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

[Jack by the hedge]

Special, isn't it?

In one post repeating the false claim that "Mr Skylight" was the fire alarm code and in the very next condemning misinformation.

It's almost as if this tragedy was just sport.

 

[JayUtah]

Sillaste was likely contacted by a journalist. We don't know what question the journo asked. It could have been, 'What do you think of people who spread misinformation?'

Or it could have been a sua sponte response, given the prevalence of conspiracy nonsense surrounding the loss of the vessel.

 

[Vixen]

Special, isn't it?

In one post repeating the false claim that "Mr Skylight" was the fire alarm code and in the very next condemning misinformation.

It's almost as if this tragedy was just sport.

Mr Skylight was the fire alarm code.

(2) It has been explained in the previous Subchapter 29.2 - The Bow Area - that the lower part of the ramp in way of the two flaps in the middle was noted to be reddish/brown with the flaps being bent and distorted and possible damage to car deck plating.

(3) The passenger Bengt Nilsson has testified that he saw white powder and foam inside the centre casing on car deck level next to the 4th car deck door from forward on starboard side. He rushed past this door on his way up when the vessel heeled abruptly to starboard and he had to hold with his hands against the wall when he noted the above. It was so fresh that the foam was still running down the wall.

(4) The coded fire alarm for the crew "Mr. Skylight to No. 1 and 2" was heard from the loud speakers, though only after the big heel when there was already full panic. It meant that Fire Group No. 1 had to assemble below the starboard bridge wing on deck 8 and Fire Group No. 2 had to assemble on the car deck.

(5) There are indications that the crew had been active on the car deck before the big heel. See the statement of Altti Hakanpää - Enclosure 21.3.3.333 and the different statements of Margus Treu in respect of his seeing Silver Linde on the car deck - Enclosures 21.2.3.261 - 21.2.3.273.

(6) It is certain that the crew knows much more about what happened on the car deck, but remain silent, so far. It has to be assumed that this knowledge relates to the circumstances described in Chapter 32 - Unexplained Damage.

Estonia Ferry Disaster

I, too, independently get the impression that drug smuggler Linde in particular is lying in his many varied accounts. He comes across as arrogant and defiant. He thinks himself a clever chap and the interrogators all a bunch of fools, is the attitude that comes out from his self-serving interviews.

 

[phiwum]

Sillaste was likely contacted by a journalist. We don't know what question the journo asked. It could have been, 'What do you think of people who spread misinformation?'

Of course, I for one, condemn misinformation.

The Friatider link is within the Espressen article quoted earlier.

That's the part of my message that's least important.

The more important part is where I chastise you for just plumb lying about what this survivor (can't we respect the survivors?) actually said. "Splashing up over" is not "sprinkling over". Duh.

And he bloody well said that the problem was water coming in at the bow. So, naturally, you figured he meant there was a fire and the sprinkler was filling the car deck.

 

[Vixen]

That's the part of my message that's least important.

The more important part is where I chastise you for just plumb lying about what this survivor (can't we respect the survivors?) actually said. "Splashing up over" is not "sprinkling over". Duh.

And he bloody well said that the problem was water coming in at the bow. So, naturally, you figured he meant there was a fire and the sprinkler was filling the car deck.

Water was always coming in at the sides, so he is not wrong there.

 

[JayUtah]

Mr Skylight was the fire alarm code.

According to your secondary source. A primary source disagrees.

I, too, independently get the impression that drug smuggler Linde in particular is lying in his many varied accounts.

You're the one who referred us to Silver Linde. How convenient that he now becomes "unreliable" when his primary testimony contradicts your preferred secondary source.

 

[Steve]

Special, isn't it?

In one post repeating the false claim that "Mr Skylight" was the fire alarm code and in the very next condemning misinformation.

It's almost as if this tragedy was just sport.

“Who is that crossing my bridge, clippety-clop, clippety-clop?”

 

[junkshop]

Mr Skylight was the fire alarm code.

Estonia Ferry Disaster

Your source is wrong, as shown by Jack by the hedge back in post #1089, 'Mr Skylight' could mean different things depending on what followed it:

... They were alerted by the coded alarm signal “Mr Skylight” and by the general fire alarm given by the alarm bells ... The call “Mr Skylight” followed by the Estonian words for “damage control” indicated that the damage control group should bring equipment for damage control and without further instructions start their work.

 

[Vixen]

The issues, according to the TURUN SANOMAT which covers the Utö area are as follows:

Background

Torturing questions

The work of the Estonian private research group is motivated by suspicions that there would be more to the sinking of Estonia than the breaking of the front gate and bad night weather.

The current suspicion is related to the scenario that someone carrying secret cargo in Estonia would have received a warning about being caught in Stockholm. In this way, an attempt was made to remove the smuggled cargo from the ship in a hurry and bury it at sea.

In a debate in the Riigikogu Commission on 10 September 2021, it was suspected that in 1994 the West might have been interested in poor Russian technology, mainly “nuclear technology or space equipment”.

One of the commissioners said that confidence in the Swedish state had gone.

According to Harri Ruotsalainen, who was heard as a Finnish expert, there were numerous strange details in Turma. The Mayday emergency call, for example, was issued far too late. There was only 15-20 minutes left to escape, when under normal conditions the ship would float in open gates for a long time.

Solutions made on the ship’s bridge were also considered strange. It was asked whether the ship was under the command of its captain at the time of the accident or whether he had been replaced by someone else.

 

[Axxman300]

But in the end the bow visor was knocked off by massive waves yanking the ramp open, which flooded the car deck, and caused the ship to list, and sink.

That's what happened.

 

[phiwum]

Water was always coming in at the sides, so he is not wrong there.

One more time, look at what you quoted.

The ship mechanic Henrik Sillaste was on board Estonia and far below deck when the ferry first got into trouble. He then went up to the control room where two other engineers told that the ship took in water via the bow.

Next to all panels and meters there was also a black and white monitor that showed camcorders from car tires. There he could see with his own eyes how water rushed in next to the ramp at the front.

Two of his colleagues saw after a while how the water covered the car tires and later how it splashed up over the camera that was in the ceiling.

He went to the control room because of an apparent emergency (at least, the ferry had "got into trouble"). Other engineers told him that the ship was taking in water via the bow. The next two paragraphs are about an influx of water.

Okay, so if this water were normal, why did he go to the control room and in what sense was the ferry "in trouble"? If there was a fire and the sprinklers were going off, why did these two engineers tell him about the water coming in from the bow (which you claim was normal)?

Surely, after the pleasantries about the water coming in (which was totally normal), they should have at some point mentioned the fire and/or sprinklers. The alleged fire wasn't normal, was it? Wouldn't mention of that spice up a conversation?

But no, it went something like this. The mechanic went to the control room after the ferry got into trouble.

Two engineers said to him, "Say, Henrik, you know that water that's always coming in around the bow? Well, it still is and in amounts that are not at all surprising or indeed noteworthy."

Henrik then watches for a while, observing the water cover the car tires and water from somewhere, splashing on the camera. He thought nothing of this, of course, though he did mention it to the interviewer much later. He of course recognized that it was a sprinkler and hence there was a fire at that time as well, but he knew the interviewer wouldn't be interested in such trivialities. Best to focus on the normal leaks at the bow which on that fateful day were ominously normal. No increased flow at all. The same as every other trip. Boy, that didn't bode well... He decided to draw a picture of the water's ingress to show just how startlingly usual it really was.

Does that sound about right?

 

[phiwum]

Your source is wrong, as shown by Jack by the hedge back in post #1089, 'Mr Skylight' could mean different things depending on what followed it:

Well, that's true, but the testimony regarding that night mentions "Mr. Skylight No. 1" and "No. 2", not any of the other suffixes.

That said, if I understood what WhoaNellie reported, the Skylight messages were overloaded so that Nos. 1 and 2 gave instructions to boat crews as well as fire crews.

(I still suspect that "fire crew" is a bit broader than it sounds, but I have no evidence for that.)

 

[Steve]

But in the end the bow visor was knocked off by massive waves yanking the ramp open, which flooded the car deck, and caused the ship to list, and sink.

That's what happened.

But, but, but, people said stuff! And some even wrote stuff down or drew cartoons!

You notice that in all the myriad scenarios presented by Vixen for the sinking there is one, and only one, that is not listed as plausible. The one you describe here. The one that actually happened.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The crew were specifically asked by the JAIC investigators what was what looked like a red mattress doing near the car ramp, as pictured on the Rockwater videos. They were also asked whether a store of bedding was kept there and the answer was that the ramp was known to leak so they stuffed this bedding in the car ramp frame. The fact they kept a store of bedding - not towels but mattresses!!! - and that customers had complained in the past of water splashing around their tyres at journey's end, tells you all you need to know.

It tells me that something was seriously wrong with the ship.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The bow visor is quite separate from the car ramp.

The ramp was not a watertight fitting, the bow was supposed to be.

Add in that the crew had to use hammers to close the locks and the ramp according to you was held up with a hawser and it is obvious there were serious problems with the ship.

If the water was over the car tyres and given that a cubic meter of water weighs a ton, what weight of water you think there was given the size of the car deck?

 

[phiwum]

If the water was over the car tyres and given that a cubic meter of water weighs a ton, what weight of water you think there was given the size of the car deck?

A normal and totally expected amount, surely? The kind of amount one is sure to mention in an interview, right?

 

[Andy_Ross]

On the Estonia it was the agreed fire drill code.

You were shown that followed by other suffixes and alarm sounds it was used for a range of emergency situations.

Either you aren't paying attention or you are being deliberately dishonest.

 

[phiwum]

You were shown that followed by other suffixes and alarm sounds it was used for a range of emergency situations.

Either you aren't paying attention or you are being deliberately dishonest.

True, but the only Skylight announcements that night were Mr. Skylights Nos. 1 and 2 as far as I could see in the JAIC summary of witness testimony. Thus, the meaning of other suffixes or alarm sounds is irrelevant.

The question remains whether and how the codes "Mr. Skylight No. 1/2" were overloaded. I think they are, at least for boat crews, but I haven't looked too carefully.

NOTE: I could have overlooked other uses of the Skylight code in JAIC report, so feel free to look.

 

[Andy_Ross]

1 and 2 refers to the two emergency teams and their muster points.
Suffixes and alarm sounds very relevant.

On a ship that size crew there would not likely be a separate teams for different types of emergency.

On a warship there are separate teams dedicated to fighting fires, flooding, mechanical breakdowns etc.
That is because a warship expects that in war it may have multiple emergencies at the same time. It is on of the reasons that even a small warship like a frigate has a couple of hundred in the crew.

Not sure what you mean by 'overloaded' a single alert call followed by a specific application is how it is usually done.

 

[phiwum]

1 and 2 refers to the two emergency teams and their muster points.
Suffixes and alarm sounds very relevant.

What I meant are that the only two suffixes heard in conjunction with "Mr. Skylight" were "No. 1" and "No. 2". Therefore, the other suffixes aren't (directly) important to us because they weren't used.

Obviously, the suffixes and their meanings are quite relevant in different contexts. Like, say, an emergency on board.

It is reasonable to point out that the JAIC report refers to "Fire Teams" not "Emergency Teams". I agree that the so-called fire team is likely to have a broader scope than just fires on this ferry, but we don't have clear and conclusive evidence for that conclusion.

By "overloaded" I mean "used for more than one purpose". If "Mr. Skylight No.1" is used to alert the fire team for a fire and also to call the boat teams, then it's overloaded -- it is used for two distinct though related purposes. If it's used for general emergencies of any sort, it would also be overloaded.

We know that "Mr. Skyline No. 1" was used to call fireteam 1 to their station in the case of fire. The question is whether it would also have been used for, oh, let's say, serious flooding on the car deck. I strongly reckon so, but that's not explicit in the JAIC report's discussion of these codes.