The Engineering Missteps Behind the OceanGate
Titan Disaster
Mian Saim Rauf Sukhera
Pakistan Islamia Higher Secondary School - Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
[email protected]
Abstract
“All good here.” These were the last words from the OceanGate’s Titan submersible crew. What
began as a routine conversation turned into a forever silence. In June 2023, Stockton Rush (the
CEO of OceanGate Expeditions) with 4 other people went deep down the Atlantic Ocean to the
Titanic wreck site on the Titan submersible. Everything was calm until the vessel suffered a
catastrophic implosion which resulted in the death of all the crew aboard. The incident shocked
the world, and various questions were raised for the engineers. The Titan was constructed with
an experimental carbon fiber and titanium design that had never been pressure-tested to full
operational depth by a third-party agency. Stockton Rush repeatedly ignored the safety warnings
and dumbed down the submersible’s design in the name of innovation. The choice of carbon-
fiber hull and simplified controls like of a gaming console were chosen for the innovation. The
submersible imploded due to immense pressure resulting in cracking the hull which was also
reported previously after multiple dives but were severely ignored by the OceanGate. The
unprofessional use of equipment, lack of proper testing led to the to the catastrophic failure of
the OceanGate Titan submersible, resulting in tragic loss of all 5 people on board.
This research investigates the Titan implosion, and the engineering missteps behind the
OceanGate Titan disaster by understanding the technical causes that contributed. This study aims
to extract vital lessons for future engineering.
Introduction
OceanGate Inc. was a private deep-sea exploration company founded in 2009 by Stockton Rush
& Guillermo Söhnlein. Its mission was to make deep-ocean access more affordable and routine,
especially through submersible expeditions to the Titanic wreck. The company was known for its
experimental use of carbon fiber in sub design and non-traditional safety practices. Its refusal to
seek third-party safety certification drew criticism from marine experts and engineers as well as
contributed to the tragic implosion of the Titan submersible. Rush believed that undersea
exploration was an underserved market, due to, in his opinion, an unwarranted reputation of
submersibles as dangerous vehicles
The Final Expedition
On June 18, 2023, the submersible Titan imploded during its final voyage, tragically ending the
lives of 5 people including Stockton Rush (the CEO of OceanGate Expeditions). What began as a
groundbreaking journey to the Titanic wreck ended in a catastrophic implosion within milliseconds.
The mission, organized by OceanGate Inc., aimed to offer a rare, close-up experience of the Titanic
to paying passengers while also contributing to deep-sea exploration. Onboard were five
individuals: Stockton Rush, the CEO of OceanGate and pilot of the submersible; Hamish Harding,
a British billionaire and seasoned explorer; Paul-Henri Nargeolet, a Titanic expert with decades of
experience; Shahzada Dawood, a prominent Pakistani British businessman; and his 19-year-old
son, Suleman Dawood.
The dive began in the morning, launched from the support vessel Polar Prince. Approximately
90-minutes into the descent, communication between Titan and the surface was abruptly lost. The
submersible was scheduled to resurface that afternoon, but no signals or signs followed. The clock
was ticking, as the sub was believed to have a 96-hour oxygen supply. On June 22, 2023, debris
of the Titan was found about 500 meters away from Titanic wreck site. The wreckage, located by
a remotely operated vehicle (ROV), indicated that the submersible had suffered a catastrophic
implosion, killing all five crew members instantly. Titan’s carbon fiber hull and lack of industry-
standard third-party safety certification became focal points in ongoing investigations. The
implosion of Titan sent shockwaves across the globe, with public grief echoed in headlines and
tributes from all corners of the world. Scientists and engineers expressed concern over the future
of deep-ocean exploration, while families and institutions mourned the loss of life. The incident
not only ended a bold expedition but also ignited international debate over the ethics, safety, and
regulation of private exploration ventures into one of the planet’s most hostile environments.
Technical Analysis of the Disaster
The tragic loss of the Titan submersible highlights the extreme challenges and dangers of deep-
sea exploration. At depths of nearly 12,500 feet, the pressure underwater is enormous—more than
380 times the atmospheric pressure at sea level. Any structural weakness in a submersible’s hull
at these depths can lead to catastrophic failure in a split second. The tragic implosion raised many
questions, mainly focusing on the unconventional and experimental use of carbon fiber in the hull
design—despite knowing the material carried significant risks. Stockton Rush, OceanGate’s CEO,
was determined to push his vision of becoming the “Elon Musk of the deep-sea world,” often
ignoring expert warnings and critical reviews about the submersible’s safety. Unlike traditional
deep-sea vessels built from titanium or steel, Titan’s hull used carbon fiber composites, which,
while lightweight and strong in many applications, behave unpredictably under the immense and
constant pressure of deep ocean depths. This experimental choice, coupled with the lack of
certification from established marine safety authorities, increased the risk of failure. Additionally,
OceanGate’s approach to testing and certification was less rigorous than industry standards,
resembling a startup pushing innovation rather than adhering to strict protocols typical of military
or scientific submersibles. These likely meant critical vulnerabilities were not fully addressed.
Furthermore, some components and operational systems, like the use of game controllers for
crucial controls, were seen by experts as unprofessional or makeshift. While possibly intended to
reduce costs and weight, these decisions may have compromised the submersible’s integrity.
Ultimately, the disaster appears to have resulted from a rapid implosion due to hull failure under
extreme pressure. The combination of experimental materials, limited safety verification, and
unconventional design choices created a fatal vulnerability. This tragedy underscores the
importance of thorough engineering, strict safety standards, and cautious innovation when
exploring one of the planet’s most hostile environments. A former marine operator who worked
for the company believed such a tragedy was “inevitable” as safety standards were flouted. David
Lochridge, the former operations director for OceanGate, alerted the company to safety concerns
he had about the submersible, but was largely ignored. He further added that the whole idea of
OceanGate was to “make money”.
Ethical and Human Perspective
A key aspect of the Titan disaster lies beyond engineering; it touches deeply on ethics and the
human cost of innovation. While the mission was framed as an exciting step toward accessible
deep-sea tourism, it raises serious concerns about how much risk is acceptable when human lives
are involved. Each passenger aboard Titan paid $250,000, likely trusting that the submersible had
undergone proper safety checks and rigorous testing. However, the company’s decision to use
unproven materials, bypass industry-standard certifications, and ignore repeated expert warnings
shows a disregard for the duty of care owed to those on board.
OceanGate’s founder, Stockton Rush, was known for challenging traditional safety protocols,
believing that regulations held back progress. But innovation without caution can become
dangerous. In this case, ambition seemed to outweigh responsibility. The crew, a father and son, a
billionaire, a diver, and the CEO himself, lost their lives not due to unforeseeable natural forces,
but due to avoidable human decisions. This tragedy forces us to reflect on where to draw the line
between bold exploration and ethical responsibility.
Alternative Approaches to Submarine Design for Preventing
Future Disasters
To prevent tragedies like the Titan implosion, submarine development must return to time-tested
engineering principles while integrating modern innovations responsibly. One of the most
effective alternatives is the use of certified pressure-tested materials, such as titanium or high-
grade steel, instead of experimental composites like carbon fiber. These materials have a long
history of withstanding deep-ocean pressures and are well understood in terms of their limits and
behavior. Additionally, future submersibles should be subject to third-party verification and
certification from recognized maritime safety bodies such as ABS (American Bureau of Shipping)
or DNV-GL. Certification ensures rigorous testing, structural integrity, and adherence to
international safety standards.
Another key improvement is in real-time hull monitoring systems that can detect micro-fractures
or stress points before they lead to failure. Submarines should also be designed with redundant life
support and emergency systems, including escape plans or remotely detachable capsules where
possible. Moreover, operational practices must prioritize crew training, routine inspections, and
transparent risk communication with passengers. While innovation in ocean exploration is
essential, it must be balanced with caution, data-backed engineering, and an uncompromising
focus on human safety. Moving forward, designing submarines with a culture of accountability,
not just ambition, is the only sustainable way to explore the depths of our oceans safely.
Conclusion
The Titan submersible tragedy serves as a powerful and painful reminder of the dangers that come
with pushing the boundaries of exploration without fully respecting the science and safety behind
it. What was intended to be a groundbreaking mission to explore the depths of the Atlantic ended
in a catastrophic failure, taking five lives and raising serious questions about ethics, responsibility,
and engineering standards. Through this research, it becomes clear that ambition alone is not
enough, especially when human lives are at stake.
The use of experimental materials, the disregard for expert warnings, and the absence of third-
party safety certification created a perfect storm of risk. The disaster has not only exposed the
flaws in OceanGate’s approach but has also reignited a global conversation about how we balance
innovation with caution. As deep-sea tourism and private exploration continue to grow, this
incident should stand as a lasting lesson: no dream, no matter how bold, is worth the cost of human
life. Future expeditions must be grounded in proven science, strict regulations, and above all, a
deep respect for the unforgiving nature of the ocean.
References
1) Marchant, Danny. 2023. Sacrificing Safety in the Name of Innovation: The OceanGate
Titan Disaster. Paper ID: 44648. Student paper. Research advisor: Elisabeth Arnold Weiss.
2) Murray, Tom. 2023. "‘Close Enough’: OceanGate CEO Stockton Rush’s Reckless
Behavior Before Titan Implosion Revealed in New Documentary." Yahoo Entertainment.
3) The Guardian. 2023. "Ex-OceanGate Employee Calls Titan Disaster ‘Inevitable’ as First
Video Shown." The Guardian.
4) Northeastern University. “Why the Titan Submersible’s Carbon Fiber Was Ineffective.”
University Newsroom, June 29, 2023. https://news.northeastern.edu/.
5) Netflix. 2025. Titan - The OceanGate Submersible Disaster Documentary series.
Directed by Mark Monroe
6) Wikipedia Contributors. 2023. "Titan Submersible Implosion." Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_submersible_implosion.
7) “The Truth About the ‘Titan’ Sub Disaster: ‘Baffling’ Decisions, Their Final Moments and
a ‘Smoking Gun’ (Exclusive).” People, June 10, 2025.
8) “'Absolutely Shocking': Netflix Documentary Examines How the Titan Sub Disaster
Happened.” The Guardian, June 11, 2025.
9) “Titan: The OceanGate Disaster Explores the Biggest Warning Signs of the Submersible
Implosion.” Time, June 11, 2025.
10) “The 5 Biggest Takeaways from ‘Titan: The OceanGate Disaster’: Narcissism, Hubris, and
a ‘Cult-like’ Operation.” Entertainment Weekly, June 11, 2025.
11) “Doomed ‘Titan’ Sub Founder Could Have Been Charged If He'd Survived Final Dive,
Investigator Says.” People, June 12, 2025.
12) Khan, M. A., and M. U. Sohail. “Evaluating the Structural Integrity of Deep-Sea Vehicle:
Design and Analysis of OceanGate’s Titan Implosion.” International Journal of Energy
and Water Resources 9 (2025): 1113–1143.
13) Praveen, S. S., A. Vijayan, and S. Babu. “The Science Behind Titan Submersible Implosion
– Insights from Physicists.” Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Mechanics & CFD
10, no. 2 (2023): 1–5.
14) “Carbon-Fiber Conundrum: Physicist Explains the Tragic Implosion of OceanGate’s Titan
Submersible.” ScienceDaily, July 4, 2023.
