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

[Steve]

I can discern no reasoning skills in your post.

Your inability to discern the obvious is well documented in hundreds, maybe thousands, of posts. The limits to your comprehension capabilities are only marginally germane to the topic of the thread. Try to stay on topic.

 

[JayUtah]

When did you stop beating your wife?

Non sequitur. Please answer the question.

 

[Steve]

When did you stop beating your wife?

In my case I stopped before I ever started. You?

 

[JayUtah]

Well, if he thinks all the quality broadsheet newspapers citing maritime experts is all a load of rubbish, nothing is going to convince him.

Broadsheets claiming exactly what, and when? Stop handwaving.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Expert witnesses give their evidence. Full stop. For example, if the CPS fails to secure a conviction it doesn't go around objecting even if it knows the defendant was guilty AFATAC.

Hmm. A demonstrable failure to understand the logical consequences of evidence presented in expert testimony sounds like it might be grounds for appeal. But that's wandering off topic.

In this case there seems to be no hint of objection to the JAIC conclusion, nor any different conclusion from any other interested party.

If there were, perhaps you would like to list them.

"FX: strikes listening pose"

 

[Steve]

Why, thank you, 'Steve'.

Steve is my name. The quote marks are not a part of it and the addition of them is unnecessary.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Well, if he thinks all the quality broadsheet newspapers citing maritime experts is all a load of rubbish, nothing is going to convince him.

I'm absolutely not saying that. I'm saying you keep quoting articles which literally do not say the thing you claim they are saying.

 

[BazBear]

The report which states that water alone on the car deck could not have caused the ship to capsize.

Well since it wasn't on the car deck alone, it doesn't matter, now does it?

 

[Steve]

Well since it wasn't on the car deck alone, it doesn't matter, now does it?

The ship does currently appear to be quite inundated with water.

 

[Andy_Ross]

As scientists, all they did was present their objective results. The JAIC whose job it was to interpret them, simply didn't bother and brushed the whole issue aside with 'There were no signals from EPIRB's'.

Nowhere do they claim they were 'manually-activated only' epirbs.

They were found in working condition but turned off.
When they were activated they worked exactly as they should.
If they had been automatic activated buoys and were in working condition they would have been found with flat batteries as they would have been transmitting when immersed.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Early reports are useful for the historian or sociologist. A report into the cause of an accident that killed 832 at least - probably more as passenger lists don't include those without tickets (children and guests of staff) - is completely different from 'developing news' and should be carried out thoroughly and properly. Then PM Carl Bildt immediately blaming the bow visor and car ramp is actually highly noteworthy, together with the JAIC's anxiety 'not to blame anybody for it', when common sense tells you that at that stage you do not know whether it was a criminal act or not.

In the case of The Herald of Free Enterprise a criminal charge of corporate manslaughter was brought against Townsend Thoreson so don't try to make out that such accidents are 'perfectly natural and that if you think otherwise you are a dirty conspiracy theorist'.

It is not the job of an enquiry to bring criminal charges.

 

[junkshop]

It is clear to anyone with eyes to see what is happening here.

Vixen's beloved Helsingin Sanomat is obviously lousy with Russian assets. These ex-KGB swine (and their traitorous sympathisers) used this 'respected broadsheet' to spread disinformation and doubt amongst the good people of the 'free world'!

So wily were they in their nefarious writings, that they deliberately used words that the yet-to-be-invented 'Google translate' would translate ambiguously. Thus they furthered their goal of eroding the trust of the people in their leaders, leading (as any fule no) inevitably to the collapse of these decadent, corrupt goverments, and and the glorious rebirth of the supposedly-former Soviet Empire!!1!!!!

So which is it, 'Vixen'? Have you been gulled by the Reds, or are you in on it?

 

[JayUtah]

It is not the job of an enquiry to bring criminal charges.

Nor are the conclusions of such investigations typically admissible in criminal or civil court proceedings.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Where does it say they were 'manual-operation-only' buoys?

You yourself have told us they were the Kanna 406 F model. this is listed as float free, the first auto activation model was the Kannad 406 ATP.

That they were found floating and turned off with full charge on their battery and when activated worked as they should.

If they had been auto activation and in working order then they would have transmitted and their batteries would be flat.
If they were auto and had been tampered with then they would not have been in working order when found.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Not that canard again or should it be kannad?

You have been given numerous citations they were automatically-activated EPIRB's and compliant with SOLAS regulations which said such vessels must have automatically activated EPIRB's by August 1993. Nowhere does Koivisto or the JAIC claim Estonia was non-compliant.

In fact, JAIC tasked Koivisto with investigating why the automatically-activated buoys did not automatically activate as they should have done.

If they were 'manual-operation-only'* buoys only there would be zero point using an automatically activated hydrostatic release mechanism which activates in 1 - 4 metres of water.

*All buoys can be manually activated if so desired. Estonia's were presumed HRU released and thus should have emitted the location signal.

SOLAS regulation did not mandate an automatic buoy until after the Estonia sinking. Before that it was a recommendation only.

Kannad only supplied an automatic release bracket for that model range.

The buoys on the Estonia were Kannad 406 F. These are float free manual activation

If they had been automatic the model designation would be Kannad 406 ATP

Edit to add, There was also a model named the Kannad 406 Auto available at the same time.

 

[Vixen]

Where can I read more about Arlanda Airport/air traffic control being down? Specifically of course how it did affect the rescue operation?

According to the journalist guy from Utah:

Tragically, when Swedish helicopters headed to the area they were dogged by communication problems and equipment that did not function well. The helicopter crews could not communicate with the flight commanders in Arlanda, the international airport near Stockholm with extensive radar control, because its short wave radio was not working at the time. They had little guidance in finding the accident site, and only a vague knowledge of where the Estonia had gone down. Those who found the wreckage had to guide the later helicopters there.

Flashes in the Night - Jack A Nelson



What did the Commission have to say about the myriad problems reported about communications that night? Early on, 28.1.1995, it seemed to believe the much complained of disruption was of no consequence - within just three months, with zero investigation or any seeming critical analysis:

Estonian mayday reaches eleven listeners Information about several recipients dispels suspicions of delays

Pärssinen Kyösti 27.1.1995 2:00

The Estonian mayday distress call was heard at 11 locations. Other recipients also quickly confirmed that the Turku Maritime Rescue Center had heard the distress message. It came to Turku very weak. The International Commission of Inquiry into the Accident discussed the coverage of the emergency call at its meeting in Helsinki on Thursday. Information from several recipients dispels suspicions that the poor coverage of the emergency call would have delayed the start of Estonia's rescue efforts.

The Swedes in particular have expressed doubts about this.
According to Kari Lehtola, a member of the research committee, the information about so many simultaneous listeners also excludes the possibility that on the night of the accident on September 28, there would have been emergency traffic on the channels for a long time before the mayday call at 1.24.

"Even if Turku's coverage problems had been even greater, the distress message was heard in so many places that operations would have started quickly anyway," says Lehtola.

Recipients quickly began to confirm and interrogate each other about the invitation.

"It was immediately checked whether they had been heard and whether it had been heard whether Turku had been heard."

In addition to Turku, the Estonian mayday invitation was heard by the Coast Guard stations of Nauvo, Kökari and Mariehamn, the Fortress of Utö, the car ferry Finnjet and the cargo ships Finnmerchant and Anette. The car ferries Silja Europa and Mariella had a discussion with Estonia, and the car ferry Silja Symphony also recorded the invitation.

HS

No investigation at all, just the type of rationalisation we have seen in buckets on this thread. Let's think of a possible explanation, ah right, eleven people heard the mayday so that proves there was no interference on that night. Investigation over.


Actually, Mariehamn reported they were not in the loop, either, until they were rung up much later by MRCC Turku.

 

[Andy_Ross]

This is like wading through treacle. If a ship sinks with zero prospect of rescue, then do you not think sabotage should be investigate, especially with the highly surprising - to marine experts - lack of radio network and EPIRB's not automatically activating when triggered by two fathoms of water and the complete disappearance of the vessel when professional training and academic examinations has scientifically taught you (a) the time it takes for a capsized vessel to sink with its hull intact ceteris paribus and (b) the physics of sinking and floating, bearing in mind the Wilhelm Gustloff which was triple torpedoed in the hull took 45 minutes to sink completely and the Titanic, broken in two and having hit an iceberg, causing damage to its watertight bulkheads and weakening its rivets, took almost three hours to sink.

We have shown plenty of examples of ships that sank very quickly yet somehow they didn't count.
Why should we consider your examples of ships sinking in different circumstances?

It has been pointed out repeatedly that each sinking has a different set of conditions.

 

[JayUtah]

According to the journalist guy from Utah.

Journalism professor. You mean the guy who made all those other mistakes and didn't cite to any sources?

 

[Andy_Ross]

If JAIC had appointed you to investigate the EPIRB's and you discover that actually they were automatically-activated models do you think it adequate for JAIC to say, 'ah well, it doesn't matter anyway'?

Or would you look at protocol and procedures as Koivisto did and conclude they had not been set up properly and report accordingly, as he did.

Where does he say they are automatic activation models?

We know they were found switched off and with full battery charges. When they were switched on they worked as they should.

How were they not 'set up properly' when there is no setting up for the user to do?

 

[Andy_Ross]

You have been provided with numerous on-site and expert citations. So I am not going to argue any further. If they were 'manual-operation-only' buoys there would not be any mystery. You can have the last word.

HS

Where are these numerous 'on site and expert citations'?
You keep referring us to the same newspaper story

As for the second thing, he thought wrong. They were released and found floating in the sea.