Svet

[Djuro]

Nije bas svejedno - ova kvazi podmornica je imala (ako je verovati vlasniku) nekoliko sistema, koji podmornicu mogu izbaciti na povrsinu mora - u slucaju havarije. Ako pluta po povrsini, bilo bi dobro da moze da se otvori i iznutra.

[nera]

5 minutes ago, Djuro said:

Nije bas svejedno - ova kvazi podmornica je imala (ako je verovati vlasniku) nekoliko sistema, koji podmornicu mogu izbaciti na povrsinu mora - u slucaju havarije. Ako pluta po povrsini, bilo bi dobro da moze da se otvori i iznutra.

Iako pluta ne izadje dovoljno na povrsinu da moze bezbedno iznutra da se otvori, poplavilo bi. Osim tih kao sistema da je vrate na povrsinu nema nista drugo. A ni to ne pomaze ako se zakaci za nesto, sto se desilo prosle godine, nekih 2 sata je submersible bila zaglavljena za nesto ali su nekako uspeli da se otkace. Ima clanak nekog novinara sto je bio u toj turi.

[ragasto]

5 minutes ago, Djuro said:

...ako je verovati vlasniku...

E, to. 

 

Guardian piše i ovo: 

Quote

 

Communications between the submersible and the surface vessel, Polar Prince, were lost at about 9.45am local time on Sunday, 1 hour and 45 minutes after starting its descent to the Titanic wreck. But it was not until 5.40pm local time that the US Coast Guard was made aware.

 

Kathleen Cosnett, a cousin of Harding, told the Telegraph:

It’s very frightening. [It] took so long for them to get going to rescue [them], it’s far too long. I would have thought three hours would be the bare minimum.

 

Znači nikakve procedure, nikakvo razmišljanje, nikakva svest o tome šta se zapravo dogodilo...  

[namenski]

 

Ma mozes u svojoj garazi da pravis sta 'oces, pogledati obavezno ovaj YT clip, vidim da se ne da van YT...

Problem je kada nameravas da uzmes pare, komercijalno eksploatises, prevozis putnike: na stranu uobicajena terminoloska konfuzija, ono je ipak podmornica, a ne submersible, ronilica: ima sopstveni pogon, nezavisno upravljanje - ne znam doduse kako je reseno upravljanje uzgonom, odnosno kretanje gore-dole sto podmornice rade praznjenjem/punjenjem tankova spomocu sabijenog vazduha...

Mozda bi batiskaf bio jos i tehnicki najkorektniji naziv...

Tek, bilo kako bilo, ekstremno je neuobicajeno za SAD da je pripustena - kao bilo koje plovilo - u eksploataciju, a da nije dobila barem atest^tm od Coast Guard, ako je vec eskivirano neko od klasifikacionih drustava poput ABS, American Bureau of Shipping, americki rodjak LLoyd-a, BV, DNV/GL...

Kao sto rekoh, podmornice jesu siva zona jos uvek, ali ne bas toliko da se, recimo, od njih ne zahteva da imaju skoro svetski, zapadnjacki u svakom slucaju standardizovan specijalni otvor sa zakacaljkom koji omogucuju da se na njih prilepi neka od specijalnih mini podmornica bilo cija da je, ako je samo srece da je blizu i koje sluze sa spasavanje i kojih ima poprilicno...

Americka RM drzi u pripravnosti upravo za slucaj neke katastrofe u bilo kom delu sveta bas takve naprave: ova na slici doduse ne bi mogla da dohvati dovoljno du duboko za ovaj konkretni slucaj, ali ima ih i koje mogu, na stranu sankcije Rusiji...  

Osim toga, ova milijarderska je jednostavno premala, mislim da ima jedva 8 metara u duzinu, jedva dovoljno ako je uopste da se na nju i u nju spakuje sve sto bi jedno iole sigurno plovilo moralo da ima, ako ne po propisima^tm ono po obicnom zdravom razumu...

Mislim da je ovde placen ceh, stigla naplata na sveopstu virtuelizaciju i tehnoloski entuzijazam koji se rukovodi nacinom razmisljanja koji ja zovem - bez uvrede - programerski....  

Jer, ono sto funkcionise na monitoru nece uvek da funkcionise kada izadje napolje: iza napraviti ne podmornicu, nego samo i obican trotinet stoji potreba da porade i ljudske ruke, od varilaca  do tehnologa, majstora za savijanje cevki i baratanje dupli-niplijima, a tu vec vaze neki drugi algoritmi^tm...

