[arista]

Originally Posted by Vanessa

But you should always make sure there is a safety procedure in case things go wrong.

That CEO that died
did not take on the Danger


Also having 5 could be too many

Best for 2 people

[Cherry Christmas]

stbf we only have the aunts words that the son was terrified and didn't want to do it and apparently she and her brother had not spoken in years as they did not agree with her lifestyle choices, so you have to wonder at her motives, bad enough for the family without an aunt who is not part of the family putting the boot in, she didn't look exactly grieving on camera this morning, pretty composed really, I know that everyone reacts differently, but it seems a ****ty thing to say given there is a sister (and I presume other closer family members) out there

[Candy Annie Cane]

Originally Posted by Cherie

stbf we only have the aunts words that the son was terrified and didn't want to do it and apparently she and her brother had not spoken in years as they did not agree with her lifestyle choices, so you have to wonder at her motives, bad enough for the family without an aunt who is not part of the family putting the boot in, she didn't look exactly grieving on camera this morning, pretty composed really, I know that everyone reacts differently, but it seems a ****ty thing to say given there is a sister (and I presume other closer family members) out there

Being very cynical as I am - I said something similar in the office this morning. They were estranged but hearing this made her remember her love for her brother is what I read - which could be true or the possibility of a slice of the will??

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Being very cynical as I am - I said something similar in the office this morning. They were estranged but hearing this made her remember her love for her brother is what I read - which could be true or the possibility of a slice of the will??

oh I didn't even think of the Will but I just thought to myself even if he was terrified you wouldn't put it out there as it makes the Dad look like he pressured him unnecessarily

sistas in cynicism !

[user104658]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

which could be true or the possibility of a slice of the will??

I mean I don't think he'll be changing it now . If she's in the will she's in it, if she's not she's a bit late!

[UserSince2005]

My hotel overlooking 9/11

[UserSince2005]

Pinochet museum

[UserSince2005]

Don't delete my posts because it ruins the context and doesnt call her out for her jealous bull****.

[Cherry Christmas]

The owner and pilot of the Titan submersible that imploded in the Atlantic Ocean this week, sparking a massive search and rescue mission, attempted to sell two tickets to the trip at a significantly-reduced price and dismissed safety concerns raised by the prospective customer, leaked text messages have shown.

Las Vegas financier Jay Bloom, who said he was considering the underwater voyage for him and his son, was offered a "last minute price" of £120,000 per person, a discount on the usual £195,000 fee, by Stockton Rush.

When Mr Bloom hesitated, he was assured by Mr Rush that a mission on the Titan submersible was "safer than crossing the street", reports Daily Mail.

Shahzada Dawood, 48, and his son Suleman, who was just 19, ended up replacing Mr Bloom and his own son, and the financier issued a statement expressing his condolences to their family, as well as Mr Rush's.

In a Facebook post he said: "I expressed safety concerns and Stockton told me: 'While there's obviously risk - it's way safer than flying in a helicopter or even scuba diving'.

"He was absolutely convinced that it was safer than crossing the street. I am sure he really believed what he was saying. But he was very wrong."

In February this year Stockton Rush repotedly asked Mr Bloom and his son Sean to go on the dive to Titanic in May. Both May dives were postponed due to weather and the dive got delayed until June 18, the date of the ill-fated trip.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/tech...93a2c350c&ei=8

another father and son declined to go and the Dawoods took their place

[UserSince2005]

Originally Posted by Cherie

The owner and pilot of the Titan submersible that imploded in the Atlantic Ocean this week, sparking a massive search and rescue mission, attempted to sell two tickets to the trip at a significantly-reduced price and dismissed safety concerns raised by the prospective customer, leaked text messages have shown.

Las Vegas financier Jay Bloom, who said he was considering the underwater voyage for him and his son, was offered a "last minute price" of £120,000 per person, a discount on the usual £195,000 fee, by Stockton Rush.

When Mr Bloom hesitated, he was assured by Mr Rush that a mission on the Titan submersible was "safer than crossing the street", reports Daily Mail.

Shahzada Dawood, 48, and his son Suleman, who was just 19, ended up replacing Mr Bloom and his own son, and the financier issued a statement expressing his condolences to their family, as well as Mr Rush's.

In a Facebook post he said: "I expressed safety concerns and Stockton told me: 'While there's obviously risk - it's way safer than flying in a helicopter or even scuba diving'.

"He was absolutely convinced that it was safer than crossing the street. I am sure he really believed what he was saying. But he was very wrong."

In February this year Stockton Rush repotedly asked Mr Bloom and his son Sean to go on the dive to Titanic in May. Both May dives were postponed due to weather and the dive got delayed until June 18, the date of the ill-fated trip.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/tech...93a2c350c&ei=8

another father and son declined to go and the Dawoods took their place

I bet they got a "deal".

This Stockton Rush is a disgrace, he wasnt fit to be car salesman.

wheeler dealer who sentenced people to death

The fact he found it fun and gloated about how makeshift the sub was makes me sick.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Cherie

In a Facebook post he said: "I expressed safety concerns and Stockton told me: 'While there's obviously risk - it's way safer than flying in a helicopter or even scuba diving'.

To be fair, although clearly the worst did happen, there's not enough data to know that this isn't true... as people do actually die doing both of those things all the time. Remember The Clutha in Glasgow . My dad saw that happen.

Or more recently Kobe Bryant et al.

[bots]

if you have a malfunction in a helicopter, or walking across the street, you still have a reasonable chance of coming out alive. If you have a malfunction in a sub 2 miles down, not so much. It's not just the chance of failure, it's also the chance of survival on a failure. A sub doesn't hold up to that type of scrutiny

[user104658]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

if you have a malfunction in a helicopter, or walking across the street, you still have a reasonable chance of coming out alive. If you have a malfunction in a sub 2 miles down, not so much. It's not just the chance of failure, it's also the chance of survival on a failure. A sub doesn't hold up to that type of scrutiny

Well... a proper sub probably does have redundancies and safety features that go beyond what this one had. A bizarre, cobbled-together hobbyist tub held together with gorilla tape.

[Nicky91]

how small that capsule is, well i think anyone who has ever been in that, can know how tuna must feel like in a can


i mean titanic is awesome for historical and educational value, true but leave ''sightseeing'' to the professionals, and all of us tourists more with the film and the documentaries


i feel saddest for the 19 yr old boy it seems he was really scared too, but he went along for his dad

[arista]

Yes the 19 year old lad
did not want to go.

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by arista

Yes the 19 year old lad
did not want to go.

we only have anecdotal evidence that was the case, someone told the aunt.... not exactly factual...

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Cherie

we only have anecdotal evidence that was the case, someone told the aunt.... not exactly factual...

TBF if you want to get really existential... it doesn't actually matter at this point, does it. They're both dead. By the looks of it they died instantly. There's no one left to take any sort of blame.

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

TBF if you want to get really existential... it doesn't actually matter at this point, does it. They're both dead. By the looks of it they died instantly. There's no one left to take any sort of blame.

Sorry but there is a wife/mother and daughter/sister left behind, its bad enough but some mad cow estranged from the family in Canada claiming he didn't want to go wont exactly help their mental state

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Sorry but there is a wife/mother and daughter/sister left behind, its bad enough but some mad cow estranged from the family in Canada claiming he didn't want to go wont exactly help their mental state

I agree Cherie, she didnt even speak to her brother ,sounds like she wants 15 mins of fame ,its to be taken with a pinch of salt ,I am sure he was old enough to say if he didnt really want to go.

[arista]

[arista]

[UserSince2005]

Shocking the communications that BBC has obtained.

I believe Stockton was on the crew because he knew if the sub ever failed he’d spend the rest of his life in prison, so might as well go out with it.

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by UserSince2005

Shocking the communications that BBC has obtained.

I believe Stockton was on the crew because he knew if the sub ever failed he’d spend the rest of his life in prison, so might as well go out with it.

why would he go to prison, the crew signed disclaimers and its open water not covered by any laws

[UserSince2005]

Originally Posted by Cherie

why would he go to prison, the crew signed disclaimers and its open water not covered by any laws

Criminal negligence, easy

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Cherie

why would he go to prison, the crew signed disclaimers and its open water not covered by any laws

Death disclaimers are VERY flimsy, it's built into most legal systems that you can't sign away your life, it would be subject to reasonable limits (i.e. that death was unlikely and would occur because of unforeseen factors). If it's found that death was likely (or inevitable) based on negligence or poor safety standards, any signed disclaimer would fall apart.

Good example of that would be the disclaimer you sign when you go for surgery - which does state that you understand the surgery might not be successful and that there can be side effects up to and including death. Doctors and hospitals are still regularly (successfully) sued for medical negligence if something goes wrong that isn't just "unfortunate", but is clearly the avoidable fault of the individual or the hospital.

The international waters part is interesting though . It's a bit of a myth that the open sea is "lawless", international waters are covered by international law governed by the UN, but something as specific and complex as contract law would probably be very murky (and realistically no one would ever fully investigate it, the UN have bigger fish to fry than the misadventures of thrillseekers).