The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-Opened

Status
Not open for further replies.
JayUtah said:
Edited by Agatha: 
Edited to match quoted post.


You have attempted to deflect several valid criticisms of your claims based on vague, handwaving references to "the laws of physics." This implies that your knowledge of those laws is sufficient to allow you simply to refer to them and that no further inquiry is warranted.

I'm testing your knowledge of those laws.

Please explain how an impact against the side of a ship will have any appreciable effect on its forward momentum.

Tell me how fast a 5,000 tonne object would need to be traveling -- and in what direction -- to stop MS Estonia moving at 14 knots.

Yes, I'm capable of answering these questions myself. But the objective is to compel you to demonstration your prowess with "the laws of physics" such that we can have some degree of confidence that your prior references to them actually have merit, and were not just ignorant appeals to things you know nothing about.

Put up or shut up.
Click to expand...



I'm still chuckling at Vixen's latest scientifically-illiterate and SI-unit-ignorant attempt at an equation:

1.9kt x 18,000t = 34,200 joules
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LondonJohn said:
I'm still chuckling at Vixen's latest scientifically-illiterate and SI-unit-ignorant attempt at an equation:
Click to expand...

It should get an award :) There used to be a monthly one here called The Stundies, but I think that was limited to 9/11 CT.
 
Vixen said:
But there were no American citizens involved in the accident.
Click to expand...

Which is one reason why the NSA is not obligated to say anything.


The NSA told author of The Hole Drew Wilson that under the FOIA the document he wanted was exempt under the FOIA, which means 'classified'. Not even a redacted copy is available.
Click to expand...

And?

Everything the NSA does is secret.

If I were to pester MI6 about operations based out of Belize they would tell me to get lost, politely, but firmly.
 
Vixen said:
The appeal court judge, Johan Hirschfeldt was tasked with investigating a whistleblower's claims that when he was a Customs Officer he was ordered by powers higher than the government (who oversee border control) to let through military arrivals from the Estonia ferry uninspected. This happened 14th September 1994 and on 20 September 1994. His curiosity got the better of him and he insisted on looking. He says he saw what looked like electronic equipment in one of the boxes. on 27 Sept - 28 th Sept 1994 he was on holiday (however Carl Ovberg and Sara Hedrenius said in the eyewitness statements they saw military trucks loaded on the the boat at the last minute, with military escort. Hirschfeld stood up in the Swedish government riksdag 2005 and confirmed that Sweden had indeed smuggled FSU military secrets out of Estonia on the Estonia ferry, so that is a matter of recorded fact and not a conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...

And?

This has nothing to do with the Estonia's sinking. You ignore the fact that her sister ship received damage to the hood (bow-cover) bolts while in rough seas and put into drydock for repairs. This suggests that there was a problem which plagued that specific design and vintage. The failing locks and hinges along with the un-strapped vehicles sliding around on the car deck account for all noises the passengers heard.

For all of your bluster you have not been able to get past these facts.
 
Vixen said:
If the ship was in a storm, it is quite possible for the location of the hole to have been completely beneath water. AFAICS it is at the waterline and Evertsson describes it as below the waterline.
Click to expand...

There was no torpedo.

The hole is (or looks to me like) stress fracture since it is right along the seam of the hull plates.

Why this is laughable is there are hundreds of photographed shipwrecks with torpedo damage in full view. The hole was not caused by a torpedo. The hole was not caused by a strike from a mystery sub that never put in for repairs anywhere in the world.

If it is a stress fracture it could have been caused at any point after the Estonia rolled on her side, and sank. No body has proven otherwise at this moment in time.
 
Axxman300 said:
Which is one reason why the NSA is not obligated to say anything.




And?

Everything the NSA does is secret.

If I were to pester MI6 about operations based out of Belize they would tell me to get lost, politely, but firmly.
Click to expand...

The NSA has three documents running to seven pages about the Estonia accident. The fact it is not available under the FOIA indicates the public have been censored from knowing the truth under the guise of 'secret'. This indicates there was a collision and/or explosives involved but as the JAIC were not allowed to talk about it it just harped on about the bow visor instead.
 
Axxman300 said:
And?

This has nothing to do with the Estonia's sinking. You ignore the fact that her sister ship received damage to the hood (bow-cover) bolts while in rough seas and put into drydock for repairs. This suggests that there was a problem which plagued that specific design and vintage. The failing locks and hinges along with the un-strapped vehicles sliding around on the car deck account for all noises the passengers heard.

For all of your bluster you have not been able to get past these facts.
Click to expand...

You ignore the fact the JAIC declared the Estonia seaworthy so it is neither here nor there what state some other ship was in.

Or are you saying the JAIC are incorrect after all?
 
Vixen said:
The huge NATO exercise was a s nearby as Skagerrak, just four hundred miles away and one hour's flight. Ironically, one of their exercises was rescue missions. Did they not hear the distress calls? Were they all jammed by the Russians so that anyone outside of the area missed it? Fourteen nations on a search-and rescue exercise and they knew NOTHING about the stricken ship all night.

