Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 3 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing Summarizing
Exclusive to OpEd News:
Sci Tech   
  

The Real Story of NetFlix's Fundamentally Flawed Documentary, "Titan: The OceanGate Submersible Disaster"

By       (Page 1 of 4 pages)   2 comments

Robert A. Leishear, PhD, PE, ASME Fellow
Message Robert A. Leishear, PhD, PE, ASME Fellow

This Netflix movie highlighted important concerns about the Titan but bypassed major technical facts. Misinformation by others promoted a fundamentally flawed documentary. An explosion ripped the Titan apart, rather than an implosion. The true story of this explosion disaster was overlooked in this documentary. I stand behind these conclusions as an expert in fluid mechanics and failure analysis. Even so, the NetFlix documentary was well produced and very informative, where the Titan was used to observe the wreckage of the Titanic.

The final report from the Marine Board of investigation was published while this Op Ed was in review, and this Op Ed was updated accordingly ("Report of the Marine Board of Investigation Into the Implosion of the Submersible Titan (CG1788361) in the North Atlantic Ocean Near the Wreck Site of the RMS Titanic Resulting in the Loss of Five Lives on June 18, 2023", click here).

Update Comment, 8/9/2025

The U.S. Coast Guard, Marine Board of Investigation refuses to respond to legitimate safety concerns and chooses to endorse incompetence in what has now become a coverup of their mistakes during the Titan explosion investigation.

Breakthrough Science for the Titan Disaster

I invented and published a brand new theory to explain explosion risks and explosion threats to submersibles. This invented and proven theory for pressure vessels and piping, based on decades of pressure-vessel and piping damage and shock-wave research, is stated as follows. The Titan sub was a 22-feet-long pressure vessel, shaped like a pipe with pipe caps (Figure 1), subjected to high pressure shock waves inside the sub.

  • First, high pressures cracked and imploded the Titan window in cyclic fatigue or sheared the adhesive layer at the titanium dome in fatigue.
  • Second, high-pressure reflected water hammer waves nearly doubled the external ocean pressure inside the sub.
  • Third, the front dome blew off the sub due to these extraordinarily high pressures, exceeding approximately 16 million pounds.
  • Fourth, the Titan hull then exploded outward at nearly twice its failure stress to shoot debris hundreds of feet through the water.
  • Fifth, the expected blast load was less than 2 tons of TNT (Figure 2). The explosion magnitude was determined by assuming cavitation, or vaporization, of water in the sub as a high pressure blast wave blew the sub apart.
  • Sixth, low pressures following the outward explosion wave crushed some debris back into the sub.
  • Finally, the carcass of the sub sunk to the bottom of the ocean.

I stand behind these conclusions as an expert in fluid mechanics and failure analysis, where I performed an independent investigation of the Titan explosion. Although I am not an expert in submersible design, I am an expert in shock waves and their destructive interactions to destroy piping and pressure vessels. The Titan was, in fact, a pressure vessel subjected to explosive shock waves, and the Titan investigation has not pursued explosive shock waves to date.

Figure 1. Before and after photos of the Titan Sub.
Figure 1. Before and after photos of the Titan Sub.
(Image by Adadapted from NTSB by Leishear Engineering, LLC)
  Details   DMCA

Figure 2. Aboveground 1-ton explosion for comparison to the underwater 2-ton Titan explosion. The Titan explosion was a cavitation pressure release explosion only without flames or detonation.
Figure 2. Aboveground 1-ton explosion for comparison to the underwater 2-ton Titan explosion. The Titan explosion was a cavitation pressure release explosion only without flames or detonation.
(Image by SRL Images Channel)
  Details   DMCA

The True Cause of the Titan Disaster

Facts and proof were published in an OpEd News article ("The Titan Submersible Blew Apart in an Explosion Before Partial Crushing - A Fight Against Public Opinion"). This Op Ed proved that a flaw in the viewport or adhesive induced a small-scale implosion to blast a wall of water into the submersible compartment to kill all five occupants and explode the hull. That killer wall of water blasted into the sub at hundreds of miles per hour and thousands of pounds per square inch. One 'item recovered included an "intact" pen belonging to Rush [the OceanGate CEO], which was found inside a piece of clothing believed to be the 61-year-old's sleeve' (click here).

The final Titan report concluded the following, in part.

'Five people died when the commercial submersible TITAN imploded on June 18, 2023, in what is considered to be a preventable tragedy. The U.S. Coast Guards Marine Board of Investigation into the fatal incident found that OceanGates failure to follow established engineering protocols for safety, testing, and maintenance of their submersible, was the primary causal factor. The investigation further identified the need for proper corporate governance, a professional workplace culture, and improved regulatory oversight, in particular for novel vessel designs and operations.'

'Titans carbon fiber hull design and construction in terms of winding, curing, gluing, thickness of hull and manufacturing standards introduced flaws that weakened its original structural integrity, and those flaws likely worsened over time.'

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

Robert A. Leishear, PhD, PE, ASME Fellow Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Robert A. Leishear, PhD, P.E., PMP, ASME Fellow, Who's Who in America Top Engineer, Who's Who Millennium Magazine cover story, NACE Senior Corrosion Technologist, NACE Senior Internal Piping Corrosion Technologist, ANSYS Expert, AMPP Certified (more...)
 

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

 
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter

Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Book Publisher Wanted for a New Book, "Industrial Murder for Profit"

The Global Warming Fallacy, Polar Warming, Energy Use, and Continental Shifts

More Exposure Of The Fukushima Explosion Cover-up - Stop The Next Nuclear Power Plant Explosion

Are the 737 Jets Safe for Return to Our Skies?

The IAEA Again Thwarts Nuclear Safety to Risk a Zaporizhzhia Explosion Disaster

The CDC Blames Workers for Food Poisonings to Cover-up Their Incompetence

Comments Image Post Article Comment and Rate This Article

These discussions are not moderated. We rely on users to police themselves, and flag inappropriate comments and behavior. In accordance with our Guidelines and Policies, we reserve the right to remove any post at any time for any reason, and will restrict access of registered users who repeatedly violate our terms.

  • OpEd News welcomes lively, CIVIL discourse. Personal attacks and/or hate speech are not tolerated and may result in banning.
  • Comments should relate to the content above. Irrelevant, off-topic comments are a distraction, and will be removed.
  • By submitting this comment, you agree to all OpEd News rules, guidelines and policies.
          

Comment Here:   


You can enter 2000 characters.
Become a Premium Member Would you like to be able to enter longer comments? You can enter 10,000 characters with Leader Membership. Simply sign up for your Premium Membership and you can say much more. Plus you'll be able to do a lot more, too.

Please login or register. Afterwards, your comment will be published.
 

Username
Password
Show Password

Forgot your password? Click here and we will send an email to the address you used when you registered.
First Name
Last Name

I am at least 16 years of age
(make sure username & password are filled in. Note that username must be an email address.)

1 people are discussing this page, with 2 comments  Post Comment


Robert A. Leishear, PhD, PE, ASME Fellow

Become a Fan
(Member since Jun 18, 2021), 81 articles, 212 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

Correction: In Figure 5, the model on the left-hand side of the figure was installed on both Titan submersibles.

Submitted on Sunday, Aug 10, 2025 at 5:50:30 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Flag This
Share Comment More Sharing          
Commenter Blocking?
Indent

Robert A. Leishear, PhD, PE, ASME Fellow

Become a Fan
(Member since Jun 18, 2021), 81 articles, 212 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Reply to Robert A. Leishear, PhD, PE, ASME Fellow:   New Content

There is some confusion about Figure 5, which does not affect any Op Ed results. However, the issue needs clarification. There are two different figures in the final MBI report to show the final viewport configuration, and they appear to be different. Then, Figure 5 is correct after all.

Apparently different photos for the final Titan design. The manufacturer's design photo is assumed to be correct.
Apparently different photos for the final Titan design. The manufacturer's design photo is assumed to be correct.
(Image by OceanGate)
Details DMCA

Submitted on Sunday, Aug 10, 2025 at 10:29:48 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Flag This
Share Comment More Sharing          
Commenter Blocking?

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment


 

Tell A Friend