OceanGate Titan submersible vehicle and crew presumed lost near Titanic wreckage

[skluth]

Honestly, I've been directly disrespected by a LOT more poor people than rich people.

That's because the rich don't have to meet you to disrespect you. They'll take your money and freedoms from a distance using lawyers most of the time. The poor don't have much so poor assholes do it the only way they can, to your face. But at least that disrespect is usually just annoying and temporary.

[kphoger]

(A bit of negativity about certification in general, and FAA in particular is self censored)
With that - would controller failure be a catastrophic event? Any fallbacks?

Exactly.  The biggest takeaway from the 737 MAX business is the importance of eliminating single-point failures.

[kalvado]

(A bit of negativity about certification in general, and FAA in particular is self censored)
With that - would controller failure be a catastrophic event? Any fallbacks?

Exactly.  The biggest takeaway from the 737 MAX business is the importance of eliminating single-point failures.

One of. And I would be more concerned with control computer redundancy I that case. But honestly speaking this thing looks simple enough to have some very manual fall back down to a dozen switches and a Big Red Button for "cut off battery for ballast drop and immediate surfacing"
Now if they say implosion was the failure, I wonder if that was structural or something else. Battery runaway is a common thing these days, for example

[Max Rockatansky]

On Megaprojects today:

Draining off negativity and finger-pointing "look, they died!".. there is very little left actually.
After any disaster, there will be people who said "I told you so!". They are always there, sometimes they are right, often they are wrong. If using a simple controller is the worst incriminating thing, I would say things were in a good shape actually.
I wonder if investigation would bring up something. For one, navy will want to know composite failure mode, so  there may be something to learn.
In other news, see Challenger space shuttle, Boeing MCAS on latest 737, and Toyota uncommanded acceleration as "you must be joking!" class of failures. Of those 3, only qualifies as "cutting corners in pushing the boundary"

FWIW the controller was barely mentioned in the video.  Pretty much everything else I've read as being suspect with the Titan is at least broached once.

[Scott5114]

In isolation, I don't think that there's necessarily anything wrong with using a video game controller for something that isn't a video game. After all, it's a bunch of buttons, switches, and joysticks in a familiar-enough arrangement that most people would be instantly comfortable with using it. If I wanted to, say, build a homemade drone to take aerial pictures, using a video game controller as a base would make more sense than trying to build a bespoke controller.

The problem with it is it makes one wonder what other cheap off-the-shelf components have been pressed into service to do things they weren't intended by the manufacturer to do.

[kalvado]

In isolation, I don't think that there's necessarily anything wrong with using a video game controller for something that isn't a video game. After all, it's a bunch of buttons, switches, and joysticks in a familiar-enough arrangement that most people would be instantly comfortable with using it. If I wanted to, say, build a homemade drone to take aerial pictures, using a video game controller as a base would make more sense than trying to build a bespoke controller.

The problem with it is it makes one wonder what other cheap off-the-shelf components have been pressed into service to do things they weren't intended by the manufacturer to do.

I realized I was sitting on a machine with a million parts all built by the lowest bidder.
Attributed to John Glenn and Allan Sheppard.

Once you need something non-trivial, certification business stopps feeling ridiculous and starts feeling  like a sabotage.

[jeffandnicole]

In isolation, I don't think that there's necessarily anything wrong with using a video game controller for something that isn't a video game. After all, it's a bunch of buttons, switches, and joysticks in a familiar-enough arrangement that most people would be instantly comfortable with using it. If I wanted to, say, build a homemade drone to take aerial pictures, using a video game controller as a base would make more sense than trying to build a bespoke controller.

The problem with it is it makes one wonder what other cheap off-the-shelf components have been pressed into service to do things they weren't intended by the manufacturer to do.

Many local TV news weather forecasters use buttons on garage door openers to change the greenscreen image that appears behind them.

[GaryV]

In isolation, I don't think that there's necessarily anything wrong with using a video game controller for something that isn't a video game. After all, it's a bunch of buttons, switches, and joysticks in a familiar-enough arrangement that most people would be instantly comfortable with using it. If I wanted to, say, build a homemade drone to take aerial pictures, using a video game controller as a base would make more sense than trying to build a bespoke controller.

I referee events for FIRST Robotics Competition. Many of the high school teams say they would not use that controller for their robot. They are just not reliable enough, considering other options that are available.

The problem with it is it makes one wonder what other cheap off-the-shelf components have been pressed into service to do things they weren't intended by the manufacturer to do.

And this point was brought up by the high schoolers as well. Some also mentioned the failure that was possible from repeated stress on the carbon fiber, as noted in one of the posts above.

If it's not good enough for what is essentially a high school game, should it be used in high-risk applications?

[kalvado]

In isolation, I don't think that there's necessarily anything wrong with using a video game controller for something that isn't a video game. After all, it's a bunch of buttons, switches, and joysticks in a familiar-enough arrangement that most people would be instantly comfortable with using it. If I wanted to, say, build a homemade drone to take aerial pictures, using a video game controller as a base would make more sense than trying to build a bespoke controller.

I referee events for FIRST Robotics Competition. Many of the high school teams say they would not use that controller for their robot. They are just not reliable enough, considering other options that are available.

The problem with it is it makes one wonder what other cheap off-the-shelf components have been pressed into service to do things they weren't intended by the manufacturer to do.

And this point was brought up by the high schoolers as well.

If it's not good enough for what is essentially a high school game, should it be used in high-risk applications?

So our engineering experts include high school students, James Cameron..  Looks like a very representative list!

[bing101]

One of the Whistleblowers come forward on OceanGate's decision to run the submersible with Carbon Fiber.

[kalvado]

One of the Whistleblowers come forward on OceanGate's decision.

😂
He shouldn't use that carbon fiber because nobody used it before!
Really great argument, I should say.

[kphoger]

In isolation, I don't think that there's necessarily anything wrong with using a video game controller for something that isn't a video game. After all, it's a bunch of buttons, switches, and joysticks in a familiar-enough arrangement that most people would be instantly comfortable with using it. If I wanted to, say, build a homemade drone to take aerial pictures, using a video game controller as a base would make more sense than trying to build a bespoke controller.

Again, making the comparison between undersea craft and aircraft:  would you board an airplane if you knew the pilot was using a video game controller to fly the plane?  The amount of work that goes into certifying an airplane–|kalvado|'s negativity aside–is done for a reason:  a critical failure while up in the air generally results in disaster.  Likewise, undersea craft.

[kalvado]

In isolation, I don't think that there's necessarily anything wrong with using a video game controller for something that isn't a video game. After all, it's a bunch of buttons, switches, and joysticks in a familiar-enough arrangement that most people would be instantly comfortable with using it. If I wanted to, say, build a homemade drone to take aerial pictures, using a video game controller as a base would make more sense than trying to build a bespoke controller.

Again, making the comparison between undersea craft and aircraft:  would you board an airplane if you knew the pilot was using a video game controller to fly the plane?  The amount of work that goes into certifying an airplane–|kalvado|'s negativity aside–is done for a reason:  a critical failure while up in the air generally results in disaster.  Likewise, undersea craft.

Well, you assume certification is a technical process. No, it is significantly bureaucratic process which may easily be counterproductive in technical terms. 

An example which may be very telling:
Once upon a time, US FAA banned operation of a foreign-owned aircraft on an international flight after a sudden inspection. Reason for grounding: labels on some of the seatbelts were unreadable, hence aircraft is not certifyable....

[kphoger]

Well, you assume certification is a technical process. No, it is significantly bureaucratic process which may easily be counterproductive in technical terms. 

Again, my good friend spends months at a time writing hundreds of pages of certification at Textron Aviation.  It's a very technical process.

[kalvado]

Well, you assume certification is a technical process. No, it is significantly bureaucratic process which may easily be counterproductive in technical terms. 

Again, my good friend spends months at a time writing hundreds of pages of certification at Textron Aviation.  It's a very technical process.

Technical process...

spends months at a time writing hundreds of pages....


You see, that's the catch. Once there are hundreds pages of documents written based on hundreds more pages of other documents, things do become bureaucratic. And the actual reason for those to exist starts to vanish. Especially as certification is explicitly separated from original development...

[kphoger]

You see, that's the catch. Once there are hundreds pages of documents written based on hundreds more pages of other documents, things do become bureaucratic. And the actual reason for those to exist starts to vanish. Especially as certification is explicitly separated from original development...

Please explain in further detail.

He evaluates every component of an airplane model to ensure that each one meets or exceeds all safety standards;  analyzes every system to ensure that, in case of component failure, entire systems don't fail;  and writes up the hundreds-of-pages-long report that shows every detail of his analysis and shows all of his work.  How is this not a very, very technical process?  The bureaucracy is what gives him the project in the first place, it is what sets the deadline for the certification to be completed, but it is not what is actually involved in doing the certification itself.  And yes, of course it's separate from original development:  it's the finished product that you want to certify, after all, not a 'rough draft'.

[Rothman]

Again, making the comparison between undersea craft and aircraft:  would you board an airplane if you knew the pilot was using a video game controller to fly the plane?

Yes.  I don't see the problem.  Shoot, my Atari 2600 joysticks are still totally functional after all these years.

[kalvado]

You see, that's the catch. Once there are hundreds pages of documents written based on hundreds more pages of other documents, things do become bureaucratic. And the actual reason for those to exist starts to vanish. Especially as certification is explicitly separated from original development...

Please explain in further detail.

He evaluates every component of an airplane model to ensure that each one meets or exceeds all safety standards;  analyzes every system to ensure that, in case of component failure, entire systems don't fail;  and writes up the hundreds-of-pages-long report that shows every detail of his analysis and shows all of his work.  How is this not a very, very technical process?  The bureaucracy is what gives him the project in the first place, it is what sets the deadline for the certification to be completed, but it is not what is actually involved in doing the certification itself.  And yes, of course it's separate from original development:  it's the finished product that you want to certify, after all, not a 'rough draft'.

Is that his words or your words?
System analysis is definitely performed by the vendor. As far as I understand, only test data is available for certification, not the underlying information. That allows things like Toyota fiasco to go through - certification had no access to see the mess in the computer system design.

[kphoger]

Is that his words or your words?

Well, mine.

Is that his words or your words?
System analysis is definitely performed by the vendor. As far as I understand, only test data is available for certification, not the underlying information. That allows things like Toyota fiasco to go through - certification had no access to see the mess in the computer system design.

How does that make it not technical?

[kalvado]

Again, making the comparison between undersea craft and aircraft:  would you board an airplane if you knew the pilot was using a video game controller to fly the plane?

Yes.  I don't see the problem.  Shoot, my Atari 2600 joysticks are still totally functional after all these years.

Joystick used to actually fly actual airplane:

[kphoger]

Again, making the comparison between undersea craft and aircraft:  would you board an airplane if you knew the pilot was using a video game controller to fly the plane?

Yes.  I don't see the problem.  Shoot, my Atari 2600 joysticks are still totally functional after all these years.

You don't see any difference between (1) the FAA certifying a joystick to keep passengers alive in the air and (2) Atari certifying a joystick to keep a video game operational long enough for the consumer to not need a refund?  I see a fundamental difference.  Airplane components have to last dozens of times longer than the expected life of the aircraft.  Video game components have to last however long the manufacturer thinks consumers will tolerate.

[kalvado]

Again, making the comparison between undersea craft and aircraft:  would you board an airplane if you knew the pilot was using a video game controller to fly the plane?

Yes.  I don't see the problem.  Shoot, my Atari 2600 joysticks are still totally functional after all these years.

You don't see any difference between (1) the FAA certifying a joystick to keep passengers alive in the air and (2) Atari certifying a joystick to keep a video game operational long enough for the consumer to not need a refund?  I see a fundamental difference. Airplane components have to last dozens of times longer than the expected life of the aircraft. Video game components have to last however long the manufacturer thinks consumers will tolerate.

Reference, please.

[Rothman]

Again, making the comparison between undersea craft and aircraft:  would you board an airplane if you knew the pilot was using a video game controller to fly the plane?

Yes.  I don't see the problem.  Shoot, my Atari 2600 joysticks are still totally functional after all these years.

You don't see any difference between (1) the FAA certifying a joystick to keep passengers alive in the air and (2) Atari certifying a joystick to keep a video game operational long enough for the consumer to not need a refund?  I see a fundamental difference.  Airplane components have to last dozens of times longer than the expected life of the aircraft.  Video game components have to last however long the manufacturer thinks consumers will tolerate.

Not really.  My Atari's joysticks have lasted about 40 years and don't show any signs of slowing down.  Good enough for me.  Shoot, bona fide aircraft parts don't last that long nowadays.  Saw a video where Heathrow had to replace the nose cone of a large airliner a few weeks ago...

[kphoger]

Reference, please.

Sorry, I'm just going off past conversations with my friend–which came up quite a bit following the 737 MAX investigation, especially considering he certifies Boeing craft.  I'm not in the industry myself.

[triplemultiplex]

What annoys me about this story is you have people shelling out a quarter mil to do something that's solely to impress their billionaire friends; so they can win Instagram for a day.  And then we're expected to be all sad for them dying in the middle of their dick measuring contest?  Pass.
Next news cycle, please.