The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-Opened

[Vixen]

What interests me is the poor loading of the car deck which led to the list once she was underway. I wonder what kind of stress this added to the ship in that weather?

The JAIC in its report said the cars were loaded correctly and properly distributed and lashed.

 

[Vixen]

If they counter flooded ballast to try and correct it the reserve buoyancy would have been reduced.

AIUI the ballasts were already full to the brim.

 

[Vixen]

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere, but can't remember the source, that even with full counter ballast tanks Estonia was still at a 2 to 3 degree list when leaving port.

0.5 according to the JAIC.

 

[Andy_Ross]

When there has been an accident of any sort, it is easy in retrospect to say the 'driver was going too fast' (although driving above speed limit is a major cause of road accidents) or that the crew were not prepared. Just knowing those facts doesn't ipso facto tell us the cause of the accident.

They are contributing factors.
If the captain had slowed the ship and his crew were properly trained fewer people might have died.

 

[Andy_Ross]

AIUI the ballasts were already full to the brim.

So how was the cargo properly loaded if the ballast needed filling?

 

[Andy_Ross]

The JAIC in its report said the cars were loaded correctly and properly distributed and lashed.

So why was counter ballasting needed to try and correct a list?

 

[Axxman300]

The JAIC in its report said the cars were loaded correctly and properly distributed and lashed.

Let me get this straight; you tout eye-witness testimony over the physical evidence to support your claims, but ignore multiple drivers - including truck drivers - who say their vehicles were not strapped down, only set their parking breaks.

You can't have it both ways. Yes, in Conspiracy World you can, but not here.

 

[Axxman300]

When there has been an accident of any sort, it is easy in retrospect to say the 'driver was going too fast' (although driving above speed limit is a major cause of road accidents) or that the crew were not prepared. Just knowing those facts doesn't ipso facto tell us the cause of the accident.

Well, you keep quoting the JAIC. Did you read it to the end?

 

[Andy_Ross]

For anyone interested, here is a link to a PDF of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency Marine Guidance Note 621
Roll-on/Roll-off Ships - Guidance for the Stowage and Securing of Vehicles

https://www.calmac.co.uk/media/7016/MGN-621/pdf/MGN_621.pdf?m=1599048061607

 

[Vixen]

They are contributing factors.
If the captain had slowed the ship and his crew were properly trained fewer people might have died.

If it was sabotage or a collision then the speed of the vessel and the training of the crew wouldn't make a hap'worth of difference.

 

[lobosrul5]

If it was sabotage or a collision then the speed of the vessel and the training of the crew wouldn't make a hap'worth of difference.

Huh? Things like quicker reaction to the fact that something was wrong, damage control, setting the emergency beacons, alerting the passengers and getting them to the lifeboats quicker would've made a difference no matter the cause of the sinking.

 

[Vixen]

So how was the cargo properly loaded if the ballast needed filling?

The JAIC is who said the cargo was properly loaded.

I assume if the ballasts are not adequate to correct the trim then once the listing has reached a point of no return, it is time to evacuate the ship. If the thing was involved in a collision then rebalancing the ballasts won't help.

 

[Vixen]

So why was counter ballasting needed to try and correct a list?

We were talking about the list at the start of the journey. Presumably the JAIC ruled a list of 0.5 was in the margins of safety.

 

[Vixen]

Let me get this straight; you tout eye-witness testimony over the physical evidence to support your claims, but ignore multiple drivers - including truck drivers - who say their vehicles were not strapped down, only set their parking breaks.

You can't have it both ways. Yes, in Conspiracy World you can, but not here.

You are still not understanding that the JAIC findings are effectively expunged or there wouldn't be a new investigation. The JAIC report clearly says that lorries were lashed in accordance with the weather conditions, whereas because of the tight packing, car drivers were merely told to apply a hand brake and put the vehicle in reverse gear.

 

[Vixen]

Well, you keep quoting the JAIC. Did you read it to the end?

The JAIC report is your bible so when you complain about its findings then you are effectively conceding the JAIC report falls short.

 

[Vixen]

Huh? Things like quicker reaction to the fact that something was wrong, damage control, setting the emergency beacons, alerting the passengers and getting them to the lifeboats quicker would've made a difference no matter the cause of the sinking.

No. Those passengers were doomed. Whoever was responsible made sure of that.

 

[lobosrul5]

No. Those passengers were doomed. Whoever was responsible made sure of that.

Except the ones who managed to survive.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Except the ones who managed to survive.

Ah, well they weren't doomed, obviously. Only the doomed were doomed and there was nothing a trained crew could have done to save them on account of how doomed they were.

 

[Andy_Ross]

If it was sabotage or a collision then the speed of the vessel and the training of the crew wouldn't make a hap'worth of difference.

Of course they would. They could have saved the ship or at least got everyone off alive.

 

[Vixen]

Except the ones who managed to survive.

A mere ten percent, excluding the crew. 9/10 chance of dying.