The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-Opened

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen said:
It seems to be at the water line, not above it.
Click to expand...

How did you conclude that? The centroid of the hole is right at the paint margin. Can you find any pictures of MV Estonia underway in which the paint margin is at or below the waterline?

Do you understand that the forward most portion of any modern submarine -- the part that would strike an obstacle first -- is underwater at all times? You have the burden to explain how a submarine can strike at ship at any depth other than below its waterline.
 
Vixen said:
Obviously something that needed to be done by stealth.
Click to expand...

How could a sub hole the ship above the water line? (I've only just scanned the thread, but I've seen the question put several times with no obvious answer suggested)
 
Captain_Swoop said:
What about it?

What do breaking waves on a shore have to do with the open sea?
Click to expand...

The claim is that that 2,000 tonnes of seawater crashing through the car ramp would have made one a hell of a noise but no-one reported it. Someone disputed the level of noise this would make. The witnesses did report a series of bangs and shudders occurring sometime before the list happened.
 
Vixen said:
It seems to be at the water line, not above it.
Click to expand...

If you look at pictures of the Estonia, the hole, with the possible exception of lowest part of the 'cross' is above water.

Seeing the shape and size of a submarine, how could it possibly have gotten that high?
 
Vixen said:
Submarines cannot 'see' aft so if one was lurking in the Baltic and was emerging it might not have seen the Estonia coming towards it from behind.
Click to expand...

Inconsistent with impact damage to the starboard side.

A modern submarine that is submerged is deaf on its aft quarter only when moving at relatively high speeds. At other times, towed sonar arrays provide perfectly adequate sonar coverage. A modern submarine that is on the surface has its bridge manned with lookouts. You know, to avoid collisions.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
If it was a Swedish sub that hit the ferry way hasn't anyone mentioned it in all these years?

Complete silence from the crew, naval staff and repair yard, government ministry people, government ministers or members of the PM staff. Many hundreds of people involved and not a peep.

Things like that leak out. You would think that at least some of the crew had feelings of guilt about all the people they killed and were told to shut up about.
Not one member of the naval staff or dockyard workers, ministry of defence staff or government bureaucrats ordered to cover up hundreds of deaths had any remorse? not one deathbed confession or 'leak' to the press?
Click to expand...

Really? The Swedish press is subsidised by the government so won't be publishing anti-establishment stuff anytime soon. If it is someone acting in an official capacity, their anonymity is guaranteed, as with policemen who are forced to shoot dead suspects, or soldiers at war. No, I do not believe that a member of the navy - whether Russian or Swedish or even British - would ever feel moved to 'confess' because they will see it as part of their job and thankful they are guaranteed anonymity. If it was a rogue inexperienced third world crew, having just bought a sub from the Russians, they are not likely to come forward, either and nor will the Russians, unless they want a casus belli.
 
erwinl said:
That conspiracy sure is growing and growing in scope, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Conspiracies worthy of the name never stay small. The most impressive thing is always the thousands and thousands of people in the know who are required to remain uniformly silent.
 
Vixen said:
Perhaps provide definitive proof it is 'above the water line'?
Click to expand...

This picture?
picture.php
 
Vixen said:
Perhaps provide definitive proof it is 'above the water line'?
Click to expand...

Try harder.

JayUtah said:
How did you conclude that? The centroid of the hole is right at the paint margin. Can you find any pictures of MV Estonia underway in which the paint margin is at or below the waterline?

Do you understand that the forward most portion of any modern submarine -- the part that would strike an obstacle first -- is underwater at all times? You have the burden to explain how a submarine can strike at ship at any depth other than below its waterline.
Click to expand...
 
erwinl said:
This picture?
Click to expand...

One can legitimately argue that in these pictures she's riding high because she is unloaded. Luckily there are plenty of pictures of the ship underway, where we can determine that she's riding lower in the water, but still not to the point where the blue painted waterline is at or below the actual physical waterline.
 
Vixen said:
Submarines cannot 'see' aft so if one was lurking in the Baltic and was emerging it might not have seen the Estonia coming towards it from behind. Maybe it was a Russian sub after all and Bildt wanted to avoid an incendiary situation in Estonia, with Russia feeling it needed to bring in 'peace-keeping troops' and never leave.

Fact is, the Russian Navy put out two official disclaimers saying none of their fleet was in operation as of the time of the accident, yet, the Finnish coastguards had to intercept a Russian vessel the Leonid Bykof. heading towards the rocks within one hour of the accident, so can't believe every statement issued, which appear to be more to do with PR and reputation management than factual truth.
Click to expand...

Why can't a submarine 'see aft'?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom