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

[Vixen]

Again

The Government of the Republic of Estonia
Final report on the MV ESTONIA disaster of 28 September 1994

Chapter 8 Observations after the accident.

Section 8.11 The EPIRB beacons



https://onse.fi/estonia/chapt08_6.html#5

You have also been shown that the manufacturer designates the model you cited as being the one involved as being float free, not automatic activation.
That model has a different designation.

Man up and admit the EPIRB's were automatically activated.

Why do you think MRCC Commander Montonen requested Bodö Baltic Satellite Sea alert station requested a search for a 'disappeared message'?

TALLINN - Car Ferry The Estonian EPIRB satellite buoys were operational, although for some reason the message they sent automatically did not progress to the alarm system. Estonian and Finnish experts tested buoys detached from sunken Estonia on Tuesday at the icebreaker Tarmo. According to Estonian radio, the buoys sent a four-hour radio message that should arrive via satellite at the ground station. Next, we want to investigate the operation of the ground stations to find out where the auto-triggered alarm message disappeared. Satellite alerts in the Baltic Sea area will be received at Bodö, Norway, which will transmit the information to the nearest maritime rescue center. Satellite alerts in the Baltic Sea may also be printed in Falmouth, England, or Toulouse, France. In connection with the Estonian accident, the absence of a satellite alarm was puzzled. The buoys were later found stranded off the coast of Estonia. JORMA ROTKO
25.1.1994

HS

In addition, yet another source confirms the EPIRB's were automatically-activated.

Jack A. Nelson

Other snafus contributed to the slow reaction that without doubt cost scores of lives. The Estonia was equipped with EPIRB: automatic emergency beacons. When a ship sinks, these buoy-enclosed mitters are supposed to pop to the surface and transmit the ship's position. At times this takes a few minutes until the proper satellite that initiates the message is in position. On this night, the emergency beacons aboard the Estonia did not work for reasons that are not entirely clear. The crew did possess the capability to activate the EPIRB manually, but they were probably proceeding under the assumption that the devices would automatically release once they were submerged, as they had been designed to do. Had this system operated, the rescue helicopters would have found the wreckage site much faster.

From: Flashes in the Night

 

[Vixen]

Of course.

And it would have been a prominent finding in the JAIC Report - even though it wouldn't actually have made a material difference to the outcome of this particular tragedy.

Oh and if the JAIC had either been ignorant/negligent in its understanding on this matter - or, worse, if the JAIC had known about it but tried to cover it up or misdirect away from it - there would, beyond a shadow of a doubt, have been plenty that would have come out about it in the many years between 1995 and today.

It is about time it dawns on you, the JAIC turned a blind eye to a lot of things.

For example:

• Channel 16 or short wave 2182 should be heard across the Baltic
• Stockholm did not hear anything at all. Turku MRCC assumed they had, and it only had a relay, it didn't hear the original live.
• Stockholm MRCC only knew about the disaster when a Swedish truck driver rang them to ask what was going on in the Baltic.
• Stockholm *had to ring MRCC Turku* - this is why Karppila says they only logged the Mayday at 0202.
• the EPIRB's were either removed or disabled.

when will the penny drop there was something seriously wrong with communications for the duration of the sinking from 0100 onwards right up until it disappeared beneath the waves at 0148.

 

[Vixen]

But in a parallel universe where the failure of vital safety equipment is considered just one of those things, nobody did anything about it. The manufacturer kept right on selling them, the safety authorities maintained their type approval, the shipping insurers kept accepting their use and the ships which depended on them kept sailing. Everyone just thought emergency buoys which don't work was no big deal.

It was not a manufacturing fault.

 

[zooterkin]

It was not a manufacturing fault.

Indeed, it was working perfectly, as designed.

 

[Vixen]

I doubt he meant that literally, just that he expected it to have remained floating, even if was not longer the right way up, and therefore he approached cautiously.


And then explicitly mentions watertight doors being open, as well as the rough seas and the fact that the Estonia did not slow down as he had. So, he does mention several factors apart from the bow visor.

Captain Mäkelä of Silja Europa said plainly (and Finns are a plain-speaking lot) it could not have been caused by just one factor, in his view. For example, the bow visor falling off. He is not the only expert who is sceptical.

Arild Winge, who was working at Berga naval base in Stockholm. He had been on duty when the MS Jan Heweliusz went down in January 1993. If you recall, that vessel, also a car ferry, capsized and floated upside down for about five days before sinking, and thus, he was expecting to see something similar as he approached theEstonia and was surprised to see only bits of debris and lots of life rafts and vests, instead.

Likewise, both Europa and Mariella approached cautiously for fear of striking an upturned vessel.

 

[zooterkin]

Why do you think MRCC Commander Montonen requested Bodö Baltic Satellite Sea alert station requested a search for a 'disappeared message'?

Because at that time it hadn't been established the EPIRBs were of the manually activated design?

In addition, yet another source confirms the EPIRB's were automatically-activated.

From: Flashes in the Night

Once again, you mistakenly equate release with activation. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

 

[junkshop]

...In addition, yet another source confirms the EPIRB's were automatically-activated.

Jack A. Nelson

Other snafus contributed to the slow reaction that without doubt cost scores of lives. The Estonia was equipped with EPIRB: automatic emergency beacons. When a ship sinks, these buoy-enclosed mitters are supposed to pop to the surface and transmit the ship's position. At times this takes a few minutes until the proper satellite that initiates the message is in position. On this night, the emergency beacons aboard the Estonia did not work for reasons that are not entirely clear. The crew did possess the capability to activate the EPIRB manually, but they were probably proceeding under the assumption that the devices would automatically release once they were submerged, as they had been designed to do. Had this system operated, the rescue helicopters would have found the wreckage site much faster.

From: Flashes in the Night

That says RELEASE, not ACTIVATE.

RELEASE and ACTIVATE are different words. They have different meanings. They are not synonyms.

You surely know this, so why do you keep claiming that RELEASE means ACTIVATE?

ETA: ninja'd

 

[GlennB]

I made a mistake about whereabouts Mariella had her helipad.

No you didn't, those are just weasel words. Yet again.

The highlighted word in the original quote (below) shows that you thought they were going to use the fo'c'sle decks as improvised helipads.

You really can't grasp it, can you? The ships were only told to prepare their fo'c'sle decks as helicopter pads at 0205 after the profession official coordinated rescue was ordered by MRCC at 0148, the exact time Estonia vanished off the radar.

 

[zooterkin]

Captain Mäkelä of Silja Europa said plainly (and Finns are a plain-speaking lot) it could not have been caused by just one factor, in his view. For example, the bow visor falling off. He is not the only expert who is sceptical.

And then he goes on to mention other factors.

The article he's quoted in wants to believe in some sort of conspiracy, but it's not at all clear that he does. For example, he dismisses the idea of a bomb.

 

[Vixen]

Indeed, it was working perfectly, as designed.

Do you believe this early day report from Helsingin Sanomat is incorrect?

13.12.1994 2:00
TALLINN - Satellite passenger buoys (EPIRBs) on the Estonian passenger ferry have been found, the Estonian Ministry of Transport announced on Monday.


Experts are now investigating why the buoys were not operating at the time of the accident. The radio transmitters in the buoys should have automatically reported the exact position of the vessel via satellites once in the water.


The buoys were found on Saturday and taken to the Estonian Maritime Administration. The Estonian news agency's EEA telegram did not mention the location. (STT-ETA)

HS

If so why?

 

[Mojo]

Technically helicopters can land almost anywhere with a flat clam surface...

Are you trying to bring Scientology into it now?

 

[Vixen]

And then he goes on to mention other factors.

The article he's quoted in wants to believe in some sort of conspiracy, but it's not at all clear that he does. For example, he dismisses the idea of a bomb.

He is not going to posit a theory he is not qualified to do so is he, being a public figure, just as Seppelin said he didn't think the radio frequencies were jammed. This is called only speaking from one's own range of experience.

From Mäkelä's own experience and expectations, he expected to find Estonia overturned.

 

[Vixen]

Because at that time it hadn't been established the EPIRBs were of the manually activated design?



Once again, you mistakenly equate release with activation. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

Citation please of when Montonen or the JAIC were notified the EPIRB's were of the manual-activation type only? They never say this. Lehtola merely brushes it aside by saying it would not have speeded up rescue anyway, which is not really the point.

 

[The Man]

Do you believe this early day report from Helsingin Sanomat is incorrect?



HS

No, not entirely.

If so why?

It doesn't appear to be incorrect just incomplete. Had the buoys been switched on they "should have automatically" transmitted when released. As I recall, from this thread, the buoys would also not have "reported the exact position of the vessel". That would need to be triangulated by at least three receiving satellites. Again the problem remains they weren't switched on.

 

[Vixen]

Erratum re Carl-Eric Reintamm, it was the Isabella who rescued him, not Mariella.

It let over the side a rubber escape chute - of the type one sees on aircraft - designed for the escape of the passengers, and has a round raft area at the bottom for them to congregate in an emergency. It then sent down a crew member to help people out of the water who were too exhausted and had no further energy left. Then they were hauled. this is an example of how the ships rescued various people.

Europa rescued one guy by opening the pilot door, but it was too dangerous to keep that open.

 

[zooterkin]

This is called only speaking from one's own range of experience.

Is that a policy you would advocate in general?

 

[Vixen]

No, not entirely.



It doesn't appear to be incorrect just incomplete. Had the buoys been switched on they "should have automatically" transmitted when released. As I recall, from this thread, the buoys would also not have "reported the exact position of the vessel". That would need to be triangulated by at least three receiving satellites. Again the problem remains they weren't switched on.

Contrary to Abaddon's claim Helsingin Sanomat is a finnish [sic] backwater rag it really is not the SUN newspaper or the NATIONAL ENQUIRER.

https://rsf.org/en/ranking

 

[The Man]

Citation please of when Montonen or the JAIC were notified the EPIRB's were of the manual-activation type only? They never say this. Lehtola merely brushes it aside by saying it would not have speeded up rescue anyway, which is not really the point.

As already cited multiple times they were "notified" when the EPIRBs were found, as well as tested to be in proper working order and just not switched on.

The switch, when off, keeps the unit from activating when separated from the mount.

EPIRB: a full explanation

ACCIDENTAL ACTIVATION: WHAT DO I DO?

Accidental activation may occur and it can happen in a wide variety of cases. In most cases, this occurs when the EPIRB is removed from or released from its support for any reason. It is important to know that any EPIRB correctly installed in its housing or in its support may not be activated for any reason, since a magnet is inserted in its support to block the EPIRB activation.

If the EPIRB is removed from this simple blocking device and separated from the support, it may turn on. In case of accidental activation, the first thing to do is to try to turn off the beacon. If this happened simply by pressing the power on button or moving the activation lever, it is necessary to press again the power on button to power off the device or to return the lever to its rest position. If the EPIRB has a water contact activation circuit, it is important to ensure that it was not activated. In many cases it may even be sufficient to touch the EPIRB with wet hands to activate it. In this case, it must be accurately dried to stop it within ten seconds.

In any case, no panic! An EPIRB that was powered on for a few seconds does not transmit any signal. The transmission will only start 90 seconds after its activation.

However, it is the responsibility of the user (as well as a civil duty) to contact COSPAS or SARSAT immediately to notify them about the false alarm. Forgetting an EPIRB on and transmitting is an action of extreme irresponsibility that can also cause serious consequences.

 

[Vixen]

Is that a policy you would advocate in general?

If I was being interviewed in my professional capacity for a national newspaper or TV channel, I would be mindful of my responsibilities in that capacity.

If I am on a discussion forum then I am free to express my opinion, just as you are.

 

[The Man]

Contrary to Abaddon's claim Helsingin Sanomat is a finnish [sic] backwater rag it really is not the SUN newspaper or the NATIONAL ENQUIRER.

https://rsf.org/en/ranking

So what, I expect it's "not" a lot of different papers of both ill and/or honored repute.