Yet another case of the engineer says no and some manager says yes. And then like when the space shuttle blows up everyone is like "why didn't the engineer make management say no?"
@@solareclipsetimer i don't know how they could have prevented the columbia disaster, besides halting the entire shuttle program.. which BTW they should have done, even before the challenger disaster
@@peabody3000 Thanks for your comment. NASA had previous launch videos showing of pieces of foam falling off the external tank where it was coming off that external pipe. It was a dangerous thing, but they did not intervene. They were lucky, foam just never struck the shuttle at a crucial spot, like the leading edge of the wing, like it did on Columbia. The fix after Columbia was simply to no longer put foam insulation on that external pipe stack. They could have made that change years earlier and the Columbia accident would not have happened.
@@solareclipsetimer that foam ramp as they called it wasn't the only spot shedding foam chunks. shuttle launches had foam coming from many spots, largely at random. the ramp area was one of the worse spots for losing foam, but even with improvements there the shuttle was still a deathtrap that could never have been made adequately safe. i'm glad it's gone for good.
In the end those sensors actually did their job and sent plenty of warnings early on that there was a big problem growing in the carbon fiber hull and Stockton ignored those warnings.
That was the part that really shocked me. You’re in the sub you hear these noises, plus you have this data showing you the sounds including this one really loud sound. And you just keep going forward like nothing’s wrong. It’s like people that keep driving their car when it is making a crazy noise. Why would you do that?
@@katrinat.3032 Agree, Stockton was in a huge finanicial mess, even when they were using hull 2. He was ignoring warnings to force the dives while at great
Especially the bits where he says Nissan-along with Rush-ignored and dismissed all of his concerns,and that Nissan and Rush dumped the Washington Uni as it was too concerned about engineering to take the project "In house" and that Rush and Nissan were arrogant,thinking they could build a deep sea sub with no experience. A lot of deflection and hindsight (and fear of blame) in this testimony.
@@infrasleep this guy testimony is so annoying because you feel like he never answers the question! You’re right so much deflection. Lockridge, he was stellar. He was hot too.
@@infrasleep U comment is very true. I have since read the transcript of the conversation in which Lochridge was dismissed/fired. Nissen took part in this conversation. The transcript is redacted but u can make out who is who. Nissen is very vocal that there is nothing wrong with what they are doing and is completely complacent to Rush. While his testimony now is quite the opposite. According to the transcript and other documents Nissen wasn't sharing technical documents with lochridge needed for his inspection. I feel at that time Nissen was part of the problem Lochridge was trying fight when it comes to the safety and engineering concerns. Nissen was completely vested that it would work and was convinced a scan of the hull wasn't needed.
I've been following Ocean Gate since the implosion last year. And really, it sounds like a shit of a place to work. I guess Rush employing what sounds like a lot of people made him feel like a big shot which fed his ego. Rush in fact created his own demise.
Yeah, it sounded like Stockton was able to overrule and steam roll anyone in the company that disagreed with him. Stockton was a smart guy, but his ego was so huge he was unable to listen to the experts he hired. I think he viewed himself in the same light as dudes like Sir Edmund Hillary, he thought he was a pioneering explorer sojourning into the final frontier. Nothing wrong with wanting to do that, but the corner cutting and unnecessary risk taking lead to the accident. There is a really good documentary about the design in manufacturer of a submersible called limiting factor. It’s a good example of the design, building testing process being done right. I’m not an expert in submarine engineering, but you can tell from the testimony that Stockton had a massive attitude problem.
@@AndrewScott1337 I agree. Thanks for your comment. A problem is that Tony had an idea about certification, what path can you use for solid engineering? Since they we not going to use submersible engineering, Tony did his best to apply aerospace engineering. But it is just not the same. Sub "classing" has made deep sea diving very safe to the point of Titan. Stockton and Titan caused the first deepsea diving fatalities.
As a person with Boeing engineering expertise in the design and manufacture of composite load bearing structures, there was a least one major flaw in the design-build process. That major flaw would have extended the time to failure. But if the use of fine grain ultrasonic inspection had been done with computer assist to find the tiny voids, the basic carbon structure would have allowed for more pressure cycles. If in addition, the carbon fiber hull had been inspected after each pressure cycle, the growing delamination(s) would have been detected as growing voids in the composite structure. The computers, hardware and software are all readily available for this inspection. The cost is not unreasonable and would have been an essential quali ty control step in the design build process. The question the is then the next step, is the joint design between t he titanium end bells and carbon tube going to fail? Absolutely it would fail after some number of cycles. The end bells connection to the fiber tube was a disaster waiting to happen. The basic concept of the joint did not take into account several known effects.
I agree with you. Thanks for the comment. I was always worried about the "glued" joints and I did another video about that. After the disaster, a lot of engineers posted videos that predicted the failure of the hull was the center of the tube collapsing and shattering the carbon hull into a million pieces. I never thought that. Now pictures of the wreckage images on the bottom of the ocean show large long pieces of the carbon fiber hull jammed into the rear titanium dome. That makes me believe that the failure was at the front ring joint and there was a lot of force to the rear.
I feel like Nissen is trying to cast himself in Lockridge's role when infact he was actually on onboard with Stockton. He's just trying to save his reputation it seems.
Not sure. He is doing this testimony under oath and he has all the paperwork of his engineering data about the problems and therefore the warnings. I don't know if you watched the video to the end, the last frame has a list of all of his work experience that I listed from what he said in his testimony. He is a smart guy. If you have chance go directly to the end of the video and quickly read about his experience.
That is the exact same feeling that I got from hearing all of the testimonies over the two weeks. I feel like Nissen is extremely guilty and pointing his finger at everyone else.
@@TikkaTCMhe was fired before everything got worse. He’s also under oath and could be charged if found lying. The company was shit but they kept records of a lot of things they discussed there is probably correspondence to back up what he’s saying. I can hardly blame the guy fired 4 years ago for the sub imploding when he was fired like the other guy. Doesn’t exactly make sense I think you’re just painting with too broad a brush.
Ugh! That shot of the wreckage, the one of the aft dome with much of the CF hull crammed into it, shown at about 30 seconds in this video, is the only shot that for me really reminds me that humans were part of this wreckage. I mean, that's where they are, in that shot, we are seeing where the majority of the remains of 5 entire humans are. THAT is where the PASTE was found. That PASTE had the DNA of all five of the previously human contents of that submersible. They actually divided that PASTE up into 4 equal portions and gave a portion each to the families of the pulverised. It's utterly gross, and fascinating, and hilarious and incomprehensible all at the same time. I'm only sad about poor Suleman never getting to claim that rubics cube world record, all because his father and four other too rich d1ckheads had more money than sense.
Right after the disaster, a lot of engineers posted videos that predicted the failure of the hull was the center of the tube collapsing and shattering the carbon hull into a million pieces. I never thought that. Now pictures of the wreckage images on the bottom of the ocean show large long pieces of the carbon fiber hull jammed into the rear titanium dome. That makes me believe that the failure was at the front ring joint and there was a lot of force towards the rear. Regarding Suleman, a father should never put his son in a position of that kind of risk,. I read an article somewhere that stated that Suleman was a bit apprehensive about the dive. They simply did not do enough research to understand that Titan was dangerous.
I'm very skeptical about Tony Nissen. It's in his best interest only now to say, "Oh, I wasn't a yes man. I fought Rush's decisions and protested about safety." (Of course he's saying that now.) A New Yorker article says, "Lochridge had been hired by OceanGate in May, 2015, as its director of marine operations and chief submersible pilot. The company moved him and his family to Washington, and helped him apply for a green card. But, before long, he was clashing with Rush and Tony Nissen, the company’s director of engineering, on matters of design and safety." Tony was on Rush's side while Lochridge was raising alarm about the issues. Tony Nissen is on video laughing it up and smiling when the Titan hull was being glued. It's in the hearings (when it serves him) that he's saying he wasn't a Yes man.
You have some points. It took a long time for Lochridge to get cleared to come to the U.S. and start work. It dragged into the Spring of 2016, by Lochridges own testimony. Tony asked David Spencer from Spencer Composites to oversee the gluing of the rings to the hull. Spencer sent their technicians to do that glue work and Spencer chose the type of epoxy to be used. Tony was just watching it happen. In his testiimony he stated that his primary role that day was to make sure things (ring and hull) lined up to be square. Apparently, gluing carbon fiber was one of David Spencer's specialties.
Correct. And it goes further than just being a "yes man". He is very person that convinced Rush to fire Lochridge and fire all the outside engineering contractors so they could do it in house. First, he says it was supposed to be "just one year" of employment. Then, he "needs to find his feet here". Why do you need to "find you feet" and get everyone who might be a real expert fired so you can be the guy who helps Stockton Rush design this thing if your employment is supposed to be just for one year? Nissen's hands are all over it and now he's trying to say he spoke up and was fired. Rush didn't allow him to stay beyond the original year, and build a large engineering department because he "pushed back". Look how fast the others were all gone who actually DID speak up and push back. Look at the OceanGate Archives videos. Nissen literally christened the original Titan. Also, listen to how vague his answers are in this testimony. Now compare his testimony to every single other engineer and even non engineers like Lochridge. He "spoke up" after the first hull was already cracked to the point it HAD to be discarded. He "stopped" the 2019 Titanic visit? NO. It stopped because that hull was too damaged. And, a board member who was pissed off told Stockton it's either you or NIssen. And THAT is when Nissen was gone. He literally says so himself. Also, no way did Rush ask Nissen to be the pilot on the Titanic dives. Tony had no experience whatsoever as a pilot. Nissen has as large an ego as Rush, they deserved each other. It's chilling that Nissen helped Rush to decide to design and build this in house and yet he knew enough not to go into it himself. Nissen designed the window, we know that for a fact. And I would not be surprised if he and Rush collaborated on that hull. That hull was NOT built to the design of either of the outside contractors, it was designed within OceanGate.
@@solareclipsetimer As director of engineering it was Nissan's job to make sure Spencer Composites was actually doing things correctly even if he had to do his own research and find another expert to consult about their recommendations. You do not get to say "oh, someone else said to do it that way" when you are the one ultimately responsible for the whole project.
Stockton Rush joined the esteemed list of inventors who were killed by their own inventions. What an accomplishment. He's right up there with the genius who jumped off the Eiffel Tower with his homemade, personally-sewn parachute suit.
OceanGate was nothing more than a vanity project disguised as a research vessel. With the proverbial "fall" coming in the form and shape of an implosion. An unnecessary and preventable incident that only happened as the result of someone who despite his "education", was not smart enough to acknowledge that he was wrong.
