The US Coast Guard has heard a week’s worth of testimony from people close to the Titan submersible that imploded last June, killing all five aboard.

Investigators are seeking to uncover the details of what led to the tragedy and find recommendations that could prevent future deadly voyages.

Titan, operated by OceanGate, imploded less than two hours into its descent during a dive to the wreckage of the Titanic.

The accident led to questions over the submersible’s safety and design, and the materials used in its construction.

Here are five takeaways from the first of the two-week set of hearings:

Investigators with the US Coast Guard revealed one of the crew’s final messages before it lost contact with a ship above water: “All good here.”

The hearing revealed other text messages between Titan and its mother ship as the deep-sea vessel began its trek to the sea floor to see the iconic British ocean liner that sank in 1912.

Support staff aboard the surface ship asked about the submersible’s depth and weight.

Communications were patchy throughout the descent, according to investigators.

About one hour into the dive, the Titan sent a message at a depth of 3,346m that would be its last. The crew communicated it had dropped two weights.

Then communication was lost.

Mission specialist Renata Rojas, who helped with the doomed trip as a volunteer, testified before the US Coast Guard on her interaction with the crew before the sub descended.

At one point, Ms Rojas teared up while remembering “five people smiling” before boarding the Titan and heading below the water.

“They were just happy to go, that’s the memory I have,” she said.

She remembered losing communication and asking colleagues: “We haven’t heard from them, where are they?”

Ms Rojas, who previously visited the Titanic wreckage with OceanGate, admitted that the Titan submersible was not classified or registered.

“I knew the Titanic dive was risky, but I never felt unsafe,” she said during the hearing.

OceanGate’s former operations director David Lochridge testified to US Coast Guard investigators that he warned of potential safety issues before he was fired in 2018.

He claimed he was ignored.

Mr Lochridge said he believed the deadly incident with the Titan was “inevitable” as the company “bypassed” standard rules.

He was fired and sued by OceanGate for revealing confidential information, and he countersued for wrongful dismissal.

US court documents show Mr Lochridge had significant concerns with the Titan’s design, including that it was made from carbon fibre which he warned would damage further with every dive.

He told US Coast Guard investigators the “whole idea” of OceanGate was “to make money”.

“There was very little in the way of science,” he said.

The US Coast Guard released new footage showing the wreckage of the Titan sub on the bottom of the sea floor.

The deep-sea vessel is seen with the “OceanGate” logo on its side as debris is scattered around it.

The vessel’s tail can also be spotted among the wreckage as well as the submersible’s wires, gauges and electronics.

A remotely operated vehicle obtained the footage.

Patrick Lahey, the co-founder and chief executive of leading submersible manufacturer Triton, told investigators he wasn’t impressed by the Titan submersible.

Mr Lahey’s company manufactures submersibles that descend to the deepest points of the ocean.

While not mandatory, he stressed the importance of certifying submersible vessels through a process that involves an extensive safety assessment carried out by independent marine organisations.

Mr Lahey told the panel there was no reason why the Titan submersible couldn’t have been certified.

He toured the Titan sub that later imploded while on vacation in the Bahamas and said he “wasn’t particularly impressed” by what he saw.

“It looked to me like a lot of the stuff was not quite ready for primetime,” he added, saying he expressed his concerns to OceanGate.

Mr Lahey added that the vessel did not seem “particular well thought out”.

“It just looked amateur-ish in its execution,” he said.

Campaigners have warned against “brutal” cuts to Wales’ environmental watchdog, saying the plans “put nature at risk”.

Natural Resources Wales (NRW) is seeking to close 265 posts, and is considering reductions in areas including tackling waste crime, advising on climate change, managing heritage features and running visitor centres.

One trade union claimed the regulator could be left without “enough staff on the ground” to protect the environment.

NRW said it was making “every effort to protect areas of work that have the most impact on nature, climate and pollution”.

BBC Wales has spoken to a number of current and former NRW staff.

While acknowledging the organisation was in “an impossible financial situation”, many felt “angry” and “excluded from planning the solution”, one said.

“We have lost a year we could have spent working to save some of Wales’ most loved services – like organising community buy-outs of our visitor centres,” they claimed, describing the situation as “a shambles”.

Another added this came after previous attempts to reorganise NRW’s structure, and that it was like rearranging “deckchairs on the Titanic”.

They criticised the message the cuts sent out, given that the Welsh government had declared both climate and nature emergencies.

“You can’t on the one hand declare an emergency and then on the other say ‘it’s alright, we’ll call the fire brigade a bit later’.”

Unison, the largest of five trade unions representing NRW staff, said workers had told them the plans would not “solve problems in the long run.”

“They also have concerns about losing staff with years of experience,” said regional organiser Andrew Woodman – adding that “Unison will fight for every job”.

While NRW’s core grant from Welsh government has not increased in recent years, costs have risen due to high inflation.

The “funding gap” in its budget is set to reach £13m in 2025-26, and will exceed £17m by 2026-27 without action.

NRW has been carrying out a 45-day consultation with unions and has uploaded documents summarising the proposed changes online.

Work related to influencing policy on the environment will be scaled back – including in areas like climate change, the documents suggest.

There will no longer be “a dedicated education and health team”.

Cuts are proposed to “the management of heritage features” in public woodlands, and cafes and shops at NRW’s visitor centres.

When it comes to dealing with incidents, NRW will adopt “a higher tolerance of risk” and reduce the number of “low priority calls we respond to”.

The organisation is planning “some small reductions in enforcement including tackling waste crime”.

NRW’s dedicated environmental library in Bangor is also set to close, a move which has sparked outrage and a petition from ecologists.

Open to the public, it also has an online catalogue featuring reports and surveys.

The information can be used to help with planning applications, and monitoring of rare species.

“As a plant recorder I find this service indispensable,” explained botanist Heather Garrett.

“I can ask for a report, I can see maps and find out all sorts of things about a particular site – are there gaps in the records or rare species we can check for?

“If the library closes I think our voluntary efforts to stop the decline of nature and to restore it will be severely impacted,” she added.

Gareth Clubb, WWF Cymru’s director, said the plans “put Welsh nature at risk”.

“There will be environmental crime that doesn’t go detected, there will be incidents where NRW doesn’t have the capacity to deal with them,” he claimed.

“These are brutal budget cuts to important public services,” added Sam Ward, head of Climate Cymru.

NRW needed to be “well-armed” with funding and expertise if Wales was to “have a chance of combatting climate breakdown and biodiversity collapse”, said Prof Christian Dunn of the British Ecological Society.

One area NRW intends to dedicate more resources to is tackling water pollution, at a time when the state of rivers and seas is a key concern for the public.

Afonydd Cymru’s chief executive Gail Davies-Walsh said that detail was encouraging.

“The overall budget cuts are a chance for the regulator to refocus on performing its legal duties and perhaps less on work that could be delivered more cost-effectively by partners,” she said.

“There is no doubt that this is a significant and challenging time for us all at NRW,” explained Prys Davies, NRW’s director of corporate strategy and development.

“Public funding is exceptionally tight across the whole of the UK and we are having to… critically review what we can and must continue to do, what we stop, and what we slow or do differently.”

He said bosses “fully understood the impact” on colleagues and support was available.

“They have continued to show the upmost professionalism and dedication to their roles during this challenging period,” he said.

Information received during the consultation would now be reviewed and final proposals presented to NRW’s board for consideration in mid-October, he added.

Deputy First Minister and climate change secretary Huw Irranca-Davies said he had confidence that “NRW will work through this with stakeholders and staff to come to a position where they can carry out their statutory duties”.

“The hard reality is that right across government, and right across the UK we are facing these difficult decisions that (have been) forced upon us after so many years of austerity,” he added.