Space tourism companies might learn a lesson from the Titan sub disaster. But are they ready to listen?

[Admin]

The tragedy of the Titan submersible might usher in a sea change in the tolerance of unclear hazard mitigation practices in space tourism companies.

Space tourism companies might learn a lesson from the Titan sub disaster. But are they ready to listen? : Read more

 

[Unclear Engineer]

In this case, the "test flight" had already been taken - this was not the first dive to the Titanic by this specific sub. So, the real risk may be in the number of dives needed to fatigue the carbon fibre structural material to the point of failure. That is hard to determine without testing a bunch of such structures to actual failure - a very expensive process. I read that this sub had experienced 24 previous pressure cycles as tests and dives. But, that doesn't really tell us that an identical one couldn't fail at 20, or couldn't last for 30. And, an "improved" design may be far better - or unexpectedly worse.

There is always going to be some risk in going into space, or deep under the sea, or climbing Mt. Everest, or even hiking the tourist trails in the Grand Canyon. It would be a shame if there was a bureaucracy that could tell individuals how much risk they can take when they want to do something adventurous. But, there is always a reaction to a loss of life to try to make sure that "it never happens again", especially if there is a bureaucracy that is given the "responsibility" to make sure that it never happens again. So, there is a tendency for over-reach built into bureaucracies.

On the other hand, when these things go wrong, it often pulls in government resources to respond, and that can cost more than money. Sometimes, responders are put in great danger to save the lives of stupid people. So, there are some laws and regulations that limit what a person can do on the basis of how dangerous it is to themselves, even if not to others. Often, for instance, trails are closed due to avalanche danger, animal behaviors, etc.

But, it is a difficult decision to determine where the government should be allowed to regulate individual risk taking.

 

[billslugg]

I believe the CEO was being untruthful to clients. Maybe charges of wire fraud, conspiracy, wrongful death against those still living who assisted the scam? If not then it will all be settled in civil court. The dude was a penny pincher, won't be much flesh left on that company's bones.

Note, the US can control your behavior anywhere in the World. Sex with underage people is illegal no matter what country you are in.

 

[Unclear Engineer]

Billslugg, I agree that the U.S. can try to apply its laws anywhere in the world, at least for U.S. citizens .

But, I disagree that the U.S. can effectively enforce those laws everywhere in the world.

And, that is the critical difference in how the world really functions.

We have violators of child sex laws to contend with right here inside the U.S. borders making news all too frequently.

 

[billslugg]

The US enforces its laws outside the US by use of extradition treaties. If no extradition treaty sometimes we just go there and shoot them, as in the case of Osama bin Ladin.

 

[Unclear Engineer]

This is getting pretty far astray, so I will just point out that things like terrorism are different than things like fraud or even sex acts committed by U.S. citizens in a foreign country. The U.S. does try to use extradition where the country has a treaty or cooperates without one. See https://www.deccanherald.com/intern...adition-treaty-with-united-states-899699.html for some insights on the terrorism aspect. But, Osama bib Ladin was not even acknowledged by Pakistan as being there, so, yes, attack the U. S. and you can expect the U.S. to respond with military force if the location of the attacker is not willing to turn him over legally. That is effectively "war", not "law".

But, that is entirely different from say, an American citizen operating a risky excursion business in a foreign port with a business chartered in the country where that port is located. I doubt that the U.S. is going to be able to enforce its regulations in that case, even though it is a U.S. citizen. The "Liberian flagged vessel" thing is a good example of U.S. corporations using foreign national standards to save money.