Implosion Titan Oceangate How it Happened | Submersible Submarine Parts

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 26 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 6 тис.

  • @Aitelly
    @Aitelly  Рік тому +201

    New Video Nuclear Powered Submarine ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html
    Check out www.piavpn.com/AiTelly for an 83% discount on Private Internet Access! That’s $2.03 a month and get 4 extra months free!

  • @kensmith3435
    @kensmith3435 Рік тому +3338

    I am a Naval Architect with submersible design training. You show the implosion as in crushing a can. It was way more violent. The atmosphere in the vessel was suddenly compressed by the pressure. It greatly heated. Think diesel engine times 20+. At high pressures and temperatures, air (O2 and N2) become reactive, and "burn" (combine into NOx, explode). Pressures get even higher, and a gas bubble forms. The pressure and temperature of the water cools and collapses the bubble. So the collapse is three events: sudden high pressure, an explosion, and collapsing of the gas bubble. Extreme mechanical violence lasting fractions of milliseconds.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +605

      Thanks Ken Smith for your technical feedback 👍
      .we love learning from Real Engineers.

    • @karenhickson9210
      @karenhickson9210 Рік тому +66

      Absolutely. Thank You! ❤️

    • @jessicaklaus8171
      @jessicaklaus8171 Рік тому +96

      You know, this is so tragic…but OceanGate if still a viable company, should be sued by the families. Just on principle alone. So so sad.😢

    • @jessicaklaus8171
      @jessicaklaus8171 Рік тому +61

      Ken Smith, above, knew what would happen…and stated it succinctly and with few words. They had to know.

    • @CheshireCad
      @CheshireCad Рік тому +146

      That's the weird thing about these kind of compression/decompression incidents. They're horrifyingly violent, so rapid and forceful that they seem to break the laws of physics. And yet, they're so infinitesimally fast, that there's no chance the victims even had time to register what was happening. They were dead before the signal from their eyes and ears could reach their brain.

  • @caseroj6020
    @caseroj6020 Рік тому +773

    Stockton Rush was a gambler who took unnecessary risks. Everyone in the deep submersible community with collective decades of experience designing and operating these craft told him it was unsafe. He metaphorically flipped them all the middle finger and went ahead with the project. The level of hubris, arrogance, recklessness on display was breathtaking. Here is a basic physics observation that explains why this tub was a disaster. It is well understood that a sphere is the most efficient shape to distribute large amounts of pressure equally across it's surface. As an engineer I was trained in college that equations and mathematical models are not perfect. There are lots of unknowns that we just don't understand in complex equations so we just invent a fudge factor into the equations. This "fudge factor" is where we lump all our ignorance about the system under study. Tell me do you want to risk your life riding a submersible designed using this approach?

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +19

      You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

    • @cindyherget5196
      @cindyherget5196 Рік тому +43

      Perfectly penned
      and I enjoy reading the use of adult words being used as such.
      “The level of hubris, arrogance, recklessness on display was breath taking. “
      Yes it’s mind boggling to understand the reckless disregard for human life and to think he could design a sub without the advice of those that have been testing and building them for decades “TESTING” what a novel idea!
      Who would have think that one with money would cheat the whole system and not hire the best people WITH EXPERIENCE!
      Well… sadly it took the lives of people that didn’t deserve to die, no one does.
      But usually the idiots sort themselves out eventually.

    • @MJones-ix9vu
      @MJones-ix9vu Рік тому +6

      💯

    • @Merely
      @Merely Рік тому +19

      Fudge Factor perfectly described the plot of Jurassic Park, too. They didn't have the entire DNA code to replicate dinosaurs, so, they used amphibian. Same result. Bad news.

    • @safeandeffectivelol
      @safeandeffectivelol Рік тому +21

      He was a sociopath and luckily he only killed 4 other people instead of hundreds or thousands

  • @twwap294
    @twwap294 Рік тому +2701

    Stockton Rush was clearly insane. This thing was glued together, there are videos showing its construction. No one in the right mind would do that and expect it to stay together at 13,000 ft below sea level. The four passengers gambled their lives and lost. RIP

    • @mangojulie123
      @mangojulie123 Рік тому +330

      Three gambled their lives. The kid was forced to go by his father. He could have declined but felt he could not say no.

    • @AnthonyDoesYouTube
      @AnthonyDoesYouTube Рік тому +111

      To be fair, it withstood previous trips, they even had previous models in use before this current one

    • @bc123132123132
      @bc123132123132 Рік тому +52

      Tbf, composites are strong because of the matrix "glue" structure. Perforations like bolts weaken the overall strength and pressure resistance.

    • @WarpedYT
      @WarpedYT Рік тому +19

      I think the connection was the failure as well.

    • @b.m.t.h.3961
      @b.m.t.h.3961 Рік тому +106

      It wasn't fit to go in a pond, never mind the ocean. Rush was an utter prat.

  • @celeina7872
    @celeina7872 Рік тому +128

    Imagine being that kid who knew exactly what was going to happen... Being in that tiny space for 8 hrs then dying.
    His epiphany was real and he knew and no one listened!

    • @Lemorande
      @Lemorande Рік тому +13

      Epiphany? Check a dictionary.

    • @ManiyaVinas
      @ManiyaVinas Рік тому

      If this kid was a 19-year-old prostitute girlie you'd call her a woman/adult :)

    • @aww8383
      @aww8383 Рік тому +20

      It imploded within few minutes after diving.

    • @hx5525
      @hx5525 Рік тому +11

      @@aww8383kr, these people love their make believe stories. I would never understand how people thought that the submarine was lost and running out of air instead of the obvious.

    • @mysterytour5983
      @mysterytour5983 Рік тому +1

      @@Lemorande Maybe English not the first language!

  • @nebelwerfer199
    @nebelwerfer199 Рік тому +1649

    Even if I was the richest person in the world, seeing the Titanic wouldn't be something on my bucket list.

    • @slowery43
      @slowery43 Рік тому

      interesting that you honestly and clearly think anyone would be interested in you and your hypothetical scenario. You are not a thousadnaire let alone "the richest person in the world" nor will you ever be. You are not someone who anyone cares even a little about so why should anyone spend time pondering something about you? Crazy

    • @joantonio6331
      @joantonio6331 Рік тому +179

      The worst part is they they would not even see the titanic with their own eyes because it is too dark, they would watch on a HD screen... don't they know youtube?

    • @kevinbarnes8762
      @kevinbarnes8762 Рік тому +102

      You mean you wouldn't want to spend 6 figures to see a rusty boat??

    • @nebelwerfer199
      @nebelwerfer199 Рік тому +6

      @@joantonio6331 💯

    • @ShipyardWelder
      @ShipyardWelder Рік тому +37

      @@kevinbarnes8762 They just wanted to to do it because they can and have the money too. To bad it cost them their lives..

  • @MiriamLedbetter
    @MiriamLedbetter Рік тому +900

    The Titanic director explained that carbon fiber composite - the make of the Titan - is used very very successfully for internal pressure, for vessels like say, a scuba tank. But for something that sees external pressure, all of the advantages of carbon composites go away and all the disadvantages come into play, he said. “It was the wrong material for submersible hulls. You can have a number of successful dives and fail later. It is quite insidious,” Cameron said in the interview.

    • @9999AWC
      @9999AWC Рік тому +63

      That's why it's great for aircraft and terrible for subs

    • @LegendsPizzaCo
      @LegendsPizzaCo Рік тому +48

      Yes from what I understand every dive down made the hull weaker and weaker. And eventually it was gonna implode.

    • @lazaruscain3424
      @lazaruscain3424 Рік тому +36

      Also the carbon fiber used in the hull was bought on the cheap from Boeing because it had passed its expiration date.

    • @renelaboy1517
      @renelaboy1517 Рік тому +21

      It is insidious, because it weakens GRADUALLY, the fibers AND the glue. Just by exposing it to water. Imagine doing THAT at EXTREME pressures.

    • @estlerd
      @estlerd Рік тому +2

      Kind of like pushing a rope. Seems stupid to me.

  • @scottmurphy650
    @scottmurphy650 Рік тому +953

    Several people told Stockton Rush that carbon fiber might not be the best material to use to construct a submersible but he knew it all apparently. Instead or wrapping several layes of carbon fibers at angles, the whole center section was one in one direction. Again, I guess he knew better than anyone else. When it imploded, which was inevitable, it basically self destructed and the people inside vaporized in a couple of milliseconds. I guess he really didn't know shit after all.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +25

      Really!
      You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

    • @Man-t6w7o
      @Man-t6w7o Рік тому

      Rich doesn't exactly mean smart. Unfortunately there are a ton of dumb people with literally stupid amounts of money. *Added to 1,000 ways to die*

    • @tresjolieme81
      @tresjolieme81 Рік тому +66

      I'm no engineer and even I could see how it would fail.

    • @leannabedore
      @leannabedore Рік тому +45

      Exactly! And it was more than a few. The oceanography submersible committee gathered 31 signatures stressing the dangers to life and risking tanting any future exploratory missions. (Which both have happened now) having a big head, putting money over people has huge ramifications. Obviously. It's extremely sad, I feel for all of their friends and families involved.

    • @JuliusCeasar224
      @JuliusCeasar224 Рік тому +22

      Lmfao what? Even I know that things like Carbon fiber CO2 tanks are woven at angles. Why would carbon fiber even be desirable in a submarine? Lightweight? It's a sub.

  • @Syntheticbreed
    @Syntheticbreed Рік тому +60

    I was a submariner in the U.S. Navy. My buddy brought this situation to my attention the Tuesday night after it went missing. As soon as I started looking into it, I knew immediately they were dead.

  • @actonman7291
    @actonman7291 Рік тому +3036

    From Human to Ketchup in a milisecond. RIP dudes.

    • @thisguy9993
      @thisguy9993 Рік тому +348

      At least it was quick.just seeing the silver lining that's all

    • @manis8569
      @manis8569 Рік тому +382

      They released the weights when they were down there to push themselves up. Which implies that they knew something was off

    • @chinadoll534
      @chinadoll534 Рік тому +122

      @@manis8569 oh wow then I’m sure was very scary for them

    • @SeaBaconZ
      @SeaBaconZ Рік тому +108

      I’m pretty sure the brain takes 125 milliseconds to process pain
      And the eye 120 to see something
      :edit it’s 13 for the eyes

    • @erossinema8797
      @erossinema8797 Рік тому +223

      How frightening and creepy. They must have heard it loudly buckling and crackling first

  • @AUNZAnon
    @AUNZAnon Рік тому +235

    Reports state the implosion happened within a fraction of a second. That's not to say the crew didn't hear the terrifying sound of the carbon fibre hull cracking prior to it (as was reportedly heard by other crews on other missions).
    One ballast was missing from the sub when found so they knew something was wrong and were attempting to re-surface.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +6

      You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

    • @AlkaVirus
      @AlkaVirus Рік тому +17

      @@WezleyB transcript is fake

    • @TeaTime826
      @TeaTime826 Рік тому +2

      @@WezleyB where did you hear the transcript?

