Since we have been introduced to the Looking Glass and there were people in it, this means the sub could not have been blown up. Surely Charlie won't be the only one to have scenes in this expensive set. This is a setup that the sub was not blown up. Otherwise no one will be able to leave the Looking Glass without suffering the effects of not decompressing. I can't imagine them introducing the underwater hatch that has been rumored for so long and not let someone be able to leave it and get back to report about it.

I never believed Locke blew up the sub anyway. There was reason he was wet on that dock. Plus that is what Locke does. He manipulates situations to his advantage. Hiding the sub gave him an ace in the hole.

I've always believed that he hid the sub, there was too much missing in between. Explains the wetness and makes everyone else think that it's gone.

Since we have been introduced to the Looking Glass and there were people in it, this means the sub could not have been blown up. Surely Charlie won't be the only one to have scenes in this expensive set. This is a setup that the sub was not blown up. Otherwise no one will be able to leave the Looking Glass without suffering the effects of not decompressing. I can't imagine them introducing the underwater hatch that has been rumored for so long and not let someone be able to leave it and get back to report about it.

I never believed Locke blew up the sub anyway. There was reason he was wet on that dock. Plus that is what Locke does. He manipulates situations to his advantage. Hiding the sub gave him an ace in the hole.

1: A swimmer would not suffer from decompression from leaving the Looking Glass and swimming to the surface. It's only under at the most 40 to 50 feet of water, and this is a depth which is completely safe to dive down and resurface from with no effects from the bends or any other decompression problems. Sponge and pearl divers throughout the world frequently dive to much deeper depths than that without incurring ill effects.

2: This set may not have been created for Lost. It might be that they are using some pre-existing facility on Oahu. Remember that Oahu has been the US Navy's Pacific Fleet headquarters for quite a number of years, and there are lots of old naval facilities on Oahu - especially around Pearl Harbor.

3: Locke was wet because he swam from the submarine back to the dock after setting the dynamite charge. A lot has been made over this, and it is in my opinion silly to try to make too much of it. The sub has been blown up, it is on the bottom of the lagoon with a hole in it. In my opinion, of course. It is also just as much in keeping with his character to have Locke get rid of the sub, which is subverting the pristine qualities of the Island... Plus, don't you think that the Others would have at least investigated the sub? It was only sitting on the bottom of the lagoon at the end of the dock - not deep at all. If Locke had thought that by just scuttling it and faking its destruction that the Others would not have discovered his ruse, that is rather short sighted of him... They could easily dive down, attach a cable to the sub, and haul it back up next to the dock to check it out. I just cannot buy into this theory that the sub was not blown up by Locke...

Far from having Charlie be the only one to have scenes in this set, I do agree with you that we'll see more of it in the future. But I don't think the submarine is working at the moment... It's blown up just like we were shown.

The sub is gone - let it be. The people in the water station are most likely trapped there since they are most likely hesitant to try and swim out to the surface and they probably don't know the sub is gone.

Plus, don't you think that the Others would have at least investigated the sub? It was only sitting on the bottom of the lagoon at the end of the dock - not deep at all.

I find that interesting as well. We see the large explosion. That means it was fairly close. I think it would be hard to fake a sunken sub. I have never been to the islands. Can I assume the water is pretty clear? Could they see the wreckage from their boat? Is Ben such a trusting person not to check out the wreckage.

I don't believe the sub is destroyed. But it's not necessary to decompress in that depth.

Is Ben such a trusting person not to check out the wreckage.

He was trusting enough not to have Sayid's backpack checked...

The sub is gone - let it be. The people in the water station are most likely trapped there since they are most likely hesitant to try and swim out to the surface and they probably don't know the sub is gone.

or they do know its gone and thats why they are so..."pi$$ed

Hot chic with gun: Ok Goldilocks rock star. What the hell happened to our sub. We've been here for days and theres a sale at Penny's.

He was trusting enough not to have Sayid's backpack checked...

You are forgetting that Ben wanted the sub blown up so he didnt have to send Juliet and Jack home. Ben left the explosives in there for Locke to find so he could blow up the sub. Bleh I hate sub talk and I got sucked into it.

3: Locke was wet because he swam from the submarine back to the dock after setting the dynamite charge. A lot has been made over this, and it is in my opinion silly to try to make too much of it. The sub has been blown up, it is on the bottom of the lagoon with a hole in it.When asked if the sub was destroyed, the producers said "no comment." They almost always debunk the "wacky" fan theories as soon as they are asked. Furthermore, they have specifically mentioned in two podcasts and one radio interview that Locke was wet when he was returning from the sub, drawing specific attention to that detail.

I'm pretty sure the chicks in the Looking Glass originally got there by way of sub, but have been stuck there since the sub was destroyed. Or there is another sub we don't know about. Either way, the original sub is out of commission, I'm sure.

1: 3: Locke was wet because he swam from the submarine back to the dock after setting the dynamite charge. A lot has been made over this, and it is in my opinion silly to try to make too much of it. The sub has been blown up, it is on the bottom of the lagoon with a hole in it. In my opinion, of course. It is also just as much in keeping with his character to have Locke get rid of the sub, which is subverting the pristine qualities of the Island... Plus, don't you think that the Others would have at least investigated the sub? It was only sitting on the bottom of the lagoon at the end of the dock - not deep at all. If Locke had thought that by just scuttling it and faking its destruction that the Others would not have discovered his ruse, that is rather short sighted of him... They could easily dive down, attach a cable to the sub, and haul it back up next to the dock to check it out. I just cannot buy into this theory that the sub was not blown up by Locke...

the only problem with this statement, the sub was touching the dock there was no need to swim, he didn't need to swim to get on the sub why would he need to swim to get off the sub it doesn't make sense.

the only problem with this statement, the sub was touching the dock there was no need to swim, he didn't need to swim to get on the sub why would he need to swim to get off the sub it doesn't make sense.

Maybe he attached the explosives to the outside hull of the sub to ensure structural destruction of the sub. That's always been what I assumed.

anyone with the means and where with all to purchase one submarine can probably afford two submarines. Dharma seems like a well funded operation.

1: A swimmer would not suffer from decompression from leaving the Looking Glass and swimming to the surface. It's only under at the most 40 to 50 feet of water, and this is a depth which is completely safe to dive down and resurface from with no effects from the bends or any other decompression problems. Sponge and pearl divers throughout the world frequently dive to much deeper depths than that without incurring ill effects.

.


Divers hold their breath for a few minutes. The max depth for unlimited time without decompression is 32 fee.

That station is deeper than 32 feet. Granted you can be at 40 feet for a long time, but more than an hour you have to decompress for a while.

Since we have been introduced to the Looking Glass and there were people in it, this means the sub could not have been blown up. Surely Charlie won't be the only one to have scenes in this expensive set. This is a setup that the sub was not blown up. Otherwise no one will be able to leave the Looking Glass without suffering the effects of not decompressing. I can't imagine them introducing the underwater hatch that has been rumored for so long and not let someone be able to leave it and get back to report about it.

I never believed Locke blew up the sub anyway. There was reason he was wet on that dock. Plus that is what Locke does. He manipulates situations to his advantage. Hiding the sub gave him an ace in the hole.


I bet they have SCUBA gear on the Looking Glass, it would be very very foolish to not have some, and you would just need to take your time coming up. It would be a standard safety protocol to have SCUBA gear in the hatch (I thought I saw tanks in the room with the sub dock as well).

I thought Ben tells people the Looking Glass is flooded, so no one goes there. Then the underwater hatchies may have been there for a while. They also might have been told the same thing as the Swan crew about quarantines and they should not leave till relieved.
About decompression, a diver needs to decompress from beathing compressed air. Gas' soluabity in the blood stream change with depth, I believe it is the Ideal Gas Law (PV=nRT). So a free diver, no air tanks, can go down as far as they can stand and shoot right back to the surface with no ill affects. Yet someone using SCUBA gear, breathing compressed air, may have to decompress. It really depends on the depth and duration of the dive.

I bet they have SCUBA gear on the Looking Glass, it would be very very foolish to not have some, and you would just need to take your time coming up. It would be a standard safety protocol to have SCUBA gear in the hatch (I thought I saw tanks in the room with the sub dock as well).


I agree, and they could have taken Scuba gear to get down there. Those ladies may not even be from Ben's group. They could possibly be from Dharma, there to repair it since it stopped transmitting the sonar ping.

Did anyone get a good look at the Looking Glass Dharma Symbol....? I noticed it was stamped on the roof of the facility as Charlie swam down, and also on the Right wall as Charlie got out of the water. I couldn't quit make out what it looked like.

yeah I don't think the Looking Glass is down deep enough to worry about decompression. After all, you can see it from the surface of the water. The only reason they would use the Sub to access it instead of scuba gear would be to transport goods or several people at once.

If you believe the schematic, it shows the depth of the station to be 70 meters... that's over 200 feet...
Either the schematic is wrong or for a different underwater station, or Charlie is a fantastic diver...