How do I know what type of sub could have collided with the Estonia? Looking at the facts of the matter, two reliable witnesses IMV who saw the military trucks loaded onto the ferry escorted by the military, Carl Bildt knew about the accident almost straight away yet the NATO rescue mission only one hours flight away - and many of these ships can carry 40 super fast aircraft on their decks, not to mention chinook or paramedical helicoptors. So Carl Bildt immediately labels it a Herald of Free Enterprise type accident. His top military guy advices the wreck and the bodies shouldn't be brought up from day one. No mention of the hole in the starboard which is undoubtedly there yet ignored by the JAIC. It seems to me a clear act of sabotage of some sort, or at least a possibility of same, which cannot be dismissed as 'the survivors must be imaging things and have false memories, as described by Dr. Loftus'. Given Sweden admitted it did smuggle Russian secrets on that passenger ferry, but only ten years later, and refuses to confirm the eyewitnesses who saw the military trucks loaded on 28 Sept. ISTM we can only assume that Sweden and the three intelligence agencies helping Estonia set up its own after the KGB were booted out had a reason for classifying the accident as secret and not going after the murderers - for that is what they are - because they had a liability in it, too, in using a passenger ferry at all. Given what we know about Russian submarines scouting the area and the KGB and its successor doing things outwith Yeltsin's knowledge or authority, had the means and military know how to (a) plant a timed device, if there was one , but it did go off n the stroke of midnight, and (b) collide something into the vessel so that it would sink for sure within minutes, together with (c) drowning out all radio wavelengths to interfere with Estonia's distress calls and (d) getting away with it completely, then I think there is a very strong case it was a KGB hit to prevent state secrets passed on to hostile (in their eyes) foreign powers. Calling it 'classified' by those agencies smuggling the secrets to save face is despicable IMV as the families of those innocent men, women and children deserve to know the truth.

What type of submarine/other brought down the Estonia? I don't know.


The Sound Surveillance System SOSUS failed to pick up the submarine that was sold to Iran as it headed out of the Baltic. We know about the Iran incident because the Swedish government issued a formal complaint to Russia when it found out about it. That steathy steal also happened during a NATO exercise involving literally dozens or hundreds of boats and planes.
Click to expand...

the exercise was 400 miles away! how could it have helped?
 
Axxman300 said:
There was no torpedo.

The hole is (or looks to me like) stress fracture since it is right along the seam of the hull plates.

Why this is laughable is there are hundreds of photographed shipwrecks with torpedo damage in full view. The hole was not caused by a torpedo. The hole was not caused by a strike from a mystery sub that never put in for repairs anywhere in the world.

If it is a stress fracture it could have been caused at any point after the Estonia rolled on her side, and sank. No body has proven otherwise at this moment in time.
Click to expand...

And this is a US National Security Agency classified secret because...?
 
JayUtah said:
I've fulfilled contracts for the NSA.
I've been to Belize.
Click to expand...

:D

giphy.gif
 
Captain_Swoop said:
the exercise was 400 miles away! how could it have helped?
Click to expand...

NATO was on a search and rescue misson...er, hello? Paul Barney was last to be recued alive at past seven o'clock in the morning some six hours after the 'accident'. Its rescue helicopters will have had infra-red light to make out figures in the dark. Of the 137 who came out alive, another 200 or so died from hypothermia or drowning after falling out of a raft. More people could have been saved with a more speedy rescue. A real life chance to help a real rescue operation instead of role-playing at Skagerrak. Even if it took a chinook helicopter three hours to get there, more people would have survived.
 
Vixen said:
The NSA has three documents running to seven pages about the Estonia accident. The fact it is not available under the FOIA indicates the public have been censored from knowing the truth under the guise of 'secret'. This indicates there was a collision and/or explosives involved but as the JAIC were not allowed to talk about it it just harped on about the bow visor instead.
Click to expand...
Have you ever held a government security clearance?
 
Vixen said:
The NSA has three documents running to seven pages about the Estonia accident. The fact it is not available under the FOIA indicates the public have been censored from knowing the truth under the guise of 'secret'. This indicates there was a collision and/or explosives involved but as the JAIC were not allowed to talk about it it just harped on about the bow visor instead.
Click to expand...

I have read hundreds of declassified NSA documents from the Cold War. Let me speculate on what's in those 7 pages:

Page 1 - The cover page with a title like Estonia Ferry Sinking along with the date.

Page 2 & 3 - A summery of communications recorded by NSA listening posts in Denmark, Scotland, and Germany detailing the distress calls and the reaction to those distress calls, and subsequent phone calls made by various counties to their SAR and navies, and relevant government officials.

Page 4 & 5 - transcripts of the distress calls and highlighter converations between rescuing countries.

Page 6 - A summery of the report.

Page 7 - End page usually detailing who received the NSA report.

I know, sexy right?
 
Vixen said:
The Sound Surveillance System SOSUS failed to pick up the submarine that was sold to Iran as it headed out of the Baltic. We know about the Iran incident because the Swedish government issued a formal complaint to Russia when it found out about it. That steathy steal also happened during a NATO exercise involving literally dozens or hundreds of boats and planes.
Click to expand...

We don't know the system didn't pick up the sub. You made that bit up.
 
Vixen said:
NATO was on a search and rescue misson...er, hello? Paul Barney was last to be recued alive at past seven o'clock in the morning some six hours after the 'accident'. Its rescue helicopters will have had infra-red light to make out figures in the dark. Of the 137 who came out alive, another 200 or so died from hypothermia or drowning after falling out of a raft. More people could have been saved with a more speedy rescue. A real life chance to help a real rescue operation instead of role-playing at Skagerrak. .
Click to expand...

The NATO exercise was not classified in any way. If you put some effort in you might get details about what they did and didn't do about Estonia.

Even if it took a chinook helicopter three hours to get there, more people would have survived
Click to expand...

The maximum range for a CH-47 is 400 miles. The NATO maneuvers were 400 miles away. I'd tell you to do the math but...

Your mythical Chinook would have arrived at the Estonia just in time to ditch into the ocean.

The internet can be your friend:

https://www.boeing.com/defense/ch-47-chinook/
 
Vixen said:
And this is a US National Security Agency classified secret because...?
Click to expand...

It isn't. To my knowledge the NSA has no position on the sinking of Estonia, nor the newly discover hole in the side, nor the current maritime operation to re-survey the wreck (although it is safe to assume they're listening and copying telemetry 'cuz a spy agency gotta spy).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom