Encyclopedia Titanica

5 lessons from the loss of the Titan

Five lessons the operators of the Titan submersible could have learned from the original Titanic disaster

Titanica!

    Hide Ads
THE Titan tragedy has much of the same macabre allure as the original Titanic disaster from all of 111 years ago, albeit on a human scale 300 times smaller.
 
The wealth involved, and the apparent glamour of exploration, explains why this latter-day story has evoked so much fascination – whereas a Mediterranean migrant disaster comprising 100 times as many souls is instead the subject of averted eyes, challenging as it does all kinds of Western sensibilities, including societal guilt.
 
It’s human nature to be inconsistent and, yes, discriminatory. And it’s human nature that the lessons of the RMS Titanic from 1912 have, in large part, not been learned, and the same mistakes repeated after more than a century of assumed progress. Here we look at five lessons the Titan submersible could have learned from the original Titanic disaster.

1. Overconfidence is a calling card of calamity.

The RMS Titanic was the largest moving object ever built by the hand of man when she entered service in 1912. She was full of innovations, including turbine power and propellers that had been reconfigured for her maiden voyage as science pointed the way ahead. She also had a double bottom… but the vaunted inner skin did not rise high along the sides, which was to be a fatal flaw with a grazing iceberg. The same misplaced belief in technology seems to apply in Titan’s case, with the merely experimental assumed to a major innovation because of the long chain of “disruption” successes that have flowed from technology in recent years. There has also been the classic Titanic failure to heed warnings – not of “ice ahead” in this case, but letters from concerned industry peers (seen as competitor jealousy) and dire advice from the company’s own safety expert, whose lawsuit after departure was quietly settled by OceanGate, owners and operators of Titan

2. The vessel is never its own lifeboat.

In 1912 the lack of escape craft in the form of lifeboats was officially mandated. Titanic had only 16 standard boats (and four collapsibles) for the 2,200 on board – a figure that could have risen to 3,500 in a packed high season. Half would have been doomed to die, even in the best-ordered evacuation. In the event, two-thirds died, with only one-third saved in the boats. A century ago, British law allowed for fewer lifeboats if there was a system of transverse bulkheads to seal off compartments. Some of those bulkheads did not go high enough, and in any case, the berg punctured too many compartments. With the Titan as a free-falling and free-ascending submersible, there was never any means of escape… and no Plan B. The craft was not certificated safe in any way, nor was there any rescue plan or capability in case of the worst eventuality, as recent days have demonstrated.

3. A rescue flotilla can’t always easily be summoned.

Titanic found this to her cost in 1912. Her collision happened at 11.40 pm when most Marconi operators – then an infant science, present on a tiny minority of ships – had already gone to bed because they had to work during the day. As a result, nearer ships than the eventual rescuer (RMS Carpathia) were deaf to appeals for help over the airwaves. Nowadays, there are instant 24-hour communications for surface ships and those who watch over them… but fewer ships in general than a century ago because almost everything goes by air. In Titanic’s case, there was a presumption that Marconi wireless meant a flotilla to help could soon be magicked in any scenario, as had happened three years previously with the White Star Line sister ship, s.s. Republic. But deafness, distance and a desperate two hours and forty minutes before the sinking saw rescue hopes evaporate. Titan was equally 435 miles from the nearest major port, horrifyingly isolated, but worse still than Titanic, nearly two and a half miles deep beneath the surface of the sea.

4. SOS is still important 

Titanic transmitted S.O.S. in Morse code, a new distress call in 1912 that supplanted the old C.Q.D. (‘Come quickly, danger’) simply because it was easier to send, not because of any ‘Save Our Souls’ emotionalism. The auditory phonetics are dit-dit-dit, dah-dah-dah, dit-dit-dit. While Morse has recently been discontinued, it has proved its worth to people trapped under rubble after earthquakes and in other disasters. P. H. Nargeolet, a wonderful human being and the most experienced man on board, would have used a steadily repeated Morse form of noise-making instead of generalised “banging,” if he had still been alive — but of course, he died immediately in the implosion. S. O. S. can only be man-made; therefore, it is conclusive proof of human survival. One expert said the “banging,” later walked back as “noises,” was therefore “not coherent and not convincing” as evidence of any survival. Sadly the “banging” rumours offered false hope. There was never any “Race Against Time” — and if there was, it was won by a nanosecond one hour and forty-five minutes after launch. 

5. Rules are there for a reason.

Prudence should still come before profit. Both the White Star Line and OceanGate have been accused of cutting corners. Interestingly, both had their Managing Directors on board – respectively, J. Bruce Ismay (who was claimed to have urged greater speed on Titanic;'s Captain E. J. Smith) and Stockton Rush. There is a video in which Mr Rush says he would like to be remembered as an innovator, adding: “I think it was General MacArthur who said: ‘You're remembered for the rules you break.’ And you know, I've broken some rules to make this (the submersible Titan). I think I broke them with logic and good engineering behind me.” Which in turn refers back to failure number one – overweening overconfidence. Matched, most unfortunately, by a line from James Cameron’s 1997 ‘Titanic’ movie: “Your money can’t save you now.”

Contributors

Senan Molony, Ireland

Contribute

  Send New Information

Comment and discuss

  1. bewnyc bewnyc
    PH was hardly shy about grabbing shoes for Tulloch and Gellar's museum. https://nypost.com/2023/07/16/james-cameron-denies-rumors-hes-working-on-titan-submersible-film/ And Cameron's under his usual fire.
  2. bewnyc bewnyc
    Zero.
  3. Mike Spooner
    So if there has be no other explorer sub lost. This can only be in the different design from previous subs. A very hard lesson be learn here and just hope the law is change that they are properly tested to the new design specifications.
  4. Michael H. Standart Michael H. Standart
    You mooted the following "3 of the 4 victims were billionaires so its not like I am rooting to see them get some $$." as if their level of wealth counts for something. It doesn't. It doesn't matter who the injured party is. Wrong is wrong. That's all there is to it.
  5. JesseK JesseK
    Whatever, move on then.
  6. Steven Christian
    Billionaires are people too. They just have more zeros on their ledger sheets. I would guess their wives and mothers feel the same as ours would. They took a chance that went against them. What they did doesnt affect anyone outside their immediate circle. No need to disrespect them.
  7. JesseK JesseK
    You are seeing things that aren't there, I simply said they don't need the $$, how is stating a simple and obvious fact disrespectful ?
  8. Michael H. Standart Michael H. Standart
    There's no 'whatever' when it comes to refuting a red herring. No you didn't. What you SAID was ""3 of the 4 victims were billionaires so its not like I am rooting to see them get some $$." " It's also irrelevant. For one thing, it's not your place (Or mine or anybody else's) to arbitrarily decide what anybody needs based on whatever social/political ideology we may confuse for fact. For another, the issue is the injury done and the sort of penalty applied to the party or parties responsible for the injury. Five people are dead who should be alive, so somebody has to answer for that.
  9. Mike Spooner
    The whole point why the sub failed is due to the fact was never given a properly soak test over a period of time before putting people into it. In other words the sub should been tested a 100 times at those pressure of 6000 psi before placing live people in. In fact if you know the pressure is 6000 psi in the new design concept of using carbon fibre it should be tested at 10,000 psi. Seeing the new development of electric planes using hydrogen to drive electric motors and pressure of 5000-10,000 psi. I just hope they are fully tested about those figures over a period of time before placing live people in. Perhaps we may learn from sub disaster do like for the planes don't take just the theory but by practical tests beforehand. Isn't that what they did in space by putting dogs and monkeys in first before the human race!
  10. MHatler
    I always thought these were obvious things for any invention. If you want something to work under certain conditions, test them with an increased load. Apparently, not in this case.
  11. mitfrc
    Stress testing is not reliable in a CFC pressure vessel. That’s one of the problems that made testing hard, and therefore something to be dropped to cut cost. Loading to proof strength can actually compromise the strength at the service rating.
View 822 comments... Open Thread Leave a Reply Watch Thread

Find Related Items

Citation

Encyclopedia Titanica (2023) 5 lessons from the loss of the Titan (Titanica!, ref: #734, published 24 June 2023, generated 3rd July 2024 12:50:48 PM); URL : https://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/5-lessons-from-the-loss-of-the-titan.html