Whistleblower Testifies Titan Sub Tragedy Was 'Inevitable' Due to Ignored Safety Warnings

[Social Media]

 

In a public hearing on the 2023 Titan submersible tragedy, a former employee of OceanGate, the company behind the ill-fated vessel, claimed the disaster was "inevitable" due to the company bypassing safety protocols. David Lochridge, OceanGate’s former operations director, testified before U.S. Coast Guard investigators, stating that he had raised concerns about potential safety issues before being dismissed in 2018. His warnings were ignored, culminating in the tragedy that claimed five lives when the Titan imploded during a descent to the Titanic wreck in June 2023.

Former OceanGate operations director David Lochridge said his report on the construction of the Titan was an opportunity to raise the issues he found in the “abomination of a sub”.https://t.co/7MWLL8yLX7 pic.twitter.com/KDxSyom8sr

— Sky News (@SkyNews) September 17, 2024

 

The public hearings are part of a two-week inquiry led by the U.S. Coast Guard, following a 15-month-long investigation into the incident. Lochridge’s testimony on Tuesday was highly anticipated, as it was his first public account of the safety concerns he had raised with OceanGate before his termination. After being fired, Lochridge was sued by OceanGate for revealing confidential information, to which he countersued for wrongful dismissal.

Former OceanGate Operations Director David Lochridge testifies during the Titan submersible hearings Tuesday. You can stream the hearings live on our Facebook page, YouTube channel, or website.

YouTube stream: https://t.co/kwx16QdA6e pic.twitter.com/xprbLSnNnU

— ABC News 4 (@ABCNews4) September 17, 2024

 

Lochridge revealed that he had been tasked by Stockton Rush, OceanGate's CEO, to produce a quality inspection report on the Titan in 2018. He voiced major concerns regarding the submersible’s design, particularly its carbon fiber construction, which he warned would degrade with each dive. "The whole idea of OceanGate was to make money," Lochridge said, adding, "There was very little in the way of science." He also accused Rush and the company of "arrogance," stating that they opted to bypass expert input from the University of Washington, choosing instead to carry out all engineering work in-house. "They think they could do this on their own without proper engineering support," Lochridge testified, further indicating that his relationship with OceanGate began to deteriorate in 2016 when he started voicing his safety concerns. He believed he was likely labeled "the troublemaker" for being outspoken about the potential dangers.

 

The inquiry into the Titan disaster includes testimonies from as many as 10 former OceanGate employees, including co-founder Guillermo Sohnlein and marine safety experts. One of these individuals, OceanGate’s former engineering director Tony Nissen, testified on Monday, revealing that he had refused to board the Titan years before its final dive. “I’m not getting in it,” Nissen said he told Rush, explaining that he felt pressured to prepare the vessel for dives despite his reservations.

OceanGate used a hand ratchet to seal the missing Titanic submarine, Titan. pic.twitter.com/whDtE9sMKi

— Remarks (@Remarks) June 22, 2023

 

Investigators disclosed additional details, including communications between the Titan and its mother ship, the Polar Prince. Notably, one of the last messages from the submersible before it imploded read, "all good here." Officials also revealed that during its earlier dives to the Titanic in 2021 and 2022, the submersible had experienced 118 equipment issues. Specific incidents included its batteries dying, leaving passengers stranded inside the sub for 27 hours.

The Titan tragedy claimed the lives of OceanGate CEO Stockton Rush, British explorer Hamish Harding, veteran French diver Paul Henri Nargeolet, British-Pakistani businessman Shahzada Dawood, and his 19-year-old son, Suleman. Following the incident, OceanGate suspended all exploration and commercial operations.

 

Credit: BBC 2024-09-19

 

 

 

[JonnyF]

A bit like launching people into space, taking people to the bottom of the ocean is inherently dangerous and there will be casualties.

 

They know the risks when they do it, although I do have a lot of sympathy for the son of the Pakistani billionaire as it sounds like he was pressured into going by an overbearing father. 

[MarkBR]

Ignoring properly qualified experts has consequences.

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

A bit like launching people into space, taking people to the bottom of the ocean is inherently dangerous and there will be casualties.

 

They know the risks when they do it, although I do have a lot of sympathy for the son of the Pakistani billionaire as it sounds like he was pressured into going by an overbearing father. 

Since the design was not compliant to established standards, not subjected to a design safety review, and not tested for the environment into which it was sent ‘they’ obviously did not know the risks.

 

The OP refers to ‘arrogance’, though ‘hubris’ might be more accurate.

 

https://www.engineering.com/the-titan-submersible-a-little-testing-wouldnt-have-killed-them/#:~:text=A new design%2C with material,should have been thoroughly tested.&text=The Titan was not sufficiently,Image%3A OceanGate.&text=for further testing that was not sent.

[JonnyF]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Since the design was not compliant to established standards, not subjected to a design safety review, and not tested for the environment into which it was sent ‘they’ obviously did not know the risks.

 

The titan had already been to the Titanic several times, so of course it had been tested in that environment. 

 

The occupants signed a document that clearly stated it was a high risk journey, the possibility of death was mentioned several times.

 

Are you suggesting they did not read it before signing? Otherwise, how did they not know the risks?

[stevenl]

5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

The titan had already been to the Titanic several times, so of course it had been tested in that environment. 

 

The occupants signed a document that clearly stated it was a high risk journey, the possibility of death was mentioned several times.

 

Are you suggesting they did not read it before signing? Otherwise, how did they not know the risks?

Knowing there are grave risks is different from knowing experts have said it is bound to go wrong soon and critical employees being fired for their criticism.

[JonnyF]

Just now, stevenl said:

Knowing there are grave risks is different from knowing experts have said it is bound to go wrong soon and critical employees being fired for their criticism.

 

Previous passengers knew. These paseengers knew. They assessed the risks and took the gamble to fulfill a dream. They lost. It can happen, but they had the right to make that choice about their own lives. 

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/read-oceangate-waiver-titan-sub-passengers-lists-numerous-death-risks-2023-7

 

[Chomper Higgot]

9 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

The titan had already been to the Titanic several times, so of course it had been tested in that environment. 

 

The occupants signed a document that clearly stated it was a high risk journey, the possibility of death was mentioned several times.

 

Are you suggesting they did not read it before signing? Otherwise, how did they not know the risks?

What the occupants signed has no bearing on the actual risk.

 

As the OP describes, the behaviour of carbon fiber under repeated pressurizations was not known.

 

A test, is not simply applying pressure, it includes analysis to determine the outcome of that pressure on the structure, particularly relevant for laminated materials and especially so for the where different critical structural elements are fabricated from different materials each with their own distinct material properties.

 

Pure hubris.

 

[Tug]

Pop goes the billionaire…..just a wealthy Darwin Award winner.who would take that kind of risk just for bragging rights is beyond me.it didn’t advance science nor any kind of benefit for anyone just stupid rich people.

[JonnyF]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

What the occupants signed has no bearing on the actual risk.

 

 

The acknowledged the risk of death. It was mentioned multiple times in the document.

 

Not many things riskier than that. 

 

If they didn't do their due diligence before signing a document that stated they could die, that is their responsibility. Nobody put a gun to their head and forced them into the vessel. Quite the opposite, they paid large amounts of money to go, while knowing the risk of death. 

 

The freedom of choice Chomps. Agency. Personal reponsibility. Would I get in it? Absolutely not. But that would be my choice and they had theirs.  

[stevenl]

11 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Previous passengers knew. These paseengers knew. They assessed the risks and took the gamble to fulfill a dream. They lost. It can happen, but they had the right to make that choice about their own lives. 

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/read-oceangate-waiver-titan-sub-passengers-lists-numerous-death-risks-2023-7

 

You're replying to my post but ignoring it.

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, Tug said:

Pop goes the billionaire…..just a wealthy Darwin Award winner.who would take that kind of risk just for bragging rights is beyond me.it didn’t advance science nor any kind of benefit for anyone just stupid rich people.

 

Of course it advances science. 71% of the earth's surface is covered with water.

 

The ocean has multiple possibilities for the future. It's certainly more viable than shooting people into space to live on the moon. Claiming that increasing our knowledge of exploring the depths of the ocean adds nothing to science is ridiculous. There is plenty more to learn about what's going on down there.  

[JonnyF]

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

You're replying to my post but ignoring it.

 

I'm disproving your assertion. It's a shame you cannot see that, but not surprising. 

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, JonnyF said:

 

The acknowledged the risk of death. It was mentioned multiple times in the document.

 

Not many things riskier than that. 

 

If they didn't do their due diligence before signing a document that stated they could die, that is their responsibility. Nobody put a gun to their head and forced them into the vessel. Quite the opposite, they paid large amounts of money to go, while knowing the risk of death. 

 

The freedom of choice Chomps. Agency. Personal reponsibility. Would I get in it? Absolutely not. But that would be my choice and they had theirs.  

It ha no bearing on the actual risks.

 

The actual risks are the flaws inherent in the design, manufacture and use of the submersible, non of which are in any way effected by the waivers signed by the passengers.

 

Freedom of (informed) choice!

 

Agency required some control over events, the passengers had zero control over any of the design and manufacturing already made that would result in their death. 
 

Somebody wasn’t listening to David Lochridge, pure hubris.

 

 

 

 

 

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It ha no bearing on the actual risks.

 

The actual risks are the flaws inherent in the design, manufacture and use of the submersible, non of which are in any way effected by the waivers signed by the passengers.

 

Freedom of (informed) choice!

 

Agency required some control over events, the passengers had zero control over any of the design and manufacturing already made that would result in their death. 
 

Somebody wasn’t listening to David Lochridge, pure hubris.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oceangate declared it an experimental vehicle, and that passengers could face death. Passengers signed that. They knew it hadn't been tested by regulators and hadn't received certification. 

 

Rush spoke about the risks and the materials used publicly on multiple occasions. He wasn't shy of the fact, he even seemed proud of the Playstation controller and the fact some of the fixings were available at a hardware store. I have no doubt the passengers were aware of this. If they weren't they should have been seeing as they knew their lives were on the line. 

 

If passengers wanted to research further the suitability of carbon fibre for a submersible hull they were free to do so. The information was out there, freely available. Maybe they did that research and proceeded anyway, who knows? I would have certainly done the research. But they made their choice. They weren't forced on there. It wasn't necessary to get on there. 

 

I know you'd like the government to micro manage our lives to the nth degree and decide what people can and cannot do but I'm afraid you'll have to wait a bit longer for your utopia. The human spirit for risk and adventure remains uncrushed, for now. 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

Oceangate declared it an experimental vehicle, and that passengers could face death. Passengers signed that. They knew it hadn't been tested by regulators and hadn't received certification. 

 

Rush spoke about the risks and the materials used publicly on multiple occasions. He wasn't shy of the fact, he even seemed proud of the Playstation controller and the fact some of the fixings were available at a hardware store. I have no doubt the passengers were aware of this. If they weren't they should have been seeing as they knew their lives were on the line. 

 

If passengers wanted to research further the suitability of carbon fibre for a submersible hull they were free to do so. The information was out there, freely available. Maybe they did that research and proceeded anyway, who knows? I would have certainly done the research. But they made their choice. They weren't forced on there. It wasn't necessary to get on there. 

 

I know you'd like the government to micro manage our lives to the nth degree and decide what people can and cannot do but I'm afraid you'll have to wait a bit longer for your utopia. The human spirit for risk and adventure remains uncrushed, for now. 

 

 

You are doing a very good job at demonstrating the precise problem of lay persons misunderstanding risk in the application of complex systems.

 

Gove listening to David Lochridge a go.

 

[Srikcir]

As soon as the submersible entered the water it violated its design. Oceanside and support ship captain knew that.

A submersible must be permanently tethered to its support ship (aka Mothership) at all times in the water whereas a submarine doesn't need to be tethered. The Titan was never tethered putting it's passengers at immediate risk. And they died from that risk.

[JonnyF]

30 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You are doing a very good job at demonstrating the precise problem of lay persons misunderstanding risk in the application of complex systems.

 

Gove listening to David Lochridge a go.

 

 

I'm well aware it was unregulated and a poor choice of material. Carbon fibre is a good choice for planes, not for submersibles. It's strong when being pulled, not when being pushed etc. You are doing a very good job at demostrating someone deliberately missing the point. 

 

The point is that is was their choice to go. They knew the risks. It's like base jumping, skydiving, deep sea diving, freestyle motocross. It's obviously risky but as long as it harms nobody other than the people choosing to take the risk then I do not have a problem with it. Many people enjoy the risk. It is part of the thrill. That's up to them, not you or some technocrat working for the government. You leftists can't help yourselves interfering in other people's lives and choices, can you... 

 

"Protect them from themselves" 😄.

 

 

[Tug]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

Of course it advances science. 71% of the earth's surface is covered with water.

 

The ocean has multiple possibilities for the future. It's certainly more viable than shooting people into space to live on the moon. Claiming that increasing our knowledge of exploring the depths of the ocean adds nothing to science is ridiculous. There is plenty more to learn about what's going on down there.  

I agree with you 100% that we have a much more immediate need to learn more about our oceans I spent a good portion of my working career working in it and when I became to old I worked on it.I know about balancing risk and reward those folks weren’t engaged in anything of value other than bragging rights it was a dumb thing to do unfortunately they paid the price.

[JonnyF]

21 minutes ago, Tug said:

I agree with you 100% that we have a much more immediate need to learn more about our oceans I spent a good portion of my working career working in it and when I became to old I worked on it.I know about balancing risk and reward those folks weren’t engaged in anything of value other than bragging rights it was a dumb thing to do unfortunately they paid the price.

 

I would disagree. It proved beyond doubt that carbon fibre is a poor choice for submersibles going to that depth on regular occasions. Lessons will be learnt.

 

Also, that sub was used for more than just trips to the Titanic. Just like the early days of flying, there were poor designs and casualties until we reached the levels we are at today. You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. 

 

Even if it was just "for bragging rights" or "the thrill", the same could be said of many dangerous activities that humans have the right to participate in, at their own risk. People must be allowed to make their own choices about the risks they take for themselves. 

[MarkBR]

Agreed, but I doubt the information conveyed to the passenger truly emphasised the size of the risks.  Safety laws & regualtions exist for the reason.  Wonder how they were able to get way with avoiding/ignoring so many safety regulations?

[degrub]

Probably by the use of the word “experimental “ and carefully written contract and release of liability. 
 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

I would disagree. It proved beyond doubt that carbon fibre is a poor choice for submersibles going to that depth on regular occasions. Lessons will be learnt.

 

Also, that sub was used for more than just trips to the Titanic. Just like the early days of flying, there were poor designs and casualties until we reached the levels we are at today. You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. 

 

Even if it was just "for bragging rights" or "the thrill", the same could be said of many dangerous activities that humans have the right to participate in, at their own risk. People must be allowed to make their own choices about the risks they take for themselves. 

I’ve got an even better example than the history of flight.

 

’Submarine Engineering’.

 

It started off  as a highly dangerous endeavor, but with lessons learned from early accidents, the application of engineering, development of materials, manufacturing methods, lots of science and copious amounts of inspection, design safety reviews and development and application of engineering and design standards and practices the early risks of submarines have been identified and eliminated.

 

There was absolutely no good reason for the idiot running the Titan fiasco to ignore this wealth of knowledge and experience.

 

Other that is than hubris.