The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-Opened

[Vixen]

I would think the bodies would be in the kind of condition that would require a closed casket. Any images escaping into the public would be distressing to the family members. Could you imagine asking them to come in for an ID?

"Nevermind the dismembered limbs and half of their chest cavity being devoured from the inside, is this your husband?"

I think leaving them there is the more dignified solution.

The "no empty graves" thing is rather callously detached, I agree.

Did they never erect a memorial stone or such? That could be a compromise.

Yes, there are memorial stones in Tallinn and Stockholm.

[credit: wiki]

 

[Andy_Ross]

There is certainly the technology or we wouldn't be able to construct rigs in the North Sea. As I recall, the Swedish government at the time estimated a recovery cost of 144m (not sure if this is dollar or pounds; if SKr, then that would be circa 1.4m) so rejected it as 'too expensive'. But the family members of the crew (who were insured by the employer) shared 44m in compo amongst them. The passenger's families are still fighting for compensation. They have a received a few thousand at most. Then many of the relatives were denied being allowed to buried their loved ones on consecrated ground in their own home town. Not all want this of course. Many prefer to imagine their family died in each others arms.

That cost would not be to recover the whole ship!

 

[Andy_Ross]

What size would the two cranes each have to be - what carrying capacity?

What type of mounting platform would be used so that they could be anchored and leveraged to prevent them from tipping into the water and joining the ferry?

What would be the secure anchor points on the ferry, each having the strength to support over half the weight of the ferry, that would ensure that this proposed operation could be completed safely?

Would the crane operators and support crew for this rather dangerous venture be allowed to volunteer, or would they be press-ganged into it?

You seem to know a lot about such things so I am assuming that you have given reasonable thought to the details.

There are semi submersible crane barges that could be used together to attain the lift capacity but as you note where would they attach any lifting gear?
There would have to be some kind of cradle built under the wreck to support it.

This cradle would have to support the length of the hull as it would certainly start to come apart if it wasn't supported over the whole length.

I can't think of any ship of the size being lifted from 60 meters.

 

[Steve]

There are semi submersible crane barges that could be used together to attain the lift capacity but as you note where would they attach any lifting gear?
There would have to be some kind of cradle built under the wreck to support it.

This cradle would have to support the length of the hull as it would certainly start to come apart if it wasn't supported over the whole length.

I can't think of any ship of the size being lifted from 60 meters.

Real world logistics are a bitch.

 

[Vixen]

What size would the two cranes each have to be - what carrying capacity?

What type of mounting platform would be used so that they could be anchored and leveraged to prevent them from tipping into the water and joining the ferry?

What would be the secure anchor points on the ferry, each having the strength to support over half the weight of the ferry, that would ensure that this proposed operation could be completed safely?

Would the crane operators and support crew for this rather dangerous venture be allowed to volunteer, or would they be press-ganged into it?

You seem to know a lot about such things so I am assuming that you have given reasonable thought to the details.

Heh, I could probably give you expert advice on financial leverage but alas, maritime salvage of wrecks and crane leverage has never been within my remit. However, I feel sure it follows normal laws of physics.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Heh, I could probably give you expert advice on financial leverage but alas, maritime salvage of wrecks and crane leverage has never been within my remit. However, I feel sure it follows normal laws of physics.

You misspelled "no, I actually have no idea what I'm talking about."

 

[Steve]

Heh, I could probably give you expert advice on financial leverage but alas, maritime salvage of wrecks and crane leverage has never been within my remit. However, I feel sure it follows normal laws of physics.

Your suggestion re two cranes then had a rather tenuous attachment to reality then? More of a random firing synapses sort of thing?

 

[Vixen]

Archimedes' principle states that the upward buoyant force that is exerted on a body immersed in a fluid, whether fully or partially, is equal to the weight of the fluid that the body displaces.[1] Archimedes' principle is a law of physics fundamental to fluid mechanics. It was formulated by Archimedes of Syracuse.[2] wiki

Official calculations show that the MS Estonia had a reserve buoyancy (the volume of a ship above the waterline, which can be made watertight, thus increasing the vessel's buoyancy) of 4,500 tonnes.

This covers two meters above the waterline, which can carry an additional weight of 4,500 tonnes. Thus, 4,500 tonnes of water flowing under the car deck was enough to sink the whole ship in any location.
However, it is also possible for a part of the ship to lose reserve buoyancy, for example, the stern sections. The result is that the stern sinks significantly deeper and the bow rises higher, so that 4,500 tonnes is above the water-line.

- This is the finding in the official report.


"Swedish marine scientists have concluded with their calculations, simulations and model tests (done by Swedish state agency Vinnova) that the ship would not have sunk until its entire superstructure, and 83 percent of the hull, is filled with water. This means that 11,000 tonnes of water had to flow under the car deck, not the 4,500 tonnes referenced. " - Margus Kurm, Estonian investigator.

If we look at Captain_Swoop's examples of Lestari Kaju and the Herald of Free Enterprise which experienced flooding on the car deck and capsized within minutes of leaving port, you'll note their resting positions are on their sides, as they banked in shallow water - deliberately, in the case of Lestari Maju. Had they commenced into deeper water, by the law of physics - Archimedes Priniciple, from capsizing, they would have then turned again and floated upside down as a result of the ship's bouyancy.

It appears the M/S Estonia never actually capsized but from listing at 40° starboard side - the May Day call confirms a list of 30° - 40°, which is definitely timed at 1:22, the vessel then righted itself - it never capsized - and heeled 15° to port before the stern sank and the boat sank to land near face down on a soft clay bed. Thus, the claim that the fractures in the hull and the hole at the side were caused by the sea bed cannot be so, as the hull doesn't touch the seabed although the bow is slightly hidden under the sand.

If the visor bow was torn off at 1:15 - the JAIC time, then it follows that seawater cannot have seeped in before that time. Yet many witnesses say the list happened before 1:00. How, if the bow visor was still intact as of that time?

Five witnesses, including two seamen in a life raft and two athletes stated they saw the car ramp fully up. However, their timings do not fit. Seaman Sillaste heard bangs at about 1:00, as did several other survivors. Ok maybe that was the bow visor banging up and down as its hinges came loose but until it fell off, it can't have dragged the car ramp open with it.

 

[Vixen]

Your suggestion re two cranes then had a rather tenuous attachment to reality then? More of a random firing synapses sort of thing?

I am assuming that the Swedish government is capable of outsourcing this work to a salvage operators and not relying on someone on ISF.

 

[Andy_Ross]

You have no idea what you are on about.

The first sign of trouble aboard Estonia was when a metallic bang was heard around 01.00, probably a heavy wave hitting the bow visor which was working loose, it didn't just drop off. In the next 10 minutes, similar noises were reported by passengers and other crew. At about 01:15, the visor separated and tore open the loading ramp behind it, that doesn't mean the ramp came all the way down, it means it suffered damage as it was subject to forces it wasn't designed for. It was not a structural or watertight component. It was there to let vehicles move from the deck level to whatever level the quayside was at.
The ship took on a starboard list of around 15 degrees, but by 01:30, the ship had rolled to 60 degrees and as vehicles fell to the lower side and more water flooded the vehicle deck the list increased to 90 degrees, this was by 01.50
All power was lost well before it sank as the machinery spaces flooded, this was well before the actual sinking. It made the result inevitable, anyone below decks when the power went would have been in almost pitch darkness.
By the time the list got to 60 degrees any chance of climbing stairways or making a way along flooding passageways would have been impossible and there was no chance of rescue.

There is no big mystery or conspiracy or foul play. It's just a standard tragedy at sea like hundreds of others.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I am assuming that the Swedish government is capable of outsourcing this work to a salvage operators and not relying on someone on ISF.

It has never been done before. It probably can't be done.

Why would they waste hundreds of millions on a fools errand?

What would be the outcome?

 

[Steve]

It has never been done before. It probably can't be done.

Why would they waste hundreds of millions on a fools errand?

What would be the outcome?

It might make a few people feel a little better to have the remains of their loved ones in hand after the sea creatures have feasted for 20 years.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I think the idea is they should have sent divers in to the wreck as soon as it sank and got all the bodies out then raised it shortly after.

That it's never been done before isn't important it seems.

 

[Steve]

I think the idea is they should have sent divers in to the wreck as soon as it sank and got all the bodies out then raised it shortly after.

That it's never been done before isn't important it seems.

Well then, in answer your previous questions - There seems to be no sensible reason to raise this ship.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Well it's to do with Secret Swedish Russian Electronics shipments and Swedish submarines ramming it and bombs aboard it planted by the Russians and MI6 or some such.

Raising the ship is the only way to find out.

 

[Steve]

Well it's to do with Secret Swedish Russian Electronics shipments and Swedish submarines ramming it and bombs aboard it planted by the Russians and MI6 or some such.

Raising the ship is the only way to find out.

They had better get on with it then. Archimedes has already shown them how to do it.

 

[Vixen]

You have no idea what you are on about.

The first sign of trouble aboard Estonia was when a metallic bang was heard around 01.00, probably a heavy wave hitting the bow visor which was working loose, it didn't just drop off. In the next 10 minutes, similar noises were reported by passengers and other crew. At about 01:15, the visor separated and tore open the loading ramp behind it, that doesn't mean the ramp came all the way down, it means it suffered damage as it was subject to forces it wasn't designed for. It was not a structural or watertight component. It was there to let vehicles move from the deck level to whatever level the quayside was at.
The ship took on a starboard list of around 15 degrees, but by 01:30, the ship had rolled to 60 degrees and as vehicles fell to the lower side and more water flooded the vehicle deck the list increased to 90 degrees, this was by 01.50
All power was lost well before it sank as the machinery spaces flooded, this was well before the actual sinking. It made the result inevitable, anyone below decks when the power went would have been in almost pitch darkness.
By the time the list got to 60 degrees any chance of climbing stairways or making a way along flooding passageways would have been impossible and there was no chance of rescue.

There is no big mystery or conspiracy or foul play. It's just a standard tragedy at sea like hundreds of others.

This is incorrect. Dozens of survivors, including Paul Barney and Kent Horstedt from different life rafts decribed the stern going down first with the bow in the air against a clear moon that suddenly appeared from behind a cloud. Both independently described it as a strangely beautiful moment.

If it listed at 90° what was the captain standing on when he made his May Day call? Obviously the bridge must have been somewhat upright and he reported 20° - 30 °. Had the ship actually capsized it would then have floated bottom up, but it didn't. As it happens, people on the ship had about ten minutes in which to escape. If the ship was already lilting at 90° with seawater rushing in and filling the car deck within two minutes, there is no way they would have had time to get to the stairs, as many obviously did. Within two minutes the ship would have capsized, as with Lesteri Maju and the Herald of Free Enterprise. Once the heel was >40° there is no way they would have even been able to stand. As it happened, the ship sank in 35 minutes without actually capsizing.

The Swedish government confirmed that military equipment was on board M/S Estonia. This is a matter of fact. They declined to admit this was the case on the night in question, but confirm it had done so two weeks before.

 

[RolandRat]

https://www.tellerreport.com/news/2...s-wreck---"sweden-lied-to-us".HJ3g07seLP.html

"Expressen, on the other hand, reached the country's then foreign minister, Lena Hjelm-Wallén.

Hjelm-Wallén said he was surprised that Kurm had received support for his allegations about the possible involvement of the submarine from Enn Tupp, who served as Estonia's defense minister during the sinking of Estonia.

According to Hjelm-Wallén, there were no similar allegations from the Estonian side years after the accident.

- I am surprised that they come now, ex-Minister of Foreign Affairs said, adding with Estonian Foreign Minister colleague cooperation to function perfectly in 1994."

"Swedish Broadcasting Corporation SVT, on the other hand, reached Anders Björck, who served as the country's Minister of Defense from 1991 to 1994.

"It would take a huge blackout operation to commit and cover up such acts," Björck said.

According to him, the damage to Estonia would have been more visible if the submarine had collided with the ship before sinking."

 

[Vixen]

https://www.tellerreport.com/news/2...s-wreck---"sweden-lied-to-us".HJ3g07seLP.html

"Expressen, on the other hand, reached the country's then foreign minister, Lena Hjelm-Wallén.

Hjelm-Wallén said he was surprised that Kurm had received support for his allegations about the possible involvement of the submarine from Enn Tupp, who served as Estonia's defense minister during the sinking of Estonia.

According to Hjelm-Wallén, there were no similar allegations from the Estonian side years after the accident.

- I am surprised that they come now, ex-Minister of Foreign Affairs said, adding with Estonian Foreign Minister colleague cooperation to function perfectly in 1994."

"Swedish Broadcasting Corporation SVT, on the other hand, reached Anders Björck, who served as the country's Minister of Defense from 1991 to 1994.

"It would take a huge blackout operation to commit and cover up such acts," Björck said.

According to him, the damage to Estonia would have been more visible if the submarine had collided with the ship before sinking."

The discovery of a hole in the side of the vessel in the hull, comes as a complete surprise to them..? They didn't know there was a hole and apx three long fractures in the hull. Yet they were responsible for producing the report.

This is why the Swedish and Estonian governments have funded the new investigation, starting last week.

 

[RolandRat]

I think it was more the silly allegations of a collision with a sub that he was surprised at.