The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-Opened

[Vixen]

We don't know the system didn't pick up the sub. You made that bit up.

NATO held a similar exercise in 1993 and a secondhand Russian submarine was sneaked out then, undetected and only picked up later by equipment at Bornholm Island - some 500 miles away from St Petersburg. The disclosure led the USA to formally complain about Russia selling equipment to countries like Iran and other tin-pot Third World dictatorships. Iran had a contract for more Russian submarines. The point being made here is that there was a massive convergence of NATO ships and aircrafts in the region, they never spotted the acoustic signatures so Russia knew that a NATO exercise was a good time to 'go under the radar' as it were in its hostile activities. The inference to be drawn is that were there a Russian submarine within the vicinity of the Estonia one could be none the wiser, due to the large presence of NATO submarines all over the place.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

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.

Not being trained in metallurgy, I refrained from comment initially.

But just informally, having binge-watched air crash investigation docs when suffering insomnia, it has a similar appearance as images from actual planes and simulation graphics I've seen hundreds of examples of.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

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.

Lots of NSA documents are secret.

I dare say a lot of them have nothing to do with collisions or explosives.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

And this is a US National Security Agency classified secret because...?

Of potentially any of thousands of different reasons.

Why pick the one or two reasons that happen to coincide with your delusion pet theory?

 

[JayUtah]

Of potentially any of thousands of different reasons.

Why pick the one or two reasons that happen to coincide with your delusion pet theory?

Perhaps to accumulate examples of argument from silence for a new textbook?

 

[Andy_Ross]

That is what a 'crash' does. You come across something in your path and it halts your progress, if only momentarily.

It either halts or doesn't.

Oh I see, so suddenly the vessel is ENORMOUSLY HEAVY yet a bow visor one three-hundred-and twenty-seventh of its weight* can cause passengers to believe the ship had crashed/had a series of two or three explosions and shudders but now it is TOO BIG to come to a halt when struck by a 5,000 tonne submarine in motion.

*Imagine a street of 327 houses, and when one slams the door on one of them, all the other 326 houses are supposed to have experienced an enormous bang and a crash and a shudder.

pathetic

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Yes, I'm asking. Please answer. Have you ever held a government security clearance? Yes or no.

...and to forestall a likely dodge attempt: No, the simple fact of holding a security clearance is not itself typically classified. It is usually considered poor OPSEC to brag about currently held clearances, though.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

That is what a 'crash' does. You come across something in your path and it halts your progress, if only momentarily.


Oh I see, so suddenly the vessel is ENORMOUSLY HEAVY yet a bow visor one three-hundred-and twenty-seventh of its weight* can cause passengers to believe the ship had crashed/had a series of two or three explosions and shudders but now it is TOO BIG to come to a halt when struck by a 5,000 tonne submarine in motion.

*Imagine a street of 327 houses, and when one slams the door on one of them, all the other 326 houses are supposed to have experienced an enormous bang and a crash and a shudder.

Imagine a 40 pound front door slamming in a 200 ton, 2000 sq ft. house. Might it be heard/felt throughout the house? To make the proportions more accurate, what if you slammed a 600 pound garage door?

 

[JayUtah]

It either halts or doesn't.

Yep, we can add conservation of momentum to the list of "laws of physics" that Vixen doesn't get.

 

[Andy_Ross]

"Just" 400 miles away? So it would have taken any of those ships around 9-10 hours to reach the Estonia's position. Far too late to participate in any rescue (of survivors) operation*.

.

far longer. In calm sea a warship makes about 25 to 30 kts. In rough sea the speed has to be cut back, In heavy seas you will be lucky to make 15 to 20 kts

 

[Andy_Ross]

Er, the one-hour's flight refers to aircraft. You do know military ships have aircraft carriers. And helicopters - all the cruise liners have helicopter pads - it was a 'search and rescue' exercise, after all. You'd think at least a distress signal would be picked up and the opportunity to carry out a real-life search and rescue.

So i seems our Russian friends successfully blocked out all distress signals very effectively.

How would a helicopter fly off a flight deck in a storm?

 

[Andy_Ross]

But the bodies of the Herald of Free Enterpise were recovered. The last body of the Concordia took three years to retrieve yet retrieve it they did. The TWA 800 flight, 4,000 dives and the bodies were recovered one by one, apart from a few still missing. Alpha Piper 190 kms out and 144m down yet every one of those men were returned home to their families, apart from the still missing.

It is nonsense of course, the UK has no affinity to any other nation than its own. Why would it care a darn about non-nationals.

Herald and Concordia were not submerged.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Regarding Piper Alpha, there were credible concerns about a terrorism factor as well. But the chief reason for the extensive (and very costly) recovery of the platform's crew quarters and bodies was that Occidental - the owner/operator of the platform - funded the operation for political and PR reasons.
:

Also the galley and dining section that broke away and sank was a lot smaller and lot less complicated than a whole ferry.

 

[Andy_Ross]

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.

What 'chinooks'? They are not naval helicopters.

What ships and helicopters were available to the NATO force?

Why would they fly over 400 miles when dedicated SAR shore based helicopters were closer?

 

[Andy_Ross]

NATO held a similar exercise in 1993 and a secondhand Russian submarine was sneaked out then, undetected and only picked up later by equipment at Bornholm Island - some 500 miles away from St Petersburg. The disclosure led the USA to formally complain about Russia selling equipment to countries like Iran and other tin-pot Third World dictatorships. Iran had a contract for more Russian submarines. The point being made here is that there was a massive convergence of NATO ships and aircrafts in the region, they never spotted the acoustic signatures so Russia knew that a NATO exercise was a good time to 'go under the radar' as it were in its hostile activities. The inference to be drawn is that were there a Russian submarine within the vicinity of the Estonia one could be none the wiser, due to the large presence of NATO submarines all over the place.

What was the exercise? what ships were involved? Where were they in relation to this submarine?
So it was picked up?

What does it have to do with the Estonia?

 

[Delphic Oracle]

What was the exercise? what ships were involved? Where were they in relation to this submarine?

So it was picked up?



What does it have to do with the Estonia?

It would seem to me that a military exercise is rather undermined if they suddenly go "oh, there's a civilian vessel I distress hundreds of miles away, let's focus on that, instead!"

 

[Andy_Ross]

It would seem to me that a military exercise is rather undermined if they suddenly go "oh, there's a civilian vessel I distress hundreds of miles away, let's focus on that, instead!"

I think this refers to an earlier NATO exercise and an earlier submarine that the Russians sold to Iran.


It all gets confusing.

 

[Axxman300]

What 'chinooks'? They are not naval helicopters.

What ships and helicopters were available to the NATO force?

Why would they fly over 400 miles when dedicated SAR shore based helicopters were closer?

There is a US Navy/ Marine Corps version, the CH-46, which is a smaller version of the CH-47. The Marines still fly them. They have a 550 mile range which translates into a 275 operational radius at sea. The Swedes even bought ten of them but had phased them out by the time of the accident.

 

[Andy_Ross]

There is a US Navy/ Marine Corps version, the CH-46, which is a smaller version of the CH-47. The Marines still fly them. They have a 550 mile range which translates into a 275 operational radius at sea. The Swedes even bought ten of them but had phased them out by the time of the accident.

I can guarantee they weren't involved in a NATO exercise in the Baltic.

At the time the RN were operating the Lynx off ships, it has a range of 530 miles and an endurance of 5 and a half hours with extra fuel tanks installed.

They were also operating the Sea King and Wessex off the carriers but they were not involved in any Baltic exercises, the Wessex had a range of 300 miles.

A Sea King could have made it with a range of 750 miles and an endurance of nearly 8 hours but they were not in the Baltic.

Again, why would a nato exercixe over 400 miles away be involved at all when there were shore based assets a lot closer?

 

[Reformed Offlian]

I can guarantee they weren't involved in a NATO exercise in the Baltic.

At the time the RN were operating the Lynx off ships, it has a range of 530 miles and an endurance of 5 and a half hours with extra fuel tanks installed.

They were also operating the Sea King and Wessex off the carriers but they were not involved in any Baltic exercises, the Wessex had a range of 300 miles.

A Sea King could have made it with a range of 750 miles and an endurance of nearly 8 hours but they were not in the Baltic.

Again, why would a nato exercixe over 400 miles away be involved at all when there were shore based assets a lot closer?

This is all a red herring, anyway. If the NATO forces *did* insert themselves into the rescue operation, Vixen would be saying: "A-ha! There must have been military secrets on that ferry!"