@@katrinat.3032 he only got 12 mill in inheritance and over the course of decades spent most of it. Oceangate apparently if someone testifying is to believed went through 100 mill and Oceangate was deep in debt along with Rush who was putting his own money in it.
@@katrinat.3032yes he was...and he was married to the great great granddaughter of the wealthiest couple who traveled on the Titanic who co-owned Macy's department store...the family still owns Macy's to this day.
Ok, I found that video. Thanks for the yip. Sure, it was a promotional and bold report and they were proud of it at the time. But I was also before they did any deep testing in the Bahamas. After the Bahamas was when they recognized the Spencer Composites hull was poorly done. That is when the whole cardin fiber hull concept started to come into question. Stockton did not want to give up so he had the second hull made.
Tony stopped them from diving to the Titanic and then hull 1 cracked. Then Tony was fired. David Lochbridge reported OceanGate to OSHA and OSHA did nothing. But I am not surprised because OSHA is a "workplace" safety organization. The don't "police" dumb ideas and potential public hazards.
That tool was the same guy who was like "its the glue that holds the family together and we want to make sure its right" lol and now he saw the disaster coming a mile away, he gets a Dr Evil RIIIGHT.
If u ask me Tony Nissen is responsible in some regard. He as lead engineer oversaw and actually personally helped with the gluing of the 2 Rings to the hull. As we all know this was done in a sub-standard way in sub-standard conditions. He should have blown the whistle right there.
Tony had the folks from Spencer Composites due the glue. The Spencer folks were supposedly the experts. Tony, actually did a lot of good work trying to match the moduli of the titanium rings and the hull. The issue is that there are no standards for what they were trying to build. It needed many, many unmanned test dives to prove the concept and the build would not work.
@@solareclipsetimer I don't want to discredit Nissen in anyway but if i look at Lochridges's and Dave Dyer's testimony it seems Nissen just like Rush disregarded many testing and engineering protocols set by APL and this was during Nissen's time as lead engineer. Nissen isn't a professional engineer and he had zero experience with submersibles, he was not in anyplace to make those decisions especially without the APL or a classing agency .His experience was more in instrumentation, in which as we now know he indeed did a good job with the acoustic monitoring system. During the conversation in which David Lochridge was fired Nissen was present, This conversation was recorded and i'am really curious what was said by Nissen. This could determine in part how vested he was in the kool-aide cult and show how liable he really is. Given the testimony's and the fact he never blew the whistle on this thing he was for a long time a true believer in the kool-aide cult of Rush.
@@solareclipsetimer There absolutely are standards for Carbon Fiber to Titanium joints. It's done in aerospace. There is no reason whatsoever that a joint you expect to stress *more* than in aerospace applications should not be done to AT LEAST aerospace standards, and on hull 1 it was not.
@@solareclipsetimer They didn't match and there was no way they possibly could. Don't you think he should have realised that if he was competent in what he was doing?
You never know what move such a company would make in the future. He basically wanted to do what he loved doing and so he applied in a sub company. As he noticed somethings getting out of bounds, he was fired for holding them back.
I don’t really buy Tony Nissen’s version of events. I think he was incompetent and less concerned about safety than he described here. It’s not like Stockton is around anymore to counter his story either. Probably just trying to cover his a**
I don't know if you watched the video to the end, the last frame has a list of all of his work experience that I listed from what he said in his testimony. He is a smart guy. If you have chance go directly to the end of the video and quickly read about his experience. This video was not about his engineering work. But I watched all of it and he really was trying to make things work. The first hull from Spencer was garbage.
@@solareclipsetimer I watched his whole testimony as well as David Lochridge’s. I have no doubt that Nissen is an intelligent and educated person, but many foolish and lying people have academic credentials. Personally, I found Lochridge’s testimony to be highly credible, most especially due to the fact that he also provided *documentation* for what he was saying-something we did not see much of from Nissen. Where are the emails where Nissen expressed his disagreement with Stockton? Texts? Why did he not support Lochridge’s safety concerns at the time? When Nissen was fired, why did he not do anything to raise the alarm about the poor safety standards at OceanGate? It just seems awfully convenient that every time Nissen told Stockton “no” it happened in private when the only other person who can verify it is now deceased. In fact, I don’t know that I even believe Nissen’s testimony about his termination being due to his refusal to approve the 2019 Titanic expedition. If you listen closely to his testimony, he admits that the reason OceanGate gave for his firing was that Nissen should have been able to foresee the design flaws in the hull. Ironically, this seems pretty reasonable to me on behalf of OceanGate. If the guy you hire to engineer and oversee the manufacturing of your submersible produces a product with a huge flaw that is unusable, it seems reasonable to me that he would be let go. I sort of doubt that even Stockton was arrogant and delusional enough to think that a cracked hull would be able to go to Titanic depths. Nissen has cast himself as the savior in that situation, implying that if it weren’t for him refusing to sign off on that expedition it would have happened. But do we have any proof of that whatsoever? I would be willing to bet that nearly every person at OceanGate who took a look at that cracked hull (including Stockton) knew immediately that it could never go to the Titanic depths. Hopefully more information will be released on Nissen’s role with time…according to Lochridge’s testimony, there is a recording of Lochridge’s termination meeting with OceanGate. If Nissen was part of that meeting, it would be very enlightening for that recording to be released so we can see what he was actually saying behind closed doors at the time.
And one more note-Even if we take Nissen’s testimony at face value, if it is true that Nissen had all these safety concerns and did nothing whatsoever to express or report them to anyone inside or outside of OceanGate, he still bears some responsibility for what happened. Nissen helped to engineer that death trap-both directly and indirectly with v2-and when he left he washed his hands of it and essentially decided it wasn’t his problem. No matter what version of events is true, Nissen’s character has not shown itself positively.
@@lalaLAX219 If I were a hiring person I would definitely not hire him to be responsible for anything major. His engineering skills may be good, I am not qualified to judge based on what little we've seen, but I am not at all impressed by what he demonstrated of his ethics.
One of my first jobs after college was doing Failure Analysis of integrated circuits. My job was very detective like. You have to rely on what little evidence you have and not color your observations with your own prejudices. In my findings the failures happen because equipment wasn't adjusted or calibrated properly. Later in my career I did other jobs as a designer. I still keep this mindset that a failure is a perfect storm of events lining up. I live by thought that the Worst Case Scenario can actually happen. I still get a LOT done faster than most people who take RISKS. I don't have to worry because THE DUDE ABIDES by safety rules. 😎
I agree and love the line " rely on what little evidence you have and not color your observations with your own prejudices." That is what Stockton was doing, he wasn't taking no for an answer.
I'd like to know who the board members are. What influence did they have over Stockton, "they said it's either me or you, and it aint going to be me" and why didn't they testify?
This was just a Coast Guard hearing to find out what happened, with OceanGate's lawyers also able to ask questions. Once they complete their report, criminal investigations could start, but I doubt this will happen. The board members Stockton Rush was referring to in that specific quote most likely do not actually exist, and Rush was trying to shirk responsibility for firing his friend by pretending it wasn't his decision but nameless board members he never listened to before or after this one instance.
Most American companies nowadays are unprofessional and will cut corners to save cost jeopardize safety to gain revenue and fuck over whoever they got to to get ahead that’s American business in a nutshell
It’s not uncommon to hear from people who have run in’s with flight test engineers to say “that guy is arrogant and won’t listen, too dumb to know he doesn’t know everything.” Like the one that rewired his mom’s house before I bought it. It was a total gut job.
In my career i ve had the chance to watch big shots similar to Rush. I guess it s a pathology that makes this kind of person behave so similarly to one another. Rush s engineers were there just to fill pspers up and make it look like a legitimate process. Everyone was useless because he was so bloody good at everything. It blows my mind how much he was lying to himself. The co2 scrubber. The towing. The storing.... and the datas were collected and clearly showing the hull had failed somehow.. he was not an idiot. He had enough to do what most cannot. For money He was a criminal.
Hi thanks for you nice comment. I wanted to excerpt out the company's communication problems for this video. I also changed the order of some answers to make it easier to follow the timeline.
@@TikkaTCM Not really. He was under oath; it is his sworn testimony. Right now this video is out of context because it is my first one about working with Stockton Rush. Other employees paint the same picture and I will be working on more videos.
You had a hard time following Nissen because he was talking the way someone talks when they are blowing smoke up people's backsides. He hemmed and hawed his way through testimony because he was trying to paint himself as being like Lochridge when he and Stockton Rush were both playing at engineering and putting people's lives at risk. Listen to his raw testimony. He was hired as a one year contractor. He is the one who sent Lochridge's famous list to Rush. And that list of issues got Lochridge in a meeting with Tony and Stockton. Read the whole meeting transcript, you can see where Nissen is chiming in. He's chiming in to just parrot every single thing Rush is saying to Lochridge. Then Lochridge gets fired at the end. Then, Nissen gets the outside engineers all fired and convinces Rush that they can design it all in house. And his job moves from being a one year contract to full time. And he and Rush LARP like they are real engineers and design everything, including hull number one, which gets cracked one month before the first dives were supposed to take place. Nissen is trying to pretend like he "said no" to those dives that were supposed to happen ONE MONTH after the first hull was CLEARLY damaged too much to go down ANYWAY. It was the hull itself that "said no", not Nissen. At that point it is clear that some of the board were angry, listen to Nissen's testimony, he admits that. He admits that Rush told him that two board members confronted Rush about the failure of the first hull and said that Nissen, as Director of Engineering, should have seen this coming. At that point Stockton Rush wasn't going to admit to the board that he and Nissen did all the design together and that it was BOTH of their faults. Rush just fired Nissen and went on to change the design of hull number two so it was wound different, one inch at a time, and also had a second direction of winding the carbon fiber. Even the window was Nissen's design, that came out very clearly at the hearings.
Rush took what should have been a scientific and engineering project and made it to a commercial enterprise. The failure was the interface between dissimilar materials that responded to increasing pressure at different rates
I agree Sometimes in engineering when you are trying to make something completely new and the prototype makes it look like the concept won't work, you have to back off. Take your losses and give up on your idea. Stockton did not want to give up.
Carbon fiber is strong in tension, not compression. It doesn't matter how thick toy make it, it delaminates and fails in compression (such as an underwater submersible). It works great for aircraft though.
I agree. It just did not seem of the proper use of the technology. The problem is that the engineers at Spencer Composites (1st hull) worked up numbers that made it look like it would work, with strength to spare. Wierd.
There is something incredibly wrong with a man who takes a job as "the initial director of engineering for Ocean Gate" without knowing the entire purose of the company. This is his claim around 3:00~3:09, and it is either a lie or a plea of innocence in manslaughter through fantastic ignorance and incompetence. Or both.
Thanks, for your comment. I agree with you, I thought that was odd in his testimony. However, the testimony of the co-founder of Ocean Gate testified that the original plan for OceanGate was to have deep sea subs stationed around the world to be leased for research. That was the original business model. The original intent had nothing to do with the Titanic. They morphed into the Titanic business model later when they realized they were probably only going to be able to afford to build one sub. So, it is conceivable that they did not tell Tony early on. Also, I think Stockton was being a little secretive about the Titanic idea until he was closer to having the sub built. That is my take. I will be doing a review of the OceanGate employee testimony soon. Thanks.
@@mich8292 Thanks for your comment. I'm not sure. I listened to Tony's testimony very carefully. He had engineering experience in the marine and aerospace industries. Stockton was an aerospace engineer. Stockton and Tony together were a dangerous combination because they were trying to work outside of the normal sub-classing engineering. Tony testified, stating in several different ways, that you can have valid engineering that follows other defined standards, like ASTE. He also, testified that he likes to do things that are "outside the box." so I think the challenge of the project interested him. So, he was trying to have good engineering principles on a part-by-part, or section-by-section basis. The problem is that sub-classing engineering looks at the machine more as a whole. But, when the sub failed testing in the Bahamas in 2018, Tony told Stockton the hull was not usable, not safe, and he would not sign off on the 2018 Titanic Expeditions (which were already planned). Tony got fired for that as if it was his fault. All of that is true. Actually, it was the Spencer Composite hull, the first hull that was the problem, it was junk. Then Stockton hired new engineers, made a new hull with a different company (still 5 inches thick), and forged ahead. Tony was far removed from the second Titan that imploded. My thoughts.
@@solareclipsetimer By the time Tony Nissen was hired they were committed to going to the Titanic and had already collected money for it. And Nissen's testimony does not sound like a seasned professional engineer. He is obfuscating and vague compared to every other engineer, and even non engineers, who testified. He was allouwed to build a large team because he was a "yes man". Even his claim that he "pushed back" does not match the reality. Every other person who pushed back was fired. Also, by the time he says he was "fired for saying no" the hull was already cracked. There was no "saying no" at that point. At that point it didn't matter what anyone wanted to do, they were forced to retire the hull. The real reason he was fired was alluded to by Nissen himself. He says that the board told Stockton it was either Stockton or Tony that had to go and Stockton wasn't going to be the one. I think the real reason is that Nissen and Rush convinced themselves they could do all the design in house and either the board did, or didn't, know they had cut ties with NASA, Boeing, and APL. Either way once that hull failed ONE MONTH prior to the first paid customers expecting to go down, the board was likely pissed off because now they had to start all over with building another hull and obviously had to change the design as well. And being the Director of Engineering, don't even TRY to convince me Nissen wasn't all in on the whole thing. He was fired due to incompetence.
at 3:00 he tells a story about how he didn't know OceanGate was focused on Titanic. He said "I needed something to do for a year." That's the most toxic, self-destructive idea I've heard throughout this entire drama. I've heard myself say it, and I regret every single time. Engineers: you're worth more than the companies hiring you. Far more; both to society and to yourself. Don't let your occupation overshadow your identity.
I think Stockton was secretive about the idea of visiting the Titanic (at some stages in the process). His co-founder testified that when they initially discussed starting a sub company (the very early talks) it was not about the Titanic. They wanted about five subs stationed around the world to lease to scientific expeditions. There is no money in science expeditions though. I think it morphed into the Titanic expeditions to make money to pay for the initial investments and then hopefully to make a lot of money later (if they could continue to do it). It seems like they started a really expensive development project and they did not want to accept defeat, so they forged ahead.
@@solareclipsetimer It's just that at the time, Nissen wasn't looking to break into pelagic tourism... he was just an engineer looking to place a block in his career. He "needed something to do" and now he's testifying before a committee. At least my friend who worked for Morton Thiokol in the 80s thought he was advancing mankind's knowledge by making O-rings for rocket boosters. This guy was developing a next-level Uber for desecrating mass graves. We shouldn't be so caught up in developing our careers that anything like this could ever have looked like a good idea in the first place. My former employer made parts for rockets, and I left because I saw the same dangerous "more faster cheaper" mindset being beaten into the company's management by its pushy customers. I work in IT now, for a non-profit; because social workers are genuinely grateful for the help. All Jeff Bezos ever did to thank me was take a selfie with his cowboy hat. As an engineer in his fifties I beg you young smart people... whenever you "need something to do," spend that time bettering yourself, and with the people you love... not enabling the wealthy.
@@jamesmurphy449 I agree with you. I did not emphasize it in the video, but Tony had experience in both aerospace and marine engineering. He like the marine stuff better. He thought this job, working on marine engineering, would be an interesting and fulfilling job. Like he testified, he though the parts were all there, he just had to take what they developed and tested on Cyclops 1 and put it on Titan. It ended up not to be the case.
The more I hear at this investigation, the more obvious it is that Stockton Rush was a world class jerk. I know it's not considered polite to speak ill of the dead, but Rush got 4 people killed, including a teenage boy. For the kid alone, Rush deserves to be condemned for all time.
if you're condensing this interview to 18', then it's wise to give access to the whole interview so they can make up their minds of what might have missed and others might find it might be significant.
Search TH-cam for the Coast Guard Titan Hearings, Day 1, September 16, 2024, it is easy to find. The 18 minutes is just about the employment situation. Tony talked about a lot of interesting engineering in the 4 hours. But that was not the point of this video.
Notice how NASA returned Starship unmanned. They learned from Challenger and Columbia. Starship made it through the re-entry fine, and Boeing said it would be okay. But NASA wasn't going to risk the lives of the two astronauts since the thrusters were not reliable. NASA made the correct call to return the capsule unmanned.
Starship is Elon musks huge space craft. He has said that it will not be manned until it has had at least 50 successful flights. Unlike Boeing and oceangate space x is always learning and testing and adapting to what they learn. At the start nasa assigned engineers to Boeing g and space x. They all said that Boeing was closed minded and that space x was open minded. The results speak for themselves
Someone testified that to be a licensed as a professional engineer, you have to go through a 5 year internship working under the supervision of another engineer. That same individual said that none of the young college graduates working at OceanGate were licensed professional engineers. Appalling.
@@stargazer5784 Nobody cares about engineering licenses anymore. Elon Musk never even took the EIT exam. He never even took one freshman engineering course.
As an engineer it's easy to have concerns brushed aside. It's important to document decisions. I wouldn't accept a job that put people at risk if my boss wasn't an engineer.
@@lophilip like any profession you’ll have those who are less on par with those at the top of their field but yes as you said when lives are at risk and your reputation you need to step back and just have some basic common sense. I will say I feel like this almost “fake it until you make it” style of engineering does tons of harm to the industry at large. I feel the same watching Oceangate attempt to “seal” an unclean mating surface on camera as I do watching the SpaceX team cheer and applaud every failed live launch from SpaceX. I know my grandpa wasn’t jumping up and down cheering when they were dealing with lunar module design issues. Maybe it’s just me but it worries me for the future.
Nobody wants to go to jail, i had some guy offer me a job, asked what the job was, he said dont worry is on the edge of legal but ill be there when things go wrong, i was like yeah right, you will be saving your ass when things go wrong, he got all pissy, never put your freedom at risk, do the right thing, if there is a problem say something.
It was an interesting case study. Stockton Rush was always going to fail with his Salesmanship over Engineering approach. Just another huckster who thought he knew better and would fire competent technical people who disagreed with him.
Nissen: I killed it, I wouldn't sign off on it Questioner: Was there a hull available? LOL, this questioner is not buying into NIssen's BS testimony. They had paying customers expecting to go to Titanic in July 2019. They took the thing to the Bahamas in June 2019. It came back CRACKED. Nissen didn't "say no". The freaking HULL said no. It was cracked. And the real reason he was fired, he said it himself- the board recognized he was incompetent. He and Rush were LARPing as submersible engineers, plain and simple. Nissen can say it was all Rush because Rush isn't around to say it was BOTH of them. But other people testified that it was the two of them. "We argued constantly". Um...no. Everyone else who argued with Rush was fired. You got to create a big department and LARP for four years. Nobody else who "pushed back" got to do that. Also, an ELECTRICAL engineer may very well have a concentration on materials science, but his education would have been more in line with the science of materials that pertain to ELECTRICAL components, not STRUCTURAL components. Mechanical engineers are the ones whose physics classes give them a proper background to understand the stresses applied to STRUCTURAL material. None of Nissen's testimony makes any sense and his supposed background in (structural) materials science doesn't make any sense either, given he is an electrical engineer.
As an electrical engineer myself with some experience in composites and interest in materials and mechanics, some university physics classes before i changed course, and a little incidental mechanical CAD skill, the only kind of submersible i'd dare design would be for use in a bathtub, i can't imagine working on anything with occupants without massive guardrails against my and everyone's incompetence. But not everyone is comfortable saying "i have no idea what i'm doing, we need a specialist", and some job environments successively discourage it, knock it out of you i suppose? It's cruel and manipulative to put an unqualified guy in such a position of responsibility to begin with, like it's setting him up as a fall guy when things do go wrong, especially if it's someone who isn't comfortable just quitting. Under the pressures of the situation, can i honestly say i'd fare much better? We're all lucky to have never been tested like that.
Thanks for your comment. Yep, I misspelled "lightning" a couple of times. Sorry about that. This video has many annotations and it is difficult to proofread all the layers in a video editing program timeline. It's not like a Word document and there is no spell checker. Sorry, it troubled you. I hope you enjoyed the content which was presented in a thoughtful and serious manner (no hype). Thanks again.
Seems to me that it would have been safer to let the husband go in the chopper instead of a swift water rescue. Ego can be as deadly as a flood event. Remember OceanGate!!
I found a picture of mr Rush sitting in the Titan, there are 2 computer monitors on each side, bolted with what seems 4 screws in the Hull! Most likely the contributing factor why it got crushed or the original spot of weakness or failure witch expanded.
Hi, the Titan had a liner than laid inside the carbon fiber hull. Anything you see screwed into the walls is screwed into that "floating" liner, not the carbon fiber.
@@solareclipsetimer I knew about the grey "Rhino" or so liner outside, but no person talked about a liner inside. still how thick was this liner? how deep went the screws? I'm sure the location of monitors would render the "sub" as not approved to host people, being a danger to possible injury. Polyester doesn't stand a change vs 37740 kg per 10 cm² on top of the hull.
@@solareclipsetimer I participated in the construction of the building where the Dynema fiber originated from, i saw the machines to could make it. There hung a chart, a single fiber could be elevated to like 275 meters height before it would brake under it own weight. much higher then any other. But it in the opposite direction there is no strength.
