The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-Opened

[Andy_Ross]

Paul Barney says he is utterly certain the Estonia had the pointy bit at the end pointing upwards before it went face down.

He is not talking about the bulbous bow way down below.

Most of the pointy bit was still there. Visor finished above the waterline

 

[Axxman300]

Ie, the Edmund Fitzgerald is estimated to have sunk in no more than 10 minutes, for example. Might actually be somewhat relevant to the Estonia since it was probably a buckling cargo hatch letting in a tremendous amount of water that sank her. She wasn't a passenger vessel so casualties were low, even though all hands were lost.

WINNER.

Both lost in a storm, both took on water causing their payload to shift. Pumps can only handle so much.

 

[Vixen]

Most of the pointy bit was still there. Visor finished above the waterline

No. When the bow visor 'fell off', there would have been no pointy bit. You yourself confirmed the lower bow is a bulbous one, bulbous is the exact opposite of pointy.

 

[lobosrul5]

No. When the bow visor 'fell off', there would have been no pointy bit. You yourself confirmed the lower bow is a bulbous one, bulbous is the exact opposite of pointy.

There's more pointy bit under the waterline before the bulbous bow.

 

[JayUtah]

There's more pointy bit under the waterline before the bulbous bow.

Indeed, the icebreaker bow.

 

[Vixen]

Are you sure? Do you have an exact timeline of when the interview took place, and when Bildt made his statement?




A person reporting what they saw is not an "opinion"; it is testimony. But let's not change the topic just yet. You asked how Bildt could have known about the bow visor story. The answer is that he had heard reports from people that had been there. Can you prove otherwise?

Carl Bildt claimed the bow visor had come off within sixteen hours of the accident, 'due to a technical fault'. Hours after the accident he ordered the Swedish Maritime Board to check the bow visors on all the other ferries 'because there might be a construction fault'.

The director of Nordstrom-Thulin, joint owners with Estonia, Estline, two days after Bildt's announcement, also told the public it was the fault of the bow visor. The JAIC 4 Oct 1994, which had only just been formed announced that, 'The Estonia sank due to thousands of tons of water entering the car deck. This occurred (it continues) because the bow lockings were of a design that was too weak, that allowed for a few strong waves to break them, after which, the bow visor was torn off, ripping off the car ramp* in the process and, as a consequence the car deck was flooded.'


*Of course, it would not be enough to simply have the bow visor fall off, the car ramp would also need to come off for it to have sank so fast.

All very convenient. No investigation or calculations needed. All decided within six days. Marvellous.

 

[lobosrul5]

Carl Bildt claimed the bow visor had come off within sixteen hours of the accident, 'due to a technical fault'. Hours after the accident he ordered the Swedish Maritime Board to check the bow visors on all the other ferries 'because there might be a construction fault'.

The director of Nordstrom-Thulin, joint owners with Estonia, Estline, two days after Bildt's announcement, also told the public it was the fault of the bow visor. The JAIC 4 Oct 1994, which had only just been formed announced that, 'The Estonia sank due to thousands of tons of water entering the car deck. This occurred (it continues) because the bow lockings were of a design that was too weak, that allowed for a few strong waves to break them, after which, the bow visor was torn off, ripping off the car ramp* in the process and, as a consequence the car deck was flooded.'


*Of course, it would not be enough to simply have the bow visor fall off, the car ramp would also need to come off for it to have sank so fast.

All very convenient. No investigation or calculations needed. All decided within six days. Marvellous.

Hours after the accident he ordered the Swedish Maritime Board to check the bow visors on all the other ferries 'because there might be a construction fault'.

They formed a theory based on eye witness accounts and asked the investigators to check it out.

The director of Nordstrom-Thulin yet another person involved in the conspiracy theory whose motives are??

 

[Vixen]

What’s your problem with using concrete as repair material?

Edit: I see this question has been raised by JayUtah as well.

What was the problem in the Ship Eastland (used as a river boat) in using concrete for repairs?

Eastland was already so top-heavy that she had special restrictions concerning the number of passengers that could be carried. Prior to that, during June 1914, Eastland had again changed ownership, this time bought by the St. Joseph and Chicago Steamship Company, with Captain Harry Pedersen appointed the ship's master. In 1914, the St. Joseph and Chicago Steamship Company removed the old hardwood flooring of the forward dining room on the cabin level and replaced it with two inches of concrete. They also added a layer of cement near the aft gangway. Together, this added fifteen to twenty tons of weight.

Wiki


The owners had also stuck a few additional life boats on top so that it could get a license to carry 2,750 more passengers.

 

[Vixen]

Hours after the accident he ordered the Swedish Maritime Board to check the bow visors on all the other ferries 'because there might be a construction fault'.

They formed a theory based on eye witness accounts and asked the investigators to check it out.

The director of Nordstrom-Thulin yet another person involved in the conspiracy theory whose motives are??

Can't have done. The bow visor fell off 1:15 the ship was at near 90° list by 1:30. The engines and lights will have cut off at 40°. Some emergency lights did come on.

It was a cloudy night and would have been very dark at the end of September. Paul Barney was only able to see the ship go down because the moonlight broke through a cloud clearance and he saw the bow perfectly whilst the boat was in a near vertical straight line.

He fell out on the port side and was obviously facing towards the moon and the ship silhouette with its few lights still on. Seaman Sillaste drew several pencil drawings showing the car ramp up, which he claimed to have seen from his life raft. IIRC one or two seamen claimed to have climbed it (really? when it was a sheer wall and partly submerged?) It was the middle of the night, cloudy, all the survivors were taken to hospital, most suffering from a degree of hypothermia. There is no way the seamen were ready to conclude it was the fault of the bow visor falling off 'because the bow bolts were of a weak design' within sixteen hours so that Carl Bildt could issue that statement. It is complete and utter nonsense.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Go on, then, let's see your list. The list is in order of the time taken to sink.

You'll find that the lobby and lounge area is usually afthwartship and not the entire area, as the car deck is. A-ten-floor cruiser with passenger cabins is not an empty space, as you claim. Of course it will sink eventually but not straight away, unless it collides with something or is torpedoed.

PS I know life has been tough in the UK since Brexit, however, not nice to call it a 'third world country' just yet.

Passenger areas are not subdivided in to watertight compartments.
passenger decks including cabin deck are not separated from each other by watertight stairways. For flooding purposes the passenger spaces are one space.
Lower decks do have watertight sub division but what was their state before the ship started taking water?
How closed down were they?
Were access doorways an hatches open to allow crew passage?
Was ventilation and extraction shut down?

We already know the machinery spaces were flooding, they comprise a large section of the lower decks and a large proportion of the reserve buoyancy.

This was a ferry, not a warship with subdivided machinery spaces and only top access to spaces below the waterline.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The description of the sinking on Wikipedia describes a series of loud metallic bangs reported from about 01:00 to 01:15, after the last of which the ship immediately began to list, a Mayday call at about 01:22 and the Estonia disappearing from other ships radar around 01:50.

If a collision caused that, why were there a protracted series of loud bangs instead of just one before the ship suddenly listed, and why did nobody see the other vessel, either directly or on radar?

That's where the sabotage theory and the mysterious disappearing crew members come in to it.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The Herald of Free Enterprise did not sink. It lay on its side on a shallow bank. Had it ventured open seas and say someone opened the car ferry doors to let in the water, it would have capsized and floated upside down, ceteris paribus .

As it happened, it was barely four minutes into its journey when it capsized but thankfully the shallow bank stopped it turning belly up and many passengers and crew could be saved, as they were.

It did sink, it was on the bottom. What is that if not sunk?
If it was in deeper water it would have gone down just like the Estonia.

 

[JayUtah]

"Together, this added fifteen to twenty tons of weight."

Or an increase of 0.7% in the ship's displacement, or 1.9-point difference in the ballast ratio. (In other words, a negligible weight increase.) Having that weight topside would certainly affect the ship's stability, but not its flood rate or reserve buoyancy.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Do keep up. The AD didn't make it to the list of 'fastest sinking' because, hello, it took eleven hours. The Estonia took 35 minutes, whilst the Wilhelm Gustloff torpedoed THREE times, in three different places, 5K tonnes heavier, seven times the number of passengers, took 50 minutes.


The Estonia sank faster than a torpedoed ship.

Why do you think that is important?

I can get you a list of ships that sank a lot faster after being torpedoed if you want. I am sure you could find one yourself with minimal searching.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The sea bed where the Estonia lies is on a gradient of 30°. There is a ridge along which the upside down bridge sits. The part on a gradient is moraine clay which is very hard (Arikas says it broke his drill) the lower part is on this soft clay.

Which would explain why the wreck has shifted over the decades and started to tear apart.

 

[lobosrul5]

Why do you think that is important?

I can get you a list of ships that sank a lot faster after being torpedoed if you want. I am sure you could find one yourself with minimal searching.

But they won't be passenger ships with high death tolls which is are the only types of sinkings that are relevant because they fit Vixens narrative. I mean I could bring up the USS Indianapolis off the top of my head.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I wish the penny would drop for you that maybe Estonia sank faster than ships sunk by collision or torpedo, because she sank due to a different reason.

Thats of course aside from the that fact that list is very small. What difference does it make if Estonia sank relatively fast, though not by a large factor, compared to 9 other vessels picked only because of large loss of life?? If compared to all ship sinkings in total, you'll find some very fast ones.

Ie, the Edmund Fitzgerald is estimated to have sunk in no more than 10 minutes, for example. Might actually be somewhat relevant to the Estonia since it was probably a buckling cargo hatch letting in a tremendous amount of water that sank her. She wasn't a passenger vessel so casualties were low, even though all hands were lost.

I already gave the example of the MV Derbyshire, the largest British flagged ship ever to have been lost at sea, 300m length and 160,000 tons
She went down so quickly that a mayday was never transmitted and all 42 of the crew were lost.
She doesn't count for some reason.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I stuck to ships of a similar category as cargo ships have different trims and different superstructures. If we were t include all sea vessels, where would it end? That rowing boat Aunty Philomena overturned but sank as she was so obese that her clinging on made it sink in zippo minutes or maybe Uncle Jethsopath when his jet ski's crossed paths with a behemoth leviathan and alas he is no more and the speedboat dragging him along took seven hours to sink due to a small leak.

Re the Edmund Fitzgerald:

Wiki

How are your examples all of the same category?
Estonia was a cargo ship, it was full of cars and lorries. It had a bow that could be opened to load and unload the cargo. Which other of your examples carried a cargo and had a bow that could come off?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Can't have done. The bow visor fell off 1:15 the ship was at near 90° list by 1:30. The engines and lights will have cut off at 40°. Some emergency lights did come on.

It was a cloudy night and would have been very dark at the end of September. Paul Barney was only able to see the ship go down because the moonlight broke through a cloud clearance and he saw the bow perfectly whilst the boat was in a near vertical straight line.

He fell out on the port side and was obviously facing towards the moon and the ship silhouette with its few lights still on. Seaman Sillaste drew several pencil drawings showing the car ramp up, which he claimed to have seen from his life raft. IIRC one or two seamen claimed to have climbed it (really? when it was a sheer wall and partly submerged?) It was the middle of the night, cloudy, all the survivors were taken to hospital, most suffering from a degree of hypothermia. There is no way the seamen were ready to conclude it was the fault of the bow visor falling off 'because the bow bolts were of a weak design' within sixteen hours so that Carl Bildt could issue that statement. It is complete and utter nonsense.

If the visor was in place how did anyone see the ramp?
You do know the ramp is not a structural or watertight component?

 

[Andy_Ross]

But they won't be passenger ships with high death tolls which is are the only types of sinkings that are relevant because they fit Vixens narrative. I mean I could bring up the USS Indianapolis off the top of my head.

Lusitania 18 minutes