Inace, ne razumem tu bolesnu opsednutost Titanic-om: cudi me, izmedju ostalog da se nije - medjunarodne vode na stranu - pribeglo uobicajenom nacinu zastite takvih lokacija, dakle zabrani ronjenja/motanja okolo bez posebne dozvole jer se, izmedju ostalog, radi o masovnoj grobnici kojoj se - a praksa je bogata - duguje i najobicniji pijetet umesto nezajazljive zelje za adrenalisanjem i - siguran sam - unovcavanjem artefakata, antikviteta.

Sve u svemu, kad prodje zal za izgubljenim zivotima, bice pitanja i potpitanja: za sada se jos uvek premalo zna, ali je za ocekivati vajdu od ponesto nove regullative: uostalom, ako ista, katastrofa pravog Titanic-a je po tom pitanju itekako doprinela unapredjenju brodogradnje, poostravanju i uvodjenju novih mera bezbednosti, procedura...

[nera]

1 sat 45 minuta znaci da su bili na 15-tak minuta od olupine Titanika sto je vec preduboko za bilo koju podmornicu ili sta vec da krene dole, objasnjavao neki USA Navy stagod. Verovatno su cekali da ispliva na povrsinu pa kad su videli da je mrtva tisina prijavili.

[ragasto]

4 minutes ago, nera said:

1 sat 45 minuta znaci da su bili na 15-tak minuta od olupine Titanika sto je vec preduboko za bilo koju podmornicu ili sta vec da krene dole, objasnjavao neki USA Navy stagod. Verovatno su cekali da ispliva na povrsinu pa kad su videli da je mrtva tisina prijavili.

Pa ok, ali cenim da (bi trebalo da) postoji neka procedura u slučaju gubljenja kontakta sa tom konzervom. Naročito zato što su komunicirali tekstualnim porukama. Oni su obalskoj straži sve prijavili tek 8 sati kasnije, verovatno PRovi kompanije nisu mogli brže da smisle šta će.

[Amos]

35 minutes ago, x500 said:

Cak i da mogu da otvore vrata, na dubini od 4000+m, to bi im bio kraj - samo ubrzan :(

 

Postojala je varijanta po kojoj su mogli plutati blizu površine ili na samoj površini i opet bi ih zadesila ista sudbina. Ludilo. 

[namenski]

BTW, tek sada obratih paznju: pa jebote, Polar Prince, brod koji ih je kao maticni  dovez'o na lice mesta je apsolutno neprimeren i neopremljen za ovakve rabote.

Bivsi kanadski, vladin, kao bajagi ledolomac, a u stvari omanji teretni brod/brod za odrzavanje oznaka na pomorskim saobracajnicama, namenjen sluzbi na i oko kanadskog Arktika, izgradjen krajem '50-ih, prodat, posle nekoliko preprodaja nekoj privatnoj kompaniji sa Newfoundland-a....

Mislilo se da ovakve brodske rabote vaze za Levant, Filipine i uopste Jugoistocnu Aziju, Juznu Ameriku, Afriku, kad ono...  

[vememah]

Što se osiguranja tiče, rekli su na nekim vestima da nije bila osigurana jer osiguravajućim kućama ne pada na pamet da osiguravaju nesertifikovana i neodobrena vozila/plovila.

 

Putnici potpisuju da znaju da je u pitanju eksperimentalno plovilo i da se odriču prava na tužbu u slučaju bilo kakvog sranja. Po pravnicima koje je Newsweek konsultovao, izgleda da su minimalne šanse da porodice nastradalih obore to i dobiju odštetu.

 

Quote

Titan Sub Disaster Raises Question Over Who Insured OceanGate for Voyage

While the search for the five passengers of the missing OceanGate sub continues, experts are weighing in on who can ultimately be held responsible when such a high-risk expedition goes wrong—and whether the passengers' families would eventually be able to sue the company.

As of 5 a.m. ET on Thursday, the five passengers aboard Titan, the OceanGate advanced submersible vessel which went missing on Sunday on its way to explore the wreckage of the Titanic, have most likely run out of breathable air.

Rescuers have been racing against time to find the vessel since Titan lost contact with the surface about an hour and 45 minutes into its two-and-a-half-hour descent to the most famous shipwreck in the world, which lies around 370 miles off the coast of Newfoundland, Canada.

But despite being encouraged by hearing banging sounds from the depth of the Atlantic Ocean, rescuers still struggled to locate the vessel.

Five people are aboard the sub: Stockton Rush, CEO of OceanGate, a private company organizing deep-sea expeditions, French submersible pilot Paul-Henry Nargeolet, billionaire British explorer Hamish Harding and Pakistani businessman Shahzada Dawood and his son, Suleman Dawood.

Since they were submerged in the Atlantic Ocean, the vessel had 96 hours of oxygen available for five people. They are expected to have run out of breathable air by early Thursday. As of Thursday morning, the search for the missing vessel continues.

Who Is Liable for the Disaster?

While the assumption would be that OceanGate will be held responsible for whatever happened to the five passengers—including the company's CEO, who was serving as the vessel's pilot—the legal technicalities around Titan complicates the situation.

OceanGate, a Washington-based company, asked all its passengers to sign waiver forms releasing them of any responsibility, even in case of death, before embarking on a dangerous deep-sea expedition.

The company's compliance with international safety law is also a complex and muddy affair, full of loopholes. Salvatore Mercogliano, an associate professor of maritime history at Campbell University in North Carolina, said that a submersible like Titan, unlike ships or other vessels, is largely unregulated.

It does not require "to be registered in a country and therefore follow specific laws that are governed by international conventions, such as the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), which was promulgated as a result of the Titanic sinking," he told Newsweek.

While submersibles like Titan would have to comply with the Passenger Vessel Safety Act in the United States, the OceanGate vessel didn't do so because it was operating in international waters, Mercogliano said.

"The submersible industry is large, with many commercial vessels used in deep-sea drilling and cable laying," he said. "There are agencies, such as the American Bureau of Shipping that provide classification [third-party] oversight of submersibles and one of OceanGate's submersibles falls under ABS. However, Titan did not."

Titan was, by OceanGate's own admission, not classed—a process that assures ship owners, insurers, and regulators that vessels are designed, constructed and inspected to accepted standards.

"When OceanGate was founded the goal was to pursue the highest reasonable level of innovation in the design and operation of manned submersibles," the company says on its website. "By definition, innovation is outside of an already accepted system. However, this does not mean that OceanGate does meet standards where they apply, but it does mean that innovation often falls outside of the existing industry paradigm."

Will OceanGate Be Sued?
The victims' families will likely struggle to sue the company, according to legal experts, as all passengers traveling on the vessel are asked to sign a waiver that specifies the risk of dying during the expedition.

"Federal maritime law would govern whether the waivers are valid," Kenneth Abraham, a distinguished professor of law at the University of Virginia, told Newsweek. "But by analogy, in most states, the waivers would be valid in this situation, and depending on their wording the waivers would bind the families too."

"But the waivers probably would not apply to the makers of the submersible, if they were not the same entity who was operating it," he said. "The makers might be liable if they caused any malfunction, though that too would depend on their wording."

Los Angeles personal injury attorney Miguel Custodio, co-founder of Custodio and Dubey LLP, told the Daily Mail that the only way families could sue OceanGate is if it was proven that the incident had been the result of the negligence of a crew member.

Attorney Sherif Edmond El Dabe, a partner with El Dabe Ritter Trial Lawyers, told Insider that "The chance of family members of the passengers having a successful lawsuit against the company is close to zero."

He added: "The passengers knowingly participated in an extremely hazardous activity and they knowingly assumed great risk."

The waiver signed by the passengers, according to reports, mentions clearly that the "experimental" vessel had "not been approved or certified by any regulatory body, and could result in physical injury, emotional trauma, or death"—an aspect that has been under the spotlight as search for Titan began earlier this week.

Who Insured OceanGate?

Mercogliano said that he would be curious to know what company insured OceanGate, "because it is usually the insurance company that will require a classification society to ensure that the submersible meets all the requirements before insuring them."

"There is also a question of liability that goes back to not just OceanGate but operator of the parent vessel, Polar Prince, as that vessel is Canadian flagged and based," he added.

OceanGate has not publicly shared any information about what firm is covering insurance for the deep-sea expeditions company. Newsweek reached out to OceanGate via email for comment on Thursday.

"There is probably liability insurance covering the various entities and individuals involved, and that could cover any liability that was not precluded by any waiver, depending on its wording," Abraham said.

'End of the Brand'
"No matter what the outcome of the currently perilous situation, this spells the end of the brand OceanGate," Andy Barr, a PR and brand expert at 10Yetis.co.uk, told Newsweek.

"Too much has now been revealed about the historic alleged issues that the brand has encountered and is alleged to have also ignored," Barr said. "When all is finally revealed, the brand's only option will be to sell its IP and assets to another company or completely rebrand, although the latter seems a hugely unlikely and unrealistic option."

The tragic incident which has consumed itself in the past four days will also have an immediate impact on the industry of deep-sea expeditions.

"All deep-sea expedition companies will now be urgently reviewing their own processes, paying particular attention to making sure their own crisis communications plans are up to date," Barr said.

"We have to remember that the nature of deep sea exploration carries a natural inherent risk, but the onus has to be on the companies involved to make sure they are going above and beyond when it comes to employee and passenger safety."

https://www.newsweek.com/titan-sub-disaster-insurance-oceangate-questions-1808356

 

Edited June 22, 2023 by vememah

[Redoran]

Koji medijski lov će sad da krene na te putnike koji su bili izgubljeni pet sati…

[vememah]

Trebalo bi najpre na tog novinara koji je to prećutao u reportaži.

Edited June 22, 2023 by vememah

[Radoye]

Nije vezano za ovo bogatuni u podmornici vs sirotinja na brodu, ali zapravo jeste.

Naime, jedna moja prijateljica pristigla u Kanadu polovinom 90-tih kao izbeglica; spopale je zdravstvene tegobe, test ovaj, test onaj - i padne dijagnoza koju niko ne zeli da cuje. Ode na hemioterapiju, i na svu srecu pregrmi sve to. Prodje par godina, u medjuvremenu ona vredno radi i napreduje, progura se na neke bitne polozaje u jednoj velikoj multinacionalnoj kompaniji, vrlo sposobna i vredna osoba je u pitanju, jedna od onih sto nameri to i izgura. Ali avaj, bolest se vrati. I sad, pristigne ona u onkolosku bolnicu i lekar krene da joj se izvinjava "znate, prvi put vam nije sve radjeno kako treba pa ovaj put moze biti komplikacija". Kakozasto pita ona, i dobi odgovor - "zato sto ste onda bili sirotinja izbeglica a ne valuable member of society"...

U Kanadi. Koja se ponosi svojim socijalizovanim zdravstvom koje tretira sve jednako. Doduse, sto si dalje od plavokos-plavook strane spektra varijacija medju ljudskom populacijom, sve vise postajes svestan da to bas i nije tako ali to je drugi par carapa...

 

Na srecu pretekla i ovaj put ali joj je receno da ako se bolest vrati i treci put da ne mogu vise apsolutno nista da ucine za nju. Navodno, prvi put nije ni dijagnoza uradjena kako treba i samo je odluceno da je napumpaju do maksimuma hemijom pa ako je to ne ubije valjda ce je izleciti. A postoji neki ukupni maksimum koliko toga ljudski organizam moze da podnese za zivota i ako se premasi ubije te jos brze nego bolest. I tako ona sa tim drugim tretmanom (koji je kao pazljivo radjen) je dogurala do tog lifetime maximuma i nema vise dalje...

(E sad ja definitivno nisam strucnjak za medicinu, prepricavam kako sam cuo posto kupio tako i prodao...)

 

I tako, odgovor se sam namece - u svetu u kome zivimo i njegovim aktuelnim vrednostima, ko je kriv mediteranskim izbeglicama sto su odabrali da budu rodjeni gde vec jesu i da budu sirotinja umesto k'o sav normalan svet da budu milioneri, pa da se neko i nad njihovom sudbinom zainteresuje!

[vememah]

U toku je specijal na britanskom C5 sa nekim sočnim detaljima.

 

Ovaj lik je CEO OceanGatea.

 

[namenski]

27 minutes ago, Mos said:

Postojala je varijanta po kojoj su mogli plutati blizu površine ili na samoj površini i opet bi ih zadesila ista sudbina. Ludilo. 

I jeste i nije, ne moze se tako sa morem : Kursk, itekako moderan, sa iskusnom i obucenom posadom, potonuo je toliko plitko da bi, da se pobo nosem u dno, dobar deo bio iznad povrsine, dakle jedva 100-ak metara ako se dobro secam, pa se zavrsilo kako se zavrsilo.

2 americke, one ozbiljne, najozbiljnije, USS Tresher i USS Scorpion se i dandanas vode kao nestale bez traga, tu su i Francuzi i Izraelci i jos po neko, jednostavno je previse promenljivih i nepredvidivih cinilaca i s tim se racuna.

Ali ne i sa ovolikom kolicinom idiotizma, manipulacije, povladjivanja najnizim instiktima i interesima...

Opet, kod zaista ozbiljnih dubokih ronjenja, jos od cuvenog batiskafa Trieste sa Pikarom mladjim i porucnikom RM SAD Welsh-om koji su se jos tamo dalekih 50-ih spustili na dubinu od skoro 11 kilometara bilo je ponajmanje problema naprosto zato sto se radilo o sustinski naucnim, dobro promisljenim i izvedenim poduhvatima koji itekako zasluzuju svako postovanje...

Mislim da je i kod nas prevedena knjiga Auguste Piccard-a o poduhvatu Trieste-a: fascinantno....

[Shan Jan]

Vau, nisam znao da su jos pre 70 godina napravili nesto sto je moglo ici 11 km u dubinu (do sad sam samo znao za onaj Kamerunov poduhvat). Samo pokazuje koliko je sve jebeno available da se uradi kako treba ali ne, pametni milijarder zna sve sam najbolje