Talk:DSV Limiting Factor

Length and width
On the official website the long dimension is given as the length, but it seems that the short dimension is more likely the axis for lateral travel, as that is the direction the occupants face and can see out of the viewports. There are precedents fot the length of a vessel to be less than or equal to the beam. &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 17:46, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It is quite possible that the DSV travels lateally on the long axis (like a crab) as a standard procedure, using CCTV to navigate visually, and sonar and compass or inertial navigation systems when out of visual range of the seabed, but there are no sources that state this, and this would make forward and the bow variable and dependent on circumstances. &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 05:47, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Pbsouthwood either way, I think the current explanation is incomprehensible. instead of the overly complicated "it depends on where the bow is" viewpoint, wouldnt it be easier to make a drawing og the measurements and insert it ? 84.215.194.129 (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * That would still not clarify where the bow is, but you are welcome to make such a drawing, upload it to Wikimedia commons, and display it in the article. &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 07:59, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Excessive detail?
, you tagged for excessive technical detail. Would you be so kind as to specify which of the specifications you think are not appropriate encyclopedic content? Cheers, &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 18:11, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * In the continued absence of actionable information on what the tagger considered excessive technical detail, I examined the information in the tagged section and assessed it in the context of the reference to WP:What Wikipedia is not mentioned in the tag. None of the information was found to be inappropriate by these criteria, so I assume the tag was added in error and can be removed as inappropriate. I further point out that it is the inherent nature of an encyclopedia to contain details that are only of interest to a particular audience and that tagging as such without sufficient explanation is a waste of everyone involved's time, verging on disruptive editing. &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 05:53, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Some clarification needed.
, It would be appreciated if you would take a look at the article and let us know of any errors or important omissions. If you find any, please explain and link on this talk page to a suitable source which we can use to make corrections. If you make corrections of fact to the article yourself, please ensure that the changes are supported by the nearest following reference (add one if needed). If there is missing information that you feel is both relevant to this article specifically, and encyclopedic in scope, please discuss on this talk page to avoid any possible issues of conflict of interest, as opinions on that point tend to be somewhat subjective and rather variable, and are best avoided altogether. &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 05:37, 22 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I will take a look now. Thank you very much for the note. I will do my best. Vlvescovo (talk) 03:18, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

incorrect wikipedia title?
hi - just noting that this craft has been renamed the Bakunawa since it was acquired - should the article be edited to reflect this? did not wish to make the edit myself but i thought i would bring it to attention. thank you. 77.103.5.249 (talk) 00:16, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
 * What reliable sources support this claim? &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 07:54, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The citation used in the article is from a reliable source (BBC). It is very likely that the vessel has been renamed as claimed, but standard Wikipedia procedure relevant to this suggestion is The subject of the article has changed its name and the new name has come into majority use (my emphasis). The DSV is notable/famous for the records made under the original name. Do we have any evidence that the new name is in majority use, or that the DSV would even qualify under General notability under the new name? My personal interpretation, based on available evidence, is not yet. &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 08:36, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned references in DSV Limiting Factor
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of DSV Limiting Factor's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "BBC": From Aquanaut:  From Jacques Mayol:  From ABISMO:  From Mary Rose:  From Arthur C. Clarke:  From Recreational dive sites:  From History of underwater diving:  From Richard Harris (anaesthetist): </li> <li>From Sirena Deep: </li> </ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. Feel free to remove this comment after fixing the refs. AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:26, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

My Own Observations - V. Vescovo
I was asked to comment on the page as of 19 Jul 23, so here are my suggestions to improve the article, but I have not made any of the edits myself. I will leave others to assess the value of the suggested edits. At this point, I think few know as much about the DSV LF as myself, other than the builder, Patrick Lahey of Triton Submarines. My suggestions:

> Suggest: Limiting Factor is a crewed deep-submergence vehicle (DSV) manufactured by Triton Submarines currently owned and operated by Gabe Newell’s Inkfish ocean-exploration research organization, but previously owned and operated (2018-2022) by explorer Victor Vescovo's ocean research firm, Caladan Oceanic. [This will highlight the successive ownership of the vessel, which I think is important as its lack might lead people to think it has always been owned and operated by Gabe Newell.)

> "with facilities for an observer." Sounds a bit odd, like it is secondary seating or something - it is not. The workspaces are virtually identical. I would just saw that it is a two-person crewed submersible.

> End of first paragraph: I might add that it is the nly submersible ever to dive to the bottom of all four 10,000 meter trenches (Mariana, Tonga, Philippine, and Kermadec) and also to the bottom of seventeen deep ocean trenches (Mariana, Tonga, Philippine, Kermadec, Puerto Rico, South Sandwich (Southern Ocean portion), Java, Palau, Yap, Ryukyu, Izo-Bonin, Japan, Santa Cruz, San Cristobal, New Hebrides, Hellenic, Atacama - Pilot, Vescovo to all of them)

> "The Limiting Factor normally operates from a dedicated support vessel, the DSSV Pressure Drop" -> Inkfish has renamed the support vessel the "Dagon"

> "The main battery . ." should be plural (as in "main batteries" or alternatively "main external battery banks". There are two external high-power battery packs of three batteries each. These racks of three were jettisonable in an emergency (in case main weighs did not release, which never happened). Inside the pressure capsule were two internal batteries, chargeable from the high-power batteries carried externally, and four emergency batteries. For some long missions this was changed to a 3+3 internal/emergency battery configuration.

> Ergonomics section: On later missions from 2020-2022, a single 4K camera was installed facing forward, just starboard of the three viewing portals, which took the first 4K-resolution film of the Titanic during 2019 and high-resolution imagery on all future dives.

> Five Deeps Expedition: I think it is important to correct that we did not dive to the deepest point of the South Sandwich Trench (the Meteor Deep) as it states, but rather, to the deepest point of the South Sandwich Trench *in the Southern Ocean* which has since been formally named by IHO as the "Factorian Deep" which is in keeping with the tradition that Deeps are named after the vessel that first discovered or visited them. To date, there has been no human dive to the Meteor dive. The Five Deeps expedition tried but violent weather caused a collision between the Limiting Factor and Pressure Drop, aborting the dive due to damage sustained.

> Challenger Deep dive: Subsequent analysis of diving data led by former NOAA Administrator Dr. Kathy Sullivan and a team of oceanographers at NOAA determined that the maximum depth reached by the Limiting Factor, and the absolute depth of Challenger Deep, is 10,935 meters. See the peer-reviewed paper here: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2021.103644

Thank you for your solicitation of comments. I am happy to provide more detail or other comments if desired and I am directed to what you would like to know more about. I do think the article is a bit light on the dives from 2021-2022 which involved dives to many other trenches (listed above) as well as taking down the first woman to Challenger Deep (Dr. Kathy Sullivan), the first Asian (Dr. Y.T. Lin of Woods Hole), the first Micronesian (Dr. Nicole Yamase), the first person of Black ethnicity (Dr. Dawn Wright), as well as many others. Best regards, VV Vlvescovo (talk) 03:50, 20 July 2023 (UTC)