After their departure, the Titan was rebuilt with a new hull that did not undergo industry-standard testing nor was certified by an independent third-party agency. Patrick Lahey, CEO of Triton Submarines, noted that certifying a novel hull is not only feasible but also crucial for safety.
"We were developing and certifying the deepest diving sub in the world concurrently with their development of this amateurish contraption," Lahey stated. "There was absolutely no reason they couldn’t have got it certified."
OceanGate’s initial missions to the Titanic in 2021 faced significant issues, including the Titan’s forward titanium dome detaching after a dive, concerning readings on the acoustic monitoring system, and a thruster failure at a depth of 3,500 meters. One piece of Coast Guard evidence documented 70 equipment issues that needed correction from that season’s dives. While there were improvements the following year, with only 48 recorded issues, these still included dead batteries prolonging a mission from roughly seven to 27 hours, and damage to the sub during recovery.
In 2022, a dive concluded with a mysterious loud bang and cracking noise upon surfacing. Antonella Wilby, an engineering contractor for OceanGate, was so concerned about the noise that she considered alerting the board of directors. She testified that another employee warned her that she risked legal retribution if she did so. “Anyone should feel free to speak up about safety without fear of retribution, and that is not at all what I saw,” Wilby said. “I was entirely dismissed.”
During the Titan’s second-to-last dive in 2023, contractor Tym Catterson admitted to neglecting a safety check, resulting in the Titan listing at a 45-degree angle for an hour, which disoriented those on board.
There was conflicting testimony regarding the safety of the Titan’s carbon fiber hull. Dyer noted that carbon fiber could be suitable for deep submersibles, and Nissen maintained that computer modeling and acoustic monitoring systems allowed for its indefinite use. In contrast, Lochridge, Catterson, and former HR director Bonnie Carl were significantly more skeptical about the hull’s design and implementation. However, they all acknowledged that they were not engineers.
Next week, the testimony of Nissen’s successor, Phil Brooks, along with other submersible engineers and a carbon fiber expert from Boeing, is expected to address many of these issues. Specifically, an engineer from the National Transportation Safety Board’s Materials Laboratory will testify on Wednesday about the Titan’s wreckage, potentially identifying the physical cause of the implosion.
Throughout the investigation, several points were raised concerning the absence of Titan’s inspection by the US Coast Guard before carrying paying passengers. Despite OceanGate seemingly contacting the Coast Guard multiple times to notify them of underwater operations, none of those questioned could explain why an inspection was not conducted.
Lochridge also testified that OSHA informed him in 2018 that it had communicated his safety complaints to the Coast Guard. At least one of the five US Coast Guard witnesses scheduled to testify next week is based in Puget Sound, near OceanGate’s headquarters, and may be able to provide insights on this matter.
US Coast Guard Rear Admiral John Lockwood, who joined OceanGate’s board in 2013, is not on the witness list. Lochridge and Carl testified that Lockwood’s role was to provide oversight and facilitate interactions with the Coast Guard.
Lockwood is not the only notable absentee from the witness list. Several witnesses this week highlighted the key roles of OceanGate employees, including Wendy Rush, Scott Griffith, and Neil McCurdy, in making critical business, regulatory, and operational decisions throughout OceanGate’s history and on the day of the incident. None are being called to testify. Additionally, no manufacturers of the hulls have been called to testify. The Coast Guard has not provided a reason for this, other than to deny that it is due to those witnesses potentially asserting their Fifth Amendment rights to avoid answering questions.