Biggest amateur-built sub sinks – owner is suspected of killing passenger
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
19:00 - Madsen and journalist depart for a trial run for a story that she's writing.
22:30 - Madsen claims he dropped the journalist off at this time, at a restaurant at the North end of the island.
02:30 - Journalist's husband reports her missing.
02:50 - Repeated attempts to reach the sub via radio are unsuccessful.
03:40 - Sub is reported missing by the police.
07:00 - General alarm set for Baltic, instructing all vessels to look for the sub.
10:15 - Sub spotted by Harbor Master in Koge Bay, South of where it was meant to be. Harbor Master talks to Madsen who claims he hadn't been in contact due to technical issues but is heading for harbor.
11:00 - Passing vessel sees the sub with Madsen on the tower. Madsen disappears below deck, then returns to the tower and the sub begins to sink. In 30 seconds, it's completely submerged and Madsen is rescued. Madsen tells the rescuers that he was the only passenger.
17:45 - After interviewing the journalist's family and Madsen, Madsen is placed under arrest for the death of the journalist. Madsen maintains that he dropped her off near a restaurant at 22:30 the previous day.
It's indicated that the location where Madsen claimed to drop her off is blanketed with security cameras (whose footage the police have). The sub has been raised and will be inspected shortly. This isn't at all a case of "he panicked when the sub sank", there's a nearly 12-hour gap in his known location and even if you believe his story, the journalist that he dropped off at a restaurant hasn't been seen in a few days now.
The sub now been initially inspected and the police reports that nobody - dead or alive - was found inside.
To add to the mystery, police reports that Mr. Madsen has changed his explanation, but the police will not clarify in what way.
Management of the restaurant say they have not noticed a submarine (!) but have handed over all surveillance recordings to the police.
Here's the latest development: Sub was sailing around without lights on in heavily trafficked water, causing a near collision [1]
[1] http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/fragtskib-kolliderede-naest...
You probably meant "divers with a basic SCUBA certification" (open water, ~30ft depth and conditions similar to your previous dives)
12m and 20m are basic recommendations listed here. I seem to remember 30ft and 100ft (plus following tables / computers) as the recommended limits.
I have a recreational dive certificate issued by NASDS Australasia in 2000. Looks like NASDS Australasia has since faded from view, and NASDS USA joined with SSI around 1999.
It appears SSI adhere to ISO 24801[1]
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scuba_Schools_International#Re...
Who is "they"? There is not some scuba sheriff who magically appears and stops you from going as deep as you want. Get some gear, swim out, and dive. How deep you go is 100% up to you.
Also, dive computers make the whole thing very safe by tracking exactly how long and how deep you can stay without needing any lengthy nitrogen releasing safety stops. As a recreational diver with a bit of experience, you can feel very confident going down to 160 feet (maybe even 200?) as long as you listen to your dive computer.
You can see tables of the no decompression time: http://elearning.padi.com/company0/tools/RDP_Table%20Met.pdf
The calculations are quite confusing do to manually, but your computer does them great, and in realtime, and for your exact depth & time. So, like I said, as long as you follow your computer, the risk for nitrogen narcosis or any other problems is very very small.
But I still argue the point: the depths that you will suffer seriously from nitrogen narcosis are beyond how deep you could even go on 1 tank + no decompression time.
Once you get to 160 ft you only have a few minutes at that depth, so realistically you couldn't even go deep enough where nitrogen narcosis would be a big problem.
So I still stand by my statement: if you have only 1 tank, and follow your dive computer's guidance, your risk of anything bad happening to you on a dive is slim to none.
They're not cheap, but they're also not all that expensive.
So, if you're "uncertified" and you somehow managed to get yourself a filled air tank, then my point still stands: you can go down to however deep you want.
And the basic open water certification is not much more than a rubber stamp. Anyone can get it as long as they pay their $100 to PADI or whoever else.
I don't get how anyone could dive for fun, it's scary down that deep :)
For anyone free diving at that depth, I'd encourage you to ensure there's always someone nearby that is capable of rescuing you.
Shallow/deep water blackout[1] is certainly dangerous with a buddy, but it's deadly if you're alone.
[1] http://divewise.org/science/physiological-causes-of-freedive...
Rescue is related. I doubt anyone could pull somebody out that's passed out at that depth. You're just not going to have enough air. I had to help someone out of a pool once and the only way I was able to manage was by walking along the bottom with them on my shoulders to shallower area. They panicked and tried to climb me, pulling me under if I did anything else
Well done helping that person. Rescuing a free diving blackout has the benefit (for the rescuer) of an unconscious victim.
Here's hoping nothing happened and the journalist just took a nap at a hostel or something, but the optics are quite bad, it's a lot of coincidences which look pretty nasty.
Ships aren't build with built-in scuttle capabilities, military submarines can be scuttled because you can blow yourself up.
The likely scenario is that the submarine has failed, she either died before she could escape or the more likely scenario is that Madsen panicked, saved himself and left her behind to die.
[1]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/10538172...
Submarines are. Ballast tanks plus leaving a hatch open.
Also, the sub didn't sink until 11am the day after. She did not plan on an overnight trip in the sub. That's why I think there's more to this story than an accidental sinking.
They were looking for the submarine for hours before it showed up and sank in front of eyewitnesses. It was in the news already at that stage. I think he may have panicked when he learnt that everybody was looking for him and the woman and then sank the sub. One eyewitness saw him in the tower, then he went down into the sub, then back up, and then it sank. My guess would be that he went down and pushed the submerge button, went back up and got himself "rescued" by a passing boat.
The vast majority of small boats have through hole fittings for things like the heads (toilet) or cooling water intake for the engine. Opening the valve and smashing the pipe off is a trivial way to sink the boat. Larger ships will have similar fittings though the sinking will take longer. As noted by your others there's ways to intentionally flood a submarine too even if they're not intended for that purpose.
Guess it depends upon you definition of "Small Boat". Certainly your standard mono hulled yacht will sink rapidly if you fill it with water (which is purposefully done on occasion, if sailing across an ocean and major damage forces you to abandon ship to another vessel the insurance company may ask you to sink the boat. It's not worth the costs required to salvage and is a danger shipping if left afloat).
He could just claim that they both abandoned the submarine and then got separated. What benefits are there to make a elaborated plan?
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-40916787
He claimed earlier that she was dropped off many hours prior to the incident. He apparently has a new and different story now, though the police aren't saying what it is.
He can't claim they both abandoned the submarine when it sunk, as there were eyewitnesses to that event.
What is likely, given what's known at this point? I don't see some more likely scenario. Her body wasn't on the submarine, and the eyewitness account of the sinking supports the idea of a deliberate scuttle. The police say it looks deliberate as well.
that makes this quite unlikely
> In the afternoon there have been divers on the submarine, lying on seven feet of water. It has not been possible to enter the submarine, either being stabilized on site or rescued and towed to port before it will be possible. This will probably happen during Saturday.
They will attempt to either enter the sub on site or tow it back to port today (Saturday).
http://www.mynewsdesk.com/dk/koebenhavns-politi/pressrelease...
[1] https://bt.bmcdn.dk/media/cache/resolve/image_1240/image/104...
Investigators also suspect that the sub was scuttled to conceal evidence.
The police may know much more than they have told the public. They very quickly arrested the man, and they must have had a good reason to do so. The court also jailed him for a couple of weeks, based on evidence presented behind closed doors - the reason for the closed doors being "of respect to the family". There was some evidence presented which would have been of harm to the family, more harm than the public fact of suspected murder. The police may already know most of the story and only needs some time to build the case for the judge.
At a guess they won't find the journalist inside, Madsen is way too smart to not realize that the sub was sinking in shallow water and would be lifted promptly, but in spite of that I don't have much hope of her still being alive.
It's a real pity, Copenhagen Space Orbitals and Madsen as a person were quite the inspiration source for many and to see it end like this is harsh. Reminds me of the Reiser case, it took a while for the truth to come out there too.
If that's really a crime, it looked improvised and panicked to me, not thought out at all.
Going further in the idea, could the researchs analyze the biocenosis of animals trapped inside the sub in search of an anormal number of species of animals atracted by corpses? If there was blood or organic remains or a missing/hidden corpse a lot of scavengers will detect it from Km and came in a hurry.
Of course such info would be really useful to start a searching but a dumped body can move with the sea currents so if is found in point X could have been dumped (or drowned accidentally) in the point W in fact.
Or destroy electronics or other evidence that might show where the sub has been. Wikipedia says the sub has video cameras that function as a periscope, for example. No idea what other electronics might be on board.
1. She dies in some kind of accident. He panics thinking that police will not believe him it was an accident and tries to cover it up.
2. Sexual advance gone wrong.
Copenhagen Suborbitals and Madsen's new venture, Madsen Spacelab, were set to perform test launches in the Baltic later this month - both having been assigned the same area and different timeslots on the same day. The sub was planned to sail towards the site - based off the island of Bornholm - this weekend. It is now probably safe to assume that only the Suborbitals launch will be going forward.
I highly recommend watching it, if you ever get a chance.
Director was following both Peter and Kristian (initial founders) hoping it will be a comedy as in two guys trying to build a manned rocket.
But then project grew and grew and became viable but the whole thing and documentary itself turned into a drama showing their fallout. Now with this news story there's another crime/thriller angle to it.
[0] https://mobile.twitter.com/Charress/status/89613387205167104...
- Flat hose just became round, so they're pumping out the sub. All this is happening leisurely; looks like they're trying to do this with minimum damage.
- This is just some of the port crew and a crew from a heavy crane company preparing to move the thing. No emergency crews. They put the sub on a truck, using a huge dockside crane, and towed it away. Any investigation has already taken place or will be done elsewhere.
That means she was probably last seen or heard from that afternoon a few hours before the sub launched.
Edit: Here: http://ekstrabladet.dk/112/kim-isabel-forsvundet-i-ubaadsdra...
Also, the eyewitness accounts of the sinking make it sound like the sinking was deliberate:
"Kristian Isbak, who had responded to the Navy's call to help locate the ship on Friday, told The Associated Press he first spotted Madsen standing wearing his trademark military fatigues in the submarine's tower while it was still afloat. "He then climbed down inside the submarine and there was then some kind of air flow coming up and the submarine started to sink," Isbak said. "(He) came up again and stayed in the tower until water came into it" before swimming to a nearby boat as the submarine sank, he added." [3]
[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-denmark-submarine-idUSKBN...
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15000076
[3] http://time.com/4898129/submarine-owner-detained-over-journa...
The FBI has some data on circumstances/motives here: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-... You can pretty quickly find a few that might be plausible.
His girlfriend disappears in a normal manner, well, normal for a disappearance, he disappears in outlandish style in a sub sinking, he was going to swim to a pre-prepped dinghy or some quiet boat anchored nearby and disappear from history (perhaps with a pile of money?) but whoopsie a passing boater not part of the plan at all, coincidentally saw him and "helped" him out by declaring an emergency and fishing him out... So much for that tragic disappearance and drowning and missing body.
Now she's disappeared successfully on some tropical island retired wondering when he's gonna get there, or wondering if she should keep all the money (assuming any has disappeared at all, of course) or if she should come forward.
The whole thing sounding like a hollywood movie plot means my speculation sounding like a movie plot isn't necessarily disqualifying.
Its also worth pointing out that this is a "submarine story" only in the sense that the Reiser murder trial was about linux filesystem development.
There is a photo floating around that might be Kim Wall in the tower of the submarine o̶n̶ ̶F̶r̶i̶d̶a̶y̶,̶ ̶d̶u̶r̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶d̶a̶y̶l̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ ̶h̶o̶u̶r̶s̶.̶.̶.̶w̶h̶i̶c̶h̶ ̶w̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶b̶e̶ ̶o̶d̶d̶.̶[1,2] That doesn't imply girlfriend though. Could also be that the "Friday" was a mistake and the picture is from Thursday.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-denmark-submarine-idUSKBN...
[2] http://www.skd.se/2017/08/12/madsen-nekas-forklara-sig-infor...
Edit: Photo was from Thursday, not Friday. Apparently the Reuters caption is wrong. http://www.zoox.se/submarine-inventor-charged-with-murder-of...
Even if it did I wonder if an AIS operates separate from the ship's radio system.
You can track ships by their AIS and some website sell historical data to show where a ship has been.
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:10.2/cente...
Copenhaguen Suborbitals was a fantastic item to talk about to convince people that hobbyists can do great things. Now there will be a crime investigation linked to it? Damn.
That feels like when I read about Pistorius crime...
Such a reputation dip has a broad splash zone.
I can't help but think the worst. It seems like something bad happened to this woman at some point at his hands and without a good plan he waited until he had no other option and then sank the sub to cover his tracks.
Truly the weirdest story for a while.
Everything has taken place within or very close to Copenhagen harbour facilities.
That makes the story all the more strange - they ride around for a few hours (19:00-23:00), then he drops her off back at the sub's dock, and then he sets out again and cruises around all night alone, next being seen some 40 miles away, at which point the sub promptly sinks.
This bit of weird comic relief doesn't even make the top ten, sorry.
Said nazis actually murdered one protestor and injured multiple others by mowing them down with cars. What happened there is bordering on insanity... and Trump didn't even try to distance himself from the nazis who voted him in in the first place.
(for the record, I personally do not like assassinations)
> he said that he had dropped the woman off Thursday evening near where they had departed from, around 10:30pm. But no one had been able to reach the woman or establish her whereabouts.
I said nothing, them. Different situation.
Why did the journalist lie about writing for Wired again?
Could it be someone other than the journalist who got onboard with Madsen? How would we verify?
Could we determine that the tank failure was not a sabotage?
Is it possible we eventually find the body of journalist neither in the ocean nor in the submarine?
She probably didn't lie. She's a freelance writer that has written for many notable publications.
Many freelancers write "on spec", meaning they intend to submit it somewhere, but don't have a contract to do the work. So "writing a story for wired" wouldn't be an odd thing to say if that's who you intended to push it to.