416
Is it because everything else on the sub was ordered from aliexpress and pieced together? This was the only part from a legitimate manufacturer?
this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2024
416 points (97.3% liked)
Technology
69950 readers
2262 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Since the story came out people fixated on "lol he used a shitty gaming controller" but really that is one of the least sketchy design choices in the entire rig. Why reinvent the wheel and make a custom set of controls that are realistically another huge expense and potential failure point, when off the shelf solutions exist for that component?
The corners that were cut are the ones involving the viewport/nose adhesion to the ships frame, and the structural integrity of the carbon fiber hull itself. They had test data suggesting it was a bad idea to engage in repeated dives with their design, and an even worse idea to operate at the depths they chose. They decided to ignore that.
From what I can tell the lawsuit (which is against Ocean Gate, not Logitech) is really just calling out the controller as another example of willfully negligent behaviour.
You're certainly correct that the actual cause of the failure was the carbon fibre hull. Just a terrible idea on so many levels. Carbon fibre, by its nature, is good under tension, not compression. It was never going to function well as a pressure vessel underwater.
There were a litany of terrible decisions made by Ocean Gate, such as not tethering the sub, because it was cheaper to launch it from a towed raft, but none of those bad decisions ultimately mattered once that pressure vessel failed. Those people were dead so fast that, to quote Scott Manley, "You go from being biology to being physics."
load more comments
(4 replies)
Having tried to use those, my main issue was the 710 is an unreliable 2.4ghz wireless, when bluetooth controllers all worked much better for me. I couldn't get the 710 to have reliable button presses from more than like 4 feet from my pc, so I ended up just using the 310 wired. Maybe there isn't enough interference on the sub for that to be an issue.
There's going to be no external interference when you're under water. Sea water makes an excellent em shield
load more comments
(1 replies)
Using commercial off the shelf technology without proper testing and certification is absolutely cutting corners. See: Kaprun disaster.
What kind of fire rating did those COTS parts throughout the interior of the vessel have? What kind of redundancy existed? Would you use a Logitech controller for a spacecraft? The requirements of deep sea submersibles and spacecraft are quite similar. Would any of the submersible certification agencies approved this? I think not.
I see the Logitech controller, the carbon fiber hull, and so many other decisions he made as symptoms of the same corner cutting, “move fast and break things” mentality he had.
Using commercial off the shelf technology without proper testing and certification is absolutely cutting corners. See: Kaprun disaster.
I just read the wikipedia article; thanks for mentioning it.
I'm not sure it's a good example of your point, though. Notably:
the cause was the failure, overheating and ignition of a fan heater in the conductor's compartments which was not designed for use in a moving vehicle.
The onboard electric power, hydraulic braking systems, and fan heaters intended for domestic use increased the likelihood of fire.
The fan heater is the only off-the-shelf technology listed here, and there's no suggestion that it was part of the train's design. It seems likely that a train conductor brought it on board to keep the compartment warm through the workday. Still a bad idea in a train, especially on a 30° slope, but not an example of the designers cutting corners.
Edit:
Thanks to others for linking photos and a report (in German) that show how the heater was installed. It was clearly not a case of a conductor just setting the heater on the floor, but the installation still looks very much out of place. Perhaps corner-cutting was involved, but this doesn't look like something done by the train designers. Even an expensive industrial heater seems like it would be an extraordinarily bad idea in that location, right up against high-pressure hydraulic oil lines. Does someone have the details behind it? It looks more likely a (very foolish) modification made by someone else, like maybe the train operators.
For anyone else following this, those hydraulic oil lines that the heater was nearly touching were apparently pressurized at 190 bar, which I think is about 2700 pounds per square inch.
It’s an example of uncertified consumer grade equipment used in a commercial environment to disastrous results, outside of its original designed purpose. It’s one of the most well known examples of why you don’t use consumer grade hardware in a commercial/industrial setting.
It was not brought on board by the conductor or someone else, it was permanently installed in the train in place of commercial grade heaters they couldn’t source. It was installed in the wall during assembly.
I’d argue it is an example of cutting corners, they didn’t want to find / pay more for commercial grade heaters. It was not compliant with the original design nor fire safety standards.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
Exactly this. When you procure custom hardware, you’re paying (a lot) for the vendor to ensure that each unit meets the specifications you provide. If you validate off the shelf hardware like this, there is no guarantee that another batch of the same sku will also meet your requirements. Imagine training on these controllers then a certain batch of them has wildly different sensitivity.
load more comments
(1 replies)
That doesn't explain why they used the wireless version of that Logitech instead of wired to control the thing they were literally inside.
To be fair, they're under water and sharks have been known to chew through electrical cables
I suspect the wired cabling would be to control components inside the sub, not outside. And I say that only because it's unlikely that wireless signals would penetrate the sub walls.
Yes but with this sub the water was on the inside too
Lol
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(17 replies)
I wouldn't use a wireless controller playing subnautica. This is on the company for using sub par tech. Next time use first party wired!
sub par tech
Nice pun
🤦♂️
If anything that controller was the most solidly built thing on that entire sub.
What a stupid waste of time and resources.
The complaint does not allege that the Logitech wireless controller, the carbon fiber construction, Titan's innovative porthole, or the use of disparate materials with differing expansion/compression coefficients—four main areas of criticism—were individually responsible for the sub's implosion. But it does suggest that these systems could have together contributed to a "daisy chain of failures of multiple improperly designed or constructed parts or systems."
Titan was an implosion, so the pressure hull failed at some point, we just don't know what. While the Logitech controller is indicative of the decision making process, it's one component we can comprehensively rule out as causing the failure.
Shouldn't have put the 'implode' action on the shoulder button. It was only a matter of time before he triggered it on accident.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"Yes, we built the sub wrong, but it's still your fault for not anticipating someone to try to use these in a poorly built submarine."
This is such a frivolous lawsuit. Logitech is going to crush them if they even have to go to trial.
It's the submarine company/estate of the owner that are being sued for wrongful death
This is such a frivolous lawsuit. Logitech is going to ~~crush~~ implode them if they even have to go to trial.
There. Fixed it for you.
It's probably in the user guide or manual: "can only be used with video games". It it's used for anything else it's not Logitech's problem.
The article doesn't say they're suing Logitech.
It's using the fact that it was a wireless controller used over Bluetooth as part of the evidence that they created a bunch of unnecessary points of failure.
I think Logitech should take responsibility and give them a $30 voucher
Maybe a $10 Uber Eats gift card?
Expires on August 1st, 2024
“best we can offer is a replacement. but you will need to return the original”
I laughed way too hard at that. Bravo.