• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-Opened

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen said:
If there has been an accident on public transport, of course we want eye witness statements. Take Grenfell Tower, the eyewitness statements were invaluable at the public inquiry.

If you are claiming a whole bunch of survivors claimed they saw the bow visor falling off or witnessed it pounding, do provide the citations. We are all waiting in listening pose.
Click to expand...

Tell me where the survivors saw an explosion or saw a submarine ram the ship.
 
Reformed Offlian said:
Remember all this the next time you try to lecture us about not taking eyewitnesses seriously enough. I know I will. And I'll make sure everybody else does.
Click to expand...

Er, the JAIC only took the crew's statements seriously. If you look at the JAIC report, after the statements of each of the crew, the sentence, 'He saw the bow visor was missing' or similar appears for each of the crew. Yet Sillaste never said this on 28 Sept 1994 when Prime Ministers Bildt, Aho and Laar interviewed him together with police at Turku Hospital.

If you recall Bildt announced within sixteen hours of the accident that it was due to the bow visor falling off. Yet Sillaste never mentioned this until much later.
 
Vixen said:
Remind us all.
Click to expand...

No, I think I'll put you on the hook to scroll back and find it to refresh your memory, seeing as how you're constantly reminding your critics that they need to keep up.

What else causes twinning?
What were the assumptions under which the velocity (not force) estimate was made?
 
JayUtah said:
If it's not that difficult, certainly you can scroll back, find it, and correctly link it as the post you referred to.



A tad presumptuous, don't you think?
Click to expand...

I helpfully advised phiwum where to find the list yet he made no effort to do so.

he wants to know how many times the specific words 'explosion' or 'collision' occurred and IMV it is best if he counts this up for himself as his definition of each might differ from mine.

ETA: phiwum: it is post number #3039.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
I helpfully advised phiwum where to find the list yet he made no effort to do so.
Click to expand...

And I helpfully advised you that I had rebutted a claim you repeated here, and you made no effort go find it. So let's dispense with the childish games.

If you want to claim the witnesses exhibited some sort of consensus that an explosion happened, it's your responsibility to demonstrate that by the actual language, not by some vague handwaving at stuff you copy-pasted earlier.
 
Vixen said:
These are visceral experiences and you don't necessarily have to see, hear or even smell it to feel the force of either. Witnesses report either hearing and/or feeling the force of it.
Click to expand...

So you agree that nobody saw anything, did feel a reduction in the forward motion of the ship, and did hear one or more loud noises.

Cool. On that basis it was obviously zombie Hitler riding the Kraken that ripped off the bow doors before kidnapping a passenger, giving them a tattoo, then killing them and leaving the body on the bridge, before mounting up with the missing crew and riding off together into the sunset.

On the way out, the Kraken also slashed a hole in the side of the Estonia with its beak.

Simples.
 
Vixen said:
They come from this site, here. As you can see, this one is in German. English translation of his 'bangs': "ca. 00.30 hours very hard bang;
slight heel to starboard, some minutes later another much stronger bang, more heeling;
another bang and vessel heeled further."


Carl-Erik Reintaam (Swedish) here.


Paul Barney (Swedish) here.


Even the Finnish guy, Pekka Ihalainen is in Swedish: here. "truck driver who had previously been with the Coast Guard/Navy at Russarö;
to bed at 22.30 hours, woke up due to radio music at 00.32 hours, turned down the sound and slept again;
woke up again shortly afterwards from 3 very hard bangs/crashes;
realised that engines were reduced and stopped;
then the vessel heeled and drifted with wind and sea;
saw the other two ferries at port side (could not believe that ESTONIA had changed course so much after the heel);
"


Perhaps someone can comment on whether these are good translations or not.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm a little unclear here. Do you interpret "bang" and "crash" to mean "explosion"?

Because all of a sudden, it doesn't seem like the passengers are drawing conclusions willy-nilly. It seems like you are. A bang is a description of a sound. So is (in some contexts) a crash. An explosion is something more than that.

My screen door sometimes bangs in the wind. It doesn't usually explode in the wind.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
These are visceral experiences and you don't necessarily have to see, hear or even smell it to feel the force of either. Witnesses report either hearing and/or feeling the force of it.
Click to expand...

So no eyewitnesses to explosions or ramming.

How many of them actually mention explosions or ramming?
 
Vixen said:
I helpfully advised phiwum where to find the list yet he made no effort to do so.

he wants to know how many times the specific words 'explosion' or 'collision' occurred and IMV it is best if he counts this up for himself as his definition of each might differ from mine.

ETA: phiwum: it is post number #3039.
Click to expand...

How can you have different definitions?

Either they mention explosions and ramming or they don't.
 
phiwum said:
ETA: I don't read German. Do you? If not, where have you found an English translation of the German page regarding Voronin? Thanks again.
Click to expand...

I do, though I'm rusty, and I understand there's at least one native speaker in the discussion, so I would defer to him. "Schlag" or "Stoss" could be "bang" if you mean some sort of dull thudding like "The landlord was banging on my door" or "My neighbors were banging furniture around upstairs all night".

I would expect a German describing a sharp report like gunfire to use something like "Knall" or even "Peng".

Explodey sounds might be more like "Hallen" or "Droehnen" (sorry, I'm having some difficulties with my keyboard, so no umlauts or Eszetts for now)

The words here simply aren't precise enough to infer: "Explosion!" Or "Kamikaze submarine!"
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
They come from this site, here. As you can see, this one is in German. English translation of his 'bangs': "ca. 00.30 hours very hard bang;
slight heel to starboard, some minutes later another much stronger bang, more heeling;
another bang and vessel heeled further."


Carl-Erik Reintaam (Swedish) here.


Paul Barney (Swedish) here.


Even the Finnish guy, Pekka Ihalainen is in Swedish: here. "truck driver who had previously been with the Coast Guard/Navy at Russarö;
to bed at 22.30 hours, woke up due to radio music at 00.32 hours, turned down the sound and slept again;
woke up again shortly afterwards from 3 very hard bangs/crashes;
realised that engines were reduced and stopped;
then the vessel heeled and drifted with wind and sea;
saw the other two ferries at port side (could not believe that ESTONIA had changed course so much after the heel);
"


Perhaps someone can comment on whether these are good translations or not.
Click to expand...

I've dived into these four best I could. I couldn't use links to Swedish, German, etc., so I looked at estoniaferrydisaster.net for what I could find. I take what they say with a large grain of salt, but do tell me what sources you use.

Your summary of the first link mentions a bang, but no explosion or collision.

I don't know why you cite Reintamm. The summary of his testimony mentions a scraping noise, but no explosion or collision. Perhaps the original Swedish says something else, but did you manage to read it? The link to English translation is dead.

The summary for Barney mentions that he awoke from a bang/shock and thought there had been a collision (not that he had heard a collision). Again, the link to the English translation is a dead link, but at least this one mentions a collision.

The summary for Ihalainen also mentions hearing bangs, but no mention of collision or explosion. Again, the English translation link is dead.

In each case, all I could find was summaries as well as unreadable (due to language) links from you. The summaries could totally be inaccurate, but none of them mentions explosion and one mentions that the fella thought there had been a collision. If you have better information than I have, let me know.

Can you read these languages? If not, these are not your real sources.

So, all this talk about people knowing what an explosion sounds like is beside the point so far. I haven't seen anyone say they heard an explosion. I've seen bangs (translated from a site that I don't particularly trust, admittedly, but if you have a better source, do let me know).

Who the heck claimed to hear explosions?
 
Vixen said:
How difficult is it to scroll back to messages dated 31 August GMT BST? I wonder how sincere your request is when you can't take the trouble but want me to list them all over again. I expect even then you will not be satisfied.
Click to expand...

I looked at the list of four people you've cited. No explosions mentioned in the summary of the lot of them, one guy is summarized as thinking there had been a collision.

Tell me: did anyone really say they heard an explosion?
 
Vixen said:
If there has been an accident on public transport, of course we want eye witness statements. Take Grenfell Tower, the eyewitness statements were invaluable at the public inquiry.

If you are claiming a whole bunch of survivors claimed they saw the bow visor falling off or witnessed it pounding, do provide the citations. We are all waiting in listening pose.
Click to expand...

Another non sequitur.

Again: do you believe the guys who heard the collision?

Do you believe the guys who heard the explosion (though I haven't seen such summarized testimony)?

Did both occur then? Or are at least some of those witnesses wrong?
 
Vixen said:
I helpfully advised phiwum where to find the list yet he made no effort to do so.

he wants to know how many times the specific words 'explosion' or 'collision' occurred and IMV it is best if he counts this up for himself as his definition of each might differ from mine.

ETA: phiwum: it is post number #3039.
Click to expand...

Thanks much.

Looking at that list, most of what I see is mentions of bangs (sometimes "metallic bangs" or "metallic crashes"). Which of course does not mean explosion. There's some talk of a "heavy loud noise" described as "bom". These reports are not relevant, since they mention neither collision nor explosion. Neither are the reports of scraping noises.

So, which ones are relevant? I shall list the ones that are most noteworthy. Keep in mind that some of these are summaries, and all of them are of unknown origin (to me).

Explosions:

Altti Hakanpää -- I thought it sounded like an explosion.

Collisions:

Carl Övberg -- it was a short, sharp intense crash as if the ship had struck against something;

Nikolajs Andrejev -- it felt as if the vessel had collided with something and at the same time was heeling over extremely;

Stephan Duijndam -- woke up at 01.00 hours from a noise as if the vessel had collided with something

Paul Barney -- woke up from a bang/shock and thought there had been a collision;

Sarah Hedrenius -- she thought they had hit a rock

Maria Fägersten -- at about midnight the vessel ran against something

Tanel Moosaar -- thought vessel had run aground



Interestingly, some of the cited summaries are pretty strongly in favor of the bow visor being the problem. This includes the repetitive bangs (which could not be a collision), some of which sounded metallic (not like an explosion), but look at this fella:

Eckard Klug -- in his opinion the unsecured cars and trucks had moved forward against the bow ramp due to the hard setting in of vessel's bow and forced the bow ramp open and this is the cause of the casualty;
Klug heard in addition to the above explained bangs a bang which was heavy as if breaking of a thick plate;

A couple of others mentioned something "beating against the hull".
Shall we respect this eyewitness, Vixen?

Summary: One person mentioned an explosion.

Seven persons mentioned something like a collision.

The summaries of many people mention "bangs", "crashes" and "bom", which could be used to describe a collision or an explosion but no such interpretation is explicit.

One person seems to have nailed it, but screw him, am I right?

Please let me know if I missed anything. And then tell me again why you think several people heard an explosion, when only one said it "sounded like" an explosion.

Jay, if these summaries are correct, you really do owe the survivors an apology. They weren't being conclusory for the most part. That was all Vixen, near as I can see.
 
Vixen said:
Remind us all.
Click to expand...
Vixen said:
ETA: phiwum: it is post number #3039.
Click to expand...

Excellent, thank you. One good turn deserves another, although I don't think everyone needs to be reminded of the rebuttal.

Twinning is also an indicator of cyclic deformation, which is the most effective way, and the second most common way, to induce metal fatigue. I gave the metallurgical details previously. Your response was a deflection that presumed incorrectly you knew what cyclic deformation was. You didn't pursue it further, even when prompted.

You're still trying to measure force in meters per second. I'm surprised you didn't remember the entire discussion that ensued from that. The number you quoted is not a force, but a detonation rate. Yes it's possible to infer a detonation rate based on twinning in metals, but only under the assumption that the twinning occurred from a high strain-rate deformation. If it didn't, then it doesn't even make sense to ask the question.

A few people have noted the cyclically deranged nature of this thread, which seems to arise from your inability to read or remember the rebuttals given to points you raise. You just repeat the same copypasta, even retaining the same errors you made earlier that others corrected. Is it possible to make some progress, or are you stuck in an insurmountable rut?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom