[madaxe_again]

It is. It has electromagnetic drop weights that are meant to detach on power failure.

Thing is, when it’s out of the water and the power is off, there’s going to be a mechanism, bolts or dogs or zip ties or whatever, to keep them on - and someone has to remember to detach those as part of the launch.

[numpad0]

It'll be another appaling surprise if they didnt have a panel or box along a checklist, either inside the sub or next to a control panel to store and verify all those safety pins and locks.

[madaxe_again]

It wouldn’t be the first time they’ve had a mundane mistake that has potential severe ramifications - like fitting a thruster backwards. Doesn’t inspire confidence.

I mean - I can think of so many examples in my life where I’ve seen some safety measure Macgyvered out of existence because it was inconvenient, and familiarity breeds complacency. I’m reminded of some really gnarly ski lift accidents where emergency brakes were disabled because they tripped inappropriately due to improper maintenance, and flights which have taken off with their pitot tubes still covered, and inertial measurement units fitted upside down in rockets, and on and on it goes.

[jacquesm]

The Risks Digest. Highly recommended.

https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/risks/

Endless food for thought.

[madaxe_again]

Oh, or watertight compartments which didn’t go all the way up the hull because it was expensive and inconvenient. Oh, the irony.