Since we have been introduced to the Looking Glass and there were people in it, this means the sub could not have been blown up. Surely Charlie won't be the only one to have scenes in this expensive set. This is a setup that the sub was not blown up. Otherwise no one will be able to leave the Looking Glass without suffering the effects of not decompressing. I can't imagine them introducing the underwater hatch that has been rumored for so long and not let someone be able to leave it and get back to report about it.

I don't think the sub was blown up either, but seeing people in the Looking Glass isn't proof of it. They are probably stationed there and don't leave very often. Or, it could be that they aren't even Others -- maybe they're Dharma people.

the water didnt have to necessarily come from swimming. You set off a detonation on a sub there is going to be a considerable spray. Personally I choose not to debate the sub because its sort of irrelevant for the moment but I wouldnt be surprised if it was still about. But if you want an explanation as to why Locke would be wet otherwise, I am thinking that whole dock got doused.

Locke was wet on the dock before the explosion.

Maybe he attached the explosives to the outside hull of the sub to ensure structural destruction of the sub. That's always been what I assumed.

Attaching the explosives outside the sub doesn't make sense, though. They would do more damage if detonated inside.

I bet they have SCUBA gear on the Looking Glass, it would be very very foolish to not have some, and you would just need to take your time coming up. It would be a standard safety protocol to have SCUBA gear in the hatch (I thought I saw tanks in the room with the sub dock as well).

Yeah, I'm sure they do have SCUBA gear down there. This screencap shows what I assume are oxygen tanks: http://gallery.lost-media.com/displayimage-1291-955.html

If you believe the schematic, it shows the depth of the station to be 70 meters... that's over 200 feet...
Either the schematic is wrong or for a different underwater station, or Charlie is a fantastic diver...

Yeah that's gotta be some kind of error. You could see the station from the surface of the water and it took Charlie like 2 minutes to get to it (using only one arm to swim, no less...I guess he is a fantastic diver...lol)

Yeah, I'm sure they do have SCUBA gear down there. This screencap shows what I assume are oxygen tanks: http://gallery.lost-media.com/displayimage-1291-955.html

I don't think those are intended for SCUBA use.
In another shot, we get a better look at their configuration. Each one his hooked up to a connection hose, which runs through some sort of indicator panel.
I can't imagine they'd want to have 8 tanks continuously hooked up to an air pump.
Unless they've got 8 people on the station, and a critical requirement to have all 8 tanks guaranteed full and ready to go... I've never seen a dive shop with something like this, and those places fill up tons of tanks each day...

My theory is that these tanks are somehow related to the air supply of the station itself. They'd need some serious C02 scrubbers to make that work, with the volume of the station, or might have some really strange nitrox-like atmosphere...

But I'm thinking that they're not for SCUBA. I'd imagine they'd have wet suits and other SCUBA gear along with the tanks. We see a wet suit over near Charlie's position, so I'd imagine they'd keep the 3 or 4 tanks (for 2 people) over there.

3: Locke was wet because he swam from the submarine back to the dock after setting the dynamite charge. A lot has been made over this, and it is in my opinion silly to try to make too much of it. The sub has been blown up, it is on the bottom of the lagoon with a hole in it.
Sorry? Since when do you have to swim from a boat to the dock, when the boat is tied to the dock? He wasn't wet when he climbed into the sub. And he only had one C4 charge, so if he went into the sub to set the charge, he didn't swim under it to set another one on the outside. And whatever blew up, blow up at the dock, not away from it.

Plus, don't you think that the Others would have at least investigated the sub? It was only sitting on the bottom of the lagoon at the end of the dock - not deep at all. If Locke had thought that by just scuttling it and faking its destruction that the Others would not have discovered his ruse, that is rather short sighted of him... They could easily dive down, attach a cable to the sub, and haul it back up next to the dock to check it out. I just cannot buy into this theory that the sub was not blown up by Locke...

I would assume they don't have the equipment, or probably the expertise, to fix the sub if it had any extensive damage. Most of the specialized expertise would have been lost of the purge. If they are capable of a salvage mission, I don't know, but they would not have the will as they have other things on their minds.

Far from having Charlie be the only one to have scenes in this set, I do agree with you that we'll see more of it in the future. But I don't think the submarine is working at the moment... It's blown up just like we were shown.

Well, that's the biggest indication that the sub was not blown up, rather than Locke simply being wet. They did show us an explosion on the dock, but they did not show us the sub, or anything else other than dock, getting blown up. If the sub had been blown up, and there wasn't supposed to be a question about it, they would have shown it in the explosion scene.

Divers hold their breath for a few minutes. The max depth for unlimited time without decompression is 32 fee.

That station is deeper than 32 feet. Granted you can be at 40 feet for a long time, but more than an hour you have to decompress for a while.

First off, we saw the station from the surface of the sea when Charlie and Desmond were in the outrigger. You could make out some of the details of the station from the surface. I am drawing on personal experience of having sailed and dived in the Pacific. But in addition, my Oceanography textbook states that as sunlight penetrates seawater it rapidly is absorbed. At 10 meters (30 feet), only 15% of sunlight is present, which means that anything lower than that becomes effectively invisible from the surface of the sea. From the clarity of how well they could see the station, I would say that the top of the building is around 20 feet below the surface, making the opening at the sub pen around 30 to 35 feet - maybe 40 at the deepest.

However, it is still a mute point. Inside the Looking Glass they will be most likely maintaining the air pressure at sea level pressure. So it is unnecessary to decompress because they are not at a higher level of pressure inside the station. Although the figures you give are correct for diving, they do not hold for such a place as the Looking Glass because they are not living at that pressure. If they jumped into the water, then they'd be at the higher pressure from the compression of the water on them, but not while they're inside the station.

However, it is still a mute point.

I think the word you are looking for is "moot."

I bet they have SCUBA gear on the Looking Glass, it would be very very foolish to not have some, and you would just need to take your time coming up. It would be a standard safety protocol to have SCUBA gear in the hatch (I thought I saw tanks in the room with the sub dock as well).

Yeah, Good Call NextOne! Take a look at these screencaps. It looks like there's some air tanks at least in screencap number two:

Cap One (http://bp0.blogger.com/_8HhjIy50yEY/Rku-f2noekI/AAAAAAAAAEo/30FKFQFlbLA/s1600-h/both.girls.in.lg.JPG)

Cap Two (http://bp3.blogger.com/_8HhjIy50yEY/RkvhImnoewI/AAAAAAAAAGM/t7lEWW9KOqI/s1600-h/lg2.JPG)

Cap Three (http://bp2.blogger.com/_8HhjIy50yEY/Rku-QWnoeiI/AAAAAAAAAEY/pAXUlA9jDRw/s1600-h/inside.lg.JPG)

Cap Four (http://bp1.blogger.com/_8HhjIy50yEY/Rkvg6GnoevI/AAAAAAAAAGE/kb3ZF95PSN8/s1600-h/lg.JPG)

2: This set may not have been created for Lost. It might be that they are using some pre-existing facility on Oahu. Remember that Oahu has been the US Navy's Pacific Fleet headquarters for quite a number of years, and there are lots of old naval facilities on Oahu - especially around Pearl Harbor.

My first thought was that it looked an awful lot like the set from the movie Abyss...

About decompression, a diver needs to decompress from beathing compressed air. Gas' soluabity in the blood stream change with depth, I believe it is the Ideal Gas Law (PV=nRT). So a free diver, no air tanks, can go down as far as they can stand and shoot right back to the surface with no ill affects. Yet someone using SCUBA gear, breathing compressed air, may have to decompress. It really depends on the depth and duration of the dive.

Right, but the air in the Looking Glass station is necessarily compressed. It's just a question of how deep the station is and how compressed the air therefore is. I'm sure they could work something out if they wanted to get out. Or they could just go through the wormhole. ;)

I thought Ben tells people the Looking Glass is flooded, so no one goes there. Then the underwater hatchies may have been there for a while. They also might have been told the same thing as the Swan crew about quarantines and they should not leave till relieved.
About decompression, a diver needs to decompress from beathing compressed air. Gas' soluabity in the blood stream change with depth, I believe it is the Ideal Gas Law (PV=nRT). So a free diver, no air tanks, can go down as far as they can stand and shoot right back to the surface with no ill affects. Yet someone using SCUBA gear, breathing compressed air, may have to decompress. It really depends on the depth and duration of the dive.

Actually, that's not quite how it works. Whether you are diving with compressed air tanks or just holding your breath, as you go deeper into water the weight of all that water above you presses against your body - compressing it. This additional pressure is transfered inside your own body - in effect making your body compressed just as much as the water around you is. Follow me so far? Your body does tend to resist this compression, but over time it adjusts to become the same pressure as the surrounding environment. This is why the longer you stay at depth, the more the effect it will have on you.

So, your blood becomes compressed by all the water above your body. In compressing it, your blood also compresses all the gases and other thingies that are absorbed in it as well. Your blood can absorb more gas at greater pressure than at less pressure. Think about a soda can. When it is closed the CO2 inside is absorbed in solution. But once the top is open and the pressure decreases, then the soda pop solution's ability to absorb the gas decreases as pressure decreases. The result is that a bunch of CO2 bubbles are formed as the gas comes out of solution and once again becomes a gas.

So, as you come up to the surface of the water, your blood starts to decompress as the outside pressure lets up, just like if a soda can is opened. Nitrogen - which is present in your body - has a very fast rate of being discharged from solution after pressure is relieved, and so it is the gas that first starts forming bubbles in your bloodstream upon decompression. The result is that your bloodstream becomes full of bubbles of nitrogen - something that is horribly devastating to the body's system, and can actually kill people or turn them into vegetables from brain damage.

Now, this will happen regardless of whether you're breathing pressurized air in scuba tanks, or just holding your breath. The nitrogen in the blood stream is what is decompressing as you come to the surface, and it has nothing to do with where you're getting your air from. Rather, it has to do with the outside pressure of the water against your body, and how it changes as you move from one depth to another.

Personally, I think the two Dharmettes are experiencing the same thing our Losties are going through, but are still brand new to it. They've been stranded at the Looking Glass for almost a week now, and their food supply is running out. I bet the sub would be used to periodically replenish their supplies, a la the pallet drop, but otherwise they are stationed down there for an extended period, a la Mikhail with the Flame. They are Lost and have been told that it is nigh impossible to get to the station AND back to the surface, so they're stuck there and freakin' out, man.

P.S. I think the Galaga is toast and Locke was wet because he's planted more C4 below the dock in case of a rescue attempt...

However, it is still a mute point. Inside the Looking Glass they will be most likely maintaining the air pressure at sea level pressure. So it is unnecessary to decompress because they are not at a higher level of pressure inside the station. Although the figures you give are correct for diving, they do not hold for such a place as the Looking Glass because they are not living at that pressure. If they jumped into the water, then they'd be at the higher pressure from the compression of the water on them, but not while they're inside the station.

That is impossible since they have the "moon pool". If the air were at sea level presure, the water would rise until the air inside the station was compressed to the same pressure as the water at that depth.

Sorry? Since when do you have to swim from a boat to the dock, when the boat is tied to the dock?

Look, there are obviously a lot of people who are completely convinced the submarine was not blown up, and there are a lot of people who are convinced that it was. One group of people are going to be wrong about this, and we'll just have to wait and see which group that is going to be. At the moment the whole subject seems patently ridiculous to debate about since there's not going to be any resolution till we've been shown something to confirm it one way or the other, which may actually never happen.
100%
I think the word you are looking for is "moot."

LOL! Actually, it probably ought to be mute, since I just ought to keep my mouth shut about the whole subject of the submarine!

This might have been discussed in another thread, but I thought when they showed the previews for the finale that it looks like Desmond shoots a spear at Mikhail -- he must have had some way of getting to the underwater station, I don't think he'd go down without a way out

That is impossible since they have the "moon pool". If the air were at sea level presure, the water would rise until the air inside the station was compressed to the same pressure as the water at that depth.

Okay, you're right. :redface:
100%
If you believe the schematic, it shows the depth of the station to be 70 meters... that's over 200 feet...
Either the schematic is wrong or for a different underwater station, or Charlie is a fantastic diver...

I looked at the screencap (http://bp1.blogger.com/_8HhjIy50yEY/RkvfrGnoeqI/AAAAAAAAAFc/vwWLWaU4lDY/s1600-h/hd.lg1.JPG), and you're absolutely right! What's up with that? There's no way a person who hasn't been working up to that depth could survive a dive like that! No wonder Desmond said Charlie was going to die!

Well I was in that campaign for the sub not blowing up, and seeing this set, which presumably we'll see a lot more of next season.

The last podcast even mentioned that the finale will be establishing in large outline the theme of the next season

So, presuming that they don't want to have such a cool set only be used for two episodes, and the fact that a sub is designed to rise up in the middle of it, it seems pretty good that we'll see it again.

Aside from the physical evidence that the sub wasn't destroyed, you also have to consider the storytelling aspect. What is more dramatic? To have lock just march over to otherville and destroy the sub, an interesting set in and of itself, or for it to appear to be destroyed but then produced by Locke at some later point in the storyline?

The writers whole mode of storytelling is to seed events ahead of time so that when further revelations occur the viewer can look back and suddenly see the previously details come together. It's like any good mystery novel. The details are there in front of you the whole time and when the solution is given and those connections snap into place you get a satisfying catharsis.

We'll see the sub again, they went out of their way to put all sorts of odd details in place around the explosion, and now we have a sub hangar... the drama of storytelling demands that it show up again.

That is impossible since they have the "moon pool". If the air were at sea level presure, the water would rise until the air inside the station was compressed to the same pressure as the water at that depth.

No, the moon pool will be in an airtight room within the station (using airlocks). This is how it's done in ships (for obvious reasons), but it would also be beneficial to do this in a permanent underwater station too.

I don't think the sub was blown up either, but seeing people in the Looking Glass isn't proof of it. They are probably stationed there and don't leave very often. Or, it could be that they aren't even Others -- maybe they're Dharma people.



Locke was wet on the dock before the explosion.

Dang...youre right. Ok....I lose that round. I likes me rum in the evening and it doesnt help when I am trying to keep my bearings on ALL of these koooky details. Ok...I retract. As you were...

well just my 2 cents but the base was at the pressure of the moon pool. no question. That would require decompression if down there for more than an hour or 2 (dont have my dive tables handy). Now, the SeaLabs that the US Navy operated had a heliox mix (helium, oxygen, and nitrogen) to minimize the decompression time as helium is released much quicker than nitrogen. But, like breathing out of a helium balloon, your voice changes very noticably. That was not the case here. So I would argue that those people would require decompression, and that will take some time. Now its possible the seperate rooms are at sealevel, but that seems unlikely as we didnt hear any noticable airlock hiss...

maybe just a minor detail that was overlooked.

Okay, you're right. :redface:
100%


I looked at the screencap (http://bp1.blogger.com/_8HhjIy50yEY/RkvfrGnoeqI/AAAAAAAAAFc/vwWLWaU4lDY/s1600-h/hd.lg1.JPG), and you're absolutely right! What's up with that? There's no way a person who hasn't been working up to that depth could survive a dive like that! No wonder Desmond said Charlie was going to die!

Not true. He had weights on him - granted should have been a bit more...
Whe I did one of my first deep dives to 100 ft, it was really quick getting down, even with wetsuit and tank which tend to make you more buoyant. In just clothes with an extra 14 lbs straight wait and swimming - easy to go to 70ft.

As for decompression - free divers can regularly go to almost 200 ft. Grranted - they do practice, but with your own air (not compressed) if will expand at the same level as inhaled - the key is to just exhale on the way up. Compressed air is different - you inhale at a lower depth and then it expands as you rise - Can do it w.o decompression but REALLY next to exhale.

As for the looking glass having pressurized air etc... You can set whatever pressure you would like on a closed system. It could be sea level pressure. Ever hold a drinking glass vertical and push it underwater in the tub? You can push it to the bottom and still keep the same air in there. Just put some weights on top of it (or on the lower edges, and it stays.

Others have said it by now, but all we need is an airlock. The moon pool should be the only part of the station above water pressure. Even if they don't show one, we might as well assume it's there - why would anyone build an underwater station that you can only spend a few hours in?

But these are the same people who built a radio jamming station underwater... so who knows?

As for the looking glass having pressurized air etc... You can set whatever pressure you would like on a closed system. It could be sea level pressure. Ever hold a drinking glass vertical and push it underwater in the tub? You can push it to the bottom and still keep the same air in there. Just put some weights on top of it (or on the lower edges, and it stays.

But the air in the glass is compressed as you take it underwater! If you took that glass down 30 feet in the ocean, the volume of air would halve.

As for decompression - free divers can regularly go to almost 200 ft. Grranted - they do practice, but with your own air (not compressed) if will expand at the same level as inhaled - the key is to just exhale on the way up. Compressed air is different - you inhale at a lower depth and then it expands as you rise - Can do it w.o decompression but REALLY next to exhale.

Divers breathe out as they surface to avoid lung overexpansion. Nitrogen build up (the bends) is a totally different issue.

Divers hold their breath for a few minutes. The max depth for unlimited time without decompression is 32 fee.

That station is deeper than 32 feet. Granted you can be at 40 feet for a long time, but more than an hour you have to decompress for a while.

The paper says it's about 65 meters down:
http://bp3.blogger.com/_RrObyQ3XzcY/RkzHV1YigcI/AAAAAAAAFeA/uSOeumrQ8iM/s1600-h/hits-promo10.jpg
That's like 200 feet. I believe some decompression after a long time down might be necessary. Even with weights, that's a long way to dive down. Charlie has come a long way from that little boy that looked nothing like him at the public pool.

one thing comes to mind: Joanna!

First

If the Sub is not destroyed it will be the all time dumbest suspension of reality on the show. And thats saying a lot on a show with magic boxes

There is no way humanly possible that they didnt go to the end of the dock and see if the sub was really blown up. If your sub blew up--would you or anyone go see if it was-----No--- you would just walk away and never go to end of the dock again

2nd..they said Locke blew up the sub about 20 times. Yet 1 "no comment" means it didnt? They are probably saying no comment because the real reason why Locke was wet is still a mystery that does have meaning

3rd--decompression? Sorry that makes no sense. Dont worry..I dont make sense either :)

Last..its completely inconsistent with Lockes moves and makes his story of fear meaningless. As a plot point it is also meaningless--as they could always write in that there are 2 subs or countless other ways off the island

The important thing about the station no one is mentioning is it was manned by Woman. Maybe they're hiding from Ben

The sub is gone - let it be. The people in the water station are most likely trapped there since they are most likely hesitant to try and swim out to the surface and they probably don't know the sub is gone.


So why was Locke wet when he was on the dock? If that's never explained, it'll be a bizzare red herring.

Want to sleep with the fishes and don't want to wear concrete booties ? Maybe it's just a franchise of the Jules Vern Undersea hotel ? Maybe they drew guns because they don't want anyone else in on the deal. And no, the submarine is not still around.

Although the underwater hotel may sound like the latest tourist fun spot, Jules' Undersea Lodge, actually began its existence as La Chalupa research laboratory, an underwater habitat used to explore the continental shelf off the coast of Puerto Rico. The authenticity of the underwater habitat is what really sets it apart from amusement parks and other similar attractions. The mangrove lagoon in which Jules' is located is a natural nursery area for many reef fish. Tropical angelfish, parrotfish, barracuda, and snappers peek in the windows of the habitat, while anemones, sponges, oysters and feather duster worms seem to cover every inch of this underwater world. Guests of the Lodge explore their marine environment with scuba gear provided by Jules' Undersea Lodge and are given an unlimited supply of tanks. Jules' Undersea Lodge may have a comfortable futuristic decor, but its sense of history is inescapable. It is the first and only underwater hotel, but is also the first underwater research lab to have ever been made accessible to the average person.

“Marine life is actually enhanced by the presence of an underwater structure”, explains Ian Koblick, owner and co-developer of the Lodge. “Jules’ Undersea Lodge serves as an artificial reef, providing shelter and substrate for marine animals. And the flow of air to the Lodge constantly adds oxygen to the entire surrounding body of water, creating a symbiotic relationship between the technology of man and the beauty of nature.”

The entire structure of Jules’ Undersea Lodge is underwater, sitting up on legs approximately five feet off the bottom of the protected lagoon. The Lodge is filled with compressed air, which prevents the water from rising and flooding the rooms. A five by seven foot “moon pool” entrance in the floor of the building makes entering the hotel much like surfacing through a small swimming pool. Divers find themselves in the wet room, the center of three compartments that make up the underwater living quarters. The wet room, as the name implies, is where divers leave their gear, enjoy a quick hot shower and towel-off before entering the rest of the living area. Designed for comfort, the air conditioned living space has two private bed rooms and a common room. The eight by twenty foot common room is a multi-purpose room providing the galley, dining and entertainment areas. Each of the bedrooms and the common room is equipped with telephone, intercom, VCR/DVD and a stereo sound system. But the main focus of attention is the big 42 inch round window that graces each room. “Waking up to view a pair of angelfish looking in your bedroom window is a moment you'll never forget”, states Koblick.

Habitat operations are monitored by the Mission Director from the land-based “Command Center”, located at the edge of the Emerald Lagoon. The control center is connected to Jules’ Undersea Lodge by an umbilical cable which delivers fresh air, water, power, and communications. “The entire facility is monitored 24 hours a day by our staff”, says Koblick, “the Lodge has independent support systems as well as redundant backup systems. We’ve taken every step to ensure a safe yet exciting adventure for our guests”.

So why was Locke wet when he was on the dock? If that's never explained, it'll be a bizzare red herring.

Uhm, it has been explained quite well. It's just that some people don't like the explanation. Here's how it goes:

Locke was wet because:

1) he untied the sub from the dock
2) he pushed it out into deeper water away from the end of the dock
3) after giving it a shove he jumped on board
4) he then set the charges - probably inside the boat
5) he then jumped into the water and swam to the dock before the sub blows up

It's very basic, and I have no idea why people are so confused about this. It's right there staring you in the face. This whole business of the sub not getting blown up will go down as the biggest farce in the history of the series, I think. I can't believe how many people are getting sucked into the crazy notion that Locke faked the explosion... But, each to his or her own, I suppose. I've had my share of cockamamee theories proven wrong too. :rolleyes:

I never believed Locke blew up the sub anyway. There was reason he was wet on that dock. Plus that is what Locke does. He manipulates situations to his advantage. Hiding the sub gave him an ace in the hole.

I thought the sub was in clear view right before the explosion on the dock...did I miss something. Anyone got a screencap to support this theory? Also, on "The Answers" TPTB said that Locke doesn't want anyone to get off the Island. So I am now really interested in some proof that Locke could have hid the sub.

My theory has been somewhat different: That there has always been more than one sub...maybe docked at the Looking Glass Hatch all this time?

When asked if the sub was destroyed, the producers said "no comment."
When/where was this said? I'd like to hear it for myself.

My first thought was that it looked an awful lot like the set from the movie Abyss...

Similar, but it's much larger than the set from the Abyss (one of my all time favorite movies).

Hey guys

Why isnt anyone explaining exactly how water does not flood that moon pool room when its that far underwater? Isnt there suppose to be an outer chamber?

Plus, don't you think that the Others would have at least investigated the sub?

You mean like they investigated Desmond and his boat?

It was only sitting on the bottom of the lagoon at the end of the dock - not deep at all.

And we saw how deep it was when exactly? I must of missed that episode.

If Locke had thought that by just scuttling it and faking its destruction that the Others would not have discovered his ruse, that is rather short sighted of him... They could easily dive down, attach a cable to the sub, and haul it back up next to the dock to check it out.

Haul it back up with what?

Far from having Charlie be the only one to have scenes in this set, I do agree with you that we'll see more of it in the future. But I don't think the submarine is working at the moment... It's blown up just like we were shown.

We were shown an explosion, I did not see submarine parts flying everywhere, did you?

Hey guys

Why isnt anyone explaining exactly how water does not flood that moon pool room when its that far underwater? Isnt there suppose to be an outer chamber?

The air is not displaced by the water, as long as there is not a leak in the chamber above the water line of the moon pool. Take a bowl, hold it perfectly upside down, and submerge it into water. The water will cause the air to compress slightly, but it will not displace the air unless the bowl is tipped sideways because they air has pressure of its own to counteract the water pressure. As air is lighter than water, the path the air would want to take would be up towards the surface, but the bowl's shape is keeping that from happen. If you were to start tilting the bowl, eventually the air would escape towards the surface of the water.

... The people in the water station are most likely trapped there since they are most likely hesitant to try and swim out to the surface and they probably don't know the sub is gone.
I would think it likely that an underwater station would have scuba gear available. Also I think it would be a short swim to the surface, after all Charlie did it in just a minute or two and going up will be faster than going down even with a weight belt.

I would think it likely that an underwater station would have scuba gear available. Also I think it would be a short swim to the surface, after all Charlie did it in just a minute or two and going up will be faster than going down even with a weight belt.

Here ya go (http://bp3.blogger.com/_8HhjIy50yEY/RkvhImnoewI/AAAAAAAAAGM/t7lEWW9KOqI/s1600-h/lg2.JPG). Notice the air tanks along the wall...
100%
Originally Posted by Saukkomies http://thefuselage.com/Threaded/images/FuselageGreen/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://thefuselage.com/Threaded/showthread.php?p=1557224#post1557224) Plus, don't you think that the Others would have at least investigated the sub? You mean like they investigated Desmond and his boat? As soon as the Others found out about Desmond's boat, they immediately took steps to investigate and seize it. What is your point? That they hadn't known about it all that while? It seems like it was hidden in a pretty sheltered cove. Plus, they have had no way of finding anything out about Desmond, because they only had clues as to who he might be in the outside world after they lost their outside communication. It was only sitting on the bottom of the lagoon at the end of the dock - not deep at all. And we saw how deep it was when exactly? I must of missed that episode.
Lagoons (such as pictured in the scene) are not typically very deep. But who knows, maybe it's very deep and the sub sunk a long way. How then would it still be reachable by Locke or anyone else? If you're saying that the sub is still functional and operational, if it's been sunk to the bottom of a very deep lagoon, and no one can get to it, then it is for all intents and purposes destroyed, regardless of whether it was blown up or not... If Locke had thought that by just scuttling it and faking its destruction that the Others would not have discovered his ruse, that is rather short sighted of him... They could easily dive down, attach a cable to the sub, and haul it back up next to the dock to check it out. Haul it back up with what? A cable and hook. The Others have another boat that has probably has a winch on it - we saw it at the end of "Stranger in a Strange Land". And even if it didn't have a winch, they could rig up a boom on it...
Far from having Charlie be the only one to have scenes in this set, I do agree with you that we'll see more of it in the future. But I don't think the submarine is working at the moment... It's blown up just like we were shown. We were shown an explosion, I did not see submarine parts flying everywhere, did you?
All Locke had to do was blow a hole in the bottom of the hull, not out of the top of the sub. We saw debris in the fire plume, not machinery parts. I think you're being way too picky here. Face it, the sub was blown up. There's no super secret here - it's gone, arrivederci, sayonara, adios, hasta la vista, bebe! No more sub.

1: A swimmer would not suffer from decompression from leaving the Looking Glass and swimming to the surface. It's only under at the most 40 to 50 feet of water, and this is a depth which is completely safe to dive down and resurface from with no effects from the bends or any other decompression problems. Sponge and pearl divers throughout the world frequently dive to much deeper depths than that without incurring ill effects.
According to this screencap
http://gallery.lost-media.com/displayimage.php?pid=99006&fullsize=1
the entrance to the Moon Pool is at 70 metres depth thats 229 feet deep.
Good luck getting down there, let alone trying to get back up.

According to sources http://www.pbs.org/saf/1102/teaching/teaching.htm second paragraph, for every 10 meters depth, it's equal to one earth atmosphere, so 70 meters would be surface pressure (14.7 psi) plus 7 atmospheres = 8 atmospheres. That would be117.6 pounds per square inch of pressure over every inch if his body.
I don't see it happenin.

According to this screencap
http://gallery.lost-media.com/displayimage.php?pid=99006&fullsize=1
the entrance to the Moon Pool is at 70 metres depth thats 229 feet deep.
Good luck getting down there, let alone trying to get back up.

According to sources http://www.pbs.org/saf/1102/teaching/teaching.htm second paragraph, for every 10 meters depth, it's equal to one earth atmosphere, so 70 meters would be surface pressure (14.7 psi) plus 7 atmospheres = 8 atmospheres. That would be117.6 pounds per square inch of pressure over every inch if his body.
I don't see it happenin.

This actually has been discussed in detail in a couple of other threads. Something doesn't jive with that diagram's depth key. Someone proposed the theory that it is a glitch in the properties department. Someone else suggested it's a diagram for an entirely different station (which I personally do not believe, since the rabbit hatch design is seen on the diagram and on the top of the station as Charlie is diving down to it). It's just "one of those things", I suppose... At any rate, since they have scuba gear down in the Bunny Hatch, it is a moot point...

Uhm, it has been explained quite well. It's just that some people don't like the explanation. Here's how it goes:

Locke was wet because:

1) he untied the sub from the dock
2) he pushed it out into deeper water away from the end of the dock
3) after giving it a shove he jumped on board


Even with a boat floating in water you have inertia to contend with. A sub that size would have a fair amount of mass. So now the island cured Locke of a hernia too? :biggrin:

Charlie diving 70 meters that easily doesn't seem likely to me. But on the other hand given the clarity of the water 7 meters would make sense since they could see the facility from the surface. But why would you build an underwater submarine dock in water that shallow? Things just don't seem to add up here. :confused:

Uhm, it has been explained quite well. It's just that some people don't like the explanation. Here's how it goes:

Locke was wet because:

1) he untied the sub from the dock
2) he pushed it out into deeper water away from the end of the dock
3) after giving it a shove he jumped on board
4) he then set the charges - probably inside the boat
5) he then jumped into the water and swam to the dock before the sub blows up

It's very basic, and I have no idea why people are so confused about this. It's right there staring you in the face. This whole business of the sub not getting blown up will go down as the biggest farce in the history of the series, I think. I can't believe how many people are getting sucked into the crazy notion that Locke faked the explosion... But, each to his or her own, I suppose. I've had my share of cockamamee theories proven wrong too. :rolleyes:
Yes that is very basic. He pushed the boat out (I guess cause it was a nice dock and he didn't want to ruin it), then jumped on, then set charges, then jumped off and swam back to the dock, and then the dock exploded. Basic is the word for it! ;)

You can pretty much see the whole dock when it explodes, if only for a few frames, and there's no sub there.
100%
Something doesn't jive with that diagram's depth key. Someone proposed the theory that it is a glitch in the properties department. Someone else suggested it's a diagram for an entirely different station (which I personally do not believe, since the rabbit hatch design is seen on the diagram and on the top of the station as Charlie is diving down to it). It's just "one of those things", I suppose... At any rate, since they have scuba gear down in the Bunny Hatch, it is a moot point...

Well there are structural differences as well. Since it looks like it is some kind of initial design or concept diagram, I'd say they just made some changes to the initial plan, including changing the build site to a shallower location. (Also, it's "jibe" not "jive". Sorry -- pet peeve. :redface:)
100%
Why isnt anyone explaining exactly how water does not flood that moon pool room when its that far underwater? Isnt there suppose to be an outer chamber?

The water will rise up through the moon pool opening if, and only if, the pressure of the water at that depth is greater than the pressure of the air in the room. If the air pressure is lower, the water would rise until the air become compressed to that pressure, and then it would be at equalibrium and stop. So basically, the deeper the Bunny Hatch, the greater the air pressure needs to be inside. You could either keep the entire station at that air pressure, or, if it were at some extreme depth and pressure, you could, as you indicate, have the moon pool room be an isolated chamber connected by air locks to a lower-pressured dwelling area.

Charlie diving 70 meters that easily doesn't seem likely to me. But on the other hand given the clarity of the water 7 meters would make sense since they could see the facility from the surface. But why would you build an underwater submarine dock in water that shallow? Things just don't seem to add up here. :confused:

70 feet would actually make the most sense. Props error?
Deep enough to not be readily visible and shallow enough to do a free dive w/ weights.

Here ya go (http://bp3.blogger.com/_8HhjIy50yEY/RkvhImnoewI/AAAAAAAAAGM/t7lEWW9KOqI/s1600-h/lg2.JPG). Notice the air tanks along the wall...
Those are not scuba tanks.
Scuba tanks contain compressed air, NOT compressed oxygen.
According to this HazMat warning label colorcode chart
http://www.hz.genium.com/images/pos_haz.gif
the color codes on those tanks indicate that at least half of them contain oxygen, there's even an Oxygen Warning sign above the manifolds that they are attached to.

Those are not scuba tanks.
Scuba tanks contain compressed air, NOT compressed oxygen.
According to this HazMat warning label colorcode chart
http://www.hz.genium.com/images/pos_haz.gif
the color codes on those tanks indicate that at least half of them contain oxygen, there's even an Oxygen Warning sign above the manifolds that they are attached to.

RichLost,

Thanks for the link, but actually the HazMat label you're refering to is not correct. The warning plaques on that sight are specifically for putting on the side of vehicles that are transporting hazardous material. The yellow-coloured plaque which I'm assuming you meant was to indicate Oxygen is actually not Oxygen at all, but an Oxidizer or Oxidizing Agent - something very different than Oxygen itself.

However, there IS a standard for warning labels for diving tanks containing compressed gases. It is based on the ISO 32 standard, which I could not find online (ISO does not like to release its information free to the public, but rather makes its money on requiring people to purchase their standards). I have worked in an engineering university's reference departement as a reference librarian, and so I know my standards! At any rate, here is an approximation of what these standards are: Diving Cylinder Labelling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diving_cylinder).

The important part of that page is quoted here (RAL refers to the international color standard used by industry) :


Air has either a white (RAL 9010) top and black (RAL 9005) band on the shoulder, or white (RAL 9010) and black (RAL 9005) "quartered" shoulders.
Heliox has either a white (RAL 9010) top and brown (RAL 8008) band on the shoulder, or white (RAL 9010) and brown (RAL 8008) "quartered" shoulders.
Nitrox, like Air, has either a white (RAL 9010) top and black (RAL 9005) band on the shoulder, or white (RAL 9010) and black (RAL 9005) "quartered" shoulders.
Pure oxygen has a white shoulder (RAL 9010).
Pure helium has a brown shoulder (RAL 9008).
Trimix has a white, black and brown segmented shoulder.
Now, take a look at this picture (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/Diving_cylinder_oxygen_label.JPG) of some cylindrical tanks of compressed Oxygen. Notice that the two labels on the tanks are the same ones that are on the holding containers of the compressed gas tanks in the Looking Glass screencap (http://bp3.blogger.com/_8HhjIy50yEY/RkvhImnoewI/AAAAAAAAAGM/t7lEWW9KOqI/s1600-h/lg2.JPG). Therefore, you were partly right! ;) Those tanks are indeed compressed Oxygen, but the labeling you refered to was not the correct type.


At any rate, pure (or nearly pure) compressed Oxygen is used by divers. Remember the movie "Jaws" where the scientist Matt Hooper (played by Richard Dreyfuss) was using compressed Oxygen to dive with? One of those cylinder bottles got stuck in the shark's jaws, and that led to its demise as Police Chief Brody shot the cylinder with his rifle while holding onto the mast of the sinking ship. Kaboom.

So, those bottles in the Looking Glass are Oxygen, and they're clearly labeled as such. And they are almost certainly used for diving purposes. That's my conclusion... IF I get a chance, I'll look up the ISO 32 standard at the library to see if it gives us any further information about the labeling, but I think we can safely assume that it's just as I've described above.

Thanks, RIchLost, for motivating me to do this - I love doing this sort of digging around for stuff. :biggrin:

100%

Even with a boat floating in water you have inertia to contend with. A sub that size would have a fair amount of mass. So now the island cured Locke of a hernia too? :biggrin:

I've pushed boats larger than that mini-sub off from moorings before. It does take a good bit of a push, but once you get the thing moving in a certain direction you can keep making it go that way with increasing ease by continuing to apply force.

Charlie diving 70 meters that easily doesn't seem likely to me. But on the other hand given the clarity of the water 7 meters would make sense since they could see the facility from the surface. But why would you build an underwater submarine dock in water that shallow? Things just don't seem to add up here. :confused:

yeah, I agree with you on that last bit - there's something fishy about the Looking Glass.

I've pushed boats larger than that mini-sub off from moorings before. It does take a good bit of a push, but once you get the thing moving in a certain direction you can keep making it go that way with increasing ease by continuing to apply force. A push strong enough to make the sub move a substantial distance from the dock would require a lot of force wouldn't it? :confused: Perhaps more than a single person giving it a shove? Once Locke no longer had the dock to brace against how would he provide continuing force? Tow it while swimming? That would be hard. A lot of time and effort to get it just a few feet more away from the dock when you don't know how fast the water gets deeper. Guess I will knock off posting and head for the coast to do some research. :biggrin:

70 feet would actually make the most sense. Props error?
Deep enough to not be readily visible and shallow enough to do a free dive w/ weights.

The current world record in free-diving is 183m (!), see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-diving

Granted, they use much more weight to get down fast, but hey, those rocks might have been super-heavy... So 70m doesn't seem totally unrealistic, especially since he didn't have to come back up again.

At any rate, pure (or nearly pure) compressed Oxygen is used by divers. Remember the movie "Jaws" where the scientist Matt Hooper (played by Richard Dreyfuss) was using compressed Oxygen to dive with? One of those cylinder bottles got stuck in the shark's jaws, and that led to its demise as Police Chief Brody shot the cylinder with his rifle while holding onto the mast of the sinking ship. Kaboom.

So, those bottles in the Looking Glass are Oxygen, and they're clearly labeled as such. And they are almost certainly used for diving purposes. That's my conclusion... IF I get a chance, I'll look up the ISO 32 standard at the library to see if it gives us any further information about the labeling, but I think we can safely assume that it's just as I've described above.

Thanks, RIchLost, for motivating me to do this - I love doing this sort of digging around for stuff. :biggrin:


Oxygen makes up only 21% of the air we breath at normal atmospheric pressure, ie. at sealevel. Enriched Air Nitrox, is air with up to 36% oxygen, this mixture is used to prevent nitrogen narcosis aka the bends. No matter what Brody said pure oxygen is not used for diving, and personally, I would not ever use the movie Jaws as a reference for arguing reality, not that Lost is either.
I noted that those tanks are attached to a manifold, possibly going to a mixing station for making an Enriched Air Nitrox mixture.
Bottom line is that those tanks, are not diving tanks.

Thanks to you, as well.

Oxygen makes up only 21% of the air we breath at normal atmospheric pressure, ie. at sealevel. Enriched Air Nitrox, is air with up to 36% oxygen, this mixture is used to prevent nitrogen narcosis aka the bends. No matter what Brody said pure oxygen is not used for diving, and personally, I would not ever use the movie Jaws as a reference for arguing reality, not that Lost is either.
I noted that those tanks are attached to a manifold, possibly going to a mixing station for making an Enriched Air Nitrox mixture.
Bottom line is that those tanks, are not diving tanks.

Thanks to you, as well.

It sounds like you have some experience with diving RichLost. So do I. Let's just agree to disagree here, since it seems as if you're convinced you are right and I'm wrong, and the same applies to me as well. BTW, I've dived with pure oxygen before... ;)

It sounds like you have some experience with diving RichLost. So do I. Let's just agree to disagree here, since it seems as if you're convinced you are right and I'm wrong, and the same applies to me as well. BTW, I've dived with pure oxygen before... ;)
Actually I have never dived before, but like you, I enjoy researching mundane topics and arguing pointless questions.
Thank for for your participation. Perhaps we shall meet again.

Actually I have never dived before, but like you, I enjoy researching mundane topics and arguing pointless questions.
Thank for for your participation. Perhaps we shall meet again.

I've enjoyed reading your posts in the past RichLost. I hope you don't take offense to my sometimes ruthless investigative style... I mean no offense. I think your finding those signs on the compressed gas tanks was pretty cool. :)

The air is not displaced by the water, as long as there is not a leak in the chamber above the water line of the moon pool. Take a bowl, hold it perfectly upside down, and submerge it into water. The water will cause the air to compress slightly, but it will not displace the air unless the bowl is tipped sideways because they air has pressure of its own to counteract the water pressure. As air is lighter than water, the path the air would want to take would be up towards the surface, but the bowl's shape is keeping that from happen. If you were to start tilting the bowl, eventually the air would escape towards the surface of the water.


Thanx

very cool indeed.

I've been thinking.............. Would you really want to shoot a gun inside of an underwater structure for fear of catostrophic decompression, and causing a possible collapse of the structure, let alone that fact that there is pure oxygen present. Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.
SCREENCAP (http://bp3.blogger.com/_8HhjIy50yEY/RkvhImnoewI/AAAAAAAAAGM/t7lEWW9KOqI/s1600-h/lg2.JPG)

Locke doesn't want to be rescue from the island, why would be pretend to blow up the sub? I think some people are being overly speculative and when they find out the sub was really blown up, it will be a let down for them.

I've been thinking.............. Would you really want to shoot a gun inside of an underwater structure for fear of catostrophic decompression, and causing a possible collapse of the structure, let alone that fact that there is pure oxygen present. Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.
SCREENCAP (http://bp3.blogger.com/_8HhjIy50yEY/RkvhImnoewI/AAAAAAAAAGM/t7lEWW9KOqI/s1600-h/lg2.JPG)Shooting guns on a submarine and on some space ships is standard movie fare and only results in catastrophe when it is in the script. With a submarine implosion there is a structural failure allowing the sub to be crushed by the pressure difference. I don't think the gun would blow a large enough hole in the moon chamber for a catastrophe, Esp if Charlie or the water under him stopped the bullet :biggrin: I believe, that air wouyld exit the bullet hole till the water level reached the same level as the hole or if the inside air pressure is less than the outside water pressure, water might enter through the bullet hole until pressures equalized. But perhaps they are using scaled down loads or frangible bullets to avoid such potential damage? Why would people in an isolated underwater facility anticipate hostile intruders and carry arms anyway? :confused:
I would not ever use the movie Jaws as a reference for arguing reality, not that Lost is either. Myth Busters tried to replicate "exploding a tank by shooting it with a high powered rifle", couldn't make it explode and they do love their explosions on that show.

Locke doesn't want to be rescue from the island, why would be pretend to blow up the sub? I think some people are being overly speculative and when they find out the sub was really blown up, it will be a let down for them.

The sub isn't going to force Locke to be rescued from the island. However, by saving it, he can possibly provide for getting the other Losties off the island, or else use it to gain tactical control of the island.

But it's not a matter of why, it's a matter of what. And what we saw does not jibe with him having blown up the sub.
100%
I don't think the gun would blow a large enough hole in the moon chamber for a catastrophe, Esp if Charlie or the water under him stopped the bullet :biggrin: I believe, that if the inside air pressure is less than the outside water pressure, water would enter through the bullet hole until pressures equalized or perhaps they are using scaled down loads or frangible bullets to avoid such potential damage? Why would people in an isolated underwater facility anticipate hostile intruders and carry arms anyway? :confused:

If the air pressure in the station (or in the moon chamber, if it's isolated from the rest of the station) were less than the outside water pressure, the water would be rising up through the moon pool until the air was compressed to the same pressure as the water. So the air pressure in the station is at the pressure of the water at the level of the moon pool's surface (and thus slightly greater than the water pressure outside the higher parts of the station). If they managed to shoot a hole in the wall, the air would escape through it, so the water level would rise to the level of the hole. Or if they shot through the ceiling of the whole station, it could flood the whole station, except for any trapped air in local pockets. But that looks like some seriously thick steel, so I don't think there's any chance of a handgun or a shotgun making a hole in it.

The sub isn't going to force Locke to be rescued from the island. However, by saving it, he can possibly provide for getting the other Losties off the island, or else use it to gain tactical control of the island.
That's pretty ambitious and while I can't rule it out, I won't hold my breath waiting for confirmation of it either. (continued below)

But it's not a matter of why, it's a matter of what. And what we saw does not jibe with him having blown up the sub.
I just watched the scene frame-by-frame and you can clearly see debris flying from the explosion. There's no way to mistake it from water or part of the dock (which is completely intact).

So what we saw does jibe quite well. Locke goes to the sub intending to blow it up, it blows up and we see the debris flying through the air, Locke apologizes to Jack for blowing up his only way off the island. There is however, no evidence to support the theory that Locke hid the sub somewhere and only pretended to blow it up.

And by the way, for the people who think a submarine would implode and not create an outward explosion... That's only true when the pressure under the water is greater then the pressure released by the explosion itself (ie: you have to be pretty deep). The sub was surfaced. ;)

I just watched the scene frame-by-frame and you can clearly see debris flying from the explosion. There's no way to mistake it from water or part of the dock (which is completely intact).

So what we saw does jibe quite well. Locke goes to the sub intending to blow it up, it blows up and we see the debris flying through the air, Locke apologizes to Jack for blowing up his only way off the island. There is however, no evidence to support the theory that Locke hid the sub somewhere and only pretended to blow it up.

Thank you for putting it so well! I just wish that these people who keep bringing this "sub not destroyed" thread up every chance they get would just forget about it finally...

3: Locke was wet because he swam from the submarine back to the dock after setting the dynamite charge. A lot has been made over this, and it is in my opinion silly to try to make too much of it.

Did you actually watch The Answers? They did not hesitate to clarify certain things such as Desmond really did crash the plane. Not once did they ever actually say he blew up the sub. At best, they seemed to insinuate he might have.

Why would they make such definitive statements about some things but skip this opportunity to clear the air on this topic?

Did you actually watch The Answers? They did not hesitate to clarify certain things such as Desmond really did crash the plane. Not once did they ever actually say he blew up the sub. At best, they seemed to insinuate he might have.

Why would they make such definitive statements about some things but skip this opportunity to clear the air on this topic?

Because it is so obvious. They probably didn't clear up a lot of things that were so obvious that they were not worth the air time to get into... They're probably just as disgusted with this subject as the rest of us who keep seeing it brought up each episode are... Just my opinion, of course.

That's pretty ambitious and while I can't rule it out, I won't hold my breath waiting for confirmation of it either. (continued below)


I just watched the scene frame-by-frame and you can clearly see debris flying from the explosion. There's no way to mistake it from water or part of the dock (which is completely intact).

So what we saw does jibe quite well. Locke goes to the sub intending to blow it up, it blows up and we see the debris flying through the air, Locke apologizes to Jack for blowing up his only way off the island. There is however, no evidence to support the theory that Locke hid the sub somewhere and only pretended to blow it up.

And by the way, for the people who think a submarine would implode and not create an outward explosion... That's only true when the pressure under the water is greater then the pressure released by the explosion itself (ie: you have to be pretty deep). The sub was surfaced. ;)

I find it amusing that Locke was able to take a random parcel of pre-wired C4 and know how to rig it to detonate like it was videogame C4 or something, nevermind turning into David Copperfield Jr and hiding a whole submarine from the uber-smart Others. But hey it must have happened because he was wet :). Maybe the island hid it for him...

If those underwater chicks are Others (or even if they are not) they must be freaked out since the EMP from the Swan would have messed there stuff up too. Although they wouldn't have lights in their station if it was actually an EMP and Locke wouldnt have been able to play chess on that computer. Sorry - Waaaaaay off-topic there.

I find it amusing that Locke was able to take a random parcel of pre-wired C4 and know how to rig it to detonate like it was videogame C4 or something, nevermind turning into David Copperfield Jr and hiding a whole submarine from the uber-smart Others. But hey it must have happened because he was wet :). Maybe the island hid it for him...

Yes, THAT is worth looking into... But it might be that Ben gave him a fuse and some blasting caps... Who knows?

Because it is so obvious. They probably didn't clear up a lot of things that were so obvious that they were not worth the air time to get into... They're probably just as disgusted with this subject as the rest of us who keep seeing it brought up each episode are... Just my opinion, of course.

I respectfully disagree. Please logically explain why:

1) Locke came back wet when he went into the sub dry.

AND

2) You can clearly see the top of the sub in the distance when Locke approaches the sub but not before the explosion (keep in mind a mock up would have been sufficient for continuity).


Take your time.

I respectfully disagree. Please logically explain why:

1) Locke came back wet when he went into the sub dry.

AND

2) You can clearly see the top of the sub in the distance when Locke approaches the sub but not before the explosion (keep in mind a mock up would have been sufficient for continuity).


Take your time.
I'll answer those..

1) It would make complete sense and is expected that explosives be placed on the outer hull of a sub if you wanted to breach it. And you'd obviously want this to happen below the water line. I don't know of any way to place explosives underneath the water without getting wet if all you have is the clothes on your back.

2) Simply put, the sub is obscured from view by the zoomed in framing of Locke's face. When the explosion occurs, it does so directly behind Locke's head in the same scene. To support that the sub really did blow up, we see plenty of debris flying through the air which is obviously not water, or part of the dock since we clearly see an intact dock afterwards.

I'm with Saukkomies that TPTB's answer to the question of whether or not the sub blew up was indeed based on it's obviousness. This isn't the first time they've done that either. I remember it happening when people questioned if the plane really tore apart and crashed or if everyone was drugged and the whole thing was some elaborate hoax. I don't want to listen through 30+ podcasts to find more example but if you do, I guarantee you'll them.

I respectfully disagree. Please logically explain why:

1) Locke came back wet when he went into the sub dry.

AND

2) You can clearly see the top of the sub in the distance when Locke approaches the sub but not before the explosion (keep in mind a mock up would have been sufficient for continuity).


Take your time.

I think TheIslandDemandsIt answered this fairly well, but I still believe Locke set the C4 inside the sub. At any rate, I did answer this earlier in this very thread, but here goes again:

1) Locke unties the sub from the dock.
2) Locke pushes the sub into deeper water so it will sink.
3) After he gets it moving away from the dock, he jumps on board the sub (I've done this a number of times with large boats, too).
4) Locke sets the charges on the sub.
5) Locke jumps in the water and swims back to the dock where he meets Jack and Juliet and company.
6) Kablooey!

The reason you see the sub in one scene and not the other is because Locke moved it to be further out away from the end of the dock where it would sink in deeper water. The direction of the camera made it so you couldn't see it from that one direction. However, there is a screencap somewhere that I've seen that clearly shows the conning tower of the sub as the explosion is taking place immediately behind it.

All of this is exactly what I would have done too. There's no bugabooo mystery about it.

2) Locke pushes the sub into deeper water so it will sink.


If he's going to blow it up, why the heck would he care if it was in deeper water?
100%

1) It would make complete sense and is expected that explosives be placed on the outer hull of a sub if you wanted to breach it. And you'd obviously want this to happen below the water line. I don't know of any way to place explosives underneath the water without getting wet if all you have is the clothes on your back.

If he put the charge outside the hull, why did he go inside and start flipping switches?


2) Simply put, the sub is obscured from view by the zoomed in framing of Locke's face. When the explosion occurs, it does so directly behind Locke's head in the same scene. To support that the sub really did blow up, we see plenty of debris flying through the air which is obviously not water, or part of the dock since we clearly see an intact dock afterwards.

Au contraire. And remind me not to leave you in charge of my dock. ;) (if I had a dock.)
tal0090.jpg (http://development.erikmartin.com/tal0090.jpg)
tal0053.jpg (http://development.erikmartin.com/tal0053.jpg)
Note the planks of wood flying through the air, the planks still attached to the dock blown upwards from underneath and burning, the lack of any debri other than wood in the air, the location of the explosion centered on the blown up part of the dock, and the big splash of water travelling through the space where the sub used to be. This is not a case for Sherlock Holmes. The only thing that's missing is a crawl on the bottom of the screen saying, "please give more weight to what you're seeing than to what you're expecting to see."


I'm with Saukkomies that TPTB's answer to the question of whether or not the sub blew up was indeed based on it's obviousness. This isn't the first time they've done that either. I remember it happening when people questioned if the plane really tore apart and crashed or if everyone was drugged and the whole thing was some elaborate hoax. I don't want to listen through 30+ podcasts to find more example but if you do, I guarantee you'll them.

I think the most relevent podcast would be the one where Damon asked "did he really blow up the sub?" and "what's the deal with Locke being soaking wet on the dock?" or something like that.
100%
I just watched the scene frame-by-frame and you can clearly see debris flying from the explosion. There's no way to mistake it from water or part of the dock (which is completely intact)

You 'avin' a laugh? Did you miss the frames above? Besides the one framed on Locke, they gave us two separate angles.

I'll answer those..

1) It would make complete sense and is expected that explosives be placed on the outer hull of a sub if you wanted to breach it. And you'd obviously want this to happen below the water line. I don't know of any way to place explosives underneath the water without getting wet if all you have is the clothes on your back.

Actually if you want to destroy a closed container of any sort, exploding from within is a MUCH better option. Don't believe me? Try this on for size . . .

DISCLAIMER: I wouldn't recommend actually doing this. This is a verbal illustration ONLY.

Get an M-80 explosive device (if you don't know, Google should help). Close your fist and set one on top of it. Now light it and let it explode. I'm sure your hand will be hurting on top and maybe a bit burnt, but other than that you should be fine once the ringing in your ears stops. Now . . . close your fist around one with the wick sticking out and light it. After you get back from the hospital and they have finished cutting off the mangled flesh that used to be your hand, tell me which makes more sense -- explosives inside or outside the sub?

Just in case you are worried the sub hull won't rupture, place the explosive in the control room. The sub won't be going anywhere even if it doesn't sink.

2) Simply put, the sub is obscured from view by the zoomed in framing of Locke's face. When the explosion occurs, it does so directly behind Locke's head in the same scene. To support that the sub really did blow up, we see plenty of debris flying through the air which is obviously not water, or part of the dock since we clearly see an intact dock afterwards.These two pictures in my opinion completely refute your assertion that Locke is obscuring the view.

http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t138/div2n/NoSub.png

http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t138/div2n/SubVisible2.png

we see plenty of debris flying through the air which is obviously not water, or part of the dock since we clearly see an intact dock afterwards.

Nothing we have seen in anyway shows us that the dock is intact after the explosion, the outer section of the dock is what is blowing up not the sub.

However, there is a screencap somewhere that I've seen that clearly shows the conning tower of the sub as the explosion is taking place immediately behind it.


Wrong. There is no such screencap.

And the idea that Locke for some mysterious reason PUSHED the submarine out from the dock is pretty ludicrous, and proven wrong by the fact that the explosion happens DIRECTLY behind Locke (Basically on the docks) and not out in the water.

Also there is no sense whatsoever in any way to placing the explosives outside and not inside the sub.

The sub is alive.


-Exodus

Actually if you want to destroy a closed container of any sort, exploding from within is a MUCH better option. Don't believe me? Try this on for size . . . The first M80 was filled with explosive and could not contain the force of the explosion, Locke lacked sufficient explosives to replicate that effect with the sub. The second M80 was subject to a dispersed charge and was shaped to deflect the blast of the first M80. I don't see this as a valid comparison to the sub which has ample volume to allow a small charge to dissipate its force without increasing interior pressure to the point of rupturing the hull. Locke's best bet was as you said to destroy vital equipment such as the controls. I see his other options as somehow placing the charge so that its blast was shaped and could pierce the hull or placing it to act as a trigger for a secondary blast such as one involving the diesel in the sub's tanks. To me the pictured explosion implies something more than just the explosives Locke had on hand went off.

Try your M80 reenactment by placing one inside a steel oil drum then placing the second against the outside. I bet the drum will survive either blast although the inside M80 would have a better chance of breaking the drums wall as it is on the inside of the arch. In my opinion the amount of explosive compared to the volume of the barrel/sub is too small to burst the container through increased pressure. In any case I don't think Locke would want to be inside and share an enclosed space with an explosion (Hard on the ears etc) so diving overboard to get outside the sub makes sense to me.

Maybe you should download the hd version so the picture is more clear for you. Also, it's common for a sub to have two skins. One inner, one outer. This design is used specifically to prevent hull breach.

The only switch Locke flipped was a light switch.

Nice try with the screen shows, however, you did not take shots when the sub is exploding so let me help you out...
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b112/image3000/locke.png
Explosion behind Locke, just like I said.

Nice try with the screen shows, however, you did not take shots when the sub is exploding so let me help you out...
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b112/image3000/locke.png
Explosion behind Locke, just like I said.

Yeah, the explosion is behind Locke, and they show the explosion from three different angles. Posting the one angle where we can't see what exactly is exploding doesn't prove that it's the sub, especially since other two angles show that it's the dock that's exploding. But even from that angle, we can see that the explosion is directly in line with the dock, not to the left of it where the sub was.

I think the Fuse' should add some sort of wagering feature!

ok to anwser your questions,

1. There is no sub. It is just a fake, it is not how they got to island. That is why juliette had to dedrugged first, cause they arrive in other way and then fake the climb out of the sub afterwars.

2. Locke wet . why, because he went into the fake sub and found it was fake, probably found it made of plywood and kicked a hole straigh thorugh the botTOM and got wet.

3. he blew up the fake sub.



Remember BEN LIES all the time.....

Yeah, the explosion is behind Locke, and they show the explosion from three different angles.
I was merely proving that yes there is indeed frames with the explosion occurring directly behind Locke's head. Mission accomplished.

I don't see how pushing a mini-sub is the same as pushing a large boat. Subs have more surface area underwater and would be much hard to push than a large boat, which floats on the surface. Locke could not have pushed that sub.

As for the Looking Glass, I would not want to be Charlie down there. The air definitely has to be compressed, either to keep the water back or or the air is compressed by the water itself. He would definitely suffer damage to his lungs if he was trying to resurface without breathing.

or they do know its gone and thats why they are so..."pi$$ed

Hot chic with gun: Ok Goldilocks rock star. What the hell happened to our sub. We've been here for days and theres a sale at Penny's.

"The South Beach Boutique is having a fire sale?"

I hope they have submarines on sale.

I was merely proving that yes there is indeed frames with the explosion occurring directly behind Locke's head. Mission accomplished.

I thought this was the premise of your mission:

2) Simply put, the sub is obscured from view by the zoomed in framing of Locke's face.

If you want to believe the sub still exists, fine. While there is no direct evidence to definitively say one way or another until we are explicitly told, there is evidence to provide plenty of doubt as to whether he actually blew it up. Personally, I argue the evidence seems to suggest not. Apparently you feel the opposite. I'm sure we'll know eventually.

Having the explosion directly behind Locke's head is actually evidence that the sub wasn't blown up. If the explosion had been to the left of Locke's head it would make more sense to say that sub blew up.

When this first came up as an issue in Par Avion I made a chart about the whole issue:

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s182/harpy_photo/lostsubnoblowchart.jpg

Having the explosion directly behind Locke's head is actually evidence that the sub wasn't blown up. If the explosion had been to the left of Locke's head it would make more sense to say that sub blew up.

When this first came up as an issue in Par Avion I made a chart about the whole issue:

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s182/harpy_photo/lostsubnoblowchart.jpg



I think you nailed it. That's exactly what we were shown. ....except I think Locke's legs are actually longer. ;)

I'm sure we'll know eventually.
Couldn't agree more. And when that time comes, if I was wrong, I'll have no problem admitting it. Hopefully others here (who think they know everything) can follow that mental lead.

It's now officially wednesday where I'm at. Can't wait to watch the finale tonight!!!

1: A swimmer would not suffer from decompression from leaving the Looking Glass and swimming to the surface. It's only under at the most 40 to 50 feet of water, and this is a depth which is completely safe to dive down and resurface from with no effects from the bends or any other decompression problems. Sponge and pearl divers throughout the world frequently dive to much deeper depths than that without incurring ill effects.

2: This set may not have been created for Lost. It might be that they are using some pre-existing facility on Oahu. Remember that Oahu has been the US Navy's Pacific Fleet headquarters for quite a number of years, and there are lots of old naval facilities on Oahu - especially around Pearl Harbor.

3: Locke was wet because he swam from the submarine back to the dock after setting the dynamite charge. A lot has been made over this, and it is in my opinion silly to try to make too much of it. The sub has been blown up, it is on the bottom of the lagoon with a hole in it. In my opinion, of course. It is also just as much in keeping with his character to have Locke get rid of the sub, which is subverting the pristine qualities of the Island... Plus, don't you think that the Others would have at least investigated the sub? It was only sitting on the bottom of the lagoon at the end of the dock - not deep at all. If Locke had thought that by just scuttling it and faking its destruction that the Others would not have discovered his ruse, that is rather short sighted of him... They could easily dive down, attach a cable to the sub, and haul it back up next to the dock to check it out. I just cannot buy into this theory that the sub was not blown up by Locke...

Far from having Charlie be the only one to have scenes in this set, I do agree with you that we'll see more of it in the future. But I don't think the submarine is working at the moment... It's blown up just like we were shown.

Hallelujah! At last some common sense being talked about the sub. One more thing though, if Otherville is in the middle of a valley, how and where exactly was the now-defunct sub docked?