The first recorded submersible disaster I'm aware of was almost exactly 249 years ago to the week before the OceanGate submersible suffered its catastrophic implosion. It happened in my home town of Plymouth, Great Britain on 28th June, 1774..To quote a contemporary account republished in 1958 in Plymouth's 'Western Evening Herald,' it was "an affair perhaps as remarkable as the whole history of gaming, even from its origin can produce, in the sinking of a vessel in 17 fathoms water [102 feet] by a man within it, without any assistance but such as himself alone could furnish.".An ingenious Suffolk millwright by the name of John Day had made the bet that he could "remain 12 hours beneath at that depth, when he was to raise the vessel to the surface again, and himself to be produced alive." His motives were entirely pecuniary; sporting gentlemen laid heavy bets upon the outcome. As the builder and operator of the 'diving vessel,' he would receive 10%..Ill-advised as the notion seemed at the time and still seems today, Day was not entirely careless of his own best interests. He first proved his concept with a barge in the Norfolk Broads, sinking it to 30' with himself inside, then raising it 24 hours later. With his investors in place, he then moved his operation to the deeper waters around the naval base of Devonport, purchased a 50' sloop and began converting it into a 'diving vessel' — a submersible, in today's parlance. To contain air to support his stay and resist the pressure of water above — something of which he was not ignorant — 'the strongest possible chamber was built in the vessel with a valve just large enough to admit Day.' Day had control of letting water in for the purposes of sinking the vessel; his subsequent ascent to the surface was to be effected by the release of limestone ballast. He christened it, the 'Maria.' .When the great day came, he once more tested the vessel in shallower water, emerging successfully after 12 hours. .What happened next, happened quickly. "Mr. Day, having provided himself with a hammock, a watch, a wax taper, a bottle of water and a biscuit or two, went on board his vessel, his patron and servant and two or three bargemen remaining in a boat near him.... When she began to descend, the self-devoted schemer retired to his chamber and with great composure shut the valve and descended to the bottom.".Unfortunately, Day seems not to have allowed sufficiently for the pressure of water in one of the deepest parts of Plymouth Sound. As the contemporary diarist records, less than five minutes after Day began his descent "the water seemed to rise and be much agitated.".A release of air suggesting a 'catastrophic implosion' then, though not identified as such at the time..And so we come to three things about the end of Titan, last Sunday..One, the tragedy of the whole thing is overwhelming. But high on the distressing scale is some of the contempt and scorn poured on those who lost their lives that day... columnist Ash Sarkar's suggestion for example to her 400,000 Twitter followers that if billionaires had enough money to waste on this kind of adventuring they should pay more taxes. As one randomly chosen twitter defender put it, they're mocked for their wealth by people who wish they were wealthy. Hear Piers Morgan on the subject. .Second, there was also the more reasonable consideration of whether the design itself was well-conceived. Like Maria, Titan was not untested: It had already made two successful dives to Titanic. On the other hand, that something was badly wrong is self-evident. Marine engineers can decide this one..Third, there will probably be a call for regulation of tourist submarines. In the aftermath of tragedy, people need to feel they have done something. Regulation is catharsis..Me? Glad I couldn't afford that opportunity. However, we need people who are prepared to explore, to risk being first on something where the outcome is uncertain, who will 'boldly go' where the rest of us don't and won't until we think it's safe. .They said of John Day that "Many and various have been the opinions of this strange, fatal and useless experiment, though the most reasonable and intelligent part of mankind seem to give it up as wholly impracticable.".Truth is, as we know, he was just a bit ahead of his time. Submarines turned out to be eminently practical. May we never breed out of ourselves the spirit that animated him and frankly, the Americans now preparing to return to the Moon..As a species, we'd be infinitely poorer.
The first recorded submersible disaster I'm aware of was almost exactly 249 years ago to the week before the OceanGate submersible suffered its catastrophic implosion. It happened in my home town of Plymouth, Great Britain on 28th June, 1774..To quote a contemporary account republished in 1958 in Plymouth's 'Western Evening Herald,' it was "an affair perhaps as remarkable as the whole history of gaming, even from its origin can produce, in the sinking of a vessel in 17 fathoms water [102 feet] by a man within it, without any assistance but such as himself alone could furnish.".An ingenious Suffolk millwright by the name of John Day had made the bet that he could "remain 12 hours beneath at that depth, when he was to raise the vessel to the surface again, and himself to be produced alive." His motives were entirely pecuniary; sporting gentlemen laid heavy bets upon the outcome. As the builder and operator of the 'diving vessel,' he would receive 10%..Ill-advised as the notion seemed at the time and still seems today, Day was not entirely careless of his own best interests. He first proved his concept with a barge in the Norfolk Broads, sinking it to 30' with himself inside, then raising it 24 hours later. With his investors in place, he then moved his operation to the deeper waters around the naval base of Devonport, purchased a 50' sloop and began converting it into a 'diving vessel' — a submersible, in today's parlance. To contain air to support his stay and resist the pressure of water above — something of which he was not ignorant — 'the strongest possible chamber was built in the vessel with a valve just large enough to admit Day.' Day had control of letting water in for the purposes of sinking the vessel; his subsequent ascent to the surface was to be effected by the release of limestone ballast. He christened it, the 'Maria.' .When the great day came, he once more tested the vessel in shallower water, emerging successfully after 12 hours. .What happened next, happened quickly. "Mr. Day, having provided himself with a hammock, a watch, a wax taper, a bottle of water and a biscuit or two, went on board his vessel, his patron and servant and two or three bargemen remaining in a boat near him.... When she began to descend, the self-devoted schemer retired to his chamber and with great composure shut the valve and descended to the bottom.".Unfortunately, Day seems not to have allowed sufficiently for the pressure of water in one of the deepest parts of Plymouth Sound. As the contemporary diarist records, less than five minutes after Day began his descent "the water seemed to rise and be much agitated.".A release of air suggesting a 'catastrophic implosion' then, though not identified as such at the time..And so we come to three things about the end of Titan, last Sunday..One, the tragedy of the whole thing is overwhelming. But high on the distressing scale is some of the contempt and scorn poured on those who lost their lives that day... columnist Ash Sarkar's suggestion for example to her 400,000 Twitter followers that if billionaires had enough money to waste on this kind of adventuring they should pay more taxes. As one randomly chosen twitter defender put it, they're mocked for their wealth by people who wish they were wealthy. Hear Piers Morgan on the subject. .Second, there was also the more reasonable consideration of whether the design itself was well-conceived. Like Maria, Titan was not untested: It had already made two successful dives to Titanic. On the other hand, that something was badly wrong is self-evident. Marine engineers can decide this one..Third, there will probably be a call for regulation of tourist submarines. In the aftermath of tragedy, people need to feel they have done something. Regulation is catharsis..Me? Glad I couldn't afford that opportunity. However, we need people who are prepared to explore, to risk being first on something where the outcome is uncertain, who will 'boldly go' where the rest of us don't and won't until we think it's safe. .They said of John Day that "Many and various have been the opinions of this strange, fatal and useless experiment, though the most reasonable and intelligent part of mankind seem to give it up as wholly impracticable.".Truth is, as we know, he was just a bit ahead of his time. Submarines turned out to be eminently practical. May we never breed out of ourselves the spirit that animated him and frankly, the Americans now preparing to return to the Moon..As a species, we'd be infinitely poorer.
