Comments by "" (@salland12) on "OceanGate Titan Disaster - A Culture of Risk - The Engineer's Words" video.

If u ask me Tony Nissen is responsible in some regard. He as lead engineer oversaw and actually personally helped with the gluing of the 2 Rings to the hull. As we all know this was done in a sub-standard way in sub-standard conditions. He should have blown the whistle right there.
16
@TikkaTCM When Lochridge wrote his Titan inspection report after this he had his dismissal conversation where Nissen was present. If u read the transcript of this conversation u can clearly see Nissen is vested in Rush and in every decision he made including not having the hull scanned for defects and severing relations with APL. Nissen was part of the problem Lochridge was trying to adres. In that period Nissen enabled Rush to make all these design changes and there is very little information available Nissen spoke out about any of this.
5
@gothgirlkim A customer who goes to a store and doesn't buy anything and than says i wont come back again.
4
@TikkaTCM In my opinion he absolutely was. I find this case very interesting because Rush didn't and couldn't have made every decision on his own he had people around him supporting him and enabling him like Nissen. Dave Dyer's (UW APL) testimony also mentioned that he and Nissen budded heads and had fierce arguments about material, design and testing procedures. Dyer specifically mentioned Nissen did not want to share overview hull designs to the company who were forging the Titanium domes and rings. Dyer passed Nissen and shared the relevant designs anyways. Nissen got extremely angry about this and shortly after the Ocean Gate APL relation was severed. There is a pattern Nissen was part of the problem, this is very obvious when u read the 79 page transcript of the conversation where Lochridge's was dismissed/fired. Nissen wasn't even sharing design/testing documents needed for Lochridges inspection. It is clear Nissen was (like Rush) a arrogant know it all engineer who was in way over his head designing this sub since he had zero experience.
4
@solareclipsetimer I don't want to discredit Nissen in anyway but if i look at Lochridges's and Dave Dyer's testimony it seems Nissen just like Rush disregarded many testing and engineering protocols set by APL and this was during Nissen's time as lead engineer. Nissen isn't a professional engineer and he had zero experience with submersibles, he was not in anyplace to make those decisions especially without the APL or a classing agency .His experience was more in instrumentation, in which as we now know he indeed did a good job with the acoustic monitoring system. During the conversation in which David Lochridge was fired Nissen was present, This conversation was recorded and i'am really curious what was said by Nissen. This could determine in part how vested he was in the kool-aide cult and show how liable he really is. Given the testimony's and the fact he never blew the whistle on this thing he was for a long time a true believer in the kool-aide cult of Rush.
2
@lalaLAX219 There is a redacted transcript of the recorded conversation in which Lochridge was dismissed/fired. It is on the US Coastguard website labeld as ''CG-100 Interview Transcript Dir. of Marine Operations with CEO_Redacted''. I have read it and it is obvious Nissen was part of the problem, couple that with Dave Dyers testimony (UW APL) where he and Nissen had fierce arguments all the time about design and testing it is obvious Nissen agreed to sever their relation with APL.
2
@infrasleep U comment is very true. I have since read the transcript of the conversation in which Lochridge was dismissed/fired. Nissen took part in this conversation. The transcript is redacted but u can make out who is who. Nissen is very vocal that there is nothing wrong with what they are doing and is completely complacent to Rush. While his testimony now is quite the opposite. According to the transcript and other documents Nissen wasn't sharing technical documents with lochridge needed for his inspection. I feel at that time Nissen was part of the problem Lochridge was trying fight when it comes to the safety and engineering concerns. Nissen was completely vested that it would work and was convinced a scan of the hull wasn't needed.
2
Where have i seen this before🤔
1
@katrinat.3032 His accent makes all the diffrence and is wat swayed me🤭
1