• 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.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
JayUtah said:
You're the one claiming it must have been measured "by eye." Do you have any evidence for how it was measured?
Click to expand...

Vixen said:
It never reached a laboratory.
Click to expand...
Let's get this straight, you suspect that the divers didn't use any sort of common tools like a vernier calipers to measure the size of the bolt, but that whoever examined the bolt merely looked at it and guessed what size it was, and the reason you suspect that is because the bolt wasn't taken to a lab for measurement?

What kind of sense is that supposed to make? This is laughable, even for you.
 
On the microphones and speakers,

I can guarantee that if they were on surface supply they were using Kirby Morgan helmets.

Here is a link to the manual for the Kirby Morgan helmet modular communications system

https://www.kirbymorgan.com/sites/d...cludes-17b-17c-mk-21-and-kmb-bandmasks-hi.pdf

and here is the manual for the KMDSI Communicator panel used on the surface.

https://www.kirbymorgan.com/sites/default/files/100-401_mk3_kmdsi_communicator_user_guide_hi.pdf

Bearing in mind the umbilical has one cable for communications, can Vixen show me how two circuits could be installed, one to each ear?
 
Vixen said:
So, because Braidwood came to the tentative conclusion that Estonia's bow could have been subjected to explosives - and he sent samples to three independent metallurgy laboratories, one in the US and another used by German forensic police themselves - and I respect this man and his sheer weight of expertise.
Click to expand...

And they found no evidence of explosives, or an explosion.

I'm sure he cashed his check, though.:thumbsup:


Of course, Braidwood is a figure of ridicule here because people are absolutely terrified of what will happen if they dare to be sceptical a wave could knock off a bow visor and even then that the ship will sink in 35 minutes to the bottom of the sea.
Click to expand...

Nobody is terrified.

Just a little confused as to how you cannot grasp the basic power of the sea under the right conditions.

This video is a good illustration of how waves similar in height to the ones that took out Estonia's bow visor effect, and impact a ship moving at high speed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zvzld04Q5XI

The bow on that ship is almost three-stories high. It's not about wave-height as much about the height of the stern when the next wave hits. I'm not expert but the pitching of the ship plays a huge factor on the force of the waves slamming into the bow, as the ship is heavy (mass), and it is moving fast combined gravity doing its thing (acceleration). Combine that with the counter-force of the wave impacts (yes, multiple), and you not only have a believable, you have the likely explanation for how the bow-visor was knocked off.

This video shows the same thing, wave-height is relative. It's all about the pitch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74kfjLPkm-U

The sea is the 500-pound gorilla in this story, and nobody can just brush it off as a non-factor.
 
I have posted both of those and more previously.
They will be ignored.

That one of the Destroyer is a good example of what happens when you push in to a head sea too fast
A warship like the one in the video is built to take it. They are expected to have to do it.
A car ferry with a bow held by just a few connections shouldn't be pushed in to a head sea.
Just think of the cumulative effect of a hammering like that for over a decade.
 
Last edited:
Axxman300 said:
And they found no evidence of explosives, or an explosion.

I'm sure he cashed his check, though.:thumbsup:




Nobody is terrified.

Just a little confused as to how you cannot grasp the basic power of the sea under the right conditions.

This video is a good illustration of how waves similar in height to the ones that took out Estonia's bow visor effect, and impact a ship moving at high speed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zvzld04Q5XI

The bow on that ship is almost three-stories high. It's not about wave-height as much about the height of the stern when the next wave hits. I'm not expert but the pitching of the ship plays a huge factor on the force of the waves slamming into the bow, as the ship is heavy (mass), and it is moving fast combined gravity doing its thing (acceleration). Combine that with the counter-force of the wave impacts (yes, multiple), and you not only have a believable, you have the likely explanation for how the bow-visor was knocked off.

This video shows the same thing, wave-height is relative. It's all about the pitch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74kfjLPkm-U

The sea is the 500-pound gorilla in this story, and nobody can just brush it off as a non-factor.
Click to expand...


Yes.

And on top of this, there's the factor which Vixen still apparently cannot - or will not - understand: the waves that caused the bottom lock to fail on that particular night were the straw that broke the camel's back. The badly-designed, badly-manufactured and badly-maintained lugs on that bottom lock will have been fatiguing cumulatively over many, many months (probably over many years). By the time the Estonia set sail that night, the bottom lock lugs were metaphorically - and almost literally - hanging on by a thread. And the waves which pounded the bow that night in open seas (at an irresponsibly-high sailing speed) were the thing that finally finished off the lugs and set in place the chain of events which culminated in the ship sinking.

For Vixen to carry on with this fatuous drivel about "yeah, so we're supposed to believe that a wave or two caused the lock to break" is as ridiculous, illogical and ill-informed as someone saying "yeah, so we're supposed to believe that a single piece of straw caused this camel's back to break"

:rolleyes:
 
Captain_Swoop said:
I have posted both of those and more previously.
They will be ignored.

That one of the Destroyer is a good example of what happens when you push in to a head sea too fast
A warship like the one in the video is built to take it. They are expected to have to do it.
A car ferry with a bow held by just a few connections shouldn't be pushed in to a head sea.
Just think of the cumulative effect of a hammering like that for over a decade.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

A machine can only be pushed so far. Even that US destroyer has limits to the type of sea conditions in which it can operate in.

The Estonia's captain pushed his luck, and it ran out.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
For anyone interested in the 'standard protocol' for commercial diving.

Here is a link to "International Consensus Standards for Commercial Diving and Underwater Operations"

Be aware, it runs to over 300 pages. There are separate documents for most of the main headings.

https://www.adc-int.org/files/C12181_International Concensus Standards.pdf
Click to expand...


But d'uh! There's also a parallel secret handbook, which covers all the shady clandestine stuff they don't want the public to know about! If you want to know all about the separate comms channel into the other ear, and the separate second microphone for the diver to communicate back to the evil controller, it's all in that secret handbook......
 
LondonJohn said:
But d'uh! There's also a parallel secret handbook, which covers all the shady clandestine stuff they don't want the public to know about! If you want to know all about the separate comms channel into the other ear, and the separate second microphone for the diver to communicate back to the evil controller, it's all in that secret handbook......
Click to expand...

I suppose the secret handbook is available from the same place that sells the secret comms panels and umbilical with the extra comms cable and the helmets with the extra comms sockets.
 
Axxman300 said:
Exactly.

A machine can only be pushed so far. Even that US destroyer has limits to the type of sea conditions in which it can operate in.

The Estonia's captain pushed his luck, and it ran out.
Click to expand...


Yes. The sad truth is that the bow visor's bottom lock was already in such bad shape that it would have failed sooner or later anyhow. That design should never, ever have been signed off: there was a total lack of redundancy engineered into it. Even if the lock itself had been of exemplary design (which it wasn't), the fundamental problem was that if that bottom lock failed, it was likely to set off a catastrophic chain of events - including the complete detachment of the bow visor, and consequent damage to bow ramp which was linked to the visor - which would leave the bow of the ship hugely susceptible to significant water ingress onto the open vehicle deck.

One failure of one lock could result in the unstoppable loss of the entire ship.

That should never have been allowed to be the case. Where something of such high magnitude as the total loss of the vessel is concerned, it should never be as a direct consequence of a single mechanical (or electrical) part/system failing.

When you add into this the obvious fact that the bottom lock's design and manufacture were both substandard, and that the owner/operator had very clearly failed dreadfully in its operation and maintenance of the lock (horrific tales of crew members forcing in the bolt with sledgehammers, and clear evidence that the bow visor was already leaking before the night of the disaster), the whole thing was a accident malpractice waiting to happen.....
 
But of course the Estonia's master undoubtedly hastened the demise of the bottom lock, the bow visor, and the entire ship - by sailing too fast and too far away from the shelter of the coastline on the night of the disaster.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
I suppose the secret handbook is available from the same place that sells the secret comms panels and umbilical with the extra comms cable and the helmets with the extra comms sockets.
Click to expand...


I think they throw in the secret handbook gratis when you purchase the secret comms gear. But you have to show them identification that you're a shady government agent before they'll even admit to stocking that stuff, let alone sell it to you.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
On the microphones and speakers,

I can guarantee that if they were on surface supply they were using Kirby Morgan helmets.

Here is a link to the manual for the Kirby Morgan helmet modular communications system

https://www.kirbymorgan.com/sites/d...cludes-17b-17c-mk-21-and-kmb-bandmasks-hi.pdf

and here is the manual for the KMDSI Communicator panel used on the surface.

https://www.kirbymorgan.com/sites/default/files/100-401_mk3_kmdsi_communicator_user_guide_hi.pdf

Bearing in mind the umbilical has one cable for communications, can Vixen show me how two circuits could be installed, one to each ear?
Click to expand...

You raise an interesting point. I would be willing to bet that Vixen knows nothing about the terms PTT, simplex, duplex, comms collisions, vox, open carrier, two way simplex comms protocol or much of any of it, really.

Not to mention that it takes a specially designed helmet to even be able to talk at all. Your typical diving suit has ones gob full of breathing apparatus, so talking is not an option anyway.

But that discipline is critical. I once bought, years ago, a half decent set of PMRs to fool and try with my kids. It was a nightmare to get them to understand such concepts. They got it in the end. But when I brought them to the zipline adventureland, we didn't resort to them. Military hand signals were far more effective. We were all up in the trees in mad harnesses (which were of madly clever design) One is not taking two way into such a scenario. Trying to explain it to Vixen is even more frustrating to me.

And here is the kicker. The manuals you kindly supplied will give some further mileage because while that allows two channels on a four wire and full duplex and cross talk between divers, it will be construed otherwise. Just wait. That is where this convo is going.
 
abaddon said:
You raise an interesting point. I would be willing to bet that Vixen knows nothing about the terms PTT, simplex, duplex, comms collisions, vox, open carrier, two way simplex comms protocol or much of any of it, really.

Not to mention that it takes a specially designed helmet to even be able to talk at all. Your typical diving suit has ones gob full of breathing apparatus, so talking is not an option anyway.

But that discipline is critical. I once bought, years ago, a half decent set of PMRs to fool and try with my kids. It was a nightmare to get them to understand such concepts. They got it in the end. But when I brought them to the zipline adventureland, we didn't resort to them. Military hand signals were far more effective. We were all up in the trees in mad harnesses (which were of madly clever design) One is not taking two way into such a scenario. Trying to explain it to Vixen is even more frustrating to me.

And here is the kicker. The manuals you kindly supplied will give some further mileage because while that allows two channels on a four wire and full duplex and cross talk between divers, it will be construed otherwise. Just wait. That is where this convo is going.
Click to expand...

Just about every diver in the world on surface supply is using a Kirby Morgan helmet.
Off the top of my head I can only think of two others in wide use.

Divex who make their own 'free flow' helmet but their other stuff is Kirby Morgan with their own 'gas reclaim' regulators grafted on.

Also the lovely Gorski helmet made by Aqua Lung and using the British Apex regulator.

ETA I forgot the Desco Air Hat which is a simple 'free flow' design.

There also used to be the Ratcliff 'Rat-Hat' and the beautiful Miller helmets that evolved in to the Kirby Morgan.
 
carlitos said:
So you're selling that "Aqualung" was quadrophonic.
Click to expand...

Oh yes. Full surround sound with multiplexed channels and selective channel suppression. The whole notion is absurd.

LOL, another term that will be misunderstood. As well as carrier sense multiple access and any number of terms with which some people are entirely unfamiliar with.

