• 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 Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Compare and contrast it to the US vessel SS Park Victory which sank near Utö, Finland, on Christmas Eve 1947, after failing to anchor properly. It drifted out to about six times before it hit a rock and sank.

The first time divers - or at least an official entourage, together with some contemporaneous Finnish sailors who were there 1947 to help the rescue - went down to view the wreck and film it was circa 1997. More recently, 2012,it was carefully filmed again. You can see from the pictures the type of deformation damage cause it by the rocks and then compare them to what we see in the Estonia.

That damage looks far more severe... its also been on the seafloor much longer.... what is your point?
 
From this page so far I can safely conclude that:
a. there is no evidence of hull penetration below the waterline; and
b. two out of an unspecified number of watertight doors between the car deck and lower deck remain sealed.
 
The viewpoint (of the ROV) is from below the waterline of the vessel looking downwards to the car deck floor.

It would then require a large hole in the car deck floor to see from the hole in the hull into the car deck, yes?
 
No, I am saying compare and contrast. You can see curled up bits of the hull on the SS Park Victory where presumably there was an explosion in the engine room.


This is different from stress caused by shifting over the years?

Now I'm doubly confused. The damage from that shipwreck does not look like damage on Estonia's hull. I agree with this statement. But you are saying the damage should look like hull fatigue damage even though it wasn't caused by hull fatigue :confused: :boggled:

Edit: I should've said "metal fatigue" not "hull fatigue".

To answer your question... yes.
 
Last edited:
Now I'm doubly confused. The damage from that shipwreck does not look like damage on Estonia's hull. I agree with this statement. But you are saying the damage should look like hull fatigue damage even though it wasn't caused by hull fatigue :confused: :boggled:

Edit: I should've said "metal fatigue" not "hull fatigue".

To answer your question... yes.

Here's a picture of SS Park Victory hull where we know there is a hole either where it hit a rock or there was an explosion in the engine room.
 

Attachments

  • 1413474.jpg
    1413474.jpg
    19 KB · Views: 6
Sorry, I'm getting really confused now. To clarify: this report is from the July expedition -

"The film, shot this summer during the official inspection of the wreck of the "Estonia" ferry resting at the bottom of the Baltic Sea, shows serious damage to the hull. Deformations may indicate an explosion, Swedish Radio (SR) reported on Monday." - A Polish Newspaper reports today.

Is that right? If so I retract my comments about their unrelibility.
 
Submarine Theory Ruled Out? Claims Expert

So now another expert wades in and says the images from Arikas indicates it wasn't a submarine that caused the hole

The expert on the new Estonia images: Can rule out the submarine theory

UPDATED TODAY 22:57PUBLISHED TODAY 19:37
New high-resolution underwater film shows prickly, black sides of the hole in the side of Estonia's hull. There is no submarine collision and no explosion behind it, believes Olle Rutgersson, professor emeritus in ship technology.

- The big damage is not a stone that has been pushed in, but the whole hull has bent around a certain point.

Ekot was the first to show the new film on the damage, which is still classified by the Swedish Accident Investigation Board.

When Olle Rutgersson, who is an expert on Estonia and followed the investigation, sees the film, he thinks that it raises more questions than gives answers.
SVE nyheter
 
Here's a picture of SS Park Victory hull where we know there is a hole either where it hit a rock or there was an explosion in the engine room.

... neither of which happened to the Estonia AFAIK... so again why bring up a wreck that was sunk by different means :confused:

ETA: are you giving us comparative evidence that Estonia was not sunk by an explosion?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom