they were hearing sounds and now talking about a debris field, the ocean can be a place where there's a lot of sound and there are a lot of debris fields, night. >> exactly. i mean, we're close to the "titanic." the "titanic" broke apart on the surface. there's a lot of debris from "titanic" all over that area. so, you know, there's a lot of debris from lots of things. when we did twa flight 800 there was debris that stretched for a lot of the area that we searched in. >> i can't thank you enough for your time. i appreciate it. this is breaking news. we know what we know and we don't know what we don't know. i appreciate you coming and giving us the explanation. appreciate it. that wraps up the hour for

me. i'm jose diaz-balart. thank you for the privilege of your time. andrea mitchell picks up with more news right now. >> and right now on "andrea mitchell reports," search crews and loved ones fearing the worse for the five people on board the small submersible with the coast guard discovering a debris field within the search area. i'll speak to former u.s. commander in just a few moments. a district judge is about to unseal documents revealing just who paid the $500,000 bond to keep disgraced congressman george santos out of jail after he turned himself in on federal criminal charges, including money laundering and wire fraud. and president biden is scheduled to hold a joint press conference with india's prime minister modi as the administration hosts a controversial leader, an ally they hope could be a military and economic counter weight to china, but closely tied to russia, accused of widespread human rights abuses.

>> good day. i'm andrea mitchell in washington, we have that breaking news, an underwater debris field has been discovered in the frigid north atlantic. within the search area where teams have been looking for that missing submersible with five men on board. we expect an update from the coast guard in two hours, but if the "titan" is still intact, that is the big question, the u.s. coast guard has projected the air supply could have already run out. estimates put that time stamp at 7:08 eastern this morning. but there are ways passengers could have been conserving oxygen like sleeping, meditating, doing as little activity as possible. in the near freezing temperatures at the bottom of the ocean could have been keeping their oxygen intake low. kristen dahlgren joins us live from boston from the coast guard headquarters there. kristen, we also have the u.s. retired navy submarine captain

david markay and christine denison, a specialist and ocean explorer. first to you, what do you expect? what is the latest? how likely is it that this is the debris field from the submersible? >> right. andrea, so within the past 15 minutes or so, the u.s. coast guard sent out a tweet saying that a debris field was discovered within the search area by an rov and experts within the unified command are evaluating that information. we learned more that it was found by the arctic horizon's rov a canadian ship, that has been on the sea floor since early this morning combing the area around the "titanic" wreckage. there is a press conference from the u.s. coast guard scheduled for 3:00 p.m. this afternoon. we're told it will be the rear admiral, the man who is in charge of this entire operation, who will be giving that briefing. we're hoping to learn more at

that point about what they think this debris could possibly be. of course, there's been a question since the beginning whether or not the "titan" was intact or not. they had been hoping that it was still intact and they would be able to go down, they do have the capability now on-site to get that low, to be able to somehow pull it up to the surface using a u.s. crane ship and that french rov that has the capabilities of hooking a cable to it. at this point, though, all they are saying is that there has been a debris field found in that area, andrea. >> and let me ask captain david, talk to me about what the situation is like? what were those forces that that submersible would have been contending with at 13,000 feet on the ocean floor? >> down at 13,000 feet, you're 380 times the pressure that we feel here at atmospheric pressure. it's the equivalent of the

entire empire state building made of lead pressing on you, and i think what they're saying when they say debris field, that implies wreckage of the ship. it is no longer intact and we have to confirm it, but i would expect the submarine, if it had some kind of catastrophic failure descending towards the "titanic" would end up in the vicinity of the "titanic" debris field. that is as big as manhattan. i feel this is bad news but perhaps closure on this case. >> and if there's a debris field, is there any likelihood of survivability at that depth? it would seem terribly unlikely, correct, captain? >> zero. yes. it erases chance of hope to 0%. >> christine, talk about the size and the equipment on this submersible? it just seems so unlikely, we're

told it's the size of a minivan. the equipment, some of it seemed off the shelf, not sophisticated. there had been questions about it. obviously, space and oh exploration is challenging. just the mission itself. >> thank you for having me on. i will agree with everything that the experts have been saying, that the debris field is potentially, the submersible, there is a great deal of debris on the ocean floor and in this area, one of the concerns i would have is that submersible at that pressure would have imploded, so possibly the debris field that we're talking about that they're going to hone in on may be the ballast that was supposed to bring the sub up in case of a catastrophic failure. it doesn't look good. i think that everyone out there is doing the very best. we've got the best experts

throughout with these rovs, which are machines capable of being able to retrieve a scan and really get the information that's needed for any type of recovery and, you know, hopefully this is -- brings some closure, but it's still a very, very difficult task at hand here, identify it and they have to be very, very sure before they release information that this is, in fact, either part of the submersible or the submersible. and there would be absolutely no hope or signs of life, absolutely none. >> captain, how risky was this mission? >> i would say it's fairly risky. what you're doing is taking people to a very, very hostile part of the world. the pressure, as i said, 380 times what we have at atmosphere. they're using a carbon fiber hull that has titan tum.

we've used steel on submarines for many years. we have a long experience with how steel reacts when it gets compressed and then relaxed and compressed and relaxed by repeated deep dives. we have procedures for mitigating where we move from a maintenance period or a period of inactivity of the submarine out to sea. we do graduated, test everything in port and then test it in shallow water and go deep. so for commercial entity trying to push the boundaries here, they deliberately chose not to go down the standard certification and inspection path to be fast moving and innovative. you're pushing the boundaries, and i admire the exploratory drive, but there's significant risk by what they did. >> what would be the advantage of using titanium instead of steel?

>> titanium is lighter, more expensive. there were some titanium -- the russians experienced with titanium submarines, but in america, we rely on tried and true carbon steel for prolonged time and we really understand well how it reacts to the changing situations of a submarine. >> one of the things that struck me, christine, when i first understood fully the temperatures, the very low temperatures, and the power source they had, they didn't have -- i don't think they had heating, so it was supposed to be a couple of hours, a day mission. how do you have enough heat to survive for long times at those frigid temperatures? >> well, sadly you don't. that is one of the issues we're discussing when you are breaking into experimental submarines or experimental submersibles, if you will, you bring on the added

issue of bringing clients on, which firstly, i don't agree with that. these are some of the things you cannot control. there's risk mitigation and risk management and there's only so much they can do to keep their passengers comfortable. they were going to be cold. i think in photos we can see everybody has a jacket. but it didn't seem like there's anything at that point that is going to protect you from 28 degree, 29 degree water that's just surrounding you at depth and the darkness. >> and kristen dahlgren, you've been in boston a number of days and talked to others involved with this project. friends, family, people from the company itself. what was the rationale for it, beyond, you know, obviously, the excitement of exploration? >> reporter: right. and i think that, you know, obviously, that was the main

driving factor. there was some research that happened on these trips as well, and that $250,000 price tag presumably underwrote some of the research they said they were doing down at that depth, down at the "titanic," and so -- but this was an adventurer's dream. fewer people have gone to that depth than have gone into space. so, you know, you look at the high dollar expeditions that are happening, they're into space, mount everest and really to the depths of the ocean are sort of the three pinnacles, if you will, of this adventure travel. these were wealthy people who were pushing the limits. they knew the risks and signed the waivers, and that was a above it, understanding this was a risky venture. of course, you know, there have been questions that we've been hearing over the past few days about what exactly those risks were and if this submersible

structurally may not have been up to the level. there were lawsuits from a former employee of oceangate who said he was concerned about the structural integrity of that hull, of that window, and he was subsequently fired and there were lawsuits back and forth over that. questions coming out over whether this was risky or maybe -- riskier than maybe it should have been. >> standby with us for a bit. please stay with us. because we have more breaking news we're going to go to capitol hill and then return to you because we have this breaking news at this hour. the federal indictment facing republican congressman george santos, of course, has been pending. we now know which wealthy benefactor guaranteed half a million dollars bail just to keep santos out of jail pending

trial, lying to get unemployment aid and lying to congress. joining me is capitol hill correspondent garrett haake and new york based supporter and author mark chezano whose book about george santos is titled "the fabulous" and tim, writer at large at the bulwark. who guaranteed his bail and why was santos trying to keep it secret? >> dre yashgs we learned the two guarantors were family members of george santos, his aunt and father were the guarantors of the half million dollars bail according to a source familiar with it. the filing hasn't yet been unsealed. santos had fought this disclosure for some time. his lawyer even suggesting at one point that he would rather be remanded into custody than let these names come out. that has not happened. this coming as a result of a lawsuit by a media coalition of which flbs is a part, so we know the -- nbc news is a part, so we

know the names but don't know the source of the funds. santos and his family members were widely thought to be not this kind of means in the first place, right. he's being accused of skimming pandemic unemployment funds, so the questions of where this money comes from i think continues to swirl around us. we know at least for now that guarantors of that half million dollar bond, again, george santos' aunt and father who is believed to be retired and have worked in construction basically, earlier in his career. andrea? >> i know that there's the ethics investigation, but those take a long period of time as he's seeking re-election. you are writing the book on george santos, reporting on him for years. what do you know about the guarantors, if anything? >> it's fascinating and this goes to show how complicated santos' family story is. as i've reported so far, i've

learned that he actually stole from his aunt years ago, he stole from this aunt that is guaranteeing his freedom, adoring a family member and family friend, and his father, he has a very complicated relationship with. i spoke to a roommate of santos' who when she moved in, the father comes and sees the apartment, and actually warns her about his own son. so it's a very complicated relationship and i think there is a lot of, you know, santos has a lot of feelings for both of these family members as well, i've been told, but it shows how complicated the situation is. >> and what is it that george santos is still a voting member of congress, what does that say about the republican party, you know, he's part of the new york delegation, which helped change the complexion of the leadership of the house from democrat to republican? >> sure. and i think that's the key point

there, andrea. those extra seats the republicans gained largely in new york are the reason why kevin mccarthy has such a narrow majority right now. look at what's happening on the floor this week, marjorie taylor greene and laura boebert, name calling each other, inability to bring up a vote because there's chaos within the republican conference. the only reason they would allow the anchor of terrible news and terrible association with their party, you know, george santos to be a voting member of congress while voting to censure adam schiff is because they need that vote, they need every vote to bring to the floor even something with unanimous support like the support for gas stove act, they couldn't bring it up

because of members blocking it. the george santos saga is tied with the narrow republican majority and how challenging it is for kevin mccarthy to hold it all together. >> well, garrett haake, mark chezno and tim miller, thank you for that important news on george santos. back now to, of course, our really sad, what we expect will be the breaking news with the u.s. coast guard, which is supposed to brief at 3:00 eastern, a robot has found a new debris field near the "titanic" wreckage where five men were heading on sunday on that submersible when the team on the surface lost contact. back with us kristen dahlgren in boston, captain david markay, a former submarine captain and christine denison, expert on all of this. christine, let's talk about the conditions around the "titanic" because the "titanic," i guess there's been a lot of

exploration over the decades, for centuries, more than a century, but it's basically a graveyard and there's a lot of ethical issues involved in any exploration of the "titanic." >> i work with an organization where a team we find world war ii lost submarines and i work with the families and there are heartfelt emotions about these sites being graveyards and sacred, hallowed ground that shouldn't be disturbed. at the same time, you know, you have arguments that they need to be preserved, they need to be brought to the attention of people that don't get down there, you can't get down there, so these expeditions have created this adventure travel for people that want to go and see this. the ethical questions will always remain. it is a graveyard. it is very deep. it is not easy to access,

obviously. there arep inherent dangers with going down to depths and recognizing that. when something goes wrong it's going to go catastrophically wrong. the idea behind support at the surface is, in my opinion, the first thing that has to be considered, is you can argue everything can go perfectly fine, but if something goes wrong and you need to get to safety, who is going to come get you. this is where an rov comes into play as far as security and safety for passengers that are on board. if we had had an rov on-site from the get go n my opinion, i think we would have been able to potentially get to this submersible in a lot faster time than five days later. >> that's a really important point. captain, with the conventional

submarine, would you be going to 13,000 feet? >> no. these guys are going ten times deeper than we go. there's no real need on a military basis to go that deep. typically oil drilling, deep sea cable drilling and exploration here. >> what kind of training -- i know there's intensive military training, bit physiologically, what do you need to do to acclimate to those depths or is it so pressurized that, you know, that it does not matter? >> i think it's closer to your second statement. they're basically passengers. there's not a lot they can do. the pressures are so great that if something starts going wrong, they're not able -- human will, we want to think it can overcome obstacles and certain can overcome allot but it cannot

overcome 380 atmospheric pressure. the pilot may have training but the tourists, they really are passengers sitting uncomfortably for eight hours during this trip. >> i want to ask you about some of the military that has been deployed because this is a 21-foot object submersible, the size of a minivan. the ocean is vast. let's talk about, you know -- i know canada was involved, the u.s., the french sent a submersible. how many countries and how many vehicles, you know -- how many personnel were involved in all of this? >> yeah. hundreds. we know at least four countries, about ten ships either en route or there, planes flying continuously from canada and the united states, so there are hundreds of people involved and these planes are experts at finding things on the surface

and from submarines making noise. they're always looking for submarines that are [ inaudible ] incapacitated or -- because it's broken apart like maybe seems to have happened. that is a much different problem, a much harder problem than what we typically go after. >> of course. when we think about debris fields what comes to mind are things like the twa crash off the coast of long island and how vast that debris field was. nbc's aviation and naval expert tom costello has been on this watch since the beginning, since the initial alert came on sunday. what have you learned? >> listen, this is deeply concerning, the fact that they found this debris field near the "titanic's" wreck itself. obviously, we don't yet know what is that debris field.

is it, in fact, pieces of the missing sub or is it something else? one would suspect the coast guard would not put out this information if it wasn't also concerned about the nature of the debris field. i'll tell you i've talked to a lot of experts over the last several days on and off camera and many have raised the concern about the possibility of an implosion inside this mini sub. others have raised concerns how many times this mini sub has gone up and down to the "titanic" and whether the stress on this carbon type of hull that it has, titanium carbon hull, would that create stress fractures that maybe it would not be able to withstand the pressure of being that deep. the equivalent here of having the entire empire state building standing on top of you is the equivalent pressure at 13,000 feet below the surface of the

ocean. if, in fact, they have been able to free themselves, if they were stuck in the mud and able to free themselves, it was still going to take two and a half hours to rise to the very top of the ocean. so all along, fact that there was no communication after an hour and 45 minutes, the fact that there was really no sounds they were getting that they could clearly identify as coming from the mini sub, all of that has had a lot of people, close friends, experts, inside and out, really concerned about the possibility that this crew may not have survived this. >> and tom, we've been talking to captain david markay, a retired submarine captain, and he points out that while the russians have experimented with titanium, the u.s. navy always uses carbon steel. they believe that is the most reliable, actually less expensive than the titanium, but heavier. >> yeah. and most importantly, and i've had -- there he is, i've had the opportunity to talk to captain

markay this morning as well. the bottom line, captain, you said to me, navy subs don't go that deep, right? this is an experimental type of sub made of an experimental composite material going to a dhaepts could crush -- depths that could crush certain objects or containers? >> the purpose is different. we need to make submarines that are robust, can withstand combat damage and based on, a, design, b, operating procedures, and c, a mindset of continuous discomfort a mindset we're only safe if we're thinking that it's dangerous and if we're comfortable, we're missing something. >> and captain markay, in terms of what they had with them, they only had some water and some sandwiches because they thought they were going for a few hours, correct? >> yeah. but i don't think they're going to [ inaudible ] or die from the

lack of water. what's going to kill them, if they were intact on the bottom, hypothermia, because they're sitting in this thing that's immersed in less than freezing water, their breaths are having condensation, ice on the inside of the vessel, [ inaudible ] carbon dioxide, they're emitting from their breathing, that's going up at the same time, and it needs to be taken out of the air. what happened when you get headaches, you start getting nauseous and then your brain functions start to deteriorate, confused, make bad decisions and eventually poisoned. >> and tom costello, you've been on the ground, if i could ask you, you've been on the ground, if you're still there, ask about the mission itself, and your better understanding of what inspires people to take this kind of risk?

you've been around astronauts, you're around all kinds of explorations in your beat, and you know the degree to which both the corporate, private sector, and nasa and other agencies, try to minimize these kinds of risks? >> 100%. and i think the commander here of this mission, the ceo of the company, who was piloting the "titan," he is a veteran aerospace engineer. he was trying to make sure that the design was in compliance or at least got a check, if you will, got signed off by experts at boeing and nasa. they never formally signed off and certified it, but he was trying to get their approval, if you will, their stamp of approval and have them oversee and look at it. ten minutes ago i got done doing an interview with a close friend of rush stockton. him himself is a marine expert and said stockton has been passionate about the oceans,

passionate about the environment, passionate about exploring and trying to get a better understanding of, you know, this huge biosphere that we live on that is threatened by global climate change, that was his mission, and he was trying to fund it. he said it was about the science and research. i say, wait a minu,

another company involved in these explorations. tim, what do you infer from what the coast guard is saying, as ga limited as it is, about what hau been discovered? >> well, they know that "titanic" t is a debris field s if they're reporting a debris field it's probably a debris field of equipment from this m s submersible. knowing how things work underwater they do -- running into the wreck may have caused this, but ultimately it would have been an implosion that i destroyed this vessel. >> what is your aseasment of the risk of going down to 13,000 feet? >> well, there's risk. you l,got to manage your risk a be ready for worse case scenarios and self-rescue and you have to -- there's got to be more planning that goes into these things and sometimes when they're done by companies that, you know, that are on the leading edge experimentally, you

know, you -- these things -- i understand that. but there was a lot higher risk in this particular submarine than in all the other submarines that have gone to the "titanic" because they were certified by y avs and lloyds. >> tom, you had a question? >> i was going to make the he point, one of the things that th hamish harding said, he's the billionaire british adventurer, if you will, who was on board, is missing right now, he also went to the, depths of the o mariana trench and on the jeff bezos rocket into space, but hep talked about going down to the mariana trench, one of the deepest points onon earth, and said, he's fully aware and understand, that if something happens at that depth he's not coming back., that so he understood that going into theod marianna trench and you'v got to expect he also understooe

that going into the "titanic" site when the waiver forms, the forms you sign before you go down, apparently mention the possibility of death three thr times, so this eewas not a hidd risk. >> it's just extraordinary. you have to just marvel at the gutshe of doing this, what inspired them to want to take on those risks. captain markay from your experience with submariners, thr navy has to be prinepared for those fokinds of acts.cts. there have been submarine accidents in the past, a terrible one with a russian wi crew, i remember some decades ago, we were all covering.ing. but you never are in a 21-foot submersible.1- that's the difference. >> yeah. we think about it because we always want to be aware that bad

things can happen and it's that thought process that helps keep us safe, but you don't want to dwell on it. it's a weird balancing act you have to do when operating undern the sea. >> christine, talk us to about what the wreckage itself entails, the "titanic," and how justc, exploring that wreckage might have created some additional risks, a collision of sorts? >> well, we'vea discussed the possibility that this may have been s entangled, could have co gotten entangled. it is a very large ship. there are a lot of pieces of this wreck that are very precarious and the sub is being -- is just falls, goes down andal lsmoves around and i easy to get caught. one of the issues that i think are very important tos bring u is that this company really did

have, by all account, they had provisions in place should they not be able to come up. however, when you have a catastrophic failure, this is very important when you're f w running an expedition company and you have passengers, it's their safety and the issue behind being able to float up is like if you're a scuba diver and go down with a weight belt, if you start to sink the first thing you do is remove the belt and become buoyant.d beco this is ame similar idea within the submersible. they would just fill the ballast andt be able to slow down.do that's wonderful if it works. if there's catastrophic failure and you can't manually inflate thely ballast and the electroni have failed you're not coming ut and this is potentially the scenario that we pohave, where they either just imploded or they kept sinking because si everything had gone down, their electrical systems had died. that's the situation where the e only way to get up is to have help.

an rov to hoist you out of danger. sadly, i think we're looking atl a tragic ending. >> christine and tim and captain marquet and tom, standby. joining us is russell honoree involved in many search and rescue missions. this was, colonel, just an extraordinary challenge for the coast guard. >>trng it is. it and it's a good reason why they have brought in theas navy and evennd civilian assets are workg at that depth. at that i had experience when i was at the pentagon working for the chairman of the joint chiefs and the national military command center and as a respondent to white house requests for those o type missions i've dealt with three of these, the russian submarine that wentth off cours dealt with the kennedy airplanen that was lost off the coast. >> and twa. >> and egyptian 300.n

so the first thing, the earliere you know the earlier you can start to search. normally the assets you need to back up the coast guard reside in the navy and they're in norfolk. within hours, what we learned after dealing with the submarine, you have to start moving the submersible that can get atub that depth. and it takes days, in some i cases, to get all the assets and a lot of coordination with the coast guard and joint command center they put together, we'vev improved that. the first couple times this was like making it up as we go. they have a good drill between the coast guard and the pentagon now, when they ask for somethink they get it. get the thing is how early can you getow started.t the earlier you can get started in the search and rescue, the higher probability you can get to things. >> should there have been equipment, recovery vehicles, prepositioned with a high risk submersible like this? >> that would be monday morning

quarterbacking. there should be some be prepositions and more redundancy. like a ship above with a tether. but all that is second guessing. all we can do now is pray with luck and with the help of the good lord, they're able to recover them.to in the future, there will be coast guard standards that say you're not ay going because you don't meet a t standard. and that's what we need now. n we can't have people just making up their own break the rules ans go in. again, it's hard at this point i to blame the victims or the survivors. but in retrospect, this was a volunteer mission, but it's a volunteer mission that is captured the nation and put a lot of pressure on the coast guardlo to do something that if they had a right to say, this wouldn't have gone. >> it's different because we s don't know what debris field

really t means, so we're surmisg that it could certainly be a worse casebe scenario. >> our hearts go out to the families and those described by experts -- i have not been at that depth -- but of the situations that could be in that sub right now. >> tom costello, my colleague in boston at coast guard headquarters, wants to ask you u question, general. >> i was going to make the point, general honore makes the point, this has the nation's attention tispellbound, but i would say this is very much an international story. we are surrounded, i am surrounded on all a sides here,y international media from every possible country, every language you can imagine, and this is s dominating headlines and has around the world for days now.ni i do think, if you don't mind, i think -- i think it would be a good idea to remember right now the names of the missing peoplee that we've been following

because these are reale' people and to begin with is a pakistani businessman his name shahzada a dawood, and his son 19-year-old suleman shahzada, a 19-year-old studying in scotland. hamish harding, a very, very wealthy british vebusinessman a he's the one who said, i recognize going down to the mariana trench f something happens i may not be coming back. stockton rush is the company's ceo, oceangate ceo and the founder and pilot, there is an unbelievable story with mr. rush. according tomr both "new york times" and "washington post," his wife is the descendent of two people who died on the "titanic." they were among the wealthiest to die on the "titanic" and according to the "times" and "washington post," his wife may end upas losing her husband at e "titanic." unbelievable series of events. finally the frenchman who is a

pilot, a sub expert is paul-henri nargeoloet. he is exp known as one of the b trying toas explore the "titani with great plactivity there. so all of them with a -- great experience, rather. we are talking about real lives, of course, people who have families that love them dearly and still waiting for some word. >> well that's extraordinary because that's probably -- i mean we can't really surmise, but it might not be a a coincidence that this is a hi descendent of two people who died on the "titanic" and would be one of the peopleit wanting explore exactly where it was that this happened. >> his wife is the descendent of two people who died on the "titanic." that's right. r unbelievable coincidence. >> it's a family narrative, general honore -- >> i imagine this is an emotional ride for that family,r what's going on, and they must be extraordinarily brave peopleb many have told the risks they

were briefed on, the bravery is to do something that -- an exceptionin to all the rules is remarkable and we need those people back. w pe they're gifted people in their own right. and i hope that the coast guard can lead the effort to bring them home safely, but as been reported, it's dim hours right now. >> general honore, you referred to some of the searches you wera involved in whenrc on active du and we're talking about the airplaneg debris, i guess off jfk. >> and the russian sub. >> the sub, the russian sub, as well as the egyptian air. >> that's right. >> how complex is it to even find the debris of an airliner? >> doing it underwater is like leaving here and going to the capitol with blinders on, because you have to depend on hearing and technology.technolo you can't seegy at that depth. so you use very advanced

technology. some of it could be affected by weather, you have to get the g right stuffet on the scene. it is a complex operation.it is my hats off to all the first responders out there, because they're, risking -- that's not safe seas there and it's cold at the bottom, so it's a complex operation. my a hatsco off to the responde >> tim taylor, i know you're still there, the rescue operation has been so extraordinary, tom was talking about how manytr countries are involved and what the assets e are, and these people are doing courageous duty themselves. >> yeah, they are. and there's been question in th media of them not doing that and i take objection to that. your guests are perfect t examples. there's a lot going on.goin these guys are making really goodre decisions with the asset they have available out there.t and they shouldn't be second guessing that sfhoact. gues the second guessing should be g going on whyue they're there in the first place and that's for

another day. i would like to add, there are certifications for these types of vessels. the sub that hammish went down in the mariana trench was s certified. that company took great pains, n efforts and expense tos, make s the submarine was certified to go to those depths.e going to the mariana trench and the "titanic" are apples and oranges as far as i'm concerned and that needs to be said. i don't want the -- this could affect the submersible industrye moving forward for years, and it needs to be aware that there are standards throughout and people follow them. and they are there for a reason. that has r to be stated. it is a t tragic event.ic i feel for them. i knew p.h. for the last 12 years. so he's -- he's -- he will be sorely h missed. >> tell us about him.

just briefly tell us about the l people you knew on board. >> i only knew p.h. from flight -- well, maybe wasn't 12 years, but knew him then but during flight 370 when we were doing the same thing for 370. had him in my office for work, discussed submersibles. he was interested in what we were doing with autonomous vehicles and had discussions.ndd kept in touch over the years. he lived in connecticut, but he was mr. titanic and there was a passion for him and a life's work and in a sad way, he's written himself into the history books of the titanic. >> tom costello. >> let me give you a sense of what's happening here at u.s. coast guard command. coas inn boston. we do expect a briefing at 3:00t p.m. from here and we expect that that will be rear admiral mauger who will be holding thath briefing. he's notol done a briefing sinc monday, so we've now gone several days without him running

the briefing. running it appears he will be running the briefing at 3:00 p.m.00 that may speak to the fact thata they expect to have some significant developments. we are 900 miles away from the site here in boston. 900 miles out to sea is where the search zone is, and yet, the incident command center is heren in boston because it is in the coast guard district 1, and that means that they are responsible for search and rescue. however, obviously, the canadians are closer and that is why you've seen such a robust response from canadian vessels already in the north atlantic, coming from halifax, coming from st. john's new finland, first on the scene and we believe there are more or less ten vessels up there in the north atlantic.he r when the canadian coast guard got there with a canadian naval office onad board he took comma on scene, so the on scene commander is t a canadian national,ad naval officer while the icc, incident command, is

here in boston simply because ol jur dixship. because of the zone that they are in. they've rushed in, the canadians on air and nad sea power, ameri in the air, we believe ships are en route from the coast guard.e you have the french vessel coming in, t dropping the deep e rov, and we're not sure if it was the french rov or the canadian rov today, that came down there to the "titanic" wreckage on the gr"tound on the sea floor and spotted the debrir field. presumably, because the "titanic" debris site itself, the wreckage site, has been so well documented and so well photographed, people can tell the difference between debris from the "titanic" and fresh fh debris and as you would expect, the coast guard then put out the notification that there was a s debris site near the wreckage itself. >> that's great context. general honore, talk to us about

the coordination among these naval fleets, the coast guard and canadians. >> all those nato buddies, we do this every day, normally from a different nation, we defend to go do search and rescue mission. bp, when we were trying to figure out what was going try o have woefully under investigated what is going on in the sea.e we spend millions and billions of m dollars exploring the hemisphere and going up. because of the ocean we get to o live. it's the navigateble waters that keep us connected, source of resource, minerals. but when we look at the redundancy and the capacity we have to go to the depths of thes ocean, we just haven't been there. it's a tough place to go, but one must say, if we're going to

spend money over ten years to do mars and other places, why are we doing the same type of investment in our oceans?stmenti our oceans are close to our survival and what happened to ia them, the health of ppthem, and even wreckage such as the "titanic," and the number of cables we got running across the ocean, we have over 1500 abandoned oil wells in the gulf, we don't have the capacity to go underneath and inspect them and see what happens before we step in there. so my call and hope this becomes a call to the administration and to the congress, we need to do more investment in studying our ocean and our ability to go to any depth in the ocean, we need to go to. >> that is profoundly important. let's bring in oceanographer and deep sea explorer david gallo.d you were listening to general honore and tom costello wants tl

have a word. >> i was just ntgoing tos make point, and i'm so sorry, right there, looking at the images of the "titan," and we had a really cool diagram or a model i should say in studio, this is a 21 to 22 foot piece of equipment, as you can see there, and it can hold or seat five people. and it's like a minivan, only one person can extend his or her legs atd a time. and they have a commode in there, with a curtain for privacy, but that's it. it is nothing extravagant at all and most people who go in, expecting a six to eight-hour journey we are told, they bring sandwiches, some water, and that is it.at and you're looking out through a single portal, a window if you will, which is described as roughly looking through the window of youry washing machin. so it's not that big. your view is not that great.gre. mostly it's outside, it's pitch-black until they turn on

the spotlights, led spotlights. you're not going to see much untilng you're at the site of t "titanic" itself because it is i such pitch-black, murky it conditions and even on the co bottom when you land you're landing in mud. you may recall seeing, if you s land, you should not beee landi, but on the bottom of the sea b around the "titanic" you've seen the photographs where the entire debris of the "titanic" is literally kind of it's entombed almost, sitting in thick mud. it is not abed hospitable environment to get a good he o environment to get a good view. you're in this cylinder, if you will, and you are really just kind of taking turns looking outside of that tiny window. >> that's incredibly graphic and makes it so comprehensible and exactly what general honore was just saying that we have not done enough research on the mechanics of getting down to

theseow depths, considering allf the underwater cables that do all of our communications and natural gas and oil and everythingtu else that we live n and communicate over, it's just extraordinary that we don't have that ability. also with us now is oceanographer and deep sea explorer david gallow, thank yog for joining us in this what seems like a forbodable. what are your conclusions? >> well, in a way, it's very close to all of us. you know, this solution was the simplest solution that we heard that they had lost contact, someone else said heard an implosion right around the same time, which meant the sub was probably right over titanic and

anyr debris would have fallen down onto the titanic debris field. broken in two parts at the bottom of the ocean, we made the first big map of that area. p.h. was one of the co-leaders with adme.wi between them thousands of pieces of debris on the sea floor, the debris field from titanic. somewhere in there is the -- is the debris from titan. so the trick now will be to sort which is which out and probably to do a forensic study while those pieces are still on the sea floor. but you know, it's sad but over. now we know what happened to the vehicle. >> and we just -- we don't -- even though we don't know yet, you're the expert, but you've lost a close friend and colleague. >> sure. >> potentially.

>> yeah, so many of us. p.h. was much loved. he was called mr. titanic. in a way there's something here that he's now in the area that he loved most under the sea, which is titanic and the titanic debris field. so that's sad, but somehow comforting in a way. and again, the ending this way, it's not suffering through days of dwindling oxygen. it's instantaneous as you can get, if there was a rupture of the hull, it's just over within milliseconds. >> mr. gallo, you've thought about this. we all see this as part of our culture, but the contining fascination with theti titanic, talk to meio about that. you've certainly experienced it. >> i came to wit zelle in 1986 after it was discovered. i thought it all would be over with by 1987.

every single year it goes up and up and up. i think jim cameron said every generation rediscovers titanic. there's something there for everybody. there's the personaler stories the 2,000 people on board. there's the tragedy of that night and everything inth betwe. the company that p.h. worked for and i work with is rms titanic inc., and they've been the ones early on that recovered artifacts, and you can see that in various exhibitions all around the planet really. but the public sitting there watching the public come in, young and old, affluent and not, individuals and families, there is a fascination that runs very deep and a passion, which in this case, the people in the submarine have to somehow feel. it's pretty amazing to me that

globally you say titanic and people right away know what that story is. >> tom costello, your thoughts? >> reporter: i wanted to ask mr. gallo a question if you don't mind becausef he is an expert the titanic and of submersibles. if, in fact, titan, the wreckage, the debris from titan is interspersed around or in the debris field for the titanic, does that damage what is really a cemetery at sea and the resting place for 1,500 people? i'm wondering how that would potentially interfere with or be a part of that 100-year-old graveyard already? >> you raise a very good point, one that we spent a good part of the last few days, day and night, talking about. okay, if that was the solution, if it imploded above the wreck site, then how do you begin to do the forensics that are necessary, at the same time

preserve the area. it's a protected area of the sea floor. that's not so important at the moment because we want answers about what exactly happened here. i don't think there's a rush at this point to -- you know, there's a lot of small debris. not much forensic you can get from that, but if there are pieces of the hull, you want to get those out fairly soon. maybe do forensics in the location, and we proved that you can do that, especially we proved it on titanic, that you could do a forensic study right there on the site. so it's going to be difficult. i mean, you raise a very good point about how do we recover and yet preserve at the same time. one big part of it, of course, is going to be understanding which is which. it should be easy to do, you would think, you could tell something from the titan versus something from 1912, but the ocean does funny things. >> reporter: and i've heard people -- >> may require bringing in heavy

equipment that might damage the sea floor around the titanic. it doesn't seem to be that importantee at this moment. solving this mystery about exactly what happened seems to be the most important thing. >> david gallo, to solve the s mystery, what kind of equipment would you be using to go down? robotics? >> yes, robots do a great job, and today with lidar laser scanning, 8k cameras, accurate r navigation, there's no gps at the psbottom. today you can know where you are within a few centimeters really, and putting together images, 3d images so that you can scan something on the bottom of the sea and actually bring it up to a forensic team up on the surface or through satellites anywhere around the world, so they can examine every nut and y bolt. and if they say you have to go back, we want to know about this particular crack, you can go back and study that in detail

and get that back to them. so, you know, the one thing we think you shouldn't do is just start recovering thingsdo immediately, just start grabbing things. you know, you do want to treat it likeu a crime scene and control who goes in there, who comes out of there, and be sure that you've got all the different elements thatth you nt to study. it's very -- air france 447, which was aircraft people thought would never be found, p.h. was a co-expedition leader with me and we were able to show you could find a debris field and work with a forensic team to get them the information they need without actually recovering everything from the sea floor. >> do you think that this will set back the submersible industry private exploration? >> that's a real good question. i don't know if it will set it back, but there's going to be a very good look at what this is

all about about if this is something that's necessarily good or bad. and i think, you know, it's a necessary thing. it's going to be painful, but very necessary to put some pieces in place. titanic is protected by an international treaty, and i assume that group will come, united states, france, canada, and the uk will probably convene and look at this whole story about the industry of tourism and dives in general to titanic. >> we have only a few seconds left, general honore, your thoughts, your final thoughts? >> well, my thoughts and good luck and vibes go to first responders. only imagine what it's like to be there and trying to pick up the remains of any debris or

humans that they're able to recover so i just hope there's still a sliver of hope that they're still there, but my heart goes out to those who are trying to o run this mission at sea. >> as do the hearts -- all of ourrt hearts as well and our thanks, of course, to my great colleague, tom costello, to general honore, tote david gall and all of our guests, and that does it for us for this edition of "andrea mitchell reports," all of our news will continue. "chris jansing reports" starts right now. ♪♪ good day, i'm chris jansing arrive at msnbc headquarters in new york city, and we are waitingms to hear more from the coast guard as experts evaluate that newly discovered debris field. is it the remains of the titanic