The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-opened Part II

[Vixen]

From Postimees, the media group helping to fund the current expedition:

Some victims’ relatives say all previous research into the accident, which has triggered numerous conspiracy theories over the years, had been conducted to hide the real cause of the accident.

“This inquiry is very important for us to find the real reason why the M/S Estonia sank,” Lennart Berglund, the head of a Swedish victims group SEA, told the Estonian newspaper Postimees.

 

[Vixen]

This was the point you were addressing responding to:


How does a link to a Wikipedia article about the rank of lieutenant colonel explain why you chose to highlight the equivalence to an Air Force rank?

Are you suggesting that since the hole is above the Estonia’s water line it could have been caused by a collision with a low-flying military aircraft?

London John asked where I got wing commander from and that was the link. A Wing Commander in the RAF is something that I can relate to whereas Lieutenant Colonel means little to me.

So, if Putin was the equivalent of wing commander that is not bad IMV.

 

[Mojo]

Brilliant! You've cracked the case!

A KGB seaplane covers all the bases - holes, bombs, offloading commandos and military secrets, the thing spotted floating nearby ...

I was thinking more of an ekranoplan.

 

[Mojo]

London John asked where I got wing commander from and that was the link. A Wing Commander in the RAF is something that I can relate to whereas Lieutenant Colonel means little to me.

So, if Putin was the equivalent of wing commander that is not bad IMV.

Because it has the word “commander” in the title you thought it might sound as if he was in charge?

 

[JesseCuster]

Comparative military ranks[/B]

why did you post a link about comparative military ranks?

So you being completely wrong about Putin's time and position in the KGB is irrelevant after accusing him of being responsible for the Estonia disaster, but a Wikipedia article about military ranks is relevant somehow?

 

[Darat]

Folks stop personalising the discussion.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

 

[junkshop]

London John asked where I got wing commander from and that was the link. A Wing Commander in the RAF is something that I can relate to whereas Lieutenant Colonel means little to me.

So, if Putin was the equivalent of wing commander that is not bad IMV.

The page you linked to doesn't mention RAF Wing Commanders at all, or any other Wing Commanders.



Or the RAF.

 

[LondonJohn]

London John asked where I got wing commander from and that was the link. A Wing Commander in the RAF is something that I can relate to whereas Lieutenant Colonel means little to me.

So, if Putin was the equivalent of wing commander that is not bad IMV.

No. LondonJohn* questioned why you'd equate it to an RAF rank, especially when it has an identical read-across equivalent in the British and US armies. LondonJohn did not "ask where (you) got Wing Commander from". LondonJohn knows perfectly well that it's the equivalent RAF rank (for reasons which ought to be apparent to you).


* And I'll tell you once again: it's "LondonJohn", not "London John". I'll assume from now on that if you misspell my username again, it'll be deliberate on your part. OK?

 

[Vixen]

Because it has the word “commander” in the title you thought it might sound as if he was in charge?

Nope, it's because I still have old-fashioned typed messages from my late-father's Wing Commander.

I had no idea exactly what a 'Lieutenant Colonel' was equivalent to. <shrug>

 

[Vixen]

why did you post a link about comparative military ranks?

So you being completely wrong about Putin's time and position in the KGB is irrelevant after accusing him of being responsible for the Estonia disaster, but a Wikipedia article about military ranks is relevant somehow?

It doesn't change the thrust of what I said.

I note you haven't jumped down Captain_Swoop's throat about not knowing that Sweden was one hour behind Estonia...?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

I am aware of that, but you specifically said he was the head of the KGB and the the replacement service at the time of the incident. He left the intelligence services in 1991 while it was still the KGB.

1991 Putin leaves the KGB. Later on that same year the KGB is dissolved. He wasn't head of the security service the. Why did you claim he was?

Do you consider yourself a expert on the KGB, yes or no?

Here's a possibly better question. Have you ever take a course in Security Studies?

Ahem.

 

[Andy_Ross]

It doesn't change the thrust of what I said.

I note you haven't jumped down Captain_Swoop's throat about not knowing that Sweden was one hour behind Estonia...?

I know of the time difference, I was asking you what time the crew changed.
You said at one, you didn't say if that was Swedish or Estonian time.

 

[LondonJohn]

Nope, it's because I still have old-fashioned typed messages from my late-father's Wing Commander.

I had no idea exactly what a 'Lieutenant Colonel' was equivalent to. <shrug>

Ahh my mistake then: I'd stupidly assumed that since your posts in this thread demonstrate such astoundingly-high levels of forensic knowledge/understanding of all things military, you'd therefore be bound to know that this exact rank (and at the same level of officer grade) exists within the British and US armies as well.

My apologies.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Grow up. I mentioned Putin maybe two or three times at most.

It is not even particularly relevant to this thread.

Don't do him a disservice. He's the personification of The Russians; one of the main characters in your story which gallops off in all directions simultaneously and fills almost the entirety of this thread.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Lieutenant Colonel is O-5 in the NATO Code. Which would equate to Group Captain, not Wing Commander.

 

[junkshop]

Lieutenant Colonel is O-5 in the NATO Code. Which would equate to Group Captain, not Wing Commander.

O-5 is the US code, equivalent to NATO code OF-4, Which is the same as Wing Commander (according to Wikipedia).

 

[LondonJohn]

Lieutenant Colonel is O-5 in the NATO Code. Which would equate to Group Captain, not Wing Commander.

At the risk of running too far down this particular rabbit hole, O-5 is the US scale. It corresponds to OF-4 on the NATO scale (on account of the fact that the US scale has two grades of lieutenant).

So Lieutenant Colonel (US), while it's ranked as O-5 in the US scale, is ranked as OF-4 in the NATO scale - equating to the UK ranks of Wing Commander (RAF), or Lieutenant Colonel (British Army). Or Lieutenant Colonel (KGB).


(You may gather that I spent a good deal of my childhood and youth around RAF officers, other European NATO officers, US NATO officers and US exchange/detachment officers. But not - not to my knowledge, at least - any KGB officers.)


ETA: Pah! Ninja'd on one of my Mastermind specialist subjects!!

 

[junkshop]

Sorry!

 

[theprestige]

London John asked where I got wing commander from and that was the link. A Wing Commander in the RAF is something that I can relate to whereas Lieutenant Colonel means little to me.

So, if Putin was the equivalent of wing commander that is not bad IMV.

Relating to a Wing Commander of the RAF is useless in this context, though. If you can't relate to a Lieutenant Colonel in the KGB, then it's probably best to keep silent on that topic, rather than try to relate it to an entirely different role in an entirely different organization.

This is a major problem with a lot of your arguments throughout: Trying to relate something you are entirely ignorant of to something you believe you know about.

 

[LondonJohn]

Relating to a Wing Commander of the RAF is useless in this context, though. If you can't relate to a Lieutenant Colonel in the KGB, then it's probably best to keep silent on that topic, rather than try to relate it to an entirely different role in an entirely different organization.

This is a major problem with a lot of your arguments throughout: Trying to relate something you are entirely ignorant of to something you believe you know about.

It is indeed a Major problem. Talk about Captain Obvious. I'd agree totally that if someone's posts show an inability to grasp the very Colonel of an argument, without even demonstrating any understanding of the General principles, then the intellectual equivalent of Corporal punishment is probably in order.