In the past few days, all of us have heard about the tragic story of the Titan Sub. Ocean Gate's Titan submarine mission was to perform a deep-sea tourist journey to view the RMS Titanic's wreckage. The Titan Sub was built to investigate the depths of the North Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Newfoundland, Canada, where the Titanic went down in 1912.

Unfortunately, the Titan Sub, which was supposed to be part of a revolutionary expedition to explore the historic remains of the RMS Titanic, was destroyed by a catastrophic implosion caused by unknown circumstances.

It's important to analyze the technological shortcomings of the Titan Sub and learn from them to prevent similar incidents in the future.

Design limitations

The hatch of the Titan could only be opened from the outside, making it impossible for the passengers inside to open it. This lack of an emergency backup system could have been problematic if the submersible surfaced and the occupants couldn't escape.

Lack of navigational instruments

The Titan did not have GPS or a locator beacon onboard, relying solely on data provided by the surface support vessel. This lack of independent navigation systems made a challenging tracking process the submersible's position accurately.

Reliance on the surface support vessel

The inability to swiftly respond to emergencies and provide immediate aid due to the vessel's distance from the submerged sub can result in tragic outcomes. This incident underscores the need for alternative or supplementary methods to ensure the safety and survival of underwater missions, emphasizing the pressing need for advancements in subsea technology and autonomous operations.

Control mechanism

The use of a video game controller to operate the submersible raises concerns about the level of sophistication and reliability of the control system. Military-grade equipment undergoes strict testing to ensure safety, but a consumer-grade controller may not meet the same standards.

Lack of certifications

Ocean Gate stated that the Titan was not certified by any ship authority, arguing that classification focused solely on the physical state of the vessel and not corporate actions. This lack of certification raises questions about adherence to safety standards and protocols.

Quality control issues

A quality control report filed by a whistleblower in January 2018 revealed that no non-destructive testing had been conducted on the carbon fiber hull of the submersible. Non-destructive testing is essential to identify any potential weaknesses or flaws in the material, and the absence of such testing is a serious concern.

Legal disputes and whistleblower retaliation

The whistleblower who raised concerns about quality control and safety measures, David Lockridge, faced retaliation and was ultimately dismissed from his position. This suggests a lack of transparency and accountability within the company.

It's important for the relevant authorities to thoroughly investigate this incident and hold Ocean Gate accountable for any negligence or lapses in safety protocols. Lessons should be learned from this tragedy to ensure the safety of future deep-sea exploration missions.