Below is a short summary and detailed review of this video written by FutureFactual:
OceanGate Titan Submersible: A Deep Dive into Composite Hull Failures, Testing Gaps, and Safety Oversight
This video provides a critical examination of OceanGate's Titan submersible, focusing on how a carbon fiber composite hull was intended to withstand extreme deep-sea pressures, why conventional testing and regulatory oversight were lacking, and how the operator's safety culture contributed to a catastrophic implosion. The host compares the move-fast ethos to established engineering safeguards, highlights the gaps in fatigue testing and autoclave curing, and argues for a responsible approach to high-stakes exploration in the name of science and safety.
Engineering challenges of a deep-sea composite pressure hull
The Titan submersible uses two titanium endcaps and a filament-wound carbon fiber reinforced epoxy hull, with an acrylic window filling the pressure-bearing envelope. Carbon fiber composites excel in tension but struggle under compression, which is exactly what a deep-sea vehicle faces at 4,000 metres depth. The design aimed for neutral buoyancy and avoided the foam outer layer typically used to adjust density, a choice the host describes as risky given the material’s unknown performance in this application. Ocean Gate claimed not to test with a regulatory body, relying instead on internal classifications, which the host argues are insufficient safeguards for operator risk.
In this section, we explore why composite hulls in deep-sea environments require rigorous, multi-axial testing and real-world validation beyond computer models. The host notes that while computer simulations can approximate behaviour, they cannot capture all failure modes, especially delamination buckling that can occur inside thick-walled pressure vessels.
"Composite materials are incredibly difficult to model in computer software. Physical testing is essential; Ocean Gate did not perform fatigue testing or autoclave curing." - Real Engineering