The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-Opened

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen said:
Nothing strange about that. However with 58 of the survivors making up the 137 (excluding the missing nine crew, if they are missing). 42% when they make up circa ten percent of the total number of people on board it is pretty top heavy and you can understand why some people feel resentful about it.
Click to expand...

Well, if your whole point is that some people feel resentful then I doubt that anyone would argue about it with you. Is that your entire thought on the percentage survival of crew members, or is there another point you would like to make? Resentment is not a point to be considered in a new investigation.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Why should a flooding car deck be easy to deal with?

What training in dealing with flooding do you think merchant crews have?
Click to expand...

As I pointed out these vessels do RO-RO journeys perpetually and have done so for decades. I've been on that vessel myself when it was M/S Viking Sally. Getting water on a car deck would not be anything new or something they don't know how to deal with, especially with the Herald of Free Enterprise lessons learned.

If it is true the bow visor bolts were too weak, then in theory it could have sunk at any time. I was on a similar vessel just a couple of years ago in the middle of winter when it made its way through hard ice. A Beaufort Force 7,
6-8 metre wave wouldn't have any effect on it.
 
Vixen said:
Nothing strange about that. However with 58 of the survivors making up the 137 (excluding the missing nine crew, if they are missing). 42% when they make up circa ten percent of the total number of people on board it is pretty top heavy and you can understand why some people feel resentful about it.
Click to expand...

Look at passenger ship sinkings, it's always the way.
 
Vixen said:
As I pointed out these vessels do RO-RO journeys perpetually and have done so for decades. I've been on that vessel myself when it was M/S Viking Sally. Getting water on a car deck would not be anything new or something they don't know how to deal with, especially with the Herald of Free Enterprise lessons learned.

If it is true the bow visor bolts were too weak, then in theory it could have sunk at any time. I was on a similar vessel just a couple of years ago in the middle of winter when it made its way through hard ice. A Beaufort Force 7,
6-8 metre wave wouldn't have any effect on it.
Click to expand...

Shups that sink tend to have been through many storms before they sink in a storm. what is your point?

Why wouldn't 6 to 7 meter waves have any effect? they obviously did. The bow fell off and the water flooded the car deck.

How would the crew deal with hundreds or thousands of tons of water flooding on to the car deck in a very few minutes?
 
Last edited:
It's worth noting, there's no indication that the crew at any point were even aware that the bow had separated from the ship, since it wasn't visible from the bridge.

As for the survival ratio of crew and passengers, it's worth noting that it was in the middle of the night, so a vast majority of the latter would have been asleep in their cabins. Once the list had set in, navigating through the corridors and stairs in the bowels of the ship would have been extremely difficult.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Do you think someone 'disappeared' them?

Were they saboteurs? witnesses? spies?

Have they been murdered?

What exactly are you claiming?
Click to expand...

My default position tends towards 'clerical error' rather than anything sinister. However, it is all very strange about the twins. I guess the parents want so much for them to be alive they are easy prey for people claiming to have seen them, perhaps with the best of intentions.

The best way to have dealt with all this would have been to recover the bodies. The 2004 Tsunami with over 3,000 victims showed it is possible to systematically identify people via DNA testing. In addition, such a recovery would have solved the mystery of who were the three dead seen on the bridge? Presumably one was Captain Andresson, Officer Andres Tammes and A.N. Other.
 
KDLarsen said:
It's worth noting, there's no indication that the crew at any point were even aware that the bow had separated from the ship, since it wasn't visible from the bridge.

As for the survival ratio of crew and passengers, it's worth noting that it was in the middle of the night, so a vast majority of the latter would have been asleep in their cabins. Once the list had set in, navigating through the corridors and stairs in the bowels of the ship would have been extremely difficult.
Click to expand...

And the full complement of night crew would have been awake, mostly working above the car deck, and appropriately dressed.
 
Steve said:
Considering our source, I don't believe that anyone "vanished after being rescued".

And I note again that this particular untrustworthy source has repeatedly asserted upthread that they are not claiming there is a conspiracy.

Notice how Vixen's claims always begin with "some people think"? Carefully avoiding any claims or original thoughts that could be directly attributed to Vixen.
Click to expand...

As I say, objectivity is my middle name.

I can't see the point of pretending something is XY or Z, when it is not. Maybe I am too literal.
 