    • @thechief00
      @thechief00 Рік тому +12

      @@WezleyB yes that's right, someone used Cameron's statement as a basis for writing a fictional transcript. it's just someone's imagination of what might have happened.

    • @cx2900
      @cx2900 Рік тому +24

      @@WezleyB they lost comms before any distress signal was raised afaik, I highly doubt the veracity of any transcript. Also the ballast could have been separated from the hull during the implosion

  • @Peppermint1
    @Peppermint1 Рік тому +212

    I did study mechanical aeronautics engineering. It is too early to point to the first component that failed, but for the sake of the discussion, I'm looking at a few different possibilities
    1. The carbon/epoxy material is usually used to stand 'traction' forces - the carbon fibers are very resistant when pulling on them, which is how they work in aviation where the cabin pressure is higher than the exterior pression. On a submersible, the pressure relation is exactly the opposite : the exterior water pressure is much higher than the interior air pressure, so the carbon fibers are put in compression rather than tension. It's actually the epoxy resin that must stand the compression - and resin is not a great material for this purpose. Some compression was also supported by the titanium rings. There is another issue: the diving results in cycles on compression. This causes what is called material fatigue which in the long term will create microscopic cracks which will continue to increase in number and size. This may not be visible to the naked eye - in aeronautics there are various instruments that 'scan' the material for these cracks at a specified maintenance interval. I wonder if the submersible had such inspection program.
    2. The acrylic 'dome' viewport appears to have been certified for only 1300 m depth (three times less than the actual diving depth of around 4000 m). Now, such component will always be designed to handle more pressure, by a certain factor of safety. Given the deep sea conditions (currents, etc) I imagine this factor was rather high - maybe a 2 or 3 or even 4. Which brings the actual resistance to close of 4000 m. However, once near the limit of resistance, it's a grey zone - it may resist for a while but this may depend on the number of cycles (dives) and may be very prone to failure at the slightest impact. On the debris recovered, this dome is absent from the supporting titanium ring which shows that if it's not the dome that collapsed first, then it didn't stand the shock of implosion, so the dome was already very close to the limit of physical resistance.
    3. I did watch one of the videos filmed inside the submersible by a tourist. I was surprised to realize that the passengers and their belongings are not secured during a dive - which dive can happen at quite a steep angle. A moving object - such as a camera or some other heavier equipment, could easily slide and hit the viewport dome, causing a microcrack that can reduce the strength of the dome even more. There is also a diver working outside the sub during the surface preparation, this diver can also impact the viewport dome with his air tank.
    4. The access hatch was secured with about 20 bolts tightened by hand. Tightening and releasing can cause fatigue cracks on these bolts. What is more, hopefully they used a torque wrench that was properly calibrated and verified before every use. In some videos, it appears a person is tightening these bolts quite in a rush.. this is a scenario that leaves place to mistakes.
    Finally, there appears to have been another serious risk : a fire inside the sub would have easily been catastrophic from a survival point of view. I'm not sure if there was a fire extinguisher but there doesn't appear to be oxygen masks for smoke. There were many electronic devices with li-ion batteries, which can be prone to sudden fire. Plus, even if the submersible would re-surface in emergency, the passengers could not exit the hatch which was bolted on from outside.

    • @JayZone73
      @JayZone73 Рік тому +12

      They did not scan the hull of the submarine, the CEO insisted that existing methods for detecting imperfections in carbon fiber aren't capable of doing so on a hull as thick as the titans. It was this same line of thinking that encouraged the CEO into the belief that the hull would produce detectable faults through their improvised RTM alert system using acoustic emission sensors along the hull body long before the hull would have been compromised to the point of failure.
      Also did you mean to say that carbon fiber is usually used to stand tensile forces?
      If so, I would agree that carbon fiber composites are extremely resistant to tensile forces, however, there is a distinct difference between an internal pressure pushing out uniformly, versus an external pressure compressing (pushing in) on these fibers uniformly.
      Carbon fibers and carbon fiber composites (Depending on their variance, like turbostratic or graphitic, weave pattern, binding agents etc) all have anywhere from 30-50% less compressive force strength than their tensile strength.
      Combine this with the repeated reflexive forces exerted on the hull and consider some of the major causes for failure in carbon fiber composite structures, and it's pretty easy to see how definitively doomed this structure was after more than the first few dives, even if it was seemingly free of flaws during post manufacture inspection.
      (Some major causes of failure are *fiber kinking*, *delamination*, *matrix cracking*, and fiber/*matrix splitting*)
      Also, you reference the absence of the acrylic port as potential evidence of it being the major failure point, but I would also point out the seemingly perfect absence of the retaining plate and its bolts. I believe it was removed to allow for easier onloading/offloading from the ship, and was likely not the initial point of failure. If this was an explosive force I might consider that it had blown off/out and ripped the ring free, but because this is an implosion we are talking about, you would likely see atleast the titanium retaining ring or bolts still in place and/or possibly deformed.
      I do agree that the torque of the bolts is a potential problem area, but when compared to the blatant risks associated with the hull, that this was far less likely.
      If the failure occurred at either the forward or aft titanium bulkheads, I would presume it to more likely have occurred along the joints between the titanium and the carbon fiber (where it was *glued together*) again, likely due to reflexive/compressive tensions placed on the two materials at different rates during descent (due to their composition/conductivity/density).
      Like taking a wax string and wrapping it around a glass bottle, burning it, and then dipping the end in ice water, it will fracture and separate along this heated area due to the rapid change in expansion/contraction between the portion of the bottle that wasn't heated (unchanged) the heated point (the joint, expanded zone) and the dipped point (contracted/compressed zone).
      The same thing is effectively happening except from sheer weight/pressure instead of thermal expansion, and in this case the joint would be the agent used to join the titanium rings (that the bulkheads could bolt onto) to the carbon fiber hull body.
      That bonding agent would be experiencing frequent changes in both tractive force (the weight of the bulkheads pulling the titanium rings away from the hull, or pushing toward the hull at depth), tensile force (the expansion of the ring around/away from the hull body during ascent/descent), compressive force (pushing into or compressing onto the hull body during ascent/descent).
      That's why I personally believe the fault originated most likely toward the forward or aft joints with the breakdown of this bonding agent being the catalyst or cause for the rapid failure of the hull body itself.

    • @blackhd92
      @blackhd92 Рік тому

      the truth is in plain view if you look at the pieces recovered.I dont believe the Main pressure vessel was the initial failure point. Hate to ruin the party for yall though..

    • @JayZone73
      @JayZone73 Рік тому +1

      @blackhd92 if the "truth is in plain view" from the obscured observation of the remnants recovered from the ocean floor then why don't you educate us then instead of acting like a pompous internet warrior?
      If the main pressure vessel (literally the thing keeping the external pressure from crushing them during the dive) didn't fail, then why was it a debris field and not a drifting tube with 5 dead people inside of it upon discovery?
      Your comment doesn't make sense.
      If by MPV you actually meant the carbon fiber hull, I would say it is exceptionally unlikely that the proven material components (the titanium endcaps) were the failure points, because they are vastly more capable of enduring the pressure differential and aren't visibly crushed or malformed in any of the pictures I've seen yet.
      If you mean the acrylic port (which is a component of the main pressure vessel by the way), then sure, an argument could be made for that... but i would ask why they would deliberately remove the titanium locking ring that kept it secured to the end cap, if the goal was the preservation of materials for the purposes of investigating points of failure.
      If however, they recovered the forward end cap and found the port was completely intact, it stands to reason that they might carefully remove it to allow for ease of transport, because that endcap weighs quite a bit to say the least.
      If it was a battery failure, it wouldn't have caused a failure of the MPV, if it was a failure of the scrubber unit or loss of oxygen, it wouldn't have caused a failure of the MPV (unless a subsequent explosion or fire occurred and weakened the carbon fiber thus causing a failure of the MPV)
      There is no scenario short of a full blown conspiracy wherein you can tell me that based purely on the photos of debris being offloaded that you somehow immediately know more than experts in the industry, as well as engineers and material/physical scientists, who have all had similar speculation on the cause of this catastrophic failure.
      Please spare me the excuse of how the aeronautics industry has bonded carbon fiber to titanium as a justification for how you just happen to "know" that it couldn't have been the cause of failure on this submersible.
      Keep in mind, those bonds are occurring at high altitudes, with negative external pressures and positive internal pressures, something that carbon fiber is distinctly adapted to, and the pressures/forces it has to withstand are absolutely insignificant compared to the positive external pressure being exerted on a submersible operating at even a portion of the depth this submersible was operating in. Not to mention the fact that carbon fiber has a compressive strength rating (on average) of less than half of its strength rating for tensile force (lower external / high internal pressures).
      Your responses to many of the comments on this video make you sound like a pompous pseudointellectual or a crackpot.

    • @treydogg77
      @treydogg77 Рік тому

      @@JayZone73 my question is why didn’t they scan, but used audio to test laminate?

    • @davechampion4987
      @davechampion4987 Рік тому

      @@JayZone73 Could have been that the hull failed and the pressure of the air attempting to escape blew out the porthole

  • @crazedmonk8u
    @crazedmonk8u Рік тому +198

    Another factor could be they were desending too fast. They made 3 successful dives before hand and decided on this last voyage to descend at a much faster Rate then what they has originally planned. I got this from the transcripts that were leaked. So the hull probably couldn't stabilize in time and boom.
    It's very similar to actual submarines when they dive down or up quickly for evasive maneuvers you can hear the hull creak and groan since it puts much more stress on it

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +18

      Yes agreed Thanks for the insightful comments

    • @davidsong5315
      @davidsong5315 Рік тому +1

      That transcript leak is a hoax, you're aware of that by now, right?

    • @renelaboy1517
      @renelaboy1517 Рік тому

      It was an accident, waiting to happen. He was warned, about the insidious ( gradual) degradation that occurs in composites, made of fibers. It was WRONG the way to build his vessel, period!! Enough, with all the rationalization already. When was the LAST time a PROPERLY built submersible, imploded? And experts have gone to WAY greater depths!

    • @pear-zq1uj
      @pear-zq1uj Рік тому +11

      those transcripts are fake

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +9

      @@pear-zq1uj Ok now whom to believe?

  • @Ont785
    @Ont785 Рік тому +427

    If you watch the video with Cameron going to the bottom of the Marianas Trench, he said that the sub actually compresses 3 inches.
    Carbon fibre doesn’t compress, It Has to stay rigid Therefore subjected to stress and fatigue

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +30

      Thanks for the great Infos.

    • @pluto9000
      @pluto9000 Рік тому +18

      @shaunnal2560 the water temperature is close to freezing so I wonder if this expands the carbon fibreglass. Google says it has a negative thermal expansion coefficient.

    • @tomthumb2815
      @tomthumb2815 Рік тому +27

      ​@shaunnal2560I have 0 confidence in the glue bond to the titanium flange for endcap

    • @Teeko2003
      @Teeko2003 Рік тому +33

      Who the fluck uses glue in anyway shape or form on a vehicle going to these debts? Oh apart from ocean gate 😢😢.

    • @baileypanama
      @baileypanama Рік тому +8

      @@Teeko2003the captain that’s who

  • @Adam-pu6jg
    @Adam-pu6jg Рік тому +725

    What this video fails to mention is the razor thin engineering margin of the Titan. Its crush depth is 4,000m and the Titanic wreck is 3,800m (95% of the Titan crush depth) That is a just a 5% margin. Ideally, you want to build something well clear of the margin

    • @kevinzki21
      @kevinzki21 Рік тому +56

      Yes 20% margin per engineers

    • @khunrocky606
      @khunrocky606 Рік тому +1

      It's actually 11000m but never been tested

    • @pauldatche8410
      @pauldatche8410 Рік тому +29

      This is really sad. Then it turns out the Rush guy lied and died while at it. It is a lesson to all creators and inventors to be especially more patient and scientific with their inventions and to listen more keenly to peer reviews and observe the scientific journeys of those who've gone before. As it turns out, cost for making a quality hull and livable diving space would have been easily met, what with the high charges they levied on participants. At $250,0000 per person, they ought to have had a more serious submarine capable of even 11km deep dive, made of super solid hardest materials found on earth.

    • @jmcinnis540
      @jmcinnis540 Рік тому +56

      In the heavy civil engineering/construction field, our margins are typically 20% min. and if I remember correctly, 50% margin is typical for work involving the railroad. 5% is insane, especially when considering the experimental design.

    • @therearenoshortcuts9868
      @therearenoshortcuts9868 Рік тому +10

      @@jmcinnis540
      i could be wrong, but i think the 20% is also based on top of some already very conservative assumptions. don't think it's even literally just 20% more than the theoretical maximum load...

  • @calmthesoul834
    @calmthesoul834 Рік тому +1109

    After watching Cameron’s submersible, it’s clear how dangerous this one was.

    • @KneeCapHill
      @KneeCapHill Рік тому +261

      They did rigorous testing on his one, they had failsafes on top of failsafes. Meanwhile this dude's whole attitude towards safety was* ''Don't harsh my mellow brah, innovating is a judgement free zone''

    • @youmemeyou
      @youmemeyou Рік тому

      @@KneeCapHill Hull, UK

    • @toddsmith1969
      @toddsmith1969 Рік тому +67

      @@KneeCapHill this submersible worked, just wasn't meant to last

    • @kamilebrahimoff3589
      @kamilebrahimoff3589 Рік тому +20

      Yes, the design was unsafe for this type of endeavor.

    • @luichinplaystation610
      @luichinplaystation610 Рік тому +22

      And Cameron had more troubles the more he stayed there

  • @786Inferno
    @786Inferno Рік тому +36

    Proof that you don't need to have wisdom to be a millionaire

    • @felipenasser7794
      @felipenasser7794 4 місяці тому +1

      I think you need some.. but wisdom has many faces, many types. they lack a lot of safeness wisdom lol

    • @PIE123441
      @PIE123441 3 місяці тому

      Yeah I guess people think that you have to be smart to be rich or whatever lmao

  • @louisboliou7432
    @louisboliou7432 Рік тому +228

    I worked in some of the original HMG (High Modulus Graphite) research--Pratt & Whitney. HMG is significantly stronger than CF. Our prepreg test panels were angled at 30 deg. layers, like plywood, then placed in steel molds and cured with variable pressure and temperature in a thermal press. Cooldown was also a stepped decreasing pressure/temp. process.
    The winding and curing process used on the Titan was abysmal and destined to fail. With the changes in pressures and temperatures being repeated, the epoxy/fabric system was doomed to fracturing of the epoxy.
    As soon as I heard of the rapid loss of communication, and then no surfacing of the Titan, I turned to my wife and stated, "it imploded." Never would I have gone on that submersible, once I knew how it was built, and added to the poor materials design, had no internal escape.

    • @renelaboy1517
      @renelaboy1517 Рік тому +4

      You DO NOT build submersibles, with composites, PERIOD!!!!!

    • @Sorrowdusk
      @Sorrowdusk Рік тому +4

      If the supposed leaked audio is true, they were descending unexpectedly fast. They might have already had a leak from the very beginning.

    • @kelsieann4617
      @kelsieann4617 Рік тому +4

      So incredible yet devistating...being so wealthy I'd assume they'd know this information. Are we truly loosing common sense even with every answer available at our fingertips

    • @hx5525
      @hx5525 Рік тому

      @@kelsieann4617There are plenty of dumb wealthy people in the world. Wealth doesn’t correlate with intelligence

    • @joshuad1716
      @joshuad1716 Рік тому +7

      A soon as I heard “submarine made of carbon fiber” I knew they were all dead and it imploded, not an engineer or a scientist, just someone not stupid enough to think carbon fiber would make a good sub lmao

  • @MakeupMobster
    @MakeupMobster Рік тому +727

    I have to say it’s pretty amazing that you can put these 3D animations together this quickly

    • @martin-krzywinski
      @martin-krzywinski Рік тому +52

      Because they're not based on any real data. It's just a 3D model rotating in space with a little bit of deformation here and there.

    • @psyoptic
      @psyoptic Рік тому +24

      It's all AI generated

    • @JustinLodes
      @JustinLodes Рік тому

      It could be yes. I was thinking the same thing

    • @topbanana4013
      @topbanana4013 Рік тому +3

      @@martin-krzywinski he talking about the 3d graphics/ rendering done on a pc in little time

    • @topbanana4013
      @topbanana4013 Рік тому +4

      @@tetrazole567 err yes it shatter. but it will bend and creek before that. the creaking is the breaking down of fibres and laminate

  • @dkjens0705
    @dkjens0705 Рік тому +162

    The pressure hull of the submersible is the carbon tube and the two titanium end caps only. All the white coverings are just external plates to make it more hydrodynamic, which plays no role at the speeds it travels, so again basically just to make it pretty and more attractive to unknowing potential customers. The scrubber system was likely contained inside the rear end cap inside the pressurized hull. As others have mentioned, a proper engineer would have built this vessel with at least a 1.5 or 1.6 safety factor which would have made its max depth around 18,000' or 6,000m and its crush depth even deeper. You also neglect to mention that the window dome used, which was manufactured by a third party, was only certified to withstand the pressure at 1,300m. The fact that it had withstood the pressure at 3,800m multiple times is a testament to real engineering where safety factors are incorporated into the specifications. There was so much wrong with Oceangate that lawsuits for blatant negligence are bound to be filed.

    • @gailmcn
      @gailmcn Рік тому +5

      also, the white coverings (known as fairings), function as protection of the inner hull and equipment against bumps and scrapes, when diving or not secured on the sled. I question the statement in this video that they were pumping "50%" O2 into the cabin, as well.

    • @Horse_Cock_Express
      @Horse_Cock_Express Рік тому

      You have no clue what you’re talking about! Pull my finger! Toot! Toot! Squirt!

    • @dkjens0705
      @dkjens0705 Рік тому +4

      @gailmcn They should have pumped 100% O2 into the cabin since the scrubbers would be removing the CO2. The cabin was basically a big CCW rebreather and with no pressure change inside, only O2 would need to be added. For breathing purposes, they could have kept a 50% O2 gas, this would have made it easier to keep the gas within the parameters of what our body functions with albeit making for a much larger fire hasard but then again safety was not a grave concern.

    • @williamrobinson4265
      @williamrobinson4265 Рік тому

      it was only certed to that rating but it likely could have tested higher if people had paid for that testing - I think people are misinterpreting wording around the use of that window or I could be wrong
      otherwise great breakdown and helpful comment thank you it was confusing to imagine the scrubber outside of the hull in the rear but it had me thinking that explained the crackling sounds from aft but probably it wasnt like that
      again on wording I think the filing of suits is pretty inevitable in this case but because of *gross negligence yes I believe some of the suits are actually likely to stick

    • @williamrobinson4265
      @williamrobinson4265 Рік тому

      @@gailmcn thank you that actually makes a lot more sense - usually when people get in their emotions and start trying to sound smart in this case I find they more often make themselves appear ignorant

  • @chronicalfredo9609
    @chronicalfredo9609 Рік тому +23

    Didn't realize I live in a world where everyone is a submarine expert.🙆‍♂️

    • @Sorrowdusk
      @Sorrowdusk Рік тому +1

      Armchair submariner matey. 💺Now admit it. Yer fond o' me lobster 🦞.

    • @1965JB
      @1965JB 8 місяців тому +2

      I just got my PhD in Submarineology reading these comments.

    • @RobertNagel-kd7kr
      @RobertNagel-kd7kr 7 місяців тому +1

      Got to love the UA-cam comment sections. It is a source of entertainment to me.

    • @truesoulghost2777
      @truesoulghost2777 2 місяці тому

      We are as long as we weren’t on that thing

  • @Cmac1992
    @Cmac1992 Рік тому +202

    Great representation, only critique is that the tail cone did not implode because it was not pressurized. Only the carbon fiber hull.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +32

      Agreed

    • @DemopVWgarage
      @DemopVWgarage Рік тому +1

      @@tetrazole567 nope, it doesn't shatter and does have a flex properties.

    • @MrSbfan2000
      @MrSbfan2000 Рік тому +29

      @@DemopVWgarage has limited flex capabilities and yes it shatters.....work with it daily.

    • @Buckheimer
      @Buckheimer Рік тому

      ​​​@@tetrazole567 the outside layer is not made of carbon fibre. Thts why when they fished the sub remains out, u can see most of it still whole. The video did represent the carbon fibre hull, which only surrounded the pressurised cabin, shattering into pieces which is wht I think would happened, and we dont see any of the carbon fibre hull nor the cabin being part of the remains tht was recovered. But then again im just basing this off of what ive seen and read thus far and Im not gonna pretend like im an expert here.

    • @RL-cq9qd
      @RL-cq9qd Рік тому +2

      @@saltysalt7339 u are right that it flexes to a point but not at those depths. At those depths carbon fiber just shatters.

  • @starr4490
    @starr4490 Рік тому +108

    I knew it the sub didn't even reach the wreckage. The amount of time and effort spent in making this video is amazing. I appreciate your work. Thank you for explaining this well.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +5

      Thanks

    • @TubagusMuhammad
      @TubagusMuhammad Рік тому +2

      It's already reached Titanic wreckage. Checkout the expedition from before. However something must have gone very wrong in this expedition

    • @Capecodham
      @Capecodham Рік тому +5

      @@TubagusMuhammad you are a genius to figure that out.

    • @thekokosho
      @thekokosho Рік тому +3

      It went to The Titanic 10 times before the implosion

    • @ryleitdept
      @ryleitdept Рік тому +6

      I think what he is trying to imply is the sub imploded before reaching the depth of the wreckage. It will took 3 or more hours before it'll reach the wreckage but already lost it's communication around pass 1 hour only while descending. Unless they are descending more faster than previous which have cause additional stress and fatigue to the structure given that it has already dived multiple times and already have degradation to the whole structure.

  • @JanaXV
    @JanaXV Рік тому +81

    There were other issues with the hull: It was made of titanium endcanps and carbonfibre which were glued together. Since these 2 materials behave differently under pressure even that might've caused a crack and with that implosion. Also the interior wasn't fire proof, that means that a small electrical fire could've damaged the hull. And the window which was only certified for a depth of 1300m, but they dived 4000. It was most likely the hull, but it could've been 'anything' as this thing was super unsafe. That is a really good animation though, thanks for sharing.

    • @delbarfield8624
      @delbarfield8624 Рік тому

      Why SAVE The Titanic Now?

    • @delbarfield8624
      @delbarfield8624 Рік тому

      @@user-wt7do4lz9x NO CELEBRATE 4 JULY

    • @MarkShinnick
      @MarkShinnick Рік тому +2

      Yes, I saw exactly this in my own testings. I've constructed and tested fiber composite pressure vessels to destruction. Fiber composites excel in tension, not compression; the design concept for this is fundamentally flawed.

    • @delbarfield8624
      @delbarfield8624 Рік тому +1

      @@MarkShinnick What was Albert Einstein About GRAVITY and MASS. Take 🍎 Fall From Tree Or WATERMELON

    • @magister61
      @magister61 Рік тому

      You are right. The problem was not only the carbon fiber but how it was jointed to the titanium. I wonder how that union was made considering they are two very diferent materials and there was the failure point.

  • @MORTONRICK
    @MORTONRICK Рік тому +1

    Really great animation. Can I ask what program you use?

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +1

      It's Blender 3D Open Source Software -(free)

  • @desaloboy
    @desaloboy Рік тому +184

    I don't know who you are, but this work you have done within this short period is great. Considering the fact that you are only 2 guys working on this channel, it's just crazy.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +23

      Thanks 🙏👍 we love y guys

    • @cziferr
      @cziferr Рік тому +22

      They put more work into this video than oceangate put into the submarine

    • @ridhvikg
      @ridhvikg Рік тому +4

      @@Aitelly also the fact that most people show the implosion animation as a can being crushed, while this may be true for a contiguous material like titanium or steel. Carbon Fiber will shatter and break into pieces while imploding unlike a soda can being crushed

    • @lindalagzdina7243
      @lindalagzdina7243 Рік тому

      As I believed it was still on the process of research. AND the public ( who can afford it) was encouraged to be part of experiment . Mr Rush ,as I remember went to many places like Las Vegas and done the promotion speech in many lectures . Well non profit organisation. To fulfil the whoever dreams to see poor titanic they needed money for one who can pay ..

    • @nmakovic
      @nmakovic Рік тому

      @@cziferr zar misliš da je g.Stocton bio šarlatan? Pa i on je bio probni pilot i student Princetona.

  • @dnx_Gr
    @dnx_Gr Рік тому +16

    Am not physician/physicist but your videos attract me closer to the field

  • @Steve197201
    @Steve197201 Рік тому +42

    If Stockton Rush hadn't been on that sub and was still alive, he probably would have been brought up on criminal charges for his negligence.

    • @N_manMETA11
      @N_manMETA11 Рік тому +2

      His next of kin should be charged then, for letting him go through with a quadruple homicide.

    • @jasonwilliams7454
      @jasonwilliams7454 11 місяців тому +12

      @@N_manMETA11 that is not reasonable. If my uncle is a douche bag I should not be charged with anything he did if I am his closest living relative. This is just a shitty situation that these folk CHOSE to put themselves into based on trusting some dude who is NOT an engineer.

    • @taisey4512
      @taisey4512 8 місяців тому +2

      @@N_manMETA11 this is such a ridiculous thing to say

    • @georgestevens1502
      @georgestevens1502 2 місяці тому

      @@Steve197201 And fraud.

  • @LucyLennon909
    @LucyLennon909 Рік тому +4

    May the people that lost their lives rest in peace. 🕊🙏💐 Hopefully mankind will learn from this tragedy.

  • @F76986jhg
    @F76986jhg Рік тому +5

    Hey Aitelly, I admire your work, A hug from Brazil to you and your team, I would like to ask you to make a video about the MQ-9 Reaper, About its uses, Technology, Operation and on-board weapons, Thanks in advance for everything you do you have been teaching me through your videos, This comment is translated by Google translator as I don't speak English fluently.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +3

      ❤ thanks 👍 apologies we could not reply to you earlier.
      Glad to have you as our audience.

    • @F76986jhg
      @F76986jhg Рік тому +2

      @@Aitelly No problem, Just the fact that you took the time to answer me already shows how dedicated you are, I feel privileged to have your attention, Keep up the good work my friend.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому

      Sometimes we get lost with the tons of comments bombarded against us.
      Thanks Again @kninezinho

  • @garyhowtobluetoothjblheadp3583
    @garyhowtobluetoothjblheadp3583 Рік тому +136

    Who in their right mind would consider going into one of those things? No matter how safe ...you have to be pretty brave ?! 😱

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +1

      You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

    • @1besieged
      @1besieged Рік тому +43

      Brave or extremely foolish.

    • @terrencekelly1256
      @terrencekelly1256 Рік тому +23

      Pretty stupid*

    • @yonggeun4222
      @yonggeun4222 Рік тому +1

      @@terrencekelly1256 maybe they trusted each other too much lol

    • @garyhowtobluetoothjblheadp3583
      @garyhowtobluetoothjblheadp3583 Рік тому +1

      @@terrencekelly1256 - with too much money?! Alas the world is a mess??

  • @RuggedSource
    @RuggedSource Рік тому +88

    IMO if you're going to create something that can be used safely below 13,000 feet underwater. It SHOULD have some sort of resistance disclaimer* of up to 20,000 feet. If something can be used in depths of 20,000 feet, then it should be able to handle pressure depths of 13,000 feet without issues. The fact they only designed this vessel to handle basically the exact depths they needed to dive, IMO was the biggest flaw in terms of common sense. It's like building a car that can drive 60 mph for only two hours but when it reaches 60mph, the car isn't stable and shakes. Once the car slows down and gets to 40mph, it then becomes stable and smooth. However, you can risk driving the shaking car at 60mph for 2 hours if you'd like and every time you decide on using the car at 60mph it will eventually collapse.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +8

      Yeah agreed

    • @ryanhampson673
      @ryanhampson673 Рік тому +9

      Exactly. The submersibles that have dove Titanic before had crush depths of around 20,000 feet. They operated at 95% up to their crush depth. Way too close to the red line.

    • @GSP-76
      @GSP-76 Рік тому +3

      Yup, they took the materials straight to their failure points..the hatch wasn't even rated for 4000 meters. It was only rated for 1300 meters.

    • @jobotmang
      @jobotmang Рік тому +1

      Good ananalogy

    • @nicholasadams2374
      @nicholasadams2374 Рік тому +2

      It's the old, "don't worry when the gas light goes on, the car can still drive for quite a while like that."

  • @DOC_951
    @DOC_951 Рік тому +32

    I’ve been dying to see an animation of this, happy someone finally did it!

    • @KetsaKunta
      @KetsaKunta Рік тому +4

      lol 🤌 choice of words

    • @DOC_951
      @DOC_951 Рік тому +2

      @@KetsaKunta 🤓

  • @Rickster5176
    @Rickster5176 Рік тому +57

    The "crackling" sounds heard on previous dives were the carbon fiber strands in the hull assembly failing. After "X" amount of repetitive cycles (dives) you eventually run out of enough unbroken strands to withstand the extreme pressures acting on the hull. So what they had was a progressive failure. This was the dive that it failed altogether.

    • @minkymott
      @minkymott Рік тому +4

      What a great explanation, thank you. Do you think they heard it crackling alot before it imploded? Like, the owner of the vessel being like "Oh crap, I've never heard THAT before". Do you think they knew what was about to happen?

    • @airplanenut89
      @airplanenut89 Рік тому +5

      @@minkymott From what I've heard given carbon fiber's properties, the pressure involved, and how quick the implosion was, I doubt they heard anything. If they did, Rush probably just brushed it off as just a routine noise he hears on his dives.

    • @xonx209
      @xonx209 Рік тому +1

      It's like the early airplane Comet which failed after a number of pressurization cycles fatigued the fuselage.

    • @alanm8932
      @alanm8932 Рік тому +4

      They are reported to have aborted the dive (presumably dropped the ballast weights) and we're returning to the surface and had reported that to the surface via a sub to surface telemetry message. Presumably they didn't ascend very far before it imploded.
      I guess that last message is why so much effort was put into using aircraft to search a vast area of the surface of the sea. As they expected the sub to have surfaced but the support ship had been unable to locate it on the surface.
      There must have been something that alerted the sub's pilot, to the extent that he aborted the dive. (When he had not done so in response to noises heard on previous dives). That must have happened with enough time before the implosion for him to drop the ballast weights and to write a message and send it over the telemetry system to the surface support ship. Even if it was a one word message like aborting or surfacing, that might take 20 or 30 seconds to perform the abort procedure and send the message. There may have been more time beyond that but I doubt that it was more than a few minutes, as if it was intact for long enough to ascend very far, then it probably wouldn't have imploded as the outside pressure would be reducing significantly.
      Edit: Just seen telemetry messages.
      09:17:50 All under control. At 2960m. No adjustments needed. We're enjoying the ride.
      First problem reported at 09:28:16 We're noting an alarm from the RTM [Real Time hull Monitoring]
      09:28:35 Reducing velocity, [vertical velocity I would think] depth 3433m.
      09:30:36 no change with thrust the rate of descent is increasing. At 35. [3500m?] Going to release the ballast now.
      09:32:12 No improvement. Preparing to jettison the frame.
      09:35:48 frame jettisoned (multiple attempts needed) starting ascent now.
      09:38:09 Crackling sounds from aft.
      09:42:12 trying to run diagnostics. Ascending now but very slow. Sounds have subsided. Global RTM alert active. All red.
      09:43:42 slow ascent in progress. Quarter predicted. Unclear white rate is small. No indicator. At 3476m.
      [Using thrusters, jettisoning ballast and jettisoning the frame has only just stopped the descent & produced a small rate of ascent. Presumably something is flooding with water - unlikely they wouldn't report that, or the hull has deformed such that it no longer has as much volume and therefore doesn't have as much buoyancy. Or possibly the thrusters are wired backwards, as has happened before and they are actually thrusting downwards without realising it]
      Last message at 09:46:37 depth 3457m, switched to power bus B, more sounds from aft.
      So about 18 minutes from first report of problem to last message.

    • @minkymott
      @minkymott Рік тому +1

      @@alanm8932 oh my God. I didn't know any of that. So it's possible they were fearing for their lives.

  • @dustinwestcottwhite
    @dustinwestcottwhite Рік тому +166

    The Polar Prince didn’t anchor in 4000m of water. It stayed in position with a dynamic positioning system.

    • @M4A3
      @M4A3 Рік тому +47

      Yeah, I was thinking, damn, thats some hellish chain storage they must have.

    • @WalterModel45
      @WalterModel45 Рік тому +10

      ​@@M4A3😂😂😂

    • @DreadX10
      @DreadX10 Рік тому +13

      Yep, and dropping an anchor above a site as the Titanic is a big NO-NO !

    • @silva7493
      @silva7493 Рік тому +5

      Thank you. I was even trying to figure out how that woulda worked.🤔🤔🤔

    • @All-Miles-Matter
      @All-Miles-Matter Рік тому +3

      He's "anchored" by a DPS....same thing.

  • @michaelcramerichliebemeinl5150
    @michaelcramerichliebemeinl5150 Рік тому +105

    to me, seeing that the end-domes and the titanium rings were recovered quite intact, and also noticing that the acrylic window was blown out inclusive the retaining titanium ring that held that window in its place and its bolts, that tells the story all to well. The carbon fibre part of the vessel crushed in on itself and then the air inside this compartment blew out the acrylic window from the inside out like a champagne cork. All that with such a force that it even dismounted the retaining titanium ring and the bolts holding it. What I really can`t get my head around is, that they did just parallel layers of the carbon fibre and not criss-crossed them. Most likely this wouldn`t be strong enough either, but it for sure would have increased the amount of pressure the hull would have been able to take by a lot.

    • @leecowell8165
      @leecowell8165 Рік тому +5

      Yep I gotta agree. I can't believe that non diagonal winding between layers. typically the windings are 45 degrees to stress and the alternating 90 degrees from there after each complete layer. Probably would have been better using fiberglass and conventional resin because carbon-fiber does not do well under compression. But then again fiberglass may not do well either. Its just a lousy material to use for this purpose. Why not go with a STAINLESS SPHERE with NO view port & instead use cameras displayed on video screens around a table (central area) surrounded by seats sitting in a circumference? Sure like a round restaurant table? You could stack the screens vertically, one for each camera and even switch the view between screens. I can do that here on my computers! I also can't believe the lack of ballast are you kidding me? Cameron used magnets to hold his ballast on his challenger deep dive why BUCK CONVENTION? they used to motors to hold negative buoyancy? I can't believe it.

    • @anyone9689
      @anyone9689 Рік тому +4

      Or the window , supposedly only rated for 1300m , failed .

    • @rogerpr364
      @rogerpr364 Рік тому

      probably, but I still believe a submersible should be made of nothing but steel and or titanium! I'm no scientist but, never I've would of gone in that sumb for all the money in the world knowing it was made of carbon fiber,,,no way!!
      Mr.Rush fished those 4 men into his sub for 250Grand each!!!
      nice, really nice,,for what,,,to die,,
      RIP

    • @kaioser
      @kaioser Рік тому +2

      What happened to those inside?

    • @mylesgarcia4625
      @mylesgarcia4625 Рік тому +1

      I also think that the sudden jerking around and panic of the 5 passengers when they realized what was happening, added to the imbalance of forces within & without the capsule.

  • @richardgoff6739
    @richardgoff6739 Рік тому +5

    The best video of the incident that I have seen thus far. Good job.

  • @shaun4787
    @shaun4787 Рік тому +30

    I think this new version still didn't go into the details of how implosion happened. Most of the vid explains the launching procedure. I saw the early version of this vid. What I was hoping to see was the process of how the pressure gradually building up as the sub descends and eventually imploded. I want to see what are the potential failure areas such as these:
    1. The under-rated acrylic view port which only certified to 1200 meter. The dive requires 4000 meter certification.
    2. The shallow bonding area between the titanium ring and the 5" thick carbon fiber tube. The bonding weakens after repeated dives due to the different rate of contract and expansion between a composite material and titanium.
    3. The bad material choice of carbon fiber which is not suited for withstand compression stress.
    4. The flawed design of choosing a cylinder over a sphere which distributes pressure far better.
    And lastly, a slow motion animation when any of the above failure points actually happened: the acrylic window cracked...the 5" carbon wall caved in... compresses the air inside of the chamber... the temperature rises immediately... the sub collapses inward... then the compressed air needs to escape....so it explodes after implosion...It sounds very graphical...for educational purposes... we could use rubber ducklings as passengers as they disintegrates into million pieces...
    There could be more failure points as the investigation starts. But a video titled "Implosion how it happened" needs to explain all of these possible failure points to provide better clarity. The most recent images of recovered debris clarified a lot of earlier assumptions. All titanium parts and external components survived nearly intact. What's missing are the main carbon pressure chamber and the acrylic view port.

    • @leecowell8165
      @leecowell8165 Рік тому

      The bond between the caps and fiber really didn't matter that much those bonds were in compression that would NOT have been the point of failure. Coulda used Elmers glue there. Failure was the implosion of the carbon fiber which splintered the layers away from those joints. The fiber litterly was SHREDDED by the implosion and the caps simply fell away from it. however the air EXPLODING probably blew the view port out and to hell and gone it was probably NOT recovered. Wouldn't be much left of the fiber either. I notice that they didn't show that part well WHY NOT? yeah these people hide shit like they do with UFO/USO investigations. Useless.

    • @foxtrot789
      @foxtrot789 Рік тому +5

      Of course, we all want to see that... but that's tough to animate and channels like these are just about getting views and not about actually about educating anyone beyond what's readily known.

    • @oliverheaviside2539
      @oliverheaviside2539 Рік тому +1

      @@leecowell8165 I saw a photo of a white basket filled with shattered shards of carbon fiber composite next to the titanium ring. I saw it only once and cannot find that photo again.

    • @Capecodham
      @Capecodham Рік тому

      wtf is a vid?

    • @michaelwest7844
      @michaelwest7844 Рік тому

      @@Capecodham A video

  • @GhostR7
    @GhostR7 Рік тому +182

    Just two people? That's quite impressive if you ask me. Great video, keep it up guys!

    • @Gardis72
      @Gardis72 Рік тому +14

      It got over a million clicks be cause the Daily Mail said it showed how it imploded suggesting it was a catastrophic accident video, and it's nothing of the kind. Cheap trick.

    • @ondemandslapperandclapper
      @ondemandslapperandclapper Рік тому +5

      @@Gardis72 their title literally says it shows how it happened. Not really the daily mail’s fault the creators clickbaited the title.

    • @WintergardenPL
      @WintergardenPL Рік тому +1

      But inaccurate....

    • @wangchung6910
      @wangchung6910 Рік тому +2

      @@Gardis72how much money do you think they made from the views? So many people are cashing in on this.

    • @KetsaKunta
      @KetsaKunta Рік тому +1

      ​@@ondemandslapperandclapperIt's totally their fault because they had to watch the video and publish their article including it for the greater public to see. If they realized that something was off then they should have thought twice. It's called having accountability to the public and it's a bigger deal for a public media company than it is a single UA-camr

  • @lwiimbokasweshi
    @lwiimbokasweshi Рік тому +27

    Good work here guys. Am happy to see that you are humble enough to make some corrections. Humility is a virtue

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому

      AppreciatedYou might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

  • @sel4hx
    @sel4hx Рік тому +5

    I'll just sit on my fat ass at home and watch a documentary about Titanic, made by professionals

  • @QuietlySoulful359
    @QuietlySoulful359 Рік тому +28

    Both visuals and narration were excellent and easy to understand. Well done!

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +1

      Thank you kindly! You
      You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

  • @zazoreal5536
    @zazoreal5536 Рік тому +33

    The problem is that an implosion is followed by a explosion. Every force has a equal opposing force. the air gets compressed for a moment in the sub and that same air then wants to escape because it is less dense than the outside and the internal pressure goes boom and breaks through all the cracks causing a explosion. Inside the ocean, this can be heard for 100's of miles with hydrophones. James Cameron said as much in his interview.

    • @edwigcarol4888
      @edwigcarol4888 Рік тому +8

      This phenomenon you describe seems to be similar in astrophysics
      A star crushes under its own weight - implosion - and thereby rejects violently its outskirts - explosion

    • @michaeloberle726
      @michaeloberle726 Рік тому +3

      That is not what causes the explosion. When any carbon in gas form is suddenly compressed at high velocity it ignites the Carbon. This effect can be seen in how diesel engines work) The sudden increase in gas volume from the ignition causes the imploded components to instantly be reversed in a fireball which then blows the material outward until the pressure of the water then collapses it again. This can sometimes cause a second and third implostion/explosion cycle until all of the oxygen is consumed in the ignition.

    • @michaeloberle726
      @michaeloberle726 Рік тому +2

      Not even remotely analogous.

    • @Salicat99
      @Salicat99 Рік тому

      I was thinking that it reminded me of a supernova, too. Even the part where the increased pressure causes an increased temperature and can ignite elements that wouldn't normally ignite.

  • @duaaismail4474
    @duaaismail4474 Рік тому +34

    What a respectful team❤. Thank you for the revised version of the video 😊

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +6

      all for you guys

  • @AleAlegria22
    @AleAlegria22 Рік тому +1

    How do you and your peer create these animations? Which software? Unity? Blender? After Effects? I saw the video editing software was Premiere. TYIA

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +1

      This Video describes how we made it ua-cam.com/video/jcnmMthyiHA/v-deo.html
      Blender for 3D
      After effects for Compositing
      Premier For Editing

  • @marcuscook5145
    @marcuscook5145 Рік тому +12

    The problem with carbon fiber is that it has no pliability so instead of flexing with stress and returning to form when removed from pressure like steel might, it cracks. It's even less flexible than fiberglass which also simply cracks when overstressed. It's highly possible that repeated trips at such depths caused small fractures in the hull that went unnoticed, weakening with each trip until failing catastrophically on its last outing. They also used a mixture of materials on the pressure vessel which expand and contract at different rates under pressure which can also contribute to faster wear, loss of structural integrity and leaks.

  • @BoatRocker619
    @BoatRocker619 Рік тому +6

    Only two man team doing all the research, animation, editing everything ?? Genius level intellect is needed to do all the research.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому

      Thansks mr Sharma ! we love you guys

    • @leecowell8165
      @leecowell8165 Рік тому

      Not really. does not take a mental giant to figure out that the carbon-fiber cylinder simply imploded. WHERE IS IT? Yeah its hidden from John W just like UFO/USO investigations these people are useless just leave the stuff down there or tell John what the hell is really going on!

  • @AlpControl
    @AlpControl Рік тому +23

    As a carbon fiber specialist, I bet on the same scenario from the first day.
    The weak point is neither the carbon or the tinanium, but the carbon/titanium interface.
    If water seeps between the two, the resistance of the carbon winding is useless and the pressure will crush the inner titanium tube.
    But it started slowly, depending on the infiltration rate, it seems to have taken more than 15 minutes before deformations accelarated the infiltration rate and then the final collapse occurred.

    • @gjpercy
      @gjpercy Рік тому +1

      Sounds correct old man, but instead of "crush the inner titanium tube", I think you meant "crush the inner CF tube". Am I right? I totally agree that if water infiltrates the bonded joint, then the separated surfaces within the joint will experience the full sea pressure (causing CF to crush/fail laterally (ie. across fibres) and causing further failure). Eventually there might be water incursion forming an internal 5,500 psi water jet which would breach the inner layers of CF when incursion forces matched the lateral strength of the remaining inner layers. cheers

    • @AlpControl
      @AlpControl Рік тому +2

      ​@@gjpercy
      As far as I know, the carbon is wrapped around a titanium tube.
      Maybe "inner tube" isn't the right word, sorry for my English (I'm French).
      But the fact is that the watertight barrier (welding) is on the inside rather than the outside is a big problem.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +2

      You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

    • @ambienthangout
      @ambienthangout Рік тому

      The brittleness of carbon fiber didn't have something to do with it?

  • @matthiasburger2315
    @matthiasburger2315 Рік тому +2

    I am confused. What is psi?

  • @presetregret184
    @presetregret184 Рік тому +7

    I'm reminded of the tailor who thought he could parachute off the Eifel Tower by wearing a big flappy coat. Love it.

  • @SsgtHolland
    @SsgtHolland Рік тому +18

    In your animation, the oxygen system is placed outside the pressure hull. This would mean that there are holes in the pressure hull, so the oxygen can be transported. This would create enormous weak points in the pressure hull. It is therefore more likely that the oxygen system was inside the pressure hull, between the vertical wall with the monitor and the titanium end cap. The tail section contained electronics and was not pressure proof itself. It probably got damaged by the implosion due to its attachment tot the pressure hull. It is likely that that is why the transponder got damaged.

  • @GoForGold256
    @GoForGold256 Рік тому +46

    I found it extremely frustrating that your animation showed the rear panel “implode”. This is just a shroud outside of the rear bulkhead so it’s impossible for it to behave that way. Only the pressure cylinder itself imploded and separated from the front and rear bulkhead domes.

    • @jordanliszewski6549
      @jordanliszewski6549 Рік тому

      Not to mention no one really knows exactly what happened. This video is bunk bullshit

    • @trishespitia7165
      @trishespitia7165 Рік тому

      Do me a favor go outside and touch the grass

    • @GoForGold256
      @GoForGold256 Рік тому +3

      @@trishespitia7165 it’s not a clever response

  • @Antoinemalone
    @Antoinemalone Рік тому +17

    This was crazy.
    I have a fear or heights and flying but never knew I had a fear of under water until this happened. Never thought about going down there and definitely wouldn't have gone in that thing. Maybe I would try when im 90 years old because I don't have much life anyways but that thing looked creepy.
    Rip to the victims.
    Even if you have money, save your money yall. Not worth it.

  • @SuperZardo
    @SuperZardo Рік тому +49

    Actually, if a volume of 1 m3 of air at ambiant temperature is compressed from 1 bar to 375 bar, using the ideal gas equation, it should heat up to more than 100 000 °C or 200 000 °Fahrenheit. Which means everything touching that air will undergo combustion. Those inside (surrounded by air) do not become meat soup but are directly converted to ash.
    EDIT: it's more like 1323 °C !

    • @rotorblade9508
      @rotorblade9508 Рік тому +4

      nice observation nice 👍
      I don’t know if that’s so easy to predict. separation of air and everything else would happen so fast there might be no time to heat up anything. but the idea seems correct: oxygen in the air bubble, rapid compression -temperature increase, it can burn things. the water will not boil so the cooling effect of water is slower

    • @suew4609
      @suew4609 Рік тому +7

      If that is true then how did they find any human remains? The debris didn't even look burnt.

    • @netx421
      @netx421 Рік тому +6

      Thermodynamics slows the transmission of heat though. For what you described you need a perfect conductor that is also a perfect resistor

    • @democratforfreesexchanges6013
      @democratforfreesexchanges6013 Рік тому +5

      It would have been like a star imploding in a black hole. The heat of ten thousand suns would have instantly vaporized everyone inside. The sea water would have boiled for a 5 mile radius around the implosion killing all the fish.

    • @Vanjonsorz
      @Vanjonsorz Рік тому +7

      Industrial air cylinders can be pressurised to 500 bar. Explain why industry do not have mini suns in cylinders just sitting around in their yards? Oh and air, as we know it,78 percent nitrogen and 21 percent oxygen, doesn't combust. Not without an adequate fuel source

  • @MADBIKER1960
    @MADBIKER1960 Рік тому +27

    Your detailed analysis of what could of happened is spot on. However there is another factor to consider for the future going forward. The Canadian Government needs to declare the Titanic wreck is sacred ground and is not to be disturbed in any way shape or form.
    Let the dead rest in peace and not being goggle-eyed by the few rich deadbeats who can afford it.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +5

      Yes agreed😮
      You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

    • @NGG1983
      @NGG1983 Рік тому +3

      who friggin cares? if people want to risk their life going there, so be it. Why waste tax dollars getting legeslation through on this? We have bigger worries.

    • @OneTequilaTwoTequila
      @OneTequilaTwoTequila Рік тому

      Why in the f would the Canadian Government have anything to do with that? It was sailing from England to New York. It sank and rests in International waters. Canada has zero say in what anyone does.

    • @elfworshipper4081
      @elfworshipper4081 Рік тому +2

      its in international waters also what are you an emotional woman?

    • @herro2883
      @herro2883 Рік тому +1

      It is obviously cursed. Venture at your own risk.

  • @DNTCreativeMedia
    @DNTCreativeMedia Рік тому +17

    Nice video. I had picked up parts of this info from all over the web, but this video was the most concise one I had come across. Good job.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +1

      Glad it was helpful!
      Even better You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

  • @kitcatmeowmeow
    @kitcatmeowmeow Рік тому +2

    I remember when I heard that the sub would use "NASA" and "Boeing" as the claim, that is who helped them with the design, although that was later rejected by both, that was a red flag for me. Carbon fiber used in planes, designed for lower pressures in the air. NASA and planes, dealing with lower pressures, going into the earth/deep ocean, dealing with super high pressures. So as an engineer that deals with super high pressures, the appeal oceangate was exposing did not make sense, and why anyone would agree. This is a prime example of herd mentality, even with educated people. Educated does not mean intelligence. Having names thrown around to sound impressive, but have no idea of the function.
    Needless to say, I appreciate this video.

  • @VictorbrineSC
    @VictorbrineSC Рік тому +53

    The tragic irony is that the Titan's wreckage, or what remains since some bits were salvaged (like the titanium hull entrance), is now part of the RMS Titanic's wreckage. When the transatlantic ship split apart during its sinking, the stern was subject to friction forces as it sank causing a bunch of debris to scatter around. The entire ship's wreckage site is kilometers squares in surface area. With the sub's remains being only a few hundreds of meters from the bow, this makes it part of the Titanic...

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому

      Thanks ! You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

    • @space0015
      @space0015 Рік тому

      I see many people comparing this with kursk when its not the same

  • @Nicholas_Hamilton
    @Nicholas_Hamilton Рік тому +17

    Splendid work! Your presentation is immaculate.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +1

      Thank you so much 😀 all for you guys

  • @bachnguyen7411
    @bachnguyen7411 Рік тому +17

    Genuine question, does anyone know or can hypothesize a reasonable conclusion to why they thought using CF was a good idea for going deep sea diving?
    As I understand it, CF is lighter and stronger than steel only for tension, as well as they absorb forces a lot better than steel. Thinking of Motorsport for example, all these properties translate really well, but why would OceanGate think it would translate to withstand sea pressure? You don’t need to be lighter, you’re not under tension, and you’re not absorbing forces.
    Does CF have any application in terms of deep sea diving?

