The former director of engineering raised serious concerns regarding the operational practices at OceanGate. He shared his decision not to pilot the Titanic missions due to his mistrust in the operational crew. This mistrust stemmed from previous experiences that left him feeling the truth about the submersible’s safety was inadequately communicated. The revelation adds credibility to ongoing questions surrounding the Titan's operational integrity.
During the inquiry, the engineer expressed the need to understand the experimental nature of the Titan Submersible thoroughly. He insisted that everyone involved should be aware of the risks, hence advocating for the term "experimental" in operational waivers. This insistence highlights the potential gap in safety communication within the organization and indicates that more rigorous safety protocols may be necessary for future missions.
Highlighting a significant worry, he mentioned the presence of young, inexperienced engineers working on the Titan. He noted that the lack of supervision over these individuals added to the safety risks associated with the submersible’s operations. This concern raises critical questions about the training and operational standards expected of engineers, especially in high-stakes scenarios such as deep-sea exploration.
In a candid confession, a former director of engineering at OceanGate voiced deep concerns about the safety protocols surrounding the Titan Submersible. During a recent inquiry, he revealed his reluctance to pilot the Titanic missions, citing a lack of trust in the operational crew and expressing doubts about the truthfulness of the vessel’s claims. This transparency highlights significant operational issues within OceanGate, raising questions about the safety measures implemented by the company in high-stakes ocean exploration. The ex-engineer elaborated on the intense pressure and precarious nature of working in such an experimental environment. He insisted on the inclusion of the term "experimental" in the waiver, emphasizing the need for potential pilots and mission specialists to be aware of the risks involved before embarking on underwater expeditions. His insistence indicates a critical gap in communication regarding safety among team members and clients, who may not have been fully briefed on the inherent dangers associated with the Titan’s operations. In addition to his personal discomfort, the engineer pointed out alarming staffing issues at OceanGate, particularly concerning young engineers, including inexperienced individuals in their late teens or early twenties. He raised concerns about the lack of supervision for these young engineers, questioning whether they possessed the necessary skills and knowledge to handle vital components of the submersible safely. This lack of oversight adds to the growing concerns surrounding the overall safety and operational standards of OceanGate’s expeditions.I do HVAC residential work and I work with a guy that does crappy work and has trouble with everything he touches. He thinks he knows everything so you cant tell him anything.
They could have gone on a decent holiday for a fraction of the price. Who the f*** wants to look rusty old ship anyway. ??
The only tragedy is that an arrogant prk was allowed to take 4 people with him and his experimental craft unwittingly to their deaths for the reasonable price of $250,000 each,,oceangate and whomever was incharge of signing off on the titans Sea worthiness should be held to account
The horror dive shocked the world nobody was shocked that a mini sub controlled by a Microsoft product imploded deep in the Ocean. FFS, the Sun is always so dramatic.