Steve said:
Well, if your whole point is that some people feel resentful then I doubt that anyone would argue about it with you. Is that your entire thought on the percentage survival of crew members, or is there another point you would like to make? Resentment is not a point to be considered in a new investigation.
Click to expand...

I am interested in this particular news item. If there is a hole in the hull, and there appears to be, then I have a lot of questions as to why it is not in the report, as one would expect.
 
Vixen said:
As I say, objectivity is my middle name.

I can't see the point of pretending something is XY or Z, when it is not. Maybe I am too literal.
Click to expand...

Actually no. The sum total of your posts on the topic show a heavy emotional involvement. You simply refuse to take responsibility for your own thoughts and hide them behind claims that you are merely repeating the (often unevidenced) thoughts of others. Your posts are chock full of insinuations and the few facts you actually post are merely a jumping off point for those insinuations. You would not recognize true objectivity if it jumped up and bit you on the ass.
 
Vixen said:
I am interested in this particular news item. If there is a hole in the hull, and there appears to be, then I have a lot of questions as to why it is not in the report, as one would expect.
Click to expand...

Good. That means we can eliminate crew member survival rates and subsequent resentment as a worthwhile topic of discussion. A little progress is always appreciated.
 
KDLarsen said:
It's worth noting, there's no indication that the crew at any point were even aware that the bow had separated from the ship, since it wasn't visible from the bridge.

As for the survival ratio of crew and passengers, it's worth noting that it was in the middle of the night, so a vast majority of the latter would have been asleep in their cabins. Once the list had set in, navigating through the corridors and stairs in the bowels of the ship would have been extremely difficult.
Click to expand...

After the power failed it would have been unlikely they would have found their way on to the deck.
 
Vixen said:
I am interested in this particular news item. If there is a hole in the hull, and there appears to be, then I have a lot of questions as to why it is not in the report, as one would expect.
Click to expand...

If it wasn't there at the time why would it be in the report?
 
Steve said:
Actually no. The sum total of your posts on the topic show a heavy emotional involvement. You simply refuse to take responsibility for your own thoughts and hide them behind claims that you are merely repeating the (often unevidenced) thoughts of others. Your posts are chock full of insinuations and the few facts you actually post are merely a jumping off point for those insinuations. You would not recognize true objectivity if it jumped up and bit you on the ass.
Click to expand...




I'll bear it in mind. Thanks for sharing your opinion of my various shortcomings with me. As for myself, I am far too polite to return the compliment.
 
Vixen said:
I don't have any powers. I am only a minnow.


:goldfish:

No point urging me to change anything. :boxedin:
Click to expand...

I didn't urge you to change anything, I agreed with others that the thread had veered into CT territitory, and should be moved to the subforum where it now resides.

My main point was that your list of questions was addressed to people making a claim that no one had made, otherwise known as a strawman.
 
Reformed Offlian said:
The fact that there were such vehicles on board on the night in question? Where was that established?
Click to expand...

How do you work it out that there must be military trucks on the M/S Estonia on the night of the accident? I will get into my listening pose as to how that would have anything to do with some kind of collision from without.

Eyewitness survivor, Sara Hedrenius reported seeing last minute military trucks loaded at the time, together with guys in military gear. The ship was late leaving and she was watching over the railings as one does.

Of course, this was 'nonsense' so the JAIC left this key observation out. Ten years later, thanks to a customs officer coming forward, it turned out that the Swedes had indeed been doing this. So Ms Hedrenius didn't have a faulty recollection, after all.


The customs officer was on holiday 28 Sept but vouched for 14th September and the 20th.
 
Vixen said:
Citation please that 'all but a handful of passengers were 'subsequently interviewed by authorities'? This sounds very grand but quite a few survivors complain they had a quick phone call and then heard nothing again. Paul Barney and Sara Hedrenius, claim they have never been contacted at all.
Click to expand...

First paragraph of chapter 6 in the final report.

JAIC final report said:
Chapter 6 is based upon 258 testimonies from 134 survivors interrogated between 28 September, 1994 and 2 February, 1997. (One Swedish survivor was not interrogated because of post-traumatic distress and two Latvians left for their home country before being interrogated. All three were passengers.)j
Click to expand...

Table 7.8 in chapter 7 lists the number of survivors brought to each hospital.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom