.

Just like when I read about the kids dying in the sea at Bournemouth I thought are they going to start regulating when people can swim in the sea ? I do agree they should keep jet skis and speedboats well away from beaches though....

Just like the law to make all performance venues have an terrorist emergence plan we should ask, how much cost and hassle is all this going to cause for how much gain ?

At the end of the day if people want to do dangerous stuff and sign a contract to that effect (and not many people do, even fewer of them can afford to go down in a submarine), who are we to stop them ? If saving lives is worth any amount of cost and inconvenience, there are other areas where far far more lives could be saved, on the roads for instance.....

yeah lets not have things like safety regulations and checks and certifications, lets just let people with money ride roughshod over it all :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Axe said:

Given the worldwide publicity this accident has attracted there should not be the need to introduce  new regulations to prevent an unsafe tiny submarine taking passengers thousands of feet under the sea. 

Good points made,  tbf,  I know people will disagree but I think it could be a very very long time before anyone attempts this again no matter how much money is concearned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, redruby said:

It’s not quite as simple as that. Let’s not forget that the 19 year old on Titan didn’t want to do that trip and only agreed to please his dad apparently.   It’s desperately sad. 

Hmmm... :huh:


It IS desperately sad.


But it was an experimental craft operating outside the jurisdiction of any particular authority, and waivers were apparently agreed and signed to that affect.


IF the 19 year old's Dad had asked him to cross a busy street without looking out for traffic, who would be responsible?


Would it be the Dad for asking his son to do a very dangerous thing?


Would it be the 19 year old for agreeing to his Dad's request?


Would it be the unfortunate driver for not ensuring that his vehicle had a nice padded mattress installed across his bonnet?


Or would it be the entire vehicle manufacturing industry who despite having loads of existing rules and regulations in place, could only warn people of the dangers of crossing a busy street without looking? :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Mr Bloke said:

Hmmm... :huh:


It IS desperately sad.


But it was an experimental craft operating outside the jurisdiction of any particular authority, and waivers were apparently agreed and signed to that affect.


IF the 19 year old's Dad had asked him to cross a busy street without looking out for traffic, who would be responsible?


Would it be the Dad for asking his son to do a very dangerous thing?


Would it be the 19 year old for agreeing to his Dad's request?


Would it be the unfortunate driver for not ensuring that his vehicle had a nice padded mattress installed across his bonnet?


Or would it be the entire vehicle manufacturing industry who despite having loads of existing rules and regulations in place, could only warn people of the dangers of crossing a busy street without looking? :roll:

Sigh!  Can I be bothered? 

OK, by the time we are young adults we know that crossing a busy street without looking is very dangerous.  You’d be mad to it and no one would do it to please their dad. 

A young adult would also know going to the depths of the ocean in a submersible  carries a risk.  Which is apparently why he was anxious about it.  But it’s not unreasonable for him to put his trust in his father and the sub’s owners that it was safe.  They were paying a considerable sum for it, it’s nothing like asking someone to cross a busy road with their eyes shut.  

 

Anyway, even if you don’t agree with that, it’s almost certain that certification will be a requirement in future after this.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, redruby said:

Sigh!  Can I be bothered? 

OK, by the time we are young adults we know that crossing a busy street without looking is very dangerous.  You’d be mad to it and no one would do it to please their dad. 

A young adult would also know going to the depths of the ocean in a submersible  carries a risk.  Which is apparently why he was anxious about it.  But it’s not unreasonable for him to put his trust in his father and the sub’s owners that it was safe.  They were paying a considerable sum for it, it’s nothing like asking someone to cross a busy road with their eyes shut.  

 

Anyway, even if you don’t agree with that, it’s almost certain that certification will be a requirement in future after this.

 

Hmmm... :huh:


You were right...


... you shouldn't have bothered! :hihi:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Mr Bloke said:

Hmmm... :huh:


You were right...


... you shouldn't have bothered! :hihi:

Hmmm... Why ?

Edited by Organgrinder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.