Titanic Shipwreck: Human remains possibly found in OceanGate’s Titan submersible debris

Human remains are thought to have been found within the wreckage of the Titan submersible owned and operated by OceanGate Expeditions, according to the US Coast Guard. Pieces from the sub were unloaded in St John’s, Canada, on Wednesday.

The submersible, which was quite different from a regular submarine in terms of design, imploded on June 18 just 90 minutes into a deep dive to the famous 1912 Titanic shipwreck, sitting at a whopping depth of 12,500 feet. All five people onboard were killed.

Further Testing And Analysis Awaits

US medical professionals will now be doing a formal analysis of the presumed remains, the coast guard said in a statement. The Coast Guard’s Marine Board of Investigation (MBI) will transport the debris to a US port for further testing and analysis.

Keep Reading

• Shipwrecks just keep happening! Is EU not doing enough?
• What must we do for the World Refugee Day to actually matter?

MBI chair Capt Jason Neubauer said a lot more work was necessary to understand what led to the catastrophic loss and help ensure a similar tragedy does not get repeated. He expressed his gratefulness for the coordinated international and interagency support to recover the evidence.

Experts’ Concerns Over Titan Sub Were Dismissed

So far, five major pieces of the submersible have been found in a large debris field near the shipwreck, the coast guard says. Canadian ship Horizon Arctic led the recovery mission, using a remotely operated vehicle.

The upcoming investigation will possibly include a formal hearing with witness testimony. OceanGate has been criticised for its safety practices and multiple former employees have raised alarms over the Titan sub, which was not subject to regulation.

In email messages seen by the BBC, the head of OceanGate, Stockton Rush – one of the passengers on the tragic trip – had previously dismissed safety concerns raised by one expert, saying he was “tired of industry players who try to use a safety argument to stop innovation”.