• 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.
Who is this "we" kemosabe?

Ok then, try this.

"You're not an accountant"

"I AM an accountant"

How about that? You are an accountant though so let's reverse the roles. Let's say that Jay was espousing on some finer point of accounting and you stated "You're clearly not an accountant".

Does Jay then get to refute you by saying actually he is? Is your statement now a "clear slur"?


You are being deliberately obtuse. If I were to explicitly announce in a public domain, 'You are not an artist' and you reply, 'I am an artist'. Who would I be to lean in and call you a liar? A bully, that is what.
 
The idea that I am a 'Jabba' figure as claimed by JayUtah reveals this is simply a mobbing exercise designed...

Or it could be an attempt to explain to you why people are reacting to you the way they are.

Little things please little minds.

What was that about you not hurling abuse?

JayUtah kept asking and asking what my science background was and then, just as I guessed, his motivation wasnt curiosity or interest, the sole aim was to set me up as a punch bag, so that whatever I replied the mob could all join the ruck by getting their boot in and claiming I had 'asked for it'.

Are you sure you're not a professional victim? You were repeatedly asked about your scientific background because you made it relevant to your argument, and because the answers you gave were largely unsatisfactory. The example was raised to show how the behavior you displayed was consistent with other instances where suspicion was warranted.
 
Or it could be an attempt to explain to you why people are reacting to you the way they are.



What was that about you not hurling abuse?



Are you sure you're not a professional victim? You were repeatedly asked about your scientific background because you made it relevant to your argument, and because the answers you gave were largely unsatisfactory. The example was raised to show how the behavior you displayed was consistent with other instances where suspicion was warranted.

I answered openly, transparently and honestly. If you don't like it, it is tough titties.
 
As it was never investigated then of course it is not included in the official report.


On the bright side, the Swedish authorities are now going to release the entire video, after removing sensitive images of human remains.

We have had the first part, as revealed on Sverige Radio.

So we have no evidence that it was seen or filmed?

If the film released shows no human remains we still won't have any evidence for a bullet in the captains noggin?
 
Because American author Jack A Nelson in Flashes in the Night describes in detail of how the crew (or, rather, some of the crew) got to their cabins, changed into warm clothes and were able to escape out of their windows, which opened, unlike those of the passengers.
Does he describe it in sufficient detail to tell if "warm clothes" means warm clothes or if it means survival suits?
 
Know what Vixen, I stand corrected. I was wrong regarding the MSci, having looked more in depth into your link. I apologise for my error.


You're entirely correct that historically* - and currently in most instances - an undergraduate "first" degree awards a Bachelor of Arts/Science/Engineering/Etc.

Someone with such a degree can then go on to take a further academic certification in postgraduate study. The lower postgrad certification is a Masters degree, which usually requires 1-2 years of additional study. And the higher postgrad certification is a Doctorate.

I suspect that over the past several years, a few academic institutions in the UK - in the new era of students paying tuition fees - have been trying to innovate as a way of attracting students to their faculties. There's clearly extra kudos, and potential extra earning power in the job market, for someone with a Masters qualification. So the deal on offer appears to be of the order of "For not much more in tuition fees, plus one extra year's study, you can come away from our university with a more prestigious qualification than most of your peers"

As far as I know though, most faculties in most of the UK's better universities still go by the traditional format of separating undergraduate degrees from postgrad Masters and Doctorates. My alma mater certainly does.

One strange thing about that Durham qualification is that it's an MSci - whereas UK universities traditionally award MSc. I wonder if the awarding authority for that particular degree might be a non-UK academic institution?**


* A historic anomaly exists in Oxford and Cambridge, where students graduate with Batchelors degrees, but then after something like 2 years, they can automatically upgrade their degree to a Masters (without doing anything more in terms of study, attendance or exams).


** Ahh now I figure it out. This MSci degree is a "hybrid" which is taken as an undergraduate degree but which ends up awarding a Masters:

https://www.findamasters.com/advice/finding/master-of-science-msc-guide.aspx
 
So we have no evidence that it was seen or filmed?

If the film released shows no human remains we still won't have any evidence for a bullet in the captains noggin?



It's clear to me that unless/until there can at least be proper attribution to any claim of having seen the captain with a bullet in his head.... I think the rational (and correct) thing to do is to disregard this claim entirely for the time being.


(Not to mention the fact that it would have been extremely difficult for a diver to have carried out anything more than the most cursory examination of any corpse - all the time wearing thick gloves, goggles and breathing apparatus. And even if the captain had had an apparent hole in his forehead, there are plenty of things other than a bullet that might have caused such a hole.)
 
Then explain how nuclear waste can eat away at the bow of the ship. You've stated that this is a theory worth considering, so defend it.

Elementary chemistry.


Vixen, you seem to have missed it the last time I asked because you were too busy not saying what scientific qualifications you have, but can you explain this “elementary chemistry”? What species are involved, how do they react, and what are the products?
 
Please stop with the personalisation, and return to the topic of the thread.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: zooterkin
 
Looks like RS Sentinel is now on its way back to the Netherlands.

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ai...mmsi:229964000/imo:7106877/vessel:RS_SENTINEL

30.9.2021 Update

At night, an underwater robot was used to look at the right side of the wreck. Using the smallest underwater robot of the research team, it was possible to film the part of the ship's starboard side that has not been documented before. "The most important thing is that at night we examined the injuries of the right side with a smaller underwater robot and we managed to crawl into the channel between these two big holes. It was not possible to completely and completely, but we were able to travel to some country and film, »described the leader of the research, Margus Kurm. "And what we discovered is that there's at least one more hole." The sinking of the ferry Estonia in 1994 brought 852 people to the seabed, with only 137 escaping. This is the largest peacetime accident, the cause of which is still unknown.

In an interview Kurm says this third hole on the hole is much smaller than the other two and it's too early to speculate what caused it.
 
Mystery of the underwater Signal Interference Solved?

A scientist says he believes he has found the source of mysterious interference experienced in sonar and other devices during an investigation into the wreck of the MS Estonia, which sank in 1994 with the loss of 852 lives. The scientist, a hydrographer called Peeter Ude, says the source is transmitter beacons installed on the sea-bed and close to the wreck, but who placed them there, why and when remains unclear, he says.
Ude, who is involved both in a private sector expedition aimed at surveying the wreck of the MS Estonia and was also involved in the official investigation whose preliminary dives took place in July, says the devices could have been the source of disturbance experienced in a wreck survey in the summer work.
He said: "The very idea of these devices is to send out alternating signals that makes it possible to triangulate the Autonomous Underwater Vehicles' (AUV) position," referring to remote dive robots used heavily in modern-day investigations of this nature.
"They have been left in place to fix the position of the hull and avoid potential mistakes installing new ones," Ude, who took part in the official Estonian Safety Investigation Bureau's expedition this summer, said.
"Looking at the direction of the noise, there is a 90 percent chance the beacons were operational when we were trying to get our images," he continued, adding that devices of this kind can be remotely activated and deactivated.

One of the most mysterious aspects of the putative sea-floor devices is where their power source is drawn from.

"I cannot tell you what triggered them and caused them to interfere with our work the last time," he went on, though said that the beacons, which would likely be expensive, would overall make surveying easier.
Ude said an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) he was controlling had happened upon three peculiar metal constructions topped by what appear to be lighthouse-like columns, or in other words beacons, lying about 100 meters due north of the wreck.
ERR
 
In refutation of your clear slur, 'you are not a scientist'. You don't get to define what or who I am. OK?

What makes "You are not a scientist" a slur?

I am not a scientist. Saying to me: "You are not a scientist" would no more be a slur than: "You are not a pirate".

Why is saying it to you a slur?
 
Axxman300, do check the date on the articles. The weather was bad last Thursday and a bit blustery on Friday but Saturday, Sunday and Monday were sunny autumn days. The crew reported they had filmed 70% as of then.

But with better planning they could have filmed 100%, and if they got lucky they could have filmed more, and got more side-scan data.

Like I said, amateur hour.

Looking at Maritime Traffic they still seem to be in position.

I think ERR is a rival news group to Postimees, hence the competitive tone emphasising the time lost instead of the research gained.

Better project management yields better results.

You do realise that Kurm likely knows a lot of the truth behind the JAIC report?

I must have missed his tell-all book complete with source materials.
 
Mystery of the underwater Signal Interference Solved?

ERR

Weird, it's almost as if you don't read the links I posted. Because if you had you would have read this:

Safety Investigation Bureau left a sensor at the site

Arikas said that researchers left a sensor at the wreck site in the summer, which will measure the speed and direction of currents.

He added that the research team was lucky and the current was rather unnoticeable and it did not affect their work, but he does consider it important that it will provide clarity on whether or not it is even possible to conduct research.

In addition, the bureau plans to install a sensor, which will forward data about water transparency, which is an important factor in planning out any coming studies.

The link again:

https://news.err.ee/1608346988/expe...-we-did-not-seen-signs-of-extraneous-activity

See, while I am not a scientist, I am a Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute gadfly due to my love of oceanography. What I posted above is how non-lunatics conduct a scientific survey of what is now an underwater archaeological site. I've seen those sensors since they get tested a short distance from where I'm sitting at the big tank at MBARI.

Looks like they're sampling the currents at that depth to accurately model the undersea stresses the Estonia's hull endures, and the clarity will come in later when they PLAN THE NEXT EXPEDITION TO DIVE. I'll go out on a limb here and suggest that it's more productive to put divers and ROVs down into clearer water than murky water.

Your story indicates that neither team is communicating with one another, and that's a waste of everyone's money, and everyone involved needs to be slapped around in the name of science for being nimrods. Sharing data save everyone time and money.
 
Mystery of the underwater Signal Interference Solved?

ERR

From the ERR website
One of the most mysterious aspects of the putative sea-floor devices is where their power source is drawn from.

Well I have to give them credit for at least wondering where these things are getting their power from. I've been told that there is a lot of nuclear fuel lying around. That would be compatible/consistent with these 'putative' beacons being nuclear powered.
 
Weird, it's almost as if you don't read the links I posted. Because if you had you would have read this:



The link again:

https://news.err.ee/1608346988/expe...-we-did-not-seen-signs-of-extraneous-activity

See, while I am not a scientist, I am a Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute gadfly due to my love of oceanography. What I posted above is how non-lunatics conduct a scientific survey of what is now an underwater archaeological site. I've seen those sensors since they get tested a short distance from where I'm sitting at the big tank at MBARI.

Looks like they're sampling the currents at that depth to accurately model the undersea stresses the Estonia's hull endures, and the clarity will come in later when they PLAN THE NEXT EXPEDITION TO DIVE. I'll go out on a limb here and suggest that it's more productive to put divers and ROVs down into clearer water than murky water.

Your story indicates that neither team is communicating with one another, and that's a waste of everyone's money, and everyone involved needs to be slapped around in the name of science for being nimrods. Sharing data save everyone time and money.


It sounds to me more like these beacons have been placed on the seabed in order to provide fixed coordinate points - this would then allow for far more methodical and accurate surveying of the wreck, including detailed photogrammetry.

Of course it's possible that these beacons also house current-measuring equipment. The issue there though would be battery life. If you're looking for accurate measurement of currents at/around the wreck over a fairly long period of time, there are three big problems: firstly, the sensor firmware/hardware will require a (relatively) high amount of power; secondly, the sensors will need to be able to transmit their data to surface level reliably and regularly (again, requiring relatively high power consumption); and thirdly, if they're charting currents at the seabed, they will need long-run data in order to get meaningful results - and unless they plan to send divers or ROVs down at regular intervals to change the batteries, the cumulative power drain is likely to render the sensors/transmitters dead before too long.

By contrast, if these are fixed-geometry beacons - which the ROVs and divers would use as reference markers - then they needn't consume much power at all in comparison with current sensors. They would be passive (as opposed to active in the case of current sensors), there would be no requirement for them to transmit to surface level (all that would be required would be localised transmission to the ROVs or divers), and they would be capable of being activated only when needed (as opposed to having to sample currents at fixed intervals 24/7/365).


Ohhhhh ETA: I hadn't noticed that your quoted material does indeed make explicit mention of current sensors and visibility sensors. So it looks like my above analysis was wrong!

ETA2: Aghh but now I see that the ERR article actually does have a quoted source (Peeter Ude) who says that they indeed are geostatic location beacons to assist with surveying of the wreck! So now I'm confused again! Maybe there are in fact both types of equipment down there by now.....
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom