The pursuit of profit was the fundamental motivation for the organization behind the ill-fated Titan submersible, which relied “minimal science,” as stated by OceanGate’s former director of operations.
The vessel suffered a catastrophic implosion while en route to the Titanic wreck in June of the previous year, resulting in the deaths of all five individuals aboard.
David Lochridge, who served in his position for two years before being dismissed in January 2018, testified before a commission investigating the calamity, declaring that “the overall concept of the company was profit-driven.”
For improved accessibility, please use the Chrome browser.
How Titan submersible tragedy unfolded
He corroborated accounts from other former employees concerning the company’s head, Stockton Rush, describing him as erratic and challenging to collaborate with.
Mr. Rush was among those who perished during the incident, alongside British billionaire explorer Hamish Harding, the Dawood father and son duo, Shahzada and Suleman, as well as French national Paul-Henri Nargeolet.
In a report composed following his evaluation of the initial Titan hull, Mr. Lochridge expressed his shock at the O-ring—a seal component—referring to the hull as “like porous paper. It was revolting.”
(Clockwise from top left) Paul-Henri Nargeolet, Stockton Rush, Hamish Harding, Suleman Dawood and Shahzada Dawood
However, he indicated that the second Titan hull utilized during the ill-fated voyage was scarcely an improvement, remarking, “they repurposed these domes. They rehashed these ceiling panels. Everything was recycled. It was all about expenses.”
Titan, he declared, was “a monstrosity of a submersible.”
Mr. Lochridge claimed that the company’s legal representatives sent him a “menacing” letter after he lodged a complaint with the US safety organization, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
Recovered components of the Titan submersible in St John’s, Newfoundland, Canada, June 28, 2023. Pic: Reuters
An image displayed at the Coast Guard hearing shows the Titan sub on the ocean floor after it imploded. Pic: US Coast Guard
He addressed the hearing, stating
He expressed having “zero trust whatsoever” in the construction of the Titan back in 2017, attributing its deficiencies to “budget reductions,” “poor engineering choices,” and “an eagerness to reach the Titanic as swiftly as possible to begin generating revenue.”
For enhanced accessibility, please use Chrome browser to view the video.
“There was significant urgency to complete this project, leading to many critical steps being overlooked,” he remarked.
The CEO, Stockton Rush, possessed “no prior experience in building submersibles,” and the former engineering director, Tony Nissen, was recruiting “young graduates who had just come out of university. Some hadn’t even enrolled in university yet.”
Discover more:
The narratives of the Titan submersible team
What transpired with the Titan?
He further stated: “There was a complete lack of experience throughout the organization. It was essentially non-existent. It was all an illusion, and the social media presence highlighting past expeditions was misleading as they frequently faced issues during their voyages.”
The submersible completed its last descent on June 18, 2023, losing communication with its support vessel approximately two hours afterwards.
Rescue teams hurriedly dispatched ships, planes, and additional resources to an area approximately 435 miles (700km) south of St John’s, Newfoundland.
The search operation for the Titan garnered international interest, and officials later confirmed that the debris was discovered on the ocean bed about 300m from the Titanic wreck.
