let me get this straight

[calimac]

This is my understanding, from what I've read. Maybe it's wrong.

1. The mercenaries were advancing to invade Moscow, and then they just ... stopped?

This may actually be the dodging of a disaster. I'm not at all sure that replacing Putin with a mercenary general would be a good idea. Especially not for Ukraine, for instead of stopping the war he'd be likely to prosecute it less incompetently.

2. So the guy who ran the submarine knew that the carbon-fiber shell was not rated for multiple descents, but he built and used it anyway? Using aftermarket materials??

I read some editorial defending the guy on the grounds that you can't push the envelope of human achievement without taking risks. I'm familiar with that argument from discussions of NASA. The difference is, 1) this wasn't pushing the envelope of human achievement, this was sight-seeing jaunts; 2) when you're taking those risks, you minimize them by being as vigilant as possible, not by cutting corners; 3) when the risk is high, you don't take tourists along.

Comments

[cmcmck]

I think he thought people would come onside as they marched and he was wrong.

The right wing nationist milbloggers in Russia are now all over calling him out for copping out

[bibliofile]

1. Lukashenko of Belarus intervened and brokered a deal between both parties: talked Prigozhin into stopping short of Moscow (to avoid shedding Russian blood), got Putin to agree to no retaliation on Wagner troops (because they previously soldiered for Russia), and Prigozhin is to move to Belarus. AIUI, the Wagner troops will also leave the Russian city of Rostov.

[petrea_mitchell]

1. It is believed that Prigozhin was expecting some of the Russian military and/or internal security forces to join him. When they didn't, he took the way out that was offered.

2. He thought he knew better than the rating agencies.

[ranunculus]

I agree, a competent military leader is far more frightening than an incompetent, narcissistic one.

Not only did this guy take tourists on a experimental dive, not only did he use unproven materials; he used carbon fiber against the strong advice of one of the best experts in the world. https://www.sfchronicle.com/science/article/titanic-sub-search-18168078.php

[armiphlage]

If the cause of the incident was some weird previously-unknown interaction of seawater with carbon fibre epoxy at high pressure and low temperature after repeated cycles, then that would mean that they were pushing the envelope of what was known. Like the de Havilland Comet.

If the cause of the incident was just a pressure vessel imploding after cyclic stress, with a previously known failure mode, then that's not pushing the envelope, that's failing to follow industry best practice.

[andrewducker]

Apparently also threats against his family:
https://inews.co.uk/news/world/clues-why-prigozhin-abandoned-coup-russia-wagner-2435778

(Although if he didn't expect this then he was an idiot)

[ranunculus]

As far as I can tell this was a case of a developer recklessly disregarding all the evidence, including all the available testing results, that showed that the vessel would not be structurally sound for the task it was designed to do. What is more, I think he was denied licensing on the basis that his material choices were not sound. Indeed the Icarus syndrome.