Cont: The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-opened Part III

[Here_to_learn]

In addition, another vessel caught a very weak mayday on Channel 16 half an hour before Aisalu's and Tammes' call at 01:22. The sailor came forward on a Swedish tv channel in 1996 and said:

EFD

Given you don't call mayday unless you are in trouble, it almost certainly was Estonia up to half an hour earlier.

Let's look at what you say above (my highlight)

Let's compare it to the text in the report you link to.

It cannot, therefore, be excluded that those on the bridge had already tried to get out a 'Mayday message' much earlier.

"It cannot be excluded" is not by any way the same thing as "it almost certainly was".

 

[Andy_Ross]

"Just the place for a Snark! ... Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice: What I tell you three times is true." ~ Lewis Carroll

No, it doesn't become true just because you wish it so.

Where is the snark?

From the December 1997 Government of the Republic of Estonia, Final report on the MV ESTONIA disaster.

Chapter 8 Observations after the accident.
Section 8.11 The EPIRB beacons

The EPIRB beacons along with some liferafts and lifejackets were found on 2 October 1994 by two Estonian fishing vessels in the vicinity of Dirhami on the north coast of Estonia. The beacons were switched off when found.
On 28 December 1994 the condition of the above EPIRBs was tested by the Finnish experts. The radio beacons proved to be in full working order when switched on.
On 24 January 1995 both EPIRBs were activated on board the Estonian icebreaker TARMO, when they worked without interval for four hours. According to the Russian COSPAS Mission control centre, whose area of responsibility includes the Estonian waters, the radio beacons were transmitting the signal in the normal way throughout the test period.

 

[Axxman300]

At least it's not a clichéd one.

It's not only cliché' , it's textbook CTist rabbit-hole misdirection.

The Estonia disaster resulted in EU mandates for Ro-Ro ferry operations, one of which was MANDITORY water-activated signal buoys...because the Estonia's buoys were manually activated. That's it, end of story.

You keep saying that the buoys were found "switched off", thus implying that they had been switched on at some point. Yet the records show they never transmitted. They weren't switched off, they were never switched on. It's that simple. I don't even blame the crew for this one, by the time the ship was rolling the buoys would be the last thing on anyone's mind.

 

[Mojo]

The Estonian service electricians inspected the buoys' activities about a week before the accident and by then those had been operating normally. Those Kannad 406-F (=free-floating) were tested as follows: the buoy's "cage" was carefully opened and the buoy was raised. When the indicator light started flashing, the cap was opened and the switch was turned to the OFF position. In that case, the signal would not yet have emitted. At the time there was no test button.

Both EPIRBs in Estonia were turned off when found, would the buoys have been left untuned after the test?

That is the implication: either the ship's electricians omitted to tune the buoys or they were tuned but were removed.

They were HRU-triggered so the puzzle is why they did not activate on being hydrostatically released? Asser Koivisto* says they were not 'tuned'.

From HS:


Please note: it is not possible to switch it on and then switch it off without having emitted a signal, unless this is done immediately.

If the epirb was manually activated only, it would not have been in an HRU and there would have been no call for an investigation by JAIC.

Four communications blackouts re the Estonia

1. Channel 16 - see tanscript of mayday calls - weak to non-existent
2. the EPIRBs HRU-activated but no signal to COSPAS-SASART
3. the Captain of Mariella used his NMT mobile phone to ring MRCC Turku coastguard as the radio was down
4. the MRCC at Turku did not get through to Stockholm until 0202
5. Helsinki Radio put out a pan-pan at 1:54 - AFTER the ship had already sunk.
6. MRCC Turku and Mariella in their police statements say they had problems getting Estonia on radar.

There was definitely a mysterious communications blackout surrounding the Estonia. If you look at this interview in in 2008 with Captain Jan-Tore Thörnroos, then Captain of the MS Mariella - which was just nine kilometres away so there should not have been a problem with Channel 16, but there was - he also highlights problems with the radar. Mariella had just had a new system fitted, running parallel with the old yet Thörnroos could not get an image (cf MRCC Turku who had the sonar image of Mariella, Europa and Isabelle, but could not capture Estonia, except later very momentarily, an image almost off screen where she was later found to have been located).

See 2:17 minutes in.




Why did the JAIC not treat this as suspicious? Because information was classified and withheld from them. JAIC understood this so played along with the 'safe explanation' and stuck rigidly to the The Herald of Free Enterprise framework. One only has to read their treatment of the mayday and epirbs to realise they did not treat these as an important facet of the investigation as they steered well clear of any suggestion of sabotage. There is zero mention of the 'nine Estonian crew survivors, including senior officers of the crew' when one would have expected at least a couple of sentences explaining how they came to be erroneously considered 'survivors'.

It is clear the JAIC rather than explain any of the communications problems other than in a superficial descriptive narrative way avoided it completely rather than draw attention to the possibility of intentional sinking.


*In Finland, once a year, we have a national 'jealousy day', when all the top tax payers are listed (= rich list). Every citizen's taxable earnings are listed for those who care to look. In Finland Proper yesterday, we saw Asser Koivisto in 13th place and his wife in 10th place, having paid something like €1m in tax between them (the really big earners are centred around Helsinki). So much for the claim Koivisto is no marine expert when his marine communications business is flourishing.

You won’t get away with a reset by not posting in the thread for a couple of days, people can still remember what has been posted, and even if they couldn’t they could just go back and read the posts.

 

[Andy_Ross]

It's not only cliché' , it's textbook CTist rabbit-hole misdirection.

The Estonia disaster resulted in EU mandates for Ro-Ro ferry operations, one of which was MANDITORY water-activated signal buoys...because the Estonia's buoys were manually activated. That's it, end of story.

You keep saying that the buoys were found "switched off", thus implying that they had been switched on at some point. Yet the records show they never transmitted. They weren't switched off, they were never switched on. It's that simple. I don't even blame the crew for this one, by the time the ship was rolling the buoys would be the last thing on anyone's mind.

Not EU mandates, they are International Maritime Organisation mandates through the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS)

It is an international maritime treaty that sets minimum safety standards in the construction, equipment and operation of merchant ships.

Following the changes to Roro ferry requirements brought about by the Estonia disaster the Baltic states added their won requirements on top of the SOLAS changes for ferries operating between the Baltic states.

Chapter 19 of the report covers regulatory changes.
https://onse.fi/estonia/chapt19.html

Chapter 22 covers recommendations made by the investigation.
https://onse.fi/estonia/chapt22.html

 

[Jack by the hedge]

We know Koivisto is an expert as the JAIC appointed him to report on the EPIRBs and he also did a presentation in January 1995.

So the translation is crap then. You quoted some technical description supposedly from a Finnish newspaper but it's not in grammatical English so should we trust the terminology to be precise or just put it down as weak translation too?

 

[abaddon]

Both EPIRBs in Estonia were turned off when found, would the buoys have been left untuned after the test?

That is the implication: either the ship's electricians omitted to tune the buoys or they were tuned but were removed.

They were HRU-triggered so the puzzle is why they did not activate on being hydrostatically released? Asser Koivisto* says they were not 'tuned'.

Jesus crappy christ. No ships electricians can "tune" an EPIRB. It doesn't work that way. It has never worked that way. The units were tested and working before the sinking, and they were tested and working after the sinking. You are claiming that somewhere in the middle of that period they were tampered with. That is absurd.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The JAIC doesn't blame the Captain or the crew. It criticises them, sure, but do you not think it at all strange the JAIC have made no attempt to explain where was the Captain in all this.

Make your mind up. You say they don't blame any crew and in your next breath insinuate it's suspicious they don't apportion particular actions to particular officers.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

From Kannad itself:

The float free type (automatic activation):
• KANNAD 406 F/P: Container made of polyester with an internal membrane (CAL87).
• KANNAD 406 FH/PH: Container fitted with a HAMMAR release system (CAL 89).

As it was fitted with an HRU within the container, it will be the latter.

F refers to Float free

Its Survival version has an S suffix.

The survival type:
• KANNAD 406 S (manual activation),
• KANNAD 406 WS (manual activation and water activation).

How many times before it sinks in?


Do keep up.

You're making assumptions about ambiguous descriptions.

S is manual Switch, not Survival
W is Water activation
You assume F is "float" but they all float. Do you have any good reason to think it's that and not Flash?
What's P?

 

[Andy_Ross]

You're making assumptions about ambiguous descriptions.

S is manual Switch, not Survival
W is Water activation
You assume F is "float" but they all float. Do you have any good reason to think it's that and not Flash?
What's P?

Care is needed with the Kannad ranges.

the 406 referred to 406 MHz transmitter and was part of the name convention for all their equipment.

Letter suffixes refer to the individual models in the range and have changed over the years and mean different things on the marine and aviation models.

 

[LondonJohn]

What's your source for "F" = free-floating? They all float, and floating free is due to the design of the holder rather than the buoy itself. Are you sure the F in the model name doesn't mean it's fitted with a flashing beacon?

LMAO at Vixen thinking the "F" meant this was a variant of buoy that was special/different from other buoys on account of being able to float......

 

[LondonJohn]

The Estonian service electricians inspected the buoys' activities about a week before the accident and by then those had been operating normally. Those Kannad 406-F (=free-floating) were tested as follows: the buoy's "cage" was carefully opened and the buoy was raised. When the indicator light started flashing, the cap was opened and the switch was turned to the OFF position. In that case, the signal would not yet have emitted. At the time there was no test button.

Both EPIRBs in Estonia were turned off when found, would the buoys have been left untuned after the test?

That is the implication: either the ship's electricians omitted to tune the buoys or they were tuned but were removed.

They were HRU-triggered so the puzzle is why they did not activate on being hydrostatically released? Asser Koivisto* says they were not 'tuned'.

Please note: it is not possible to switch it on and then switch it off without having emitted a signal, unless this is done immediately.

If the epirb was manually activated only, it would not have been in an HRU and there would have been no call for an investigation by JAIC.

Yeah..... you've definitely got your fingers wedged deep inside your ears, haven't you?

You're still unable to figure out that automatic release and automatic activation are two different - and entirely separate and unconnected - things.

The evidence is right there in front of your face. When the EPIRBs were tested, both just prior to the disaster and after they'd been recovered post-disaster, part of the testing involved (manually) switching them on to check that their electronics and their transceivers were working properly.

When the engineers tested the EPIRBs' circuitry and transceivers not long before the disaster, they would - by definition and by design - have switched them off again after the test. Because leaving them switched on would have resulted in those EPIRBs a) continuously broadcasting a distress signal from the moment of the test onwards until the batteries ran out, and b) running their batteries down to zero.


At this point, it's beyond parody that you can't work all this out for yourself. And it rides a coach and horses through any claims that your work is the product of literate, objective research & analysis.

Simply put: you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Care is needed with the Kannad ranges.

the 406 referred to 406 MHz transmitter and was part of the name convention for all their equipment.

Letter suffixes refer to the individual models in the range and have changed over the years and mean different things on the marine and aviation models.

Yes, it seemed so when they list an F model in a manual from 2006 but that can't be the Estonia's F model as it also says models over 12 years old are obsolete and should be withdrawn.

 

[LondonJohn]

The JAIC doesn't blame the Captain or the crew. It criticises them, sure, but do you not think it at all strange the JAIC have made no attempt to explain where was the Captain in all this. Especially as the Rockwater divers specifically went to the bridge to retrieve the logbook and GPS navigational equipment. Rockwater's remit was to advise whether it was feasible to salvage the vessel and/or bring up the bodies (it said yes).

So what did the logbook have to say? Was Captain Andresson at the helm? This is important, surely even to the most avid fawning sycophant of 'authority', just as the situation of a pilot in an air disaster would be to an air disaster investigation.

LOL. Here, ladies and gentleman, we see the mantra of the conspiracy theorist. It says, in so many words: "Ha! Those of you who suck at the teat of your governments and their related authority groups are precisely the types of useful idiots at whom they're aiming their lies and cover-ups! However, I belong to a small select group of pioneering and fearless truth-seekers - capable of seeing right through the authorities' deception and figuring out what really happened!"

 

[Andy_Ross]

As far as I can make out the 'S' designation was for a 'Survival' model.
It was a compact version for use on liferafts, small fishing boats and yachts, not commercial vessels.

It had to be manually removed from it's casing and activated.

There was also an 'FH' model which was automatic eject and activation.

Again, this was a 'Survival' model, not intended for use on large commercial vessels.

Earliest date for it is 1998

http://ryvingen.webtest.autohosting...ad-406-s-inspection-and-operation-booklet.pdf

 

[JesseCuster]

What's your source for "F" = free-floating?

From Kannad itself:

The float free type (automatic activation):
• KANNAD 406 F/P: Container made of polyester with an internal membrane (CAL87).
• KANNAD 406 FH/PH: Container fitted with a HAMMAR release system (CAL 89).

As it was fitted with an HRU within the container, it will be the latter.

F refers to Float free

Where does "Kannad itself" say that F refers to float free?

 

[Andy_Ross]

From further research the Kannad models from that era have an A in their name if they are automatic. F is for Float Free. There are manual and automatic models that both are float free.

 

[JesseCuster]

From further research the Kannad models from that era have an A in their name if they are automatic. F is for Float Free. There are manual and automatic models that both are float free.

Thanks for the info.

For some reason I question Vixen when she claims it because she says that Kannad themselves say that's what the F means, but her copy and paste from Kannad's website doesn't say that, and she has a history of rather dubious interpretations of her sources.

You say there are both manual and automatic models that are float-free, but Vixen says that's wrong. She thinks that if an EPIRB is float-free then it is therefore automatically activated.

At this point it seems pointless arguing the point, she's dug her heels in on this claim and won't be dissuaded by any evidence otherwise.

 

[LondonJohn]

From further research the Kannad models from that era have an A in their name if they are automatic. F is for Float Free. There are manual and automatic models that both are float free.

In any event.... this is all somewhat moot to a debate about the Estonia disaster.

Because firstly, we know for certain that the two EPIRBs aboard the Estonia that night were of the "manual activation only" type.

And the reason why we know this for certain is because the JAIC Report explicitly points this out. The JAIC's facts and conclusions on this matter have never been challenged on anything more than spurious CT-agenda grounds.

Secondly (and as has been pointed out so many times here already), wrt the Estonia disaster in particular, the non-activation of the EPIRBs was actually of no material importance/significance anyhow in terms of emergency assistance/rescue efforts. The nearby ships and the rescue authorities already had a reliable, accurate fix on the Estonia's position as quickly as (or maybe even more quickly than) the EPIRBs would have reported the position had they indeed been (manually) activated before the ship sank.

 

[Andy_Ross]

List of all Kannad Marine models oldest to newest before model names changed to 'Safelink' and 'Sportpro'

Kannad 406 Non Float-Free
Kannad 406 F Float-Free
Kannad 406 S Non Float-Free
Kannad 406 FH or Kannad 406 PH Float-Free
Kannad 406 S or Kannad 406 SW or Rescuer 406 S Non Float-free
Kannad 406 FW or Kannad 406 PW Float-Free
Kannad 406 ATP Automatic
Kannad 406 ATP-M Automatic
Kannad 406 XS Non Float-Free EPIRB/Manual
Kannad 406 AP or Kannad 406 AF or Kannad 406 AF-H Automatic
Kannad 406 Survival Manual Non Float-free
Kannad 406 AP or Kannad 406 AF or Kannad 406 AF-H or Kannad 406 AP-H Automatic
Kannad 406 ATP TAC Automatic ELT/Portable
Kannad 406 AF-H Automatic
Kannad 406 XS-2, Kannad 406 XS-2 GPS Float-Free
Kannad 406 GPS PRO Float-Free
Kannad 406 SVW GPS, Kannad 406 SV GPS Non Float-Free
Kannad 406 PRO Float-Free
Kannad 406 SVW, Kannad 406 SV Non Float-Free
Kannad Auto GPS, Kannad Automatic Float-Free
Kannad Manual + GPS, Kannad Manual +, Kannad Manual GPS, Kannad Manual Float-Free
Kannad 406 AF-Compact, Kannad 406 AF-Compact(ER) Automatic