QUOTE (keithisco @ Jan 27 2008, 05:20 AM)
Not at all!
It shows the technology is still with us,
No, the technology still
doesn't exist.
QUOTE (keithisco @ Jan 27 2008, 05:20 AM)
and if you care to read the link to the article it also gives you a good clue why manned submersibles are today irrelevant for such deep ocean study.
There has to be a very good reason for sending men back down to the Challenger Deep, fact is, there just isnt a good enough reason.
Actually, there are very good
reasons for sending manned submersibles to the bottom of Challenger Deep, and elsewhere...
A report from Nov. 12, 2003...
Deep-Ocean Science Limited by Capabilities of Existing Submersibles;
Value of Both Manned and Unmanned Vehicles Recognized
WASHINGTON -- Deep-diving manned submersibles, such as Alvin, which gained worldwide fame when researchers used it to reach the wreck of the Titanic, have helped advance deep-ocean science. But many scholars in this field have noted that the number and capabilities of today's underwater vehicles no longer meet current scientific demands. At the same time, the relative value of manned and unmanned vehicles is often disputed. A new report from the National Academies' National Research Council says new submersibles -- both manned and unmanned -- that are more capable than those in the current fleet are needed and would be of great value to the advancement of ocean research.
The National Science Foundation's Division of Ocean Science, which is a major funder of U.S. ocean research, asked the Research Council to study the issue because of NSF's concerns about the current fleet's usefulness.
The launch of Alvin almost 40 years ago was a milestone in the exploration of the ocean. Although it may be best known for reaching the Titanic, the submersible has also gained fame for other significant findings, such as the discovery of deep-sea hydrothermal vent ecosystems. Over the years, manned and unmanned deep-sea vehicles have improved our understanding of the processes that govern plate tectonics and ocean chemistry, and of the origins and evolution of life. But despite significant improvements in the design and operation of manned, remotely operated, and autonomous underwater vehicles, much of the ocean and seafloor remains beyond the reach of U.S. scientists. And, the report notes, human observation is still often the best way to study some aspects of the ocean and seafloor.
Alvin has been modified over the years to allow it to take a pilot and two scientists to depths of 4,500 meters. The report calls for a new and more capable manned vehicle that should provide the scientists onboard with improved visibility and achieve neutral buoyancy at various depths -- which Alvin has difficulty doing -- so that researchers can pause to study life forms that exist between the surface and the seafloor. A detailed engineering study also is needed to assess the costs and technical risks of extending the diving range of an upgraded manned vehicle to 6,500 meters.http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews...?RecordID=10854 Oceans cover two thirds of the earth and is home to much of the life on our planet. But humankind's freedom to enjoy and benefit from this vast submerged habitat is sadly limited. Scuba divers barely scratch the surface, reaching down to 164 feet (1/225 of the way to the bottom of the deepest ocean) About half a dozen aging submersible craft can carry people a little more than halfway to the deepest parts of the oceans; only a few robotic systems can go deeper. The piloted bathyscaphe Trieste dived down to the MarianaÍs Trench at 36,000 feet in 1960, and no human has been back since. Today only the new robotic Japanese vehicle Kaiko can attain these depths. The truth of the matter is, it is now almost 2000, and we still do not know if there are fish in the deepest part of the oceans.
In the near future, we similarly envision fleets of Deep Flight craft which will be taking scientists, teachers, politicians, schoolchildren, poets and artists down to the deepest parts of our oceans. How has the Deep Flight program affected people? Firstly, we are educating future generations that the age of exploration is not dead. We've actually been at Explorer's Club meetings where they lament that the age of exploration is over. We hear over and over again that man has climbed every mountain, and named every peak. How could they forget that there are tremendous mountain ranges, valleys and peaks all underwater, many undiscovered, and most un-named. Not to mention so many discoveries, such as entirely new species? Which brings up another important benefit: Deep Flight enables access to two thirds of our planet where we will find many of the resources necessary to sustain humankind in the future, including: food and natural resources, biotechnology products, geographic territories, etc.
Deep Flight is only one of two programs worldwide building manned vehicles for the deep oceans. The other project is run by JAMSTEC, a Japanese government-business initiative which has $500 million in funding, and is trying to build a conventional manned submersible (which will be tied to a mother ship, and thus be very expensive to
operate). There are many original aspects to Deep Flight: from being the first underwater aircraft, to shrinking all the operational technologies needed to fit into a one-man microsubmersible. We will be able to take people deeper, more quickly and more cost effectively: whether it be for science and industry, or just for pure exploration and
adventure.
Unlike the Japanese program, which is very well funded, Deep Flight has always been a grass roots project. It began when world renowned engineer, Graham Hawkes, took on the engineering challenge to build a deep ocean craft to withstand the pressures of full ocean depth. In the beginning, there was a crazy engineer/inventor and a team of volunteers in a garage workshop. Graham sold a vintage car to begin building the prototype Deep Flight I, and the build continued with much of his personal money, plus some funding from sponsors, such as Imax, TV New Zealand, National Geographic Television, and Rolex. We also have many product sponsors, including Autodesk, ANSYS, Inc., Sony, and many others.http://www.cwhonors.org/search/his_4a_detail.asp?id=3954We have been developing technologies with which to realize an remotely operated underwater vehicle that makes it possible for us to survey in deep sea, for example, on the seafloor at the world’s deepest ocean depth of 11,000 m. In such deep sea, the underwater vehicle is exposed to extremely high water pressure. In order to survey under high pressure, new materials and equipment need to be reseach and developed. Using onbrand-new technologies, we take on the challenge of research and exploration in the world’s deepest part of the ocean.http://www.jamstec.go.jp/e/about/research/technology.htmlAs noted above, there are two distinct programs currently devoted to developing and building manned vehicles for the deep oceans. One of which - the Japanese program - being "very well funded", which eliminates the 'lack of funding' excuse for not duplicating the Trieste's claimed achievement.
This also bears repeating...
"In order to survey under high pressure, new materials and equipment need to be reseach and developed."It's abundantly clear that we are
still unable to build a manned submersible that can duplicate what the Trieste supposedly did, way back in 1960!
There are valid reasons to develop and build manned submersibles capable of such extreme ocean depths. There are 2 programs, one with massive resources, dedicated to achieving that goal.
Your excuses don't hold up.
QUOTE (keithisco @ Jan 27 2008, 05:20 AM)
Anyways, care to offer any evidence for your ridiculous "conspiracy" theory? Such as "Why" it is a conspiracy, why the logs of the research vessels involved should be discounted? Who gained what, exactly from this venture?
It's only your
excuses which are "ridiculous", as I've pointed out above. There
are "good reasons" for it, there
are programs actively pursuing it, and there
is adequate funding for it (in Japan's case, certainly)
Why is it a conspiracy?
Because Piccard and Walsh conspired in making a fraudulent claim about the Trieste's feat.
Why should the logs of the research vessels involved be discounted?
Because they relied solely on the account of Piccard and Walsh. There was no independent verification for their account.
Who gained what from the bogus claim?
Piccard and Walsh, who gained fame and fortune. They were recognized as brave, heroic pioneers. Piccard obviously gained financially from it, as did his father...
In 1953 Swiss oceanographer Jacques Piccard (1922- ) helped his father Auguste Piccard (1884-1963) build the Trieste, which they dove to a depth of 10,168 feet off the Mediterranean island of Ponza. In 1956, under contract with the U.S. Navy, the Piccards redesigned the Trieste to withstand the pressure of any known sea depth; they sold the Trieste to the navy two years later. In 1960, accompanied by U.S. Navy Lieutenant Don Walsh, Jacques Piccard took the Trieste to the bottom of one of the deepest parts of the Mariana Trench, the Challenger Deep, where they touched bottom at a depth of 35,800 feet (10,912m), just 400 feet (122m) less than the deepest sounding recorded.http://www.bookrags.com/research/deep-sea-...d-and-scit-071/Piccard just had to bribe Walsh into going along with the lie, and nobody else would - or could - ever know the actual truth.
But 48 years has exposed the truth - it was all a fraud.