    • @DarkPlaysThings
      @DarkPlaysThings Рік тому +20

      To be honest I don even know why you’d use carbon fibre in the first place for diving applications. Beyond the obvious issues with its severe lack of compressive stress resistance, it simply doesn’t make sense from a practical standpoint. The use of carbon fibre is to provide similar or higher tensile strength than steel for a much lower weight cost. For diving however, the major reduction in weight is actually a disadvantage in manned submersibles such as this, as their large internal air displacement combined with reduced weight causes them to be significantly more buoyant. This means that far more ballast is required to offset that displacement, as well as to keep them balanced. This is why heavier materials are normally used, as they provide a more neutral buoyancy and act themselves as a form of ballast, which allows for more fine tuning in terms of diving and surfacing rates, as smaller quantities of additional ballast are required. And as I said, this is all before even considering the lack of testing of carbon fibre in deep sea conditions as well as the fact that it’s known to degrade under such high pressures. Really feels like a case of trying to use a material somewhere it shouldn’t be used just because you thought it would be cool.

    • @Lee67001
      @Lee67001 Рік тому +17

      The only reason I can think of is cost & time.
      Submersibles that can reach this depth (and beyond) are usually made from a high yield, high strength low allow steel, giving good strength, ductility and corrosion resistance. Usually, the pressure vessel, housing the crew, is spherical (a spherical pressure vessel under external load is an efficient design as the external loads are distributed evenly around the vessel), rather than cylindrical. To manufacture a steel sphere to meet the pressure requirements would mean casting a pair of hemispheres, machining their mating faces and bolting the two hemispheres together. Its a proven method of design and manufacture. A great example of this are the Russian Mir submersibles (Mir-1 & Mir-2), which I believe had test depths of 6000m each. To cast, and machine, a pair of hemispheres, with a specially manufactured high yield steel is not likely to be cheap. I think that going for Carbon Fibre would have been seen as the cheaper, cost effective solution. However, the caveat is that Carbon Fibre is not a proven material for a submersible vessel. For an internally pressurised lightweight gas tank, sure, it makes sense, but for a cylinder under an incredible external pressure, no.
      As a designer of industrial pressure vessels, we have to submit our calculations and manufacturing drawings to be rigorously checked, then approved by an independent inspection authority prior to manufacture. All materials connected to the manufacture of the pressure vessel are supplied with material certificates showing composition, minimum strength of material, place of origin etc (also subject to the same inspection authority), plus prior to release to the client, successfully perform a pressure test. The procedures for a manned submersible would be more rigorous and exacting than that an industrial pressure vessel.
      It's my understanding that serious concerns were raised about the design and manufacture of the 'Titan' back in 2018, but they seem to have been brushed under the carpet.
      Keeping this comment as short and concise as I can, I think that after the inquest to this tragedy, the legislation and procedures surrounding the design, manufacture and use of private submersibles will tighten significantly.

    • @bjornironsides6474
      @bjornironsides6474 Рік тому +6

      Because people are not as smart as they think they are.

    • @pussydestroyer87
      @pussydestroyer87 Рік тому

      It was cheaper.

    • @revolvermaster4939
      @revolvermaster4939 Рік тому +7

      Rush thought CF was a good idea because it was his idea.

  • @dadtype2339
    @dadtype2339 Рік тому +2

    I wonder if they will use your video in court? It's that good! ❤

  • @bugtalk84
    @bugtalk84 Рік тому +46

    The moments before the OceanGate imploded must've been a really scary and harrowing experience for the 5 people involved.

    • @lisagardner5157
      @lisagardner5157 Рік тому

    • @Aaron-rv1si
      @Aaron-rv1si Рік тому +17

      You mean the milli-milli seconds?
      They didn't know. You can't even blink as fast as they were crushed.

    • @lamb8086
      @lamb8086 Рік тому +30

      How? They didn’t see it coming. The scariest moment should have been when they initially looked inside the titan and then decided to take a tour in it…

    • @xiongbreeze
      @xiongbreeze Рік тому +3

      @@lamb8086 u do realize they can feel the pain right? Getting crush in an instant is like getting burn before it hit the nerve system lol

    • @xiongbreeze
      @xiongbreeze Рік тому

      ​​@@Aaron-rv1siol if that was you it would feel painful the reason u people think it's painless is because it's so fast that it instantly happened our skin when we touch it we instantly feel it lol

  • @briankibetronoh4685
    @briankibetronoh4685 Рік тому +17

    RIP guys. Getting to that depth can never be me

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +1

      Im afraid of Baby Shark Song

    • @miscvids2810
      @miscvids2810 Рік тому

      @@Aitelly lol

    • @RaviShankar-yf7vq
      @RaviShankar-yf7vq Рік тому

      birth is chaos , death is peace.. whether on land,water or air..or or space

    • @RaviShankar-yf7vq
      @RaviShankar-yf7vq Рік тому

      i missed the 5th element fire or sun.. i know your 6th sense is searching for answer

  • @jordancapps9521
    @jordancapps9521 Рік тому +96

    Nice animation. I hope the updated video recognizes how these composites would just shatter to bits in an implosion. I've heard tales that the company did not even do standard aerospace NDT on the finished layup. Delamination can happen even when everything was done perfectly, and I have seen it on aerospace parts.

    • @kevins.3825
      @kevins.3825 Рік тому +3

      I believe the Boing 777 and F117 Stealth Fighter used carbon fiber wings, there was also an instance of one of the wings on the F117 failing and snapping off like a cracker. Most wing designs have a certain amount of flex or deflection. I think about how whales dive so deep, they basically have a lot of fat that compresses inward as they dive down deep...deep enough to find giant squids.

    • @juliebraden6911
      @juliebraden6911 Рік тому

      A lot of people here who think it's still 2 spaces after a period. It looks weird.

    • @kevins.3825
      @kevins.3825 Рік тому +2

      @@juliebraden6911 hopefully this helps your understanding.
      Ellipsis points are periods in groups of usually three, or sometimes four. They signal either that something has been omitted from quoted text, or that a speaker or writer has paused or trailed off in speech or thought. That's the basics.

    • @follybeachusa
      @follybeachusa Рік тому

      @@juliebraden6911 It is still two spaces after a period

  • @damianbeatz
    @damianbeatz Рік тому +9

    "The CEO of OceanGate was supposed to explain that the training would be useless, because in the event of a failure "they will be dead anyway." And I suppose he explained it like this: "There is always a threat, but even when you get on a plane or a car, there is a danger to life." I don't believe he made it clear and blunt to them, because it would have discouraged them, unless he didn't realize it himself.

  • @Chazd1949
    @Chazd1949 Рік тому +49

    That was an excellent presentation ! Very informative, great graphics ! The best I've seen. Thank you for all the work you put into this !

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +2

      Much appreciated! You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

    • @Chazd1949
      @Chazd1949 Рік тому +1

      @@Aitelly Thank you. I will check it out soon. In fact, after going to your site, I subscribed. You have lots of good, informative videos to watch.

  • @nikobellic3856
    @nikobellic3856 Рік тому +12

    Id be freaking out just knowing the amount of pressure on the hull that only increases as you descend, yea those people on board were definitely nuts

    • @michellebabicz2143
      @michellebabicz2143 Рік тому +2

      It is tremendously sad that the young kid on board was said to have been terrified beforehand (according to his aunt), but went anyway to please his father as a Father's Day gift. Both perished.

    • @Spitta504TV
      @Spitta504TV Рік тому +2

      @@michellebabicz2143 That's the part the fucks me up the most

  • @PRR5406
    @PRR5406 Рік тому +97

    Looking at the layout of the submersible, one finds it seductively modern and complete. The immediate flaws are the carbon fiber hull (obviously) the hatch closure, the toilet arrangement, and the game controller. The steering mechanism is another thing that appears to come up short. Very interesting animation. I think showing the intensity and immediacy of the implosion would be worth illustrating.

    • @bryanrocker5033
      @bryanrocker5033 Рік тому +6

      The passengers should have been wearing diapers.

    • @BVZTIII
      @BVZTIII Рік тому +15

      The most obvious flaw is its layout. Guess why every other submersible is a ball shape 🤷‍♂️

    • @ZealotryWingsGogo
      @ZealotryWingsGogo Рік тому +5

      believe it or not, the game controller is actually industry standard

    • @sigmachud9092
      @sigmachud9092 Рік тому +19

      @@ZealotryWingsGogo no. it is not. people keep saying this, its just not. for ROV's or even certain periscope operations on actual subs- sure, but for critical operations where people's lives depend on it, it is not 'industry standard'

    • @ShotgunNShacK
      @ShotgunNShacK Рік тому +1

      @@sigmachud9092 wrong.

  • @mikedaugherty30
    @mikedaugherty30 Рік тому +18

    I am also curious if the “grain” of the carbon fiber tube matters. Supposedly pressure tanks like fire extinguishers are made of carbon fiber, but when the fiber is woven it is weaved with alternating diagonal fibers. I saw a video where the Titan sub seemed to be weaved in only one direction.

  • @NSSMutableYoutubeChannel
    @NSSMutableYoutubeChannel Рік тому +8

    Very good animation, good job! Which software do you use to animate this?

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +2

      Blender 3d Software- It's free

  • @123martinap
    @123martinap Рік тому +3

    All these videos coming out of this tragic events. 99% of these will be for the views and $$. This one is greatly educational and gives us all who as humans hoped they never suffered. Great video thanks.

  • @Emily-lh6em
    @Emily-lh6em Рік тому +61

    I found this video to be very informative about how the titan was built and the animation was very good. I was curious about its design and you explained that well. This is a lesson and reminder that there's a good reason to listen to the advice and warnings of other experts in the same field. No one man knows best and we need other people to review important things like this. Stockton strikes me as a man who truly believed in his design and felt confident enough to be personally aboard it. I personally don't like the idea of using a modified game controller because game controllers aren't the sturdiest. They tend to wear down, become unresponsive to a button press, and joysticks can have the tendency to drift (like joycons). Its not a big deal on land when im playing a game but deep in the ocean where it would be hard to get help quickly it may not be as dependable. You shouldn't gamble when it comes to human lives. 😔

    • @pankajsingh-od2vb
      @pankajsingh-od2vb Рік тому

      From which country u r dear 💞

    • @juliebraden6911
      @juliebraden6911 Рік тому

      Yeah except the video depicts the carbon fiber hull crumpled like a Coke can on the ocean floor when in reality it was pulverized and is now a fine powder if anything. These people aren't scientists and it shows. This video is entertainment and nothing else.

    • @justiceLiberte590
      @justiceLiberte590 Рік тому

      Well Said

  • @chadlimon
    @chadlimon Рік тому +1

    This video does not show the implosion or how it happened. Did you replace this after you received complaints?

  • @add_nyc
    @add_nyc Рік тому +9

    this was so well put together and explained! the graphics are amazing! thank you! 🙌🏻

    • @juliebraden6911
      @juliebraden6911 Рік тому

      Other than getting the information completely wrong, yeah, it's real pretty to look at.

  • @xotekissu9938
    @xotekissu9938 Рік тому +31

    You guys really hit gold with this one.. But it all seriousness, It's very informative so thank you. U guys uacknowledging error and making corrections is just cherry on top. Great channel!!

    • @juliebraden6911
      @juliebraden6911 Рік тому

      Yeah. The gold of spreading false information for clicks. Not a great channel, stop encouraging this lying horseshit.

  • @IKnowYouDidnt
    @IKnowYouDidnt Рік тому +4

    Wow. Thanks for explaining the difference between a submersible and a submarine and that it can be controlled with a video game controller.

  • @creaperassassin450
    @creaperassassin450 Рік тому +2

    Stockton Rush is a gambler and on that day, his luck ran out.
    RIP to them.

  • @SizzleGeko
    @SizzleGeko Рік тому +6

    5:14 Man was playing Subnautica irl

  • @TresPalmer
    @TresPalmer Рік тому +10

    I would add that the Titan was unregistered as an unregulated experimental craft and that a sphere will always be the sturdiest shape with a tube coming in a distant second. Also, I think the carbon scrubber would have to be situated within the pressure hull.

    • @alanm8932
      @alanm8932 Рік тому +2

      I'm thinking the CO2 scrubber is behind the rear wall, in the rear titanium dome. Views of the inside, looking towards the rear, show a flat wall with a large flat screen on it. They have obviously reserved that valuable internal space behind that wall for something. I think it's the CO2 scrubber and the air circulation fan it would need. As you say, located inside the pressure hull.

    • @TresPalmer
      @TresPalmer Рік тому

      @@alanm8932 Agreed.

  • @livinup33
    @livinup33 Рік тому +4

    Cool. But how did the ramp return to Mother Ship? Was it being controlled by the Polar Prince or just bouyed up by itself once the submersible left it?

    • @samweller2001
      @samweller2001 10 місяців тому

      Ramp? They purposely made part of the vessel detach to help assend quicker but it wasn't a ramp. The vessel didn't just disinagrate either. It imploded/exploded so there will be part rising to the surface based on the weight of the part.

  • @nashG
    @nashG Рік тому +1

    Bro, This video got to the news! NEW SUBSCRIBER!
    Edit: That controller lived forever fr

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому

      Many stole our videos and many gave permission

    • @nashG
      @nashG Рік тому

      @@Aitelly yeah. but congrats for being on the news!

    • @nashG
      @nashG Рік тому

      Btw as a submarine fan, This is approved. (This is cool)

  • @kumardigvijaymishra5945
    @kumardigvijaymishra5945 Рік тому +5

    Cool animation 👍
    Eventually Titanic claimed another vessel. The story is tragic and a reminder that engineers must always be listened to on such critical voyages.

  • @microscopic.caterpill
    @microscopic.caterpill Рік тому +15

    3:02 That is honestly so cute you guys backed up the camera to animate the tiny opening of the submersible door.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому

      😂
      You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

  • @z414141
    @z414141 Рік тому +3

    Fabulous video that explains everything and makes it very understandable.

  • @KyndlingStoneCB
    @KyndlingStoneCB Рік тому +2

    Can't wait for this to be a history lesson in the near future.

  • @donmcpherson9568
    @donmcpherson9568 Рік тому +12

    To my knowledge, carbon fiber composite is quite strong and also very brittle. Cracks could have developed in the carbon fiber mesh. Getting bigger with each dive. Finally progressing to catastrophic failure.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +1

      Agreed,but I guess after 4 dives
      You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

    • @satyanpatel6403
      @satyanpatel6403 Рік тому

      Very true. This is why carbon fiber bicycle frames only last about 4-5 years before showing cracks. Could be riding them in high heat or transport under the hot sun, and then riding in the winter as well.

  • @likestoospooge
    @likestoospooge Рік тому +7

    0:48. Aloo-mini-um? But you’re speaking with an American accent. This is the real story here. I want answers!

  • @CwSeniorHensley441
    @CwSeniorHensley441 Рік тому +11

    This video is very informative, the description of all the components and how things work are top notch, keep up the good work and God bless the families and friends of the ones lost on the sub. Truly heartbreaking 💔

  • @garyvale8347
    @garyvale8347 Рік тому +1

    is there a layout or diagram of titan submersible , as I believe sea water began entering thru a sealed rear penetration required from the exterior mounted equipment cables, causing the carbon fiber to weaken and fail ........ taking on water weight would explain the rapid dive rate and inability to begin resurfacing quickly ..........

  • @JayVP9
    @JayVP9 Рік тому +22

    Crazy how much information you can find and tell people and the animation you made to help people that learn by seeing, with you comparing it to SUVs. It makes more sense to me now in one video, Thanks AiTelly!

    • @lamb8086
      @lamb8086 Рік тому

      To be fair from day one it was compared to the size of a standard minivan. Nothing new there…

    • @lamb8086
      @lamb8086 Рік тому

      @SuperNostalgia. eww…just eww

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому

      😂 You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

    • @heathermoore9008
      @heathermoore9008 Рік тому

      Yes ,I love the size comparison

  • @jeanie8831
    @jeanie8831 Рік тому +8

    This was great. Thanks. I really expected it to be all bent and crumpled but it wasn't. Large pieces were brough up but they weren't misshapen. The coast guard site indicates the investigative report could take 1-2 years. That seems a very long time for such a small unit.

    • @gailmcn
      @gailmcn Рік тому +4

      investigations of major airplane crashes typically take 1-2 years also. And in those cases they have detailed documentation of the air craft's mechanical history, and recordings of the plane performance before the crash,and cockpit recordings. For Titan, nothing like that. Here, they have to compile massive amounts of testimony from everyone involved going back to the production of all the components, do detailed microscopic examination of all damaged elements, do lengthy tests on the materials.....it's going to take a lot of time, travel, and manpower to do all that.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому

      You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html

    • @silly_hammy1
      @silly_hammy1 Рік тому +4

      @@gailmcn why even waste money and time doing all that. Just never build one of these again. There, mission accomplished 🤣🤣

  • @LegallyArMD
    @LegallyArMD Рік тому +21

    One thing that nobody states is that not even a navy sub goes that deep during dive or even in enemy territory. To put in perspective how wild this entire trip even happend

    • @jeffreyv8306
      @jeffreyv8306 Рік тому +5

      So what? Navy subs are not designed to dive to these depths. Intentionally. If the navy wanted to dive regularly to depths of the Titanic, they would design a sub capable of doing so

    • @LegallyArMD
      @LegallyArMD Рік тому +1

      @@jeffreyv8306 which proves my point even more.

    • @jeffreyv8306
      @jeffreyv8306 Рік тому

      @@LegallyArMD hardly. If someone tries to cross the ocean in a kayak, you don't say crossing the ocean is a "wild" trip.

  • @bryansmith536
    @bryansmith536 Рік тому +2

    What was the point of making at lightweight when they're dealing with massive water pressure?

  • @laurencefahrni4821
    @laurencefahrni4821 Рік тому +17

    A couple of shortfalls:
    A ship would not drop anchor at that depth 4:35
    The aft section at the back would not crush as it's outside the pressure vessel. 0:41

    • @edwardwilley3404
      @edwardwilley3404 Рік тому +1

      Thank you for saving me writing same. It's a fancy cartoon, but incorrect.

    • @kevins.3825
      @kevins.3825 Рік тому

      You sure about that? What about the oxygen tank and C02 recirculation pump that pumped through the vessel compartment. The parts/pieces inside the aft/tail section would be under the same pressure where it interfaced with the main pressure vessel. If one the ducts or hoses failed it would enter the cabin, like a door on an airplane when pressurized, except instead of sucking out it would suck in.

    • @kavalogue
      @kavalogue Рік тому

      Two. Two slight issues that in terms of information does not matter. This fancy cartoon is still bang on

    • @kevins.3825
      @kevins.3825 Рік тому +2

      @@kavalogue simple minds are simply amused. When it comes to investigating engineering catastrophes I prefer facts. The animation is great, just no need to speculate with the commentary when the facts remain unknown.

    • @edwardwilley3404
      @edwardwilley3404 Рік тому +1

      @@kevins.3825 That's an interesting thought about an external tank imploding. A standard SCUBA tank is full at 200 bar with a big factor of safety. But if they got to the bottom there was 380 bar, a differential of 180 bar compression which a normal tank is not built for. I assume folks designing a submersible would not have overlooked that.
      It's possible, but not likely that the external equipment fairing collapsed first and not in the context of the implosion the article was describing.

  • @Xcreator999
    @Xcreator999 Рік тому +6

    Most basic submarine yet the highest price tag to ride in.

    • @joebidenisyourpresidentget2481
      @joebidenisyourpresidentget2481 Рік тому +2

      To be fair the price was reasonable considering the costs involved. This thing was never going to make its money back. It was just to feed one man’s ego.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому +3

      I feel bad for the Little Boy

    • @Whiaf
      @Whiaf Рік тому

      If the ceo wanted the ocean gate to have a long life, the tickets would have costed 1.5 million dollars to maintain it

    • @jobotmang
      @jobotmang Рік тому

      You couldn't have said it better

  • @Desire123ification
    @Desire123ification Рік тому +5

    Well explained many thanks!

  • @IowaKim
    @IowaKim Рік тому

    What keeps it from tipping up on end and staying oriented?

  • @seanchang1202
    @seanchang1202 Рік тому +11

    0:05 The tail cone is not a pressure hull, so it will not implode.

  • @hunterlinton1672
    @hunterlinton1672 Рік тому +4

    The fact that some billionaires paid $250,000 each to sit on the floor of a small dinky submersible that was operated by a video game controller and had a bucket behind a curtain for shitting in is fucking hilarious to me. 😂 I'm sorry it is really sad what happened to them. But if you're just going to look at the titanic on a monitor screen anyways, why even go down there? Why not stay at the surface and send an unmanned drone and camera down instead? This whole thing sounds like a love death robots episode.

  • @powysdewhurst
    @powysdewhurst Рік тому +4

    Good work folks. Well thought out and animated.

    • @Aitelly
      @Aitelly  Рік тому

      ❤ we love you guys.
      You might also like Nuclear Powered Submarine Engineering behind it #3d Nuclear Reactor released
      Link: ua-cam.com/video/J0lb46Zi5-s/v-deo.html