@@AnalogDude_ Hull 1 at least was constructed to have the outer pressure hull and an inner liner insert that could be "easily" swapped so you could customize an insert for your needs while the sub was busy elsewhere, then just swap in your insert when it was time for your job. Kind of a modular concept.
No. The point of this video is to describe working for OceanGate and Stockton Rush with sworn testimony. This is not just rumors or "hear-say." I will be making other videos with the statements from other employees that testified and you will see the pattern of the workplace environment The rest of Tony's testimony, about 3 hours of it, was about engineering.
@@solareclipsetimer you are very defensive of Tony Nissen and are refusing to see that he contributed to the negative culture at Oceangate...coupled with contributing poor engineering! Everyone knows that Stockton was the problem, but the "professionals" that let it happen or encouraged it, are guilty parties to this as well!
@@TikkaTCM Thanks for your comment. I am not defending Tony I am just presenting excerpts of his sworn testimony that has to do with his recollection of working with Stockton. He was under oath, these statements are not rumors. He seemed genuine to me. Most of his 4 hour testimony was about engineering. He was trying to help Stockton build a sub outside of the normal sub "classing" pathways. He developed the acoustic monitoring and strain systems that proved that hull 1 was not good, it wasn't safe, and could not take passengers to the Titanic. Hull 1 got scrapped after it cracked. Then Tony got fired. Those same monitoring systems were then implemented by new engineers in hull 2, the hull that imploded. Tony had nothing to do with the build that imploded.
@@solareclipsetimer the hull that Tony worked on also failed though...and many of the decisions that he made and signed off on were used again on the second hull that took lives......
As I analyze more of the testimony and supporting paperwork, I don't know what to think about Tony by himself. What I do believe is that he and Stockton together were a bad combination because they talked each other into thinking they could do this complex marine submersible engineering alone. Kind of like "there was no adult in the room" to direct them properly.
@solareclipsetimer one of my main problems with Nissen is that he doesn't really take any responsibility for everything that was done. If you listen to his testimony he attributes the failures to the sub being struck by lightning. This claim is actually disputed btw. He is the Head of engineering, it's not just "something fun to do for a year".
@@TheCoolhead27 I agree with you. Except he was there for hull one, the Spencer Composite hull, which was trash, with or without the lighting. Tony wouldn't let Stockton use it and got fired for it. Another interesting thing was the testimony of the second director of engineering, Phil Brooks, who complained that the data coming from the acoustic monitoring system for (hull 1) that Tony was using was terrible and did not provide coherent, usable data. Phil re-wrote the software for the data collection so it properly logged peaks. So, I don't know what Tony was analyzing. The testimony of Mr. Brooks about this issue was clear and compelling.
Stockton wanted to make his mark in history as his ancestors already had. Unfortunately his mark will be of a narciscistic failure which caused the death of four innocent people. It was never said whether Rush had any children. If not then he truely deserves the Darwin Award that year, as his genetic contribution to the gene pool came to an end.. I find it an interesting pattern of blame shifting on Rush's part, when he blamed the lack of a support ship as the reason for cancelling the 2019 dive on the Titanic instead of a crack in the hull. Previously he blamed his eyesight as the reason he was rejected by Nasa as an astronaut candidate. Most likely it was due to his arrest record for drug possession while a Princeton University which disqualified him. Had Stockton not been on that fateful dive when it imploded I wonder who he would have blamed for the trajedy.
My thought has been, why is the CEO of the company, being the pilot on these 10-hour dives that are not comfortable? The reason: he could not find anyone else who trusted the sub enough to pilot it. Anybody with any sense knew it was a death trap. Stockton was in huge debt due to the project, so the dives had to go on.
Culture of risk....be realistic, any novelty, any, involves some degrees of risks, regarding the design itself, it did prove carbon fiber is a legitimate option, the only issues are in the manufacturing process and of course the shelf life. Having said that deep dive subs are usually retired after only a few dives, this includes titanium sphere models. Any material weaken over time, Rush when too far for sure but he was a pioneer and it turns out one of his competitor in Florida is working on taking tourists to the titanic.....
Thanks for your comment. Fiber hulls (glass fiber and carbon fiber) have been used in the past, so Stockton was not the pioneer with that idea. So, it can work. The point of my video was that engineering principles were not followed with design, manufacturing, or testing. As far as I can tell from analyzing the testimony, there were six 1/3 scale models produced and tested. Four scale models tested before the first hull failed and two more after the first hull (before the second hull was built) Only ONE test hull in the first group of four, made it to the target pressure! How do you justify having a failed test program that does not support the concepts, but yet you proceed to build full-scale hulls and think it's okay? "culture of risk" How do you design a sub with grade 5 titanium domes for a margin of error, and then one day decide that Grade 3 titanium will be fine. "culture of risk" How do you use a viewport to go down to 4,000 meters when the expert manufacturer of the viewport only rates it to ~1,600 meters. "culture of risk" And with all that said, how do you risk the lives of paying passengers! And in this reply, I am only talking about the hull. Risky things were done elsewhere in the design. Thanks again for commenting and contributing to the discussion.
Also, only experimental subs are retired after a few dives. Fully classed and safety rated subs are capable of making hundreds of dives before the hull degrades enough to be retired. For instance, DSV Alvin has made something like 2500 dives (including to the Titanic), and it's titanium pressure hull has only been replaced twice (as far as I could find). So it's gotten perhaps as many as a thousand dives out of one hull.
@@thomasostrander4835 Thanks for your comment and I agree with you. I titanium sphere, the standard for this, has almost unlimited dives in it. All the other mechanical and electrical components can be updated around it.
Yep, sorry, I did have a few misspelled words. I apologize. It's hard to proof read in the video editing timeline, with all the different layers. Additionally, I am concentrating of the video edits, the audio, the annotations, and inserting the various pictures, etc. It's not like writing a Word document. I will try to do better.
@@randylplampin1326 Unfortunately you can't correct the spelling mistakes after the video is uploaded. I would have to delete it and then re-upload a corrected version and then all of the old comments are lost. It's starts over. So, the mistakes will live on; ugh.
@@solareclipsetimer Tech writer here, and old CAD magazine guy. Best solution is to have a two-monitor setup, with Word on one screen and your other software on the second monitor. Write in Word then paste into the video editor. I can’t write as well in any app that’s not Word, so I try to not do so!
You're like a customer saying they'll never come back to this store again. You're literally not important enough to any content creator for them to care about your view XD
Not sure what you mean. The story is compelling, the comments on my video have been thoughtful, positive, and great, and I have enjoyed interacting with the viewers. I have commented back on almost all comments. Excerpting 4 hours of testimony for this video was a lot of work for me, but a healthy discussion about the facts of this story is fun.
Yet another case of the engineer says no and some manager says yes. And then like when the space shuttle blows up everyone is like "why didn't the engineer make management say no?"
You are absolutely correct. The two shuttle accidents did not need to happen.
@@solareclipsetimer i don't know how they could have prevented the columbia disaster, besides halting the entire shuttle program.. which BTW they should have done, even before the challenger disaster
@@peabody3000 Thanks for your comment. NASA had previous launch videos showing of pieces of foam falling off the external tank where it was coming off that external pipe. It was a dangerous thing, but they did not intervene. They were lucky, foam just never struck the shuttle at a crucial spot, like the leading edge of the wing, like it did on Columbia. The fix after Columbia was simply to no longer put foam insulation on that external pipe stack. They could have made that change years earlier and the Columbia accident would not have happened.
From My own experience from acid bath's to 350psi nitrogen lines, that's exactly how it works. The engineer's say No. The Managers say Yes.
@@solareclipsetimer that foam ramp as they called it wasn't the only spot shedding foam chunks. shuttle launches had foam coming from many spots, largely at random. the ramp area was one of the worse spots for losing foam, but even with improvements there the shuttle was still a deathtrap that could never have been made adequately safe. i'm glad it's gone for good.
In the end those sensors actually did their job and sent plenty of warnings early on that there was a big problem growing in the carbon fiber hull and Stockton ignored those warnings.
Correct. The sensors worked, but did not make it safe.
That was the part that really shocked me. You’re in the sub you hear these noises, plus you have this data showing you the sounds including this one really loud sound. And you just keep going forward like nothing’s wrong. It’s like people that keep driving their car when it is making a crazy noise. Why would you do that?
@@solareclipsetimer because the humans didn’t take the data and use it properly
@@katrinat.3032 Agree, Stockton was in a huge finanicial mess, even when they were using hull 2. He was ignoring warnings to force the dives while at great
@@solareclipsetimer . . . Yes? At great . . . what?
The suspense is killing me, man!
David Lockridge's testimony was the one that I was most interested in. Sheesh.(I appreciate this guy too)
Except scottish people are known liars and others have said he lied there was no controller throwing incident
Especially the bits where he says Nissan-along with Rush-ignored and dismissed all of his concerns,and that Nissan and Rush dumped the Washington Uni as it was too concerned about engineering to take the project "In house" and that Rush and Nissan were arrogant,thinking they could build a deep sea sub with no experience. A lot of deflection and hindsight (and fear of blame) in this testimony.
@@infrasleep this guy testimony is so annoying because you feel like he never answers the question! You’re right so much deflection. Lockridge, he was stellar. He was hot too.
@@katrinat.3032 His accent makes all the diffrence and is wat swayed me🤭
@@infrasleep U comment is very true. I have since read the transcript of the conversation in which Lochridge was dismissed/fired. Nissen took part in this conversation. The transcript is redacted but u can make out who is who. Nissen is very vocal that there is nothing wrong with what they are doing and is completely complacent to Rush. While his testimony now is quite the opposite. According to the transcript and other documents Nissen wasn't sharing technical documents with lochridge needed for his inspection. I feel at that time Nissen was part of the problem Lochridge was trying fight when it comes to the safety and engineering concerns. Nissen was completely vested that it would work and was convinced a scan of the hull wasn't needed.
I've been following Ocean Gate since the implosion last year. And really, it sounds like a shit of a place to work.
I guess Rush employing what sounds like a lot of people made him feel like a big shot which fed his ego.
Rush in fact created his own demise.
Thank you for this contribution. I have been shocked and appalled for years by this individual and his company.
Thanks for your supportive comment.
Some of the testimonies were very interesting. It was a very unprofessional company, that much is clear.
Yes, to say the least especially if providing a service that is dangerous. Thanks for your comment.
The more you listen to these hearings, the more baffling this whole fiasco ...
Yeah, it sounded like Stockton was able to overrule and steam roll anyone in the company that disagreed with him. Stockton was a smart guy, but his ego was so huge he was unable to listen to the experts he hired. I think he viewed himself in the same light as dudes like Sir Edmund Hillary, he thought he was a pioneering explorer sojourning into the final frontier. Nothing wrong with wanting to do that, but the corner cutting and unnecessary risk taking lead to the accident. There is a really good documentary about the design in manufacturer of a submersible called limiting factor. It’s a good example of the design, building testing process being done right. I’m not an expert in submarine engineering, but you can tell from the testimony that Stockton had a massive attitude problem.
@@TheKetsaI agree. It is just an incredible story/mess.
@@AndrewScott1337 I agree. Thanks for your comment. A problem is that Tony had an idea about certification, what path can you use for solid engineering? Since they we not going to use submersible engineering, Tony did his best to apply aerospace engineering. But it is just not the same. Sub "classing" has made deep sea diving very safe to the point of Titan. Stockton and Titan caused the first deepsea diving fatalities.
Not a glue that keeps the family together but a glue that kept anyone's mouth shut who challenged the bogus craft. Fixed it.
As a person with Boeing engineering expertise in the design and manufacture of composite load bearing structures, there was a least one major flaw in the design-build process. That major flaw would have extended the time to failure. But if the use of fine grain ultrasonic inspection had been done with computer assist to find the tiny voids, the basic carbon structure would have allowed for more pressure cycles. If in addition, the carbon fiber hull had been inspected after each pressure cycle, the growing delamination(s) would have been detected as growing voids in the composite structure. The computers, hardware and software are all readily available for this inspection. The cost is not unreasonable and would have been an essential quali ty control step in the design build process. The question the is then the next step, is the joint design between t he titanium end bells and carbon tube going to fail? Absolutely it would fail after some number of cycles. The end bells connection to the fiber tube was a disaster waiting to happen. The basic concept of the joint did not take into account several known effects.
I agree with you. Thanks for the comment. I was always worried about the "glued" joints and I did another video about that. After the disaster, a lot of engineers posted videos that predicted the failure of the hull was the center of the tube collapsing and shattering the carbon hull into a million pieces. I never thought that. Now pictures of the wreckage images on the bottom of the ocean show large long pieces of the carbon fiber hull jammed into the rear titanium dome. That makes me believe that the failure was at the front ring joint and there was a lot of force to the rear.
I feel like Nissen is trying to cast himself in Lockridge's role when infact he was actually on onboard with Stockton. He's just trying to save his reputation it seems.
Not sure. He is doing this testimony under oath and he has all the paperwork of his engineering data about the problems and therefore the warnings. I don't know if you watched the video to the end, the last frame has a list of all of his work experience that I listed from what he said in his testimony. He is a smart guy. If you have chance go directly to the end of the video and quickly read about his experience.
That is the exact same feeling that I got from hearing all of the testimonies over the two weeks. I feel like Nissen is extremely guilty and pointing his finger at everyone else.
@@TikkaTCMI don’t think you blame a guy that was fired 4 years before the loss of Titan
@@TikkaTCMhe was fired before everything got worse. He’s also under oath and could be charged if found lying. The company was shit but they kept records of a lot of things they discussed there is probably correspondence to back up what he’s saying. I can hardly blame the guy fired 4 years ago for the sub imploding when he was fired like the other guy. Doesn’t exactly make sense I think you’re just painting with too broad a brush.
Ugh! That shot of the wreckage, the one of the aft dome with much of the CF hull crammed into it, shown at about 30 seconds in this video, is the only shot that for me really reminds me that humans were part of this wreckage. I mean, that's where they are, in that shot, we are seeing where the majority of the remains of 5 entire humans are. THAT is where the PASTE was found. That PASTE had the DNA of all five of the previously human contents of that submersible. They actually divided that PASTE up into 4 equal portions and gave a portion each to the families of the pulverised. It's utterly gross, and fascinating, and hilarious and incomprehensible all at the same time. I'm only sad about poor Suleman never getting to claim that rubics cube world record, all because his father and four other too rich d1ckheads had more money than sense.
Right after the disaster, a lot of engineers posted videos that predicted the failure of the hull was the center of the tube collapsing and shattering the carbon hull into a million pieces. I never thought that. Now pictures of the wreckage images on the bottom of the ocean show large long pieces of the carbon fiber hull jammed into the rear titanium dome. That makes me believe that the failure was at the front ring joint and there was a lot of force towards the rear. Regarding Suleman, a father should never put his son in a position of that kind of risk,. I read an article somewhere that stated that Suleman was a bit apprehensive about the dive. They simply did not do enough research to understand that Titan was dangerous.
I'm very skeptical about Tony Nissen. It's in his best interest only now to say, "Oh, I wasn't a yes man. I fought Rush's decisions and protested about safety." (Of course he's saying that now.)
A New Yorker article says, "Lochridge had been hired by OceanGate in May, 2015, as its director of marine operations and chief submersible pilot. The company moved him and his family to Washington, and helped him apply for a green card. But, before long, he was clashing with Rush and Tony Nissen, the company’s director of engineering, on matters of design and safety."
Tony was on Rush's side while Lochridge was raising alarm about the issues. Tony Nissen is on video laughing it up and smiling when the Titan hull was being glued. It's in the hearings (when it serves him) that he's saying he wasn't a Yes man.
You have some points. It took a long time for Lochridge to get cleared to come to the U.S. and start work. It dragged into the Spring of 2016, by Lochridges own testimony. Tony asked David Spencer from Spencer Composites to oversee the gluing of the rings to the hull. Spencer sent their technicians to do that glue work and Spencer chose the type of epoxy to be used. Tony was just watching it happen. In his testiimony he stated that his primary role that day was to make sure things (ring and hull) lined up to be square. Apparently, gluing carbon fiber was one of David Spencer's specialties.
Correct. And it goes further than just being a "yes man". He is very person that convinced Rush to fire Lochridge and fire all the outside engineering contractors so they could do it in house.
First, he says it was supposed to be "just one year" of employment. Then, he "needs to find his feet here". Why do you need to "find you feet" and get everyone who might be a real expert fired so you can be the guy who helps Stockton Rush design this thing if your employment is supposed to be just for one year? Nissen's hands are all over it and now he's trying to say he spoke up and was fired. Rush didn't allow him to stay beyond the original year, and build a large engineering department because he "pushed back". Look how fast the others were all gone who actually DID speak up and push back. Look at the OceanGate Archives videos. Nissen literally christened the original Titan. Also, listen to how vague his answers are in this testimony. Now compare his testimony to every single other engineer and even non engineers like Lochridge.
He "spoke up" after the first hull was already cracked to the point it HAD to be discarded. He "stopped" the 2019 Titanic visit? NO. It stopped because that hull was too damaged. And, a board member who was pissed off told Stockton it's either you or NIssen. And THAT is when Nissen was gone. He literally says so himself.
Also, no way did Rush ask Nissen to be the pilot on the Titanic dives. Tony had no experience whatsoever as a pilot. Nissen has as large an ego as Rush, they deserved each other. It's chilling that Nissen helped Rush to decide to design and build this in house and yet he knew enough not to go into it himself. Nissen designed the window, we know that for a fact. And I would not be surprised if he and Rush collaborated on that hull. That hull was NOT built to the design of either of the outside contractors, it was designed within OceanGate.
@@solareclipsetimer As director of engineering it was Nissan's job to make sure Spencer Composites was actually doing things correctly even if he had to do his own research and find another expert to consult about their recommendations. You do not get to say "oh, someone else said to do it that way" when you are the one ultimately responsible for the whole project.
@@TrappedinSLCyou 100% nailed it!
but he did get fired for refusing to sign off on another dive
Risk is not the word. Reckless is the word. Stockton was a narcissist. They’re never wrong. He’s in hell but it’s still gonna be someone else’s fault.
100%
“I’m not reckless and incompetent, they can’t see how I’m a genius innovator”
Stockton Rush joined the esteemed list of inventors who were killed by their own inventions. What an accomplishment. He's right up there with the genius who jumped off the Eiffel Tower with his homemade, personally-sewn parachute suit.
The submersible was already designed and was perfect for deep sea exploration. The ass clown named S.Rush didn't event anything except a death trap.
OceanGate was nothing more than a vanity project disguised as a research vessel. With the proverbial "fall" coming in the form and shape of an implosion. An unnecessary and preventable incident that only happened as the result of someone who despite his "education", was not smart enough to acknowledge that he was wrong.
they should have hauled some of the board members up there to testify
I would be more interested in the investigations of the financials. did 100 million really go into Oceangate? how deep were they in debt?
@@toomanyaccounts I don’t understand this Debt thing. Wasn’t Rush from old money?
@@katrinat.3032 he only got 12 mill in inheritance and over the course of decades spent most of it. Oceangate apparently if someone testifying is to believed went through 100 mill and Oceangate was deep in debt along with Rush who was putting his own money in it.
@@katrinat.3032 nope.
@@katrinat.3032yes he was...and he was married to the great great granddaughter of the wealthiest couple who traveled on the Titanic who co-owned Macy's department store...the family still owns Macy's to this day.
Isn’t Tony Nissen the guy who is very proud of himself in a short tv report because they build Titan extremely fast?
Hi, I am not aware of that report/video. It may exist, but I have never seem it myself.
Ok, I found that video. Thanks for the yip. Sure, it was a promotional and bold report and they were proud of it at the time. But I was also before they did any deep testing in the Bahamas. After the Bahamas was when they recognized the Spencer Composites hull was poorly done. That is when the whole cardin fiber hull concept started to come into question. Stockton did not want to give up so he had the second hull made.
Oceangate removed most of the sensors. Then filtered out the bad results
In Canada there are laws in place that allow prosecution of persons that know or see an unsafe act and don’t report it to be held accountable.
Tony stopped them from diving to the Titanic and then hull 1 cracked. Then Tony was fired. David Lochbridge reported OceanGate to OSHA and OSHA did nothing. But I am not surprised because OSHA is a "workplace" safety organization. The don't "police" dumb ideas and potential public hazards.
That tool was the same guy who was like "its the glue that holds the family together and we want to make sure its right" lol and now he saw the disaster coming a mile away, he gets a Dr Evil RIIIGHT.
Yes exactly. I don’t buy it
@@lalaLAX219I would trust you with driving a car with those conclusions.
Tony is the same guy when the Titan was being built he was happy as hell to put the glue on
Actually, Tony had the folks from Spencer Composites due the glue. The Spencer folks were supposedly the experts.
classification would have stifled stockton mush's ability to implode titan
If u ask me Tony Nissen is responsible in some regard. He as lead engineer oversaw and actually personally helped with the gluing of the 2 Rings to the hull. As we all know this was done in a sub-standard way in sub-standard conditions. He should have blown the whistle right there.
Tony had the folks from Spencer Composites due the glue. The Spencer folks were supposedly the experts. Tony, actually did a lot of good work trying to match the moduli of the titanium rings and the hull. The issue is that there are no standards for what they were trying to build. It needed many, many unmanned test dives to prove the concept and the build would not work.
@@solareclipsetimer I don't want to discredit Nissen in anyway but if i look at Lochridges's and Dave Dyer's testimony it seems Nissen just like Rush disregarded many testing and engineering protocols set by APL and this was during Nissen's time as lead engineer. Nissen isn't a professional engineer and he had zero experience with submersibles, he was not in anyplace to make those decisions especially without the APL or a classing agency .His experience was more in instrumentation, in which as we now know he indeed did a good job with the acoustic monitoring system. During the conversation in which David Lochridge was fired Nissen was present, This conversation was recorded and i'am really curious what was said by Nissen. This could determine in part how vested he was in the kool-aide cult and show how liable he really is. Given the testimony's and the fact he never blew the whistle on this thing he was for a long time a true believer in the kool-aide cult of Rush.
@@solareclipsetimer There absolutely are standards for Carbon Fiber to Titanium joints. It's done in aerospace. There is no reason whatsoever that a joint you expect to stress *more* than in aerospace applications should not be done to AT LEAST aerospace standards, and on hull 1 it was not.
@@solareclipsetimer They didn't match and there was no way they possibly could. Don't you think he should have realised that if he was competent in what he was doing?
@@TrappedinSLC Aerospace is just completely different. The pressure differences are huge.
This engineer loves the spotlight and the sound of his own voice. I don't trust anything he says. He's as culpable as the rest.
I wonder what Stockton’s family life/dynamic was like. IMO his recklessness began there.
I’d say it was “Here is a new toy! Go away!!!”
Nissen was part of the problem. He should never have been in charge of engineering.
You never know what move such a company would make in the future. He basically wanted to do what he loved doing and so he applied in a sub company. As he noticed somethings getting out of bounds, he was fired for holding them back.
I don’t really buy Tony Nissen’s version of events. I think he was incompetent and less concerned about safety than he described here. It’s not like Stockton is around anymore to counter his story either. Probably just trying to cover his a**
I don't know if you watched the video to the end, the last frame has a list of all of his work experience that I listed from what he said in his testimony. He is a smart guy. If you have chance go directly to the end of the video and quickly read about his experience. This video was not about his engineering work. But I watched all of it and he really was trying to make things work. The first hull from Spencer was garbage.
@@solareclipsetimer I watched his whole testimony as well as David Lochridge’s. I have no doubt that Nissen is an intelligent and educated person, but many foolish and lying people have academic credentials. Personally, I found Lochridge’s testimony to be highly credible, most especially due to the fact that he also provided *documentation* for what he was saying-something we did not see much of from Nissen. Where are the emails where Nissen expressed his disagreement with Stockton? Texts? Why did he not support Lochridge’s safety concerns at the time? When Nissen was fired, why did he not do anything to raise the alarm about the poor safety standards at OceanGate? It just seems awfully convenient that every time Nissen told Stockton “no” it happened in private when the only other person who can verify it is now deceased.
In fact, I don’t know that I even believe Nissen’s testimony about his termination being due to his refusal to approve the 2019 Titanic expedition. If you listen closely to his testimony, he admits that the reason OceanGate gave for his firing was that Nissen should have been able to foresee the design flaws in the hull. Ironically, this seems pretty reasonable to me on behalf of OceanGate. If the guy you hire to engineer and oversee the manufacturing of your submersible produces a product with a huge flaw that is unusable, it seems reasonable to me that he would be let go. I sort of doubt that even Stockton was arrogant and delusional enough to think that a cracked hull would be able to go to Titanic depths. Nissen has cast himself as the savior in that situation, implying that if it weren’t for him refusing to sign off on that expedition it would have happened. But do we have any proof of that whatsoever? I would be willing to bet that nearly every person at OceanGate who took a look at that cracked hull (including Stockton) knew immediately that it could never go to the Titanic depths.
Hopefully more information will be released on Nissen’s role with time…according to Lochridge’s testimony, there is a recording of Lochridge’s termination meeting with OceanGate. If Nissen was part of that meeting, it would be very enlightening for that recording to be released so we can see what he was actually saying behind closed doors at the time.
And one more note-Even if we take Nissen’s testimony at face value, if it is true that Nissen had all these safety concerns and did nothing whatsoever to express or report them to anyone inside or outside of OceanGate, he still bears some responsibility for what happened. Nissen helped to engineer that death trap-both directly and indirectly with v2-and when he left he washed his hands of it and essentially decided it wasn’t his problem. No matter what version of events is true, Nissen’s character has not shown itself positively.
@@solareclipsetimer I wrote three paragraph reply to this comment and it’s not here. I hate TH-cam comment systems.
@@lalaLAX219 If I were a hiring person I would definitely not hire him to be responsible for anything major. His engineering skills may be good, I am not qualified to judge based on what little we've seen, but I am not at all impressed by what he demonstrated of his ethics.
One of my first jobs after college was doing Failure Analysis of integrated circuits. My job was very detective like. You have to rely on what little evidence you have and not color your observations with your own prejudices.
In my findings the failures happen because equipment wasn't adjusted or calibrated properly.
Later in my career I did other jobs as a designer. I still keep this mindset that a failure is a perfect storm of events lining up. I live by thought that the Worst Case Scenario can actually happen.
I still get a LOT done faster than most people who take RISKS.
I don't have to worry because THE DUDE ABIDES by safety rules. 😎
I agree and love the line " rely on what little evidence you have and not color your observations with your own prejudices." That is what Stockton was doing, he wasn't taking no for an answer.
Very well done. Screen info helped with the context. Thank you, and please continue this work!
Thanks for the nice comment. I am going to work on more.
I'd like to know who the board members are. What influence did they have over Stockton, "they said it's either me or you, and it aint going to be me" and why didn't they testify?
This was just a Coast Guard hearing to find out what happened, with OceanGate's lawyers also able to ask questions. Once they complete their report, criminal investigations could start, but I doubt this will happen. The board members Stockton Rush was referring to in that specific quote most likely do not actually exist, and Rush was trying to shirk responsibility for firing his friend by pretending it wasn't his decision but nameless board members he never listened to before or after this one instance.
I wonder if Stocktons Wig survived.
Lol. Did he have a wig? 😂
Most American companies nowadays are unprofessional and will cut corners to save cost jeopardize safety to gain revenue and fuck over whoever they got to to get ahead that’s American business in a nutshell
Yep just look at Boeing
I believe doing a Stockton should be entered in the dictionary.
It’s not uncommon to hear from people who have run in’s with flight test engineers to say “that guy is arrogant and won’t listen, too dumb to know he doesn’t know everything.” Like the one that rewired his mom’s house before I bought it. It was a total gut job.
Tony stayed too long. He should have kept a meticulous paper trail and resigned.
I would have loved to hear what the admiral on the board had to say but I’m sure he lawyered up and refused to testify
In my career i ve had the chance to watch big shots similar to Rush. I guess it s a pathology that makes this kind of person behave so similarly to one another. Rush s engineers were there just to fill pspers up and make it look like a legitimate process. Everyone was useless because he was so bloody good at everything. It blows my mind how much he was lying to himself. The co2 scrubber. The towing. The storing.... and the datas were collected and clearly showing the hull had failed somehow.. he was not an idiot. He had enough to do what most cannot. For money He was a criminal.
Yeah, the whole thing is odd.
Your editing and splicing made it possible for me to understand this testimony. I had a hard time following the raw footage. Thanks.
Hi thanks for you nice comment. I wanted to excerpt out the company's communication problems for this video. I also changed the order of some answers to make it easier to follow the timeline.
I wouldn't trust this video to be honest. It is extremely biased and tries to paint Tony in a positive light.
@@TikkaTCM Not really. He was under oath; it is his sworn testimony. Right now this video is out of context because it is my first one about working with Stockton Rush. Other employees paint the same picture and I will be working on more videos.
You had a hard time following Nissen because he was talking the way someone talks when they are blowing smoke up people's backsides. He hemmed and hawed his way through testimony because he was trying to paint himself as being like Lochridge when he and Stockton Rush were both playing at engineering and putting people's lives at risk.
Listen to his raw testimony. He was hired as a one year contractor. He is the one who sent Lochridge's famous list to Rush. And that list of issues got Lochridge in a meeting with Tony and Stockton. Read the whole meeting transcript, you can see where Nissen is chiming in. He's chiming in to just parrot every single thing Rush is saying to Lochridge. Then Lochridge gets fired at the end.
Then, Nissen gets the outside engineers all fired and convinces Rush that they can design it all in house. And his job moves from being a one year contract to full time. And he and Rush LARP like they are real engineers and design everything, including hull number one, which gets cracked one month before the first dives were supposed to take place. Nissen is trying to pretend like he "said no" to those dives that were supposed to happen ONE MONTH after the first hull was CLEARLY damaged too much to go down ANYWAY. It was the hull itself that "said no", not Nissen.
At that point it is clear that some of the board were angry, listen to Nissen's testimony, he admits that. He admits that Rush told him that two board members confronted Rush about the failure of the first hull and said that Nissen, as Director of Engineering, should have seen this coming. At that point Stockton Rush wasn't going to admit to the board that he and Nissen did all the design together and that it was BOTH of their faults. Rush just fired Nissen and went on to change the design of hull number two so it was wound different, one inch at a time, and also had a second direction of winding the carbon fiber. Even the window was Nissen's design, that came out very clearly at the hearings.
@@bees5461 I did not know a transcript of the Rush, Nissen, Lochridge meeting existed? I will look for it, Thanks for your comment,
Rush took what should have been a scientific and engineering project and made it to a commercial enterprise.
The failure was the interface between dissimilar materials that responded to increasing pressure at different rates
I agree Sometimes in engineering when you are trying to make something completely new and the prototype makes it look like the concept won't work, you have to back off. Take your losses and give up on your idea. Stockton did not want to give up.
@@solareclipsetimer because he had commercial pressures.
nothing wrong with experimentation if it is personal risk
Carbon fiber is strong in tension, not compression. It doesn't matter how thick toy make it, it delaminates and fails in compression (such as an underwater submersible). It works great for aircraft though.
I agree. It just did not seem of the proper use of the technology. The problem is that the engineers at Spencer Composites (1st hull) worked up numbers that made it look like it would work, with strength to spare. Wierd.
There is something incredibly wrong with a man who takes a job as "the initial director of engineering for Ocean Gate" without knowing the entire purose of the company.
This is his claim around 3:00~3:09, and it is either a lie or a plea of innocence in manslaughter through fantastic ignorance and incompetence.
Or both.
Thanks, for your comment. I agree with you, I thought that was odd in his testimony. However, the testimony of the co-founder of Ocean Gate testified that the original plan for OceanGate was to have deep sea subs stationed around the world to be leased for research. That was the original business model. The original intent had nothing to do with the Titanic. They morphed into the Titanic business model later when they realized they were probably only going to be able to afford to build one sub. So, it is conceivable that they did not tell Tony early on. Also, I think Stockton was being a little secretive about the Titanic idea until he was closer to having the sub built. That is my take. I will be doing a review of the OceanGate employee testimony soon. Thanks.
Nissen was blatantly lying. He was complicit
@@mich8292 Thanks for your comment. I'm not sure. I listened to Tony's testimony very carefully. He had engineering experience in the marine and aerospace industries. Stockton was an aerospace engineer. Stockton and Tony together were a dangerous combination because they were trying to work outside of the normal sub-classing engineering. Tony testified, stating in several different ways, that you can have valid engineering that follows other defined standards, like ASTE. He also, testified that he likes to do things that are "outside the box." so I think the challenge of the project interested him. So, he was trying to have good engineering principles on a part-by-part, or section-by-section basis. The problem is that sub-classing engineering looks at the machine more as a whole. But, when the sub failed testing in the Bahamas in 2018, Tony told Stockton the hull was not usable, not safe, and he would not sign off on the 2018 Titanic Expeditions (which were already planned). Tony got fired for that as if it was his fault. All of that is true. Actually, it was the Spencer Composite hull, the first hull that was the problem, it was junk. Then Stockton hired new engineers, made a new hull with a different company (still 5 inches thick), and forged ahead. Tony was far removed from the second Titan that imploded. My thoughts.
@@solareclipsetimer By the time Tony Nissen was hired they were committed to going to the Titanic and had already collected money for it.
And Nissen's testimony does not sound like a seasned professional engineer. He is obfuscating and vague compared to every other engineer, and even non engineers, who testified.
He was allouwed to build a large team because he was a "yes man". Even his claim that he "pushed back" does not match the reality. Every other person who pushed back was fired. Also, by the time he says he was "fired for saying no" the hull was already cracked. There was no "saying no" at that point. At that point it didn't matter what anyone wanted to do, they were forced to retire the hull. The real reason he was fired was alluded to by Nissen himself. He says that the board told Stockton it was either Stockton or Tony that had to go and Stockton wasn't going to be the one. I think the real reason is that Nissen and Rush convinced themselves they could do all the design in house and either the board did, or didn't, know they had cut ties with NASA, Boeing, and APL. Either way once that hull failed ONE MONTH prior to the first paid customers expecting to go down, the board was likely pissed off because now they had to start all over with building another hull and obviously had to change the design as well. And being the Director of Engineering, don't even TRY to convince me Nissen wasn't all in on the whole thing. He was fired due to incompetence.
Two words:
Experimental.
Uncertified.
😮
Yes. Unfortunately, it was not ready for paying passengers.
at 3:00 he tells a story about how he didn't know OceanGate was focused on Titanic. He said "I needed something to do for a year."
That's the most toxic, self-destructive idea I've heard throughout this entire drama. I've heard myself say it, and I regret every single time.
Engineers: you're worth more than the companies hiring you. Far more; both to society and to yourself. Don't let your occupation overshadow your identity.
I think Stockton was secretive about the idea of visiting the Titanic (at some stages in the process). His co-founder testified that when they initially discussed starting a sub company (the very early talks) it was not about the Titanic. They wanted about five subs stationed around the world to lease to scientific expeditions. There is no money in science expeditions though. I think it morphed into the Titanic expeditions to make money to pay for the initial investments and then hopefully to make a lot of money later (if they could continue to do it). It seems like they started a really expensive development project and they did not want to accept defeat, so they forged ahead.
@@solareclipsetimer It's just that at the time, Nissen wasn't looking to break into pelagic tourism... he was just an engineer looking to place a block in his career. He "needed something to do" and now he's testifying before a committee. At least my friend who worked for Morton Thiokol in the 80s thought he was advancing mankind's knowledge by making O-rings for rocket boosters. This guy was developing a next-level Uber for desecrating mass graves.
We shouldn't be so caught up in developing our careers that anything like this could ever have looked like a good idea in the first place. My former employer made parts for rockets, and I left because I saw the same dangerous "more faster cheaper" mindset being beaten into the company's management by its pushy customers.
I work in IT now, for a non-profit; because social workers are genuinely grateful for the help. All Jeff Bezos ever did to thank me was take a selfie with his cowboy hat.
As an engineer in his fifties I beg you young smart people... whenever you "need something to do," spend that time bettering yourself, and with the people you love... not enabling the wealthy.
@@jamesmurphy449 I agree with you. I did not emphasize it in the video, but Tony had experience in both aerospace and marine engineering. He like the marine stuff better. He thought this job, working on marine engineering, would be an interesting and fulfilling job. Like he testified, he though the parts were all there, he just had to take what they developed and tested on Cyclops 1 and put it on Titan. It ended up not to be the case.
@@solareclipsetimerThanks for this summary. I believe it is on point.
*STOCKTON RUSH: "DEAD OR ALIVE YOU ARE COMING WITH ME."*
The more I hear at this investigation, the more obvious it is that Stockton Rush was a world class jerk. I know it's not considered polite to speak ill of the dead, but Rush got 4 people killed, including a teenage boy. For the kid alone, Rush deserves to be condemned for all time.
It said Spencer composites predicted 1000 cycles. But they predicted for a hull that was flexing 37% less than data showed
They did a poor job with the construction process of the hull. Their modeling was wrong. Huge issues there.
5:18 he is looking for a non-insult word to talk about Stockdon Rush and he cannot find it xD
I know. That was amazing! You could see his pain.
That Nissen dude lied. Hes trying to cover his ass.
He is testifying under oath. Not a good place to lie.
if you're condensing this interview to 18', then it's wise to give access to the whole interview so they can make up their minds of what might have missed and others might find it might be significant.
Search TH-cam for the Coast Guard Titan Hearings, Day 1, September 16, 2024, it is easy to find. The 18 minutes is just about the employment situation. Tony talked about a lot of interesting engineering in the 4 hours. But that was not the point of this video.
As Starship loses its crew an investigation will be made and the results will be similar as here, but the show will go on.
Notice how NASA returned Starship unmanned. They learned from Challenger and Columbia. Starship made it through the re-entry fine, and Boeing said it would be okay. But NASA wasn't going to risk the lives of the two astronauts since the thrusters were not reliable. NASA made the correct call to return the capsule unmanned.
Starship is Elon musks huge space craft. He has said that it will not be manned until it has had at least 50 successful flights. Unlike Boeing and oceangate space x is always learning and testing and adapting to what they learn. At the start nasa assigned engineers to Boeing g and space x. They all said that Boeing was closed minded and that space x was open minded. The results speak for themselves
The engineers that didn’t leave/get fired should never have a job in engineering ever again.
Someone testified that to be a licensed as a professional engineer, you have to go through a 5 year internship working under the supervision of another engineer. That same individual said that none of the young college graduates working at OceanGate were licensed professional engineers. Appalling.
@@stargazer5784 Nobody cares about engineering licenses anymore. Elon Musk never even took the EIT exam. He never even took one freshman engineering course.
Totally agree with you!!
As an engineer it's easy to have concerns brushed aside. It's important to document decisions. I wouldn't accept a job that put people at risk if my boss wasn't an engineer.
@@lophilip like any profession you’ll have those who are less on par with those at the top of their field but yes as you said when lives are at risk and your reputation you need to step back and just have some basic common sense. I will say I feel like this almost “fake it until you make it” style of engineering does tons of harm to the industry at large. I feel the same watching Oceangate attempt to “seal” an unclean mating surface on camera as I do watching the SpaceX team cheer and applaud every failed live launch from SpaceX. I know my grandpa wasn’t jumping up and down cheering when they were dealing with lunar module design issues. Maybe it’s just me but it worries me for the future.
Nobody wants to go to jail, i had some guy offer me a job, asked what the job was, he said dont worry is on the edge of legal but ill be there when things go wrong, i was like yeah right, you will be saving your ass when things go wrong, he got all pissy, never put your freedom at risk, do the right thing, if there is a problem say something.
It was an interesting case study. Stockton Rush was always going to fail with his Salesmanship over Engineering approach. Just another huckster who thought he knew better and would fire competent technical people who disagreed with him.
Where have i seen this before🤔
5:41 dunning Krueger?
I don't feel sorry for Stockton Rush but I do feel sorry for the kid his lost is sad!
Arrest those Board Members for their Negligence
Nissen: I killed it, I wouldn't sign off on it
Questioner: Was there a hull available?
LOL, this questioner is not buying into NIssen's BS testimony. They had paying customers expecting to go to Titanic in July 2019. They took the thing to the Bahamas in June 2019. It came back CRACKED. Nissen didn't "say no". The freaking HULL said no. It was cracked. And the real reason he was fired, he said it himself- the board recognized he was incompetent. He and Rush were LARPing as submersible engineers, plain and simple. Nissen can say it was all Rush because Rush isn't around to say it was BOTH of them. But other people testified that it was the two of them.
"We argued constantly". Um...no. Everyone else who argued with Rush was fired. You got to create a big department and LARP for four years. Nobody else who "pushed back" got to do that.
Also, an ELECTRICAL engineer may very well have a concentration on materials science, but his education would have been more in line with the science of materials that pertain to ELECTRICAL components, not STRUCTURAL components. Mechanical engineers are the ones whose physics classes give them a proper background to understand the stresses applied to STRUCTURAL material. None of Nissen's testimony makes any sense and his supposed background in (structural) materials science doesn't make any sense either, given he is an electrical engineer.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment. You make some excellent points.
As an electrical engineer myself with some experience in composites and interest in materials and mechanics, some university physics classes before i changed course, and a little incidental mechanical CAD skill, the only kind of submersible i'd dare design would be for use in a bathtub, i can't imagine working on anything with occupants without massive guardrails against my and everyone's incompetence. But not everyone is comfortable saying "i have no idea what i'm doing, we need a specialist", and some job environments successively discourage it, knock it out of you i suppose? It's cruel and manipulative to put an unqualified guy in such a position of responsibility to begin with, like it's setting him up as a fall guy when things do go wrong, especially if it's someone who isn't comfortable just quitting. Under the pressures of the situation, can i honestly say i'd fare much better? We're all lucky to have never been tested like that.
Stockton really was like YOLO terrible he selfishly took others lives with his madness
The various misspellings displays a certain level of carelessness to what should have been a serious subject.
Thanks for your comment. Yep, I misspelled "lightning" a couple of times. Sorry about that. This video has many annotations and it is difficult to proofread all the layers in a video editing program timeline. It's not like a Word document and there is no spell checker. Sorry, it troubled you. I hope you enjoyed the content which was presented in a thoughtful and serious manner (no hype). Thanks again.
get a job bro its not that serious 😭😭😭😭😭
Your opinion is bad, and your comment is useless.
I think we can still understand it Karen.
You tube spelling police. Oh nooooooooooooooooo😮
Fun fact: you spelled “lightning” three different ways in this video, and NONE of them were correct.
Ouch, you are correct.
Two words: toxic positivity
He's the definition of loyalty, and was fired for it. "Never let the boss knowingly make a mistake." - TKM
So basically he hired the engineer to take shit from him and for him.
I made Oceangate Titan Submersible a GMOD map. Little soon but yeah
Seems to me that it would have been safer to let the husband go in the chopper instead of a swift water rescue. Ego can be as deadly as a flood event. Remember OceanGate!!
I found a picture of mr Rush sitting in the Titan, there are 2 computer monitors on each side, bolted with what seems 4 screws in the Hull! Most likely the contributing factor why it got crushed or the original spot of weakness or failure witch expanded.
Hi, the Titan had a liner than laid inside the carbon fiber hull. Anything you see screwed into the walls is screwed into that "floating" liner, not the carbon fiber.
@@solareclipsetimer I knew about the grey "Rhino" or so liner outside, but no person talked about a liner inside. still how thick was this liner? how deep went the screws?
I'm sure the location of monitors would render the "sub" as not approved to host people, being a danger to possible injury.
Polyester doesn't stand a change vs 37740 kg per 10 cm² on top of the hull.
@@solareclipsetimer I participated in the construction of the building where the Dynema fiber originated from, i saw the machines to could make it.
There hung a chart, a single fiber could be elevated to like 275 meters height before it would brake under it own weight. much higher then any other.
But it in the opposite direction there is no strength.
@@AnalogDude_ Hull 1 at least was constructed to have the outer pressure hull and an inner liner insert that could be "easily" swapped so you could customize an insert for your needs while the sub was busy elsewhere, then just swap in your insert when it was time for your job. Kind of a modular concept.
@@AnalogDude_ Between the inner liner and the hull were spacers that were about 3/4" think, So, there was a gap between the two of about 3/4".
Hovercrafts, submarines, aircrafts. Are supposed to be fun and safe, but also durable. This is not safe and durable 🤦
Agree. It needed lots and lots of monitored unmanned testing.
Sounds like Rush was on a one way mission with that sub. Sad he was willing to take innocent people with him to his grave. Thats criminal
Yeah, he was under financial pressure. It's so sad.
Excellent video.
Thanks!
Glue.......
Did Tony pay you to make this?
No. The point of this video is to describe working for OceanGate and Stockton Rush with sworn testimony. This is not just rumors or "hear-say." I will be making other videos with the statements from other employees that testified and you will see the pattern of the workplace environment The rest of Tony's testimony, about 3 hours of it, was about engineering.
@@solareclipsetimer you are very defensive of Tony Nissen and are refusing to see that he contributed to the negative culture at Oceangate...coupled with contributing poor engineering! Everyone knows that Stockton was the problem, but the "professionals" that let it happen or encouraged it, are guilty parties to this as well!
@@TikkaTCM Thanks for your comment. I am not defending Tony I am just presenting excerpts of his sworn testimony that has to do with his recollection of working with Stockton. He was under oath, these statements are not rumors. He seemed genuine to me. Most of his 4 hour testimony was about engineering. He was trying to help Stockton build a sub outside of the normal sub "classing" pathways. He developed the acoustic monitoring and strain systems that proved that hull 1 was not good, it wasn't safe, and could not take passengers to the Titanic. Hull 1 got scrapped after it cracked. Then Tony got fired. Those same monitoring systems were then implemented by new engineers in hull 2, the hull that imploded. Tony had nothing to do with the build that imploded.
@@solareclipsetimer the hull that Tony worked on also failed though...and many of the decisions that he made and signed off on were used again on the second hull that took lives......
Most companies are unprofessional and risky😊
Madsen murdered one citizen. Rush - if he was not on the final dive of his contraption -
This guy will probably go to jail for negligence. His flippant demeanor makes him seem like a liar.
As I analyze more of the testimony and supporting paperwork, I don't know what to think about Tony by himself. What I do believe is that he and Stockton together were a bad combination because they talked each other into thinking they could do this complex marine submersible engineering alone. Kind of like "there was no adult in the room" to direct them properly.
@solareclipsetimer one of my main problems with Nissen is that he doesn't really take any responsibility for everything that was done. If you listen to his testimony he attributes the failures to the sub being struck by lightning. This claim is actually disputed btw. He is the Head of engineering, it's not just "something fun to do for a year".
@@TheCoolhead27 I agree with you. Except he was there for hull one, the Spencer Composite hull, which was trash, with or without the lighting. Tony wouldn't let Stockton use it and got fired for it. Another interesting thing was the testimony of the second director of engineering, Phil Brooks, who complained that the data coming from the acoustic monitoring system for (hull 1) that Tony was using was terrible and did not provide coherent, usable data. Phil re-wrote the software for the data collection so it properly logged peaks. So, I don't know what Tony was analyzing. The testimony of Mr. Brooks about this issue was clear and compelling.
Not THAT engineer. Will he be heard?
Don't trust his words lots of not me in it .
Hate to say it but I don’t think one person on this earth is upset over the loss of this Stockton guy.. lol
His fangirl Renata Rojas is sad.
Stockton wanted to make his mark in history as his ancestors already had. Unfortunately his mark will be of a narciscistic failure which caused the death of four innocent people. It was never said whether Rush had any children. If not then he truely deserves the Darwin Award that year, as his genetic contribution to the gene pool came to an end..
I find it an interesting pattern of blame shifting on Rush's part, when he blamed the lack of a support ship as the reason for cancelling the 2019 dive on the Titanic instead of a crack in the hull. Previously he blamed his eyesight as the reason he was rejected by Nasa as an astronaut candidate. Most likely it was due to his arrest record for drug possession while a Princeton University which disqualified him.
Had Stockton not been on that fateful dive when it imploded I wonder who he would have blamed for the trajedy.
My thought has been, why is the CEO of the company, being the pilot on these 10-hour dives that are not comfortable? The reason: he could not find anyone else who trusted the sub enough to pilot it. Anybody with any sense knew it was a death trap. Stockton was in huge debt due to the project, so the dives had to go on.
Culture of risk....be realistic, any novelty, any, involves some degrees of risks, regarding the design itself, it did prove carbon fiber is a legitimate option, the only issues are in the manufacturing process and of course the shelf life. Having said that deep dive subs are usually retired after only a few dives, this includes titanium sphere models. Any material weaken over time, Rush when too far for sure but he was a pioneer and it turns out one of his competitor in Florida is working on taking tourists to the titanic.....
Thanks for your comment. Fiber hulls (glass fiber and carbon fiber) have been used in the past, so Stockton was not the pioneer with that idea. So, it can work. The point of my video was that engineering principles were not followed with design, manufacturing, or testing. As far as I can tell from analyzing the testimony, there were six 1/3 scale models produced and tested. Four scale models tested before the first hull failed and two more after the first hull (before the second hull was built) Only ONE test hull in the first group of four, made it to the target pressure! How do you justify having a failed test program that does not support the concepts, but yet you proceed to build full-scale hulls and think it's okay? "culture of risk" How do you design a sub with grade 5 titanium domes for a margin of error, and then one day decide that Grade 3 titanium will be fine. "culture of risk" How do you use a viewport to go down to 4,000 meters when the expert manufacturer of the viewport only rates it to ~1,600 meters. "culture of risk" And with all that said, how do you risk the lives of paying passengers! And in this reply, I am only talking about the hull. Risky things were done elsewhere in the design. Thanks again for commenting and contributing to the discussion.
Also, only experimental subs are retired after a few dives. Fully classed and safety rated subs are capable of making hundreds of dives before the hull degrades enough to be retired. For instance, DSV Alvin has made something like 2500 dives (including to the Titanic), and it's titanium pressure hull has only been replaced twice (as far as I could find). So it's gotten perhaps as many as a thousand dives out of one hull.
@@thomasostrander4835 Thanks for your comment and I agree with you. I titanium sphere, the standard for this, has almost unlimited dives in it. All the other mechanical and electrical components can be updated around it.
Rush. Nomen est omen.
Risk is judged individually not collectively silly Karen. If it were up to you Karens we would all still be in caves.
Karen, shut up! Thanks!
Now we know it was likely the Diddy parties that left Stockton Rush wishing to implode at the bottom of the sea.
Perhaps next time the person responsible for generating the callouts should know somethings about English spelling.
Yep, sorry, I did have a few misspelled words. I apologize. It's hard to proof read in the video editing timeline, with all the different layers. Additionally, I am concentrating of the video edits, the audio, the annotations, and inserting the various pictures, etc. It's not like writing a Word document. I will try to do better.
At least you recognize the problem. Perhaps it will be corrected some day. Good luck.
@@randylplampin1326 Unfortunately you can't correct the spelling mistakes after the video is uploaded. I would have to delete it and then re-upload a corrected version and then all of the old comments are lost. It's starts over. So, the mistakes will live on; ugh.
Perhaps some day technology will allow a smoother way of fixing these things. Thanks.
@@solareclipsetimer Tech writer here, and old CAD magazine guy. Best solution is to have a two-monitor setup, with Word on one screen and your other software on the second monitor. Write in Word then paste into the video editor.
I can’t write as well in any app that’s not Word, so I try to not do so!
Why repost old news…..Why no genuine content? Your channel is filler. Selecting “Don’t recommend channel”. Well done champ.
You're like a customer saying they'll never come back to this store again. You're literally not important enough to any content creator for them to care about your view XD
@@gothgirlkim A customer who goes to a store and doesn't buy anything and than says i wont come back again.
@@gothgirlkimYou copied this content for views. Who are you lying to?
Look at the Limiting Factor.. Your not going to tell me Classing Stifles Innovation. Its not true
And you guys are still trying to make money off of it how shame on you guys
Not sure what you mean. The story is compelling, the comments on my video have been thoughtful, positive, and great, and I have enjoyed interacting with the viewers. I have commented back on almost all comments. Excerpting 4 hours of testimony for this video was a lot of work for me, but a healthy discussion about the facts of this story is fun.