Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CTV News)   Bali Bali oxygen-free   (ctvnews.ca) divider line
    More: Followup, CTV Television Network, CTV News Channel, CTV National News, CTVglobemedia, CTV News, Sandie Rinaldo, News Video, Scientific paper  
•       •       •

3660 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Apr 2021 at 6:05 AM (3 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



47 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-04-23 6:07:55 AM  
Link goes to?
 
2021-04-23 6:13:33 AM  
According to the video in the link, the submarine was only rated for 200 meters.  They think it sank to 600-700 meters.  The pressure on the sub would 3-3.5X what it's rated for.  They also found a big oil slick near where they think it sank.  I'm not holding out much hope.
 
2021-04-23 6:16:11 AM  

fzumrk: According to the video in the link, the submarine was only rated for 200 meters.  They think it sank to 600-700 meters.  The pressure on the sub would 3-3.5X what it's rated for.  They also found a big oil slick near where they think it sank.  I'm not holding out much hope.


That isn't promising at all. 😟
 
2021-04-23 6:17:41 AM  

valenumr: Link goes to?


One of the most awful websites in the history of electrons?
I'm going with that.
 
2021-04-23 6:22:46 AM  

fzumrk: According to the video in the link, the submarine was only rated for 200 meters.  They think it sank to 600-700 meters.  The pressure on the sub would 3-3.5X what it's rated for.  They also found a big oil slick near where they think it sank.  I'm not holding out much hope.


I'd think that an incappicated sub would still be able to transmit radio messages.

But this one didn't, AFAIK.

At least the Indonesians aren't repeating the Kursk facade, as it turned out that the crew aboard Kursk was actually alive, and did die from oxygen starvation (the crew aboard Kursk wrote messages to their families, and sealed them in watertight containers).
 
2021-04-23 6:25:44 AM  

valenumr: fzumrk: According to the video in the link, the submarine was only rated for 200 meters.  They think it sank to 600-700 meters.  The pressure on the sub would 3-3.5X what it's rated for.  They also found a big oil slick near where they think it sank.  I'm not holding out much hope.

That isn't promising at all. 😟


Finding it is perhaps about closure?

I do remember that Norway had a vessel that could get at Kursk. But I don't think Kursk was that deep.

Going to look it up now.
 
2021-04-23 6:27:00 AM  

Ketchuponsteak: fzumrk: According to the video in the link, the submarine was only rated for 200 meters.  They think it sank to 600-700 meters.  The pressure on the sub would 3-3.5X what it's rated for.  They also found a big oil slick near where they think it sank.  I'm not holding out much hope.

I'd think that an incappicated sub would still be able to transmit radio messages.

But this one didn't, AFAIK.

At least the Indonesians aren't repeating the Kursk facade, as it turned out that the crew aboard Kursk was actually alive, and did die from oxygen starvation (the crew aboard Kursk wrote messages to their families, and sealed them in watertight containers).


Hopefully their transmitted gear failed due to the depth, and not the pressure hull :/

/could've also shorted out
//or they just lost that compartment, etc
 
2021-04-23 6:27:41 AM  

valenumr: fzumrk: According to the video in the link, the submarine was only rated for 200 meters.  They think it sank to 600-700 meters.  The pressure on the sub would 3-3.5X what it's rated for.  They also found a big oil slick near where they think it sank.  I'm not holding out much hope.

That isn't promising at all. 😟


They're saying 240-250m test depth in other articles, so that would put crush depth somewhere in the 350-500m range? But yeah, 600-700m wouldn't be good.

/wikipedia lists a 500m test depth for the Type 209, but I guess that's for newer boats
 
2021-04-23 6:32:30 AM  

fzumrk: According to the video in the link, the submarine was only rated for 200 meters.  They think it sank to 600-700 meters.  The pressure on the sub would 3-3.5X what it's rated for.  They also found a big oil slick near where they think it sank.  I'm not holding out much hope.


I worked on deep sea construction vehicles for over ten years. They were rated for 3000 and later on 4000 meters.

You did not, ever, for any reason go past these depths. Not even by ten or so meters.
Granted there were no souls aboard these vehicles so there was most likely less wiggle room baked into the tolerances.

I'm sure many of you understand what happens once you go past whatever your depth rating is but I'm not sure how many folks know how sudden and all-encompassing it is.  One second you're in a sphere or a cylinder or some other happy air-filled void and the next you're a pancake.

Now this is different than the event I'd a subsea flooding. Say like if you are struck by a weapon, or a valve fails or whatever and there is water ingress while you're still at a rated depth. Then you'll just drown and die screaming and the vehicle will settle down largely intact. If however you take a structurally sound air-filled void and bring it past it's rating; pancake city.

CSB:
Years ago we were deploying a subsea jumper. Really fun work, precise, exciting, bla bla bla.
The jumper is rigged to a large spreader bar, this one was over 120' long and about a meter in diameter. The spreader bar is rigged to the crane.
Typically spreader bars are open cylinders.  This one was built by Technip and since Technip "we engineeeeeeerly got it right this time boys!" is the worst group of engineers in the offshore oil business they welded giant caps to each side of the spreader bar.

My job was to pop out of TMS at 100 meters and do a visual of the jumper/spreader bar/rigging prior to it tripping to depth. We were working in 2500 meters or so of water.
First thing the copilot and I noticed was the spreader bar had capped ends. We brought this up to one of their "engineers" and was told there were holes drilled into it for water ingress. This is moronic because it's hard to inspect the spreader bar after use for rust and what not but whatever it's their toy I'm just here to land it out.

Inspection went good and we started tripping to depth with the crane going a more or less standard 20m per minute.  Somewhere between 400-420m I flew up and looked at the spreader again and then returned to the jumper hanging under it.  You typically fly up and down the asset for the duration of the trip to depth but you mostly watch it from the lowest point so you don't accidentally tag bottom. Survey is not always right with the proposed depth.
At any rate I had just inspected the bar, flew down to the jumper hubs, and then flew back up to the bar and it was totally pancaked. Instead of a tube it was a flat piece of steel several inches thick from end to end.

That's what pressure does.  You don't have a weak spot (typically) go and then have water rush in. One second you're in a void, the next you're smashed.

It sounds like a terrible way to go but honestly it would be super fast. I'd take it over drowning every time.
 
2021-04-23 6:35:37 AM  
Sorry about using metric and imperial together. It's something we just got used to in the job.
 
2021-04-23 6:45:35 AM  

PunGent: Ketchuponsteak: fzumrk: According to the video in the link, the submarine was only rated for 200 meters.  They think it sank to 600-700 meters.  The pressure on the sub would 3-3.5X what it's rated for.  They also found a big oil slick near where they think it sank.  I'm not holding out much hope.

I'd think that an incappicated sub would still be able to transmit radio messages.

But this one didn't, AFAIK.

At least the Indonesians aren't repeating the Kursk facade, as it turned out that the crew aboard Kursk was actually alive, and did die from oxygen starvation (the crew aboard Kursk wrote messages to their families, and sealed them in watertight containers).

Hopefully their transmitted gear failed due to the depth, and not the pressure hull :/

/could've also shorted out
//or they just lost that compartment, etc


You can't transmit radio messages through water. Best they could do is launch a radio bouy, but they are all dead anyway. What bugs me about this whole thing is that I don't understand how a power failure on a dive can  cause  a  loss of the ship, unless the power loss was caused by them diving with a hatch open.

/if it was an  explosion we'd already know, anyone operating passive sonar in the  SCS would have heard it.
 
2021-04-23 6:48:01 AM  

omg bbq: Sorry about using metric and imperial together. It's something we just got used to in the job.


Funny, I didn't even notice. I used to take thermo and fluids tests with mixed units on them. I guess the professors wanted to make sure we knew conversions by heart

I was on an internship interview, and , I was meeting talking to the hiring manager when one of his engineers popped in to ask him if he knew what a "torr" was. I said it's a unit of pressure and gave him the approximate conversion to psi. I thought it might have been staged, but this was a medical device company delving into pneumatics for the first time, and the guy asking the question came across the unit in a medical journal.

I got the internship, which turned into a job. And I never, ever used "torr" as a unit of measure anywhere.
 
2021-04-23 6:52:10 AM  
https://youtu.be/LmEgD6pqWTY

Das Boot is btw. a 6+ hour long movie about Germans having fun under water.

The Uboat is at display in Kiel, if you for some reason want to be inside it after watching the movie.
 
2021-04-23 6:56:11 AM  

Mail Order American Husband: You can't transmit radio messages through water.


Yeah, they probably don't have E.L.F., do they?
 
2021-04-23 6:56:13 AM  

omg bbq: That's what pressure does. You don't have a weak spot (typically) go and then have water rush in. One second you're in a void, the next you're smashed.

It sounds like a terrible way to go but honestly it would be super fast. I'd take it over drowning every time.


Atmospheric pressure crushes 220 litre drum (Experiment)
Youtube j0TQxYemrgg


That's a great description you gave.  Thank you.

It's harder to find implosion videos for objects at depth, but there's visual examples of it on the surface.  Taking a low pressure container (usually filled with steam/a relative vacuum) inside of a rigid body like that drum and it being crushed by the ambient atmospheric pressure at the bottom of our gassy ocean.  The moment it goes is far faster than anyone can react.
 
2021-04-23 6:56:23 AM  
Should they not have some sort of gps down there? Even if it's some kind of military access only gps, shouldn't modern day military have kind of stuff now in case somebody or something goes missing?
 
2021-04-23 7:00:51 AM  

GreenSun: Should they not have some sort of gps down there? Even if it's some kind of military access only gps, shouldn't modern day military have kind of stuff now in case somebody or something goes missing?


Water is a fantastic insulator against EM signals.  It's a good part of the reason why you don't use radar underwater.

Per this article, GPS signals only penetrate to a depth of 90m.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.​1​007/s00190-018-1147-x
 
2021-04-23 7:03:58 AM  

Ketchuponsteak: https://youtu.be/LmEgD6pqWTY

Das Boot is btw. a 6+ hour long movie about Germans having fun under water.

The Uboat is at display in Kiel, if you for some reason want to be inside it after watching the movie.


The one in Kiel would be U995, not the actual U96.
Same type, but with a stronger hull.

/It's so cool to read about Kiel on fark
//Lived in Kiel and worked at the shipyard for a while
 
2021-04-23 7:09:18 AM  
Just put all the sailors in the order of time they can hold their breath (longest going last) then open a hatch.. (sub floods)...then they all try to swim up as fast as they can.
 
2021-04-23 7:16:43 AM  

bisi: Ketchuponsteak: https://youtu.be/LmEgD6pqWTY

Das Boot is btw. a 6+ hour long movie about Germans having fun under water.

The Uboat is at display in Kiel, if you for some reason want to be inside it after watching the movie.

The one in Kiel would be U995, not the actual U96.
Same type, but with a stronger hull.

/It's so cool to read about Kiel on fark
//Lived in Kiel and worked at the shipyard for a while


Oh OK.

I didn't feel like going inside it regardless. I'm a bit claustrophobic, and also had a hot girl to play with.
 
2021-04-23 7:17:32 AM  

mmojo: Just put all the sailors in the order of time they can hold their breath (longest going last) then open a hatch.. (sub floods)...then they all try to swim up as fast as they can.


Not sure what you were going for here, but that's neither clever nor funny.
 
2021-04-23 7:18:10 AM  

GreenSun: Should they not have some sort of gps down there? Even if it's some kind of military access only gps, shouldn't modern day military have kind of stuff now in case somebody or something goes missing?


What good would GPS do even if it worked under that much saltwater? The crew would know exactly where they are but nobody else would. GPS only works one way; it does not provide any kind of uplink back to the satellites to relay your location.

Submarines at any kind of depth are extremely limited in their ability to communicate.
 
2021-04-23 7:35:23 AM  
I believe their had a leak prior to the sinking on the same voyage. The snorkel seal leaked and the seawater shorted out the forward batteries. So they only had the stern batteries working. If they dived after this occurred, then it might be a case of command stupidity.
 
2021-04-23 7:42:16 AM  

Ketchuponsteak: The Uboat is at display in Kiel, if you for some reason want to be inside it after watching the movie.


bisi: The one in Kiel would be U995, not the actual U96.
Same type, but with a stronger hull.


Kiel's boat is on Laboe.  U-995 is a Type VIIC/41, the next model later than the U-96, which was supposed to be a Type VIIC.

Some of the Das Boot set and materials are on display at the Bavarian studios in Munich.

https://uboat.net/gallery/articles/u9​6​_bavaria_studios.htm

https://www.uboat.net/types/viic.htm

https://www.uboat.net/types/viic-41.h​t​m


If you're looking for a more claustrophobic uboat, try the Type II prototype boat Vesikko in Helsinki, Finland.

https://www.uboat.net/types/iia.htm

Other boats are in Bremerhaven, Germany with Type XXI U-2540; Birkenhead, England with Type IXC/40 U-534; Chicago, IL with Type IXC U-505.
 
2021-04-23 7:42:17 AM  
Nice one Subby, took me a minute to get it.

Hopefully it was a case of them going way too deep, as omg bbq said, it would be over in an instant (rather than an uncontrollable leak where they slowly filled and sank).

/better still would be them tucking the sub into a hidden beach & the whole crew going on an unscheduled hookers & blow bender ... but sadly I don't think that's the case here
 
2021-04-23 8:08:15 AM  

fzumrk: According to the video in the link, the submarine was only rated for 200 meters.  They think it sank to 600-700 meters.  The pressure on the sub would 3-3.5X what it's rated for.  They also found a big oil slick near where they think it sank.  I'm not holding out much hope.


Those subs also have rescue buoys they can send out to tell rescuers where they are.  It sounds like they haven't seen any.  That is not good.
 
2021-04-23 8:12:20 AM  

kyleaugustus: omg bbq: That's what pressure does. You don't have a weak spot (typically) go and then have water rush in. One second you're in a void, the next you're smashed.

It sounds like a terrible way to go but honestly it would be super fast. I'd take it over drowning every time.

[iFrame https://www.youtube.com/embed/j0TQxYem​rgg?autoplay=1&widget_referrer=https%3​A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&start=0&enablejsap​i=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&​widgetid=1]

That's a great description you gave.  Thank you.

It's harder to find implosion videos for objects at depth, but there's visual examples of it on the surface.  Taking a low pressure container (usually filled with steam/a relative vacuum) inside of a rigid body like that drum and it being crushed by the ambient atmospheric pressure at the bottom of our gassy ocean.  The moment it goes is far faster than anyone can react.


This is the one you were looking for.
i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
2021-04-23 8:16:43 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: kyleaugustus: omg bbq: That's what pressure does. You don't have a weak spot (typically) go and then have water rush in. One second you're in a void, the next you're smashed.

It sounds like a terrible way to go but honestly it would be super fast. I'd take it over drowning every time.

[iFrame https://www.youtube.com/embed/j0TQxYem​rgg?autoplay=1&widget_referrer=https%3​A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&start=0&enablejsap​i=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&​widgetid=1]

That's a great description you gave.  Thank you.

It's harder to find implosion videos for objects at depth, but there's visual examples of it on the surface.  Taking a low pressure container (usually filled with steam/a relative vacuum) inside of a rigid body like that drum and it being crushed by the ambient atmospheric pressure at the bottom of our gassy ocean.  The moment it goes is far faster than anyone can react.

This is the one you were looking for.
[i.imgur.com image 400x312]


Wow.

At depth it's even more impressive. When that spreader bar was trying as hard as it could to be a two dimensional object. It was as flat as if it went through a rolling press.
 
2021-04-23 8:29:38 AM  

Mail Order American Husband: What bugs me about this whole thing is that I don't understand how a power failure on a dive can cause a loss of the ship, unless the power loss was caused by them diving with a hatch open.


Something along the lines of "Who needs manual ballast blow valves? These electronic ones are much faster and more accurate!".
 
2021-04-23 8:54:04 AM  

LoneVVolf: Mail Order American Husband: What bugs me about this whole thing is that I don't understand how a power failure on a dive can cause a loss of the ship, unless the power loss was caused by them diving with a hatch open.

Something along the lines of "Who needs manual ballast blow valves? These electronic ones are much faster and more accurate!".


More likely, they're not trimmed perfectly, and thus need to "swim" to hold depth. Hitting neutral buoyancy is hard, much easier to bias slightly to sink or rise and use your planes to hold depth. Obviously, you prefer rise but if you've just dived you're already biased to depth.

Lose power, and you just slowly sink. That's when you do the emergency blow. If it works, you pop up, probably doing some damage when you shoot out of the water and land back. If it doesn't, you are the USS Thresher and you just sink sink sink until you hit the magic depth then FOOM you're a cloud of debris heading downwards.

A big problem is that you're using compressed air to push the water out, if you don't design the nozzles right and keep the air dry in that bottle, you'll freeze at the nozzle and suddenly, your emergency blow isn't.
 
2021-04-23 8:54:10 AM  

kyleaugustus: Ketchuponsteak: The Uboat is at display in Kiel, if you for some reason want to be inside it after watching the movie.

bisi: The one in Kiel would be U995, not the actual U96.
Same type, but with a stronger hull.

Kiel's boat is on Laboe.  U-995 is a Type VIIC/41, the next model later than the U-96, which was supposed to be a Type VIIC.

Some of the Das Boot set and materials are on display at the Bavarian studios in Munich.

https://uboat.net/gallery/articles/u96​_bavaria_studios.htm

https://www.uboat.net/types/viic.htm

https://www.uboat.net/types/viic-41.ht​m


If you're looking for a more claustrophobic uboat, try the Type II prototype boat Vesikko in Helsinki, Finland.

https://www.uboat.net/types/iia.htm

Other boats are in Bremerhaven, Germany with Type XXI U-2540; Birkenhead, England with Type IXC/40 U-534; Chicago, IL with Type IXC U-505.


I am not looking for more claustrophobic boats to be honest ;)

I liked the trip to Kiel though, especially since going inside was optional.
 
2021-04-23 9:23:35 AM  

kyleaugustus: GreenSun: Should they not have some sort of gps down there? Even if it's some kind of military access only gps, shouldn't modern day military have kind of stuff now in case somebody or something goes missing?

Water is a fantastic insulator against EM signals.  It's a good part of the reason why you don't use radar underwater.

Per this article, GPS signals only penetrate to a depth of 90m.


90m?  More like 3cm.

This won't surprise anyone who has hiked in a wet forest.
 
2021-04-23 9:25:58 AM  

Mail Order American Husband: PunGent: Ketchuponsteak: fzumrk: According to the video in the link, the submarine was only rated for 200 meters.  They think it sank to 600-700 meters.  The pressure on the sub would 3-3.5X what it's rated for.  They also found a big oil slick near where they think it sank.  I'm not holding out much hope.

I'd think that an incappicated sub would still be able to transmit radio messages.

But this one didn't, AFAIK.

At least the Indonesians aren't repeating the Kursk facade, as it turned out that the crew aboard Kursk was actually alive, and did die from oxygen starvation (the crew aboard Kursk wrote messages to their families, and sealed them in watertight containers).

Hopefully their transmitted gear failed due to the depth, and not the pressure hull :/

/could've also shorted out
//or they just lost that compartment, etc

You can't transmit radio messages through water. Best they could do is launch a radio bouy, but they are all dead anyway. What bugs me about this whole thing is that I don't understand how a power failure on a dive can  cause  a  loss of the ship, unless the power loss was caused by them diving with a hatch open.

/if it was an  explosion we'd already know, anyone operating passive sonar in the  SCS would have heard it.


For a moment I thought I heard... singing.
 
2021-04-23 9:29:12 AM  
That thread title. Cruel but funny. Well done submitter
 
2021-04-23 9:29:24 AM  

kyleaugustus: omg bbq: That's what pressure does. You don't have a weak spot (typically) go and then have water rush in. One second you're in a void, the next you're smashed.

It sounds like a terrible way to go but honestly it would be super fast. I'd take it over drowning every time.

[YouTube video: Atmospheric pressure crushes 220 litre drum (Experiment)]

That's a great description you gave.  Thank you.

It's harder to find implosion videos for objects at depth, but there's visual examples of it on the surface.  Taking a low pressure container (usually filled with steam/a relative vacuum) inside of a rigid body like that drum and it being crushed by the ambient atmospheric pressure at the bottom of our gassy ocean.  The moment it goes is far faster than anyone can react.


This is the one I think of:
https://youtu.be/kM-k1zofs58
Crush is right after ~2:54

Sudden, catastrophic failure of the entire system.
 
2021-04-23 9:34:40 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


Wanted for questioning.
 
2021-04-23 10:01:04 AM  

omg bbq: fzumrk: According to the video in the link, the submarine was only rated for 200 meters.  They think it sank to 600-700 meters.  The pressure on the sub would 3-3.5X what it's rated for.  They also found a big oil slick near where they think it sank.  I'm not holding out much hope.

I worked on deep sea construction vehicles for over ten years. They were rated for 3000 and later on 4000 meters.

You did not, ever, for any reason go past these depths. Not even by ten or so meters.
Granted there were no souls aboard these vehicles so there was most likely less wiggle room baked into the tolerances.

I'm sure many of you understand what happens once you go past whatever your depth rating is but I'm not sure how many folks know how sudden and all-encompassing it is.  One second you're in a sphere or a cylinder or some other happy air-filled void and the next you're a pancake.

Now this is different than the event I'd a subsea flooding. Say like if you are struck by a weapon, or a valve fails or whatever and there is water ingress while you're still at a rated depth. Then you'll just drown and die screaming and the vehicle will settle down largely intact. If however you take a structurally sound air-filled void and bring it past it's rating; pancake city.

CSB:
Years ago we were deploying a subsea jumper. Really fun work, precise, exciting, bla bla bla.
The jumper is rigged to a large spreader bar, this one was over 120' long and about a meter in diameter. The spreader bar is rigged to the crane.
Typically spreader bars are open cylinders.  This one was built by Technip and since Technip "we engineeeeeeerly got it right this time boys!" is the worst group of engineers in the offshore oil business they welded giant caps to each side of the spreader bar.

My job was to pop out of TMS at 100 meters and do a visual of the jumper/spreader bar/rigging prior to it tripping to depth. We were working in 2500 meters or so of water.
First thing the copilot and I noticed was the spr ...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zz95_​V​vTxZM
 
2021-04-23 10:25:01 AM  

omg bbq: since Technip "we engineeeeeeerly got it right this time boys!" is the worst group of engineers in the offshore oil business


I can verify this, having had the dubious pleasure of working ona Technip boat for almost a year....

There were more "🤦♂" and "are you shiatting me"s there than I've ever encountered.

And yes, pressure at depth is no farking game. My company had a welder who, for whatever reason, capped the ends of a piece of our gear while repairing it (4" square tubing) and "squashed" isn't quite the word I would use.

CSB- OMGBBQ.
 
2021-04-23 10:52:41 AM  

kyleaugustus: It's harder to find implosion videos for objects at depth, but there's visual examples of it on the surface.


The Hydraulic Press guy on Youtube has been crushing a bunch of stuff on high-speed video lately in a pressure vessel he built. Granted, it's a small chamber so the objects are small things like dive watches, lightbulbs and such. It's still pretty instructive though on how things fail at depth; there's not much plastic deformation going on, things just let go. The exception would be for objects where a seal fails and starts leaking before the test subject yields.
 
2021-04-23 11:19:36 AM  

kendelrio: omg bbq: since Technip "we engineeeeeeerly got it right this time boys!" is the worst group of engineers in the offshore oil business

I can verify this, having had the dubious pleasure of working ona Technip boat for almost a year....

There were more "🤦♂" and "are you shiatting me"s there than I've ever encountered.

And yes, pressure at depth is no farking game. My company had a welder who, for whatever reason, capped the ends of a piece of our gear while repairing it (4" square tubing) and "squashed" isn't quite the word I would use.

CSB- OMGBBQ.


I gotta know what boat.

I was on the Ironhorse, the REM Instsaller, and the Grand Canyon II with them.

They always took these bold and ambitious engineering ideas and then did something idiotic like not installing a pop off valve on a subsea (collected ON the bottom) gas bladder that was going to then trip up from depth.  That was fun because The bladder entirely de-rigged it's self from the 40' gator basket it was in and was only held in place and not screaming up under the vessel because the hot stab (ROV interface device) got wrapped around the basket. So upon approaching it mid water-column it was like this a evil Black Balloon (and not the amazing song from The Kills) hovering above the basket.
I kicked the manip operator off the T4 and made him pilot because as a supervisor I got to pull rank. I wanted to use the "Freddy Krueger" and slice open the bladder. All the ROVs at our company had hand-made blades mounted to the front porch or abouts for us to use when we needed to do some unexpected cutting and I was going to be god damned if my farking tech got to do such a rad task.

Technip once installed slip-nuts (the bolt will fall all the way in the nut and then capture when you start to tighten, that way you don't need to turn each farker 60+ times with subsea tooling) upside down on a pipe lifting skid that we had spent two days getting into position. Oops.

They once had us cleaning wellhead gaskets (Ax/VX) with toilet brushes because they did not want to pay the $50/day hubcleaning tool rental. So we spent two weeks breaking toilet brushes.
Vessel day-rate on that boat (the REM) was $63k US a day at the time.

I've seen them over pull and shear rigging, insist on ops when the sea state was in the red for it, and be cowboy in so many other ways.

Best part was that as ROV and in a company contracted by them we would just voice our concern, be told how wrong we were by some asshole 23-27 year old "engineer" and then log and record accordingly when the job went pear-shaped.
We were actually a pretty competent group of ROV pilots so most of the time we could recover their shiat-sandwich for them before it hit the mud.

I think FMC bought them now and they're Tfmc?
 
2021-04-23 11:29:47 AM  

omg bbq: kendelrio: omg bbq: since Technip "we engineeeeeeerly got it right this time boys!" is the worst group of engineers in the offshore oil business

I can verify this, having had the dubious pleasure of working ona Technip boat for almost a year....

There were more "🤦♂" and "are you shiatting me"s there than I've ever encountered.

And yes, pressure at depth is no farking game. My company had a welder who, for whatever reason, capped the ends of a piece of our gear while repairing it (4" square tubing) and "squashed" isn't quite the word I would use.

CSB- OMGBBQ.

I gotta know what boat.

I was on the Ironhorse, the REM Instsaller, and the Grand Canyon II with them.

They always took these bold and ambitious engineering ideas and then did something idiotic like not installing a pop off valve on a subsea (collected ON the bottom) gas bladder that was going to then trip up from depth.  That was fun because The bladder entirely de-rigged it's self from the 40' gator basket it was in and was only held in place and not screaming up under the vessel because the hot stab (ROV interface device) got wrapped around the basket. So upon approaching it mid water-column it was like this a evil Black Balloon (and not the amazing song from The Kills) hovering above the basket.
I kicked the manip operator off the T4 and made him pilot because as a supervisor I got to pull rank. I wanted to use the "Freddy Krueger" and slice open the bladder. All the ROVs at our company had hand-made blades mounted to the front porch or abouts for us to use when we needed to do some unexpected cutting and I was going to be god damned if my farking tech got to do such a rad task.

Technip once installed slip-nuts (the bolt will fall all the way in the nut and then capture when you start to tighten, that way you don't need to turn each farker 60+ times with subsea tooling) upside down on a pipe lifting skid that we had spent two days getting into position. Oops.

They once had us cleaning wellhead gaskets (Ax/VX) with toilet brushes because they did not want to pay the $50/day hubcleaning tool rental. So we spent two weeks breaking toilet brushes.
Vessel day-rate on that boat (the REM) was $63k US a day at the time.

I've seen them over pull and shear rigging, insist on ops when the sea state was in the red for it, and be cowboy in so many other ways.

Best part was that as ROV and in a company contracted by them we would just voice our concern, be told how wrong we were by some asshole 23-27 year old "engineer" and then log and record accordingly when the job went pear-shaped.
We were actually a pretty competent group of ROV pilots so most of the time we could recover their shiat-sandwich for them before it hit the mud.

I think FMC bought them now and they're Tfmc?


I was on the REM commander.... and yes... Keystone Kops all around.

We call our blades "Ginsus"....

We went away from the T4 and use an in house designed SC arm now. (It's dual rate/SC depending on needs/mission), but I miss the delicacy of the T4.

When I was a Jr tech I was learning to operate it and had to keep asking the pilot to pan over so I could stow it. He told me "You have 5 days to learn where the motherfarking arm is or you're fired".

To this day I know where my arms are at all times... 🤣
 
2021-04-23 11:45:36 AM  

kendelrio: omg bbq: kendelrio: omg bbq: since Technip "we engineeeeeeerly got it right this time boys!" is the worst group of engineers in the offshore oil business

I can verify this, having had the dubious pleasure of working ona Technip boat for almost a year....

There were more "🤦♂" and "are you shiatting me"s there than I've ever encountered.

And yes, pressure at depth is no farking game. My company had a welder who, for whatever reason, capped the ends of a piece of our gear while repairing it (4" square tubing) and "squashed" isn't quite the word I would use.

CSB- OMGBBQ.

I gotta know what boat.

I was on the Ironhorse, the REM Instsaller, and the Grand Canyon II with them.

They always took these bold and ambitious engineering ideas and then did something idiotic like not installing a pop off valve on a subsea (collected ON the bottom) gas bladder that was going to then trip up from depth.  That was fun because The bladder entirely de-rigged it's self from the 40' gator basket it was in and was only held in place and not screaming up under the vessel because the hot stab (ROV interface device) got wrapped around the basket. So upon approaching it mid water-column it was like this a evil Black Balloon (and not the amazing song from The Kills) hovering above the basket.
I kicked the manip operator off the T4 and made him pilot because as a supervisor I got to pull rank. I wanted to use the "Freddy Krueger" and slice open the bladder. All the ROVs at our company had hand-made blades mounted to the front porch or abouts for us to use when we needed to do some unexpected cutting and I was going to be god damned if my farking tech got to do such a rad task.

Technip once installed slip-nuts (the bolt will fall all the way in the nut and then capture when you start to tighten, that way you don't need to turn each farker 60+ times with subsea tooling) upside down on a pipe lifting skid that we had spent two days getting into position. Oops.

They once had us cleaning wellhead gaskets (Ax/VX) with toilet brushes because they did not want to pay the $50/day hubcleaning tool rental. So we spent two weeks breaking toilet brushes.
Vessel day-rate on that boat (the REM) was $63k US a day at the time.

I've seen them over pull and shear rigging, insist on ops when the sea state was in the red for it, and be cowboy in so many other ways.

Best part was that as ROV and in a company contracted by them we would just voice our concern, be told how wrong we were by some asshole 23-27 year old "engineer" and then log and record accordingly when the job went pear-shaped.
We were actually a pretty competent group of ROV pilots so most of the time we could recover their shiat-sandwich for them before it hit the mud.

I think FMC bought them now and they're Tfmc?

I was on the REM commander.... and yes... Keystone Kops all around.

We call our blades "Ginsus"....

We went away from the T4 and use an in house designed SC arm now. (It's dual rate/SC depending on needs/mission), but I miss the delicacy of the T4.

When I was a Jr tech I was learning to operate it and had to keep asking the pilot to pan over so I could stow it. He told me "You have 5 days to learn where the motherfarking arm is or you're fired".

To this day I know where my arms are at all times... 🤣


I started with the Orion arm and went up the Schilling tech tree from there. Most of the time we had a rigmaster or the awful Perry copycat (the one that loved to shear off at the wrist) on the left though I've used the Conan and Atlas as well on a bear claw template. I've heard of using an Atlas with a rate setup and that sounds pretty dope.

I was always a helpful pilot to my manip operator so they were never without a camera on the arm until it was stowed and locked. That said I was always a fanatic about manipulator ops and really pushed "slow is smooth and smooth is fast" on my trainees. I had good supervisors for the most part train me and it was important to pass that on. There were enough others out there who liked to yell.

I've heard them called Ginsus from the old Saipam and Oceaneering folks.
I worked for iTech for a while and they had some other name. It's fun to see how different companies make their blades.  My first and longest company we'd make these evil looking hooked things, still the best design IMO because you can hook and pull back while rotating the wrist back and forth to chew.
iTech made these gladiator looking blades with serrated edges and you'd saw with them. I've seen curved sickle looking ones also.

It's funny to see where artistic creativity leads.


I miss the wonky humor.
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-04-23 12:01:08 PM  

omg bbq: Huge threadjack


I've been out here for about 15 years, so I'm familiar with the arms you mention.

And yes, the humor gets wonky sometimes.

What I don't understand about this situation is it's shallow ops for an ROV to get down there and see whats going on. I don't get why that isn't happening right now (didn't rtfa, so maybe it is?)
 
2021-04-23 12:26:52 PM  

CluelessMoron: kyleaugustus: GreenSun: Should they not have some sort of gps down there? Even if it's some kind of military access only gps, shouldn't modern day military have kind of stuff now in case somebody or something goes missing?

Water is a fantastic insulator against EM signals.  It's a good part of the reason why you don't use radar underwater.

Per this article, GPS signals only penetrate to a depth of 90m.

90m?  More like 3cm.

This won't surprise anyone who has hiked in a wet forest.


Yeah, that sounded impossible. The article says 90m for ice, 400m for dry snow. Liquid water, salt water in particular, is going to absorb the signal much sooner than that. To get radio down to a sub you need to use low frequencies with huge antennas.
 
2021-04-23 1:48:10 PM  

Ivo Shandor: Yeah, that sounded impossible. The article says 90m for ice, 400m for dry snow. Liquid water, salt water in particular, is going to absorb the signal much sooner than that. To get radio down to a sub you need to use low frequencies with huge antennas.


And by low frequency you mean LOW frequency, like tens of Hz, with antennas needing to be miles long.
 
2021-04-23 4:26:12 PM  

I hereby demand that I be given a Fark account: LoneVVolf: Mail Order American Husband: What bugs me about this whole thing is that I don't understand how a power failure on a dive can cause a loss of the ship, unless the power loss was caused by them diving with a hatch open.

Something along the lines of "Who needs manual ballast blow valves? These electronic ones are much faster and more accurate!".

More likely, they're not trimmed perfectly, and thus need to "swim" to hold depth. Hitting neutral buoyancy is hard, much easier to bias slightly to sink or rise and use your planes to hold depth. Obviously, you prefer rise but if you've just dived you're already biased to depth.

Lose power, and you just slowly sink. That's when you do the emergency blow. If it works, you pop up, probably doing some damage when you shoot out of the water and land back. If it doesn't, you are the USS Thresher and you just sink sink sink until you hit the magic depth then FOOM you're a cloud of debris heading downwards.

A big problem is that you're using compressed air to push the water out, if you don't design the nozzles right and keep the air dry in that bottle, you'll freeze at the nozzle and suddenly, your emergency blow isn't.


I assumed most countries learned that lesson after Thresher. I doubt anyone designed a sub without HPADs after that. Same with the vent valves being remote and  manual operating.

"Obviously, you prefer rise but if you've just dived you're already biased to depth."

Had a  rather  harrowing experience with this once. As in "dive, dive."... "depth gages acting erratically, all stations report ships depth!"... "RIG SHIP FOR DEEP SUBMERGENCE!!!!" planesmen holding  full rise the whole time while COW was pumping water off as fast as he could. Happened in about 10 minutes. Diving comp was a tad bit off. Good times.
 
2021-04-23 9:00:21 PM  

Ivo Shandor: The article says 90m for ice, 400m for dry snow. Liquid water, salt water in particular, is going to absorb the signal much sooner than that.


If you're under 400m of dry snow, GPS is the least of your worries.
 
Displayed 47 of 47 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.