We are back to the idea of rotating cell towers. Cell towers rotate to locate your cell phone, always.

So we are told from authority. What authority?

No cell towers rotate. But we were told they absolutely do like whirling dervishes.

Same with ILS, NDB, DME, and who knows what else.

I could trivially rock up to my local airport and demonstrate that to be false. But why would I bother?

I have decent camera gear, so I could do that. I am insufficiently motivated to bother. It is absurd.

And the Aqualung does not by default does not include speaking apparatus.

It includes gear for breathing underwater.And adding voice is not required. It happens in restricted circumstance. Why would anyone pay the money for that if it adds nothing?

The only way that happens is if one is committed to the CT du jour.
 
abaddon said:
Oh yes. Full surround sound with multiplexed channels and selective channel suppression. The whole notion is absurd.

LOL, another term that will be misunderstood. As well as carrier sense multiple access and any number of terms with which some people are entirely unfamiliar with.

We are back to the idea of rotating cell towers. Cell towers rotate to locate your cell phone, always.

So we are told from authority. What authority?

No cell towers rotate. But we were told they absolutely do like whirling dervishes.

Same with ILS, NDB, DME, and who knows what else.

I could trivially rock up to my local airport and demonstrate that to be false. But why would I bother?

I have decent camera gear, so I could do that. I am insufficiently motivated to bother. It is absurd.

And the Aqualung does not by default does not include speaking apparatus.

It includes gear for breathing underwater.And adding voice is not required. It happens in restricted circumstance. Why would anyone pay the money for that if it adds nothing?

The only way that happens is if one is committed to the CT du jour.
Click to expand...

The dive being discussed was surface supply, not an 'aqualung'
Air is supplied by an umbilical cable which is made up of several different components. usually a breathing gas hose, a Pneumofathometer hose for recording depth and a communications cable, which usually also serves as a lifeline strength member. For cold conditions a hot water line is added and a video line can also be used. For deeper diving a light power cable can be added and for deep 'saturation' diving from a closed bell For saturation diving from a closed bell a gas 'reclaim hose' will be used.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
The dive being discussed was surface supply, not an 'aqualung'
Click to expand...
What makes you think our protagonist cares?

Captain_Swoop said:
Air is supplied by an umbilical cable which is made up of several different components. usually a breathing gas hose, a Pneumofathometer hose for recording depth and a communications cable, which usually also serves as a lifeline strength member. For cold conditions a hot water line is added and a video line can also be used. For deeper diving a light power cable can be added and for deep 'saturation' diving from a closed bell For saturation diving from a closed bell a gas 'reclaim hose' will be used.
Click to expand...
You know that. I know that. Some do not know that.

I had to search, but one can see these in actual operation on yooboob. Except the protagonist, who some can see none of it for reasons not defined.

Selective blindness? No idea.

At the end, I come at it as the absurdity on the radio side and you come at the absurdity from a marine perspective.

But whichever, we agree it really is absurd.

Please don't make me the various wild degrees that our proponent has claimed. Doesn't matter. None of them were maritime anyway.

I have encountered Heiwa before. No moon landings ever happened. ISS is not real. Satelites are not real. The world is flat. There are no rovers on mars. Or probes. Or orbiters. Or Jupiter, Europa, Enceladus or anywhere. Because the world is flat. Some twonk merely painted them on a backdrop. The Firmament, I suppose. And he clearly imagines.

But he must be credible on his primary degree, right? Oooo yes. He must be. Ignore the elephant in the corner, he must be right. Doesn't matter that he is bonkers and gets banned from bonkers sites. Even flatties end up banning him. Simon Shack banned him. He really is that bonkers.

But somehow, he must be accepted as vaguely credible for some inexplicable reason. He was banned from here, but one must wonder. Why do crank sites also ban him.

He is comprehensively bonkers. I have no clue what happened to him do that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom