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

[zooterkin]

Okaaay. We'll just ignore veteran elite expert Brian Braidwood.

No, but we'll ignore your creative interpretation of his reported comments.

 

[whoanellie]

According to the JAIC the accident was caused by the Atlantic lock and the two side locks all failing sequentially as a result of a single strong wave.

Your lie use to be that it was a few strong waves, now it's a single wave. It's still a lie.

 

[LondonJohn]

What is your evidence that a boast will 'turn upside down very rapidly'?

For example, watch as this large passenger ship capsizes and then "turns upside down very rapidly", then remains afloat upside down for quite some time before eventually sinking:




Not.


Vixen's posts in this thread - individually and collectively - are a bad, ill-informed, scientifically-illiterate joke.

 

[LondonJohn]

I see, so US Navy SEAL's or Royal Navy divers are unable to set up communications with more than one platform.

First, and just to be precise (although I know you don't understand the difference yourself), we're talking here specifically about tethered deep-sea divers, who have an umbilical air and comms link to the surface vessel.

(We're not, for example, talking about troops in RIBs).

So now we've established that...... no - military tethered deep-sea divers are unable to set up communications with more than one platform. Tell me why they would even need to do so, or benefit from doing so.*

Okaaay. We'll just ignore veteran elite expert Brian Braidwood.

Ahh, "veteran elite expert" LOLOL.

And what we'll actually do, Vixen, is this: firstly we'll want to see a direct quote from Braidwood which explicitly talks about tethered divers having a two separate incoming comms channels - one in each ear. But you won't be able to find such a quote, Vixen. Can you guess why you won't be able to find such a quote, Vixen?

Joke.


* The correct answer is: they wouldn't need to do so, and nor would they ever benefit from being able to do so.

 

[JayUtah]

Elite Royal Navy military explosives expert and diver Braidwood's perception of what those mysterious items in the Rockwater video were, are likely far sharper than the smooth soft-handed lawyer Lehtola, who identified them as 'bits of pallet' and 'tarpaulin' and dismissed them with a wave of his unblemished pen-pushing hand.

None of that has the slightest thing to do with what I posted.

 

[JayUtah]

It was held by hydraulic arms on both sides, together with the side locks. Can't get much stronger than that.

How many naval structural assemblies have you personally designed?

 

[JayUtah]

Why wouldn't you bring back the bolt, a key piece of evidence...

According to whom?

...as to why 852 sank to their deaths in the most horrifying manner of mass panic and hysteria?

Keep ladling on the emotional rhetoric. It does wonders to show how dispassionately you're treating the issue.

According to the JAIC the accident was caused by the Atlantic lock and the two side locks all failing sequentially as a result of a single strong wave.

False.

 

[JayUtah]

The JAIC very clearly states the thing was seaworthy.

Asked and answered a dozen times already in this thread.

 

[JayUtah]

If your car was in an accident, the police would certainly want to know if it was roadworthy.

How many road accidents have you investigated as a police officer? I've been involved in a number of them, one of which ended up in a court case that went all the way to the Idaho Supreme Court. Not once was the "roadworthiness" of my vehicle ever asked about.

 

[JayUtah]

Because when a boat capsizes it turns upside down very rapidly. It doesn't float about on its side for any length of time.

What is your evidence for this claim?

 

[JayUtah]

As the VINNOVA simulation points out, it needs a minimum of 11,000tonnes-equivalent plus 83% of the superstructure to be filled with water (that has displaced the air keeping it afloat).

Asked and answered. That's according to the way they parameterized the flooding model in one instance, which necessarily involves parameters that can only be guessed at. That's why the real use of these models in a forensic investigation is to run them several times, parameterized variously, until the outcome matches the observed behavior of the system under investigation.

How many of these investigations have you personally participated in again?

 

[JayUtah]

I see, so US Navy SEAL's or Royal Navy divers are unable to set up communications with more than one platform.

No such claim was made. However, we know the limitations of the equipment likely used in this case. Those are facts you can't simply dispel by waving the conspiracy wand.

Okaaay. We'll just ignore veteran elite expert Brian Braidwood.

The problem is not with Braidwood but with your imaginative reinterpretation of his report. Once again you can't seem to draw a distinction between what has been said with what you think was said. And it's not at all limited to Braidwood. You seem to have a chronic problem accurately reporting anything you read in connection with this thread, including the posts written by your critics.

 

[SpitfireIX]

Possibly, but in my case I fulfilled contracts for the U.S. National Nuclear Safety Administration, specifically in the area of stewardship over the U.S. nuclear warhead stockpile. I intended my statement to be a little bit more literal than you've taken it.

So you're obviously part of the conspiracy to fool the American public into believing that nuclear weapons are real.

 

[Here_to_learn]

So you're obviously part of the conspiracy to fool the American public into believing that nuclear weapons are real.

I actually read it the other way around - sounds to me that JayUtah has landed the perfect job, responsible for ensuring that something that does not exist does not fall into the wrong hands!

 

[Reformed Offlian]

ISTM that the system can be set up for left- or right- ear communication.

So can a phone. How often do people really listen on two phones simultaneously?

It is obvious that the military tactics will sometime require commands communicated from more than one person, possibly from different locations.

What is obvious is that we can add battlefield communications to the list of topics you know nothing about, but pretend to be expert in.

 

[JayUtah]

So you're obviously part of the conspiracy to fool the American public into believing that nuclear weapons are real.

That was literally Björkman's response.

I actually read it the other way around - sounds to me that JayUtah has landed the perfect job, responsible for ensuring that something that does not exist does not fall into the wrong hands!

"Stockpile stewardship" is a euphemism for making sure the things still blow up when you push the button. Keep in mind how old some of those devices are. I mean yes, the NNSA does have the mandate to keep them from falling into the wrong hands. But it's mostly about making sure they're still as much of a deterrent now as they were 50 years ago.

 

[Mojo]

So can a phone. How often do people really listen on two phones simultaneously?

 

[Here_to_learn]

"Stockpile stewardship" is a euphemism for making sure the things still blow up when you push the button. Keep in mind how old some of those devices are. I mean yes, the NNSA does have the mandate to keep them from falling into the wrong hands. But it's mostly about making sure they're still as much of a deterrent now as they were 50 years ago.

Ok then, I need to rephrase it to that you have the perfect job of ensuring that something that does not exist actually never fail!

But given that I'm not one of those that believe that Björkman is factually correct - I'd say - impressive job!

 

[SpitfireIX]

I was referring to Estonia. I am not interested in his views on JFK, 9/11 or Pearl Harbour.

Bjorkmann is a qualified naval architect. That is different from 'having an opinion'.

<snip>

So your dismissing someone wholesale just because you differ from them in an opinion reflects on yourself not them.

Just to add to what others have written, every profession has its share of quacks, charlatans, and crackpots, despite the best efforts of professional schools, professional licensing organizations, and professional societies to weed them out. Therefore, the fact that Björkman (note the correct spelling) may have been a qualified marine engineer at some point does not automatically give his pronouncements about the Estonia disaster credibility.

As for the hilited, Björkman actively promotes four main conspiracy theories: nuclear weapons are fake, human space flight is fake, the generally accepted explanation for the sinking of the Estonia is fake, and the generally accepted explanation for the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings is fake. The common thread running through all of these is a mind-boggling misunderstanding of physics (including nuclear physics). Do you believe that a person can perform competently as a marine engineer without understanding physics?

Finally, because I know how much you love being pedantic, Pearl Harbor is a proper noun, so you should use the American spelling.

 

[Vixen]

They can if they received evidence the brakes had failed some time after the MOT test and I'd been using the handbrake to stop the car. Rather analogous to crew using hammers to get ill-fitting locks shut, no?

So yes, "person B" could perfectly well report that my car had a valid in-date MOT certificate yet it was not in fact roadworthy.

If that was the case with Estonia, the JAIC never said there was poor care and maintenance. It took the view it was seaworthy. Full stop. As for SOLAS checks, whilst there might be faults on a SOLAS inspection list, these are rarely deemed 'do not sail'. Like an oil change warning light on your car, it is advisory and should be seen to at your earliest convenience. Defects on the SOLAS list are largely left to the discretion of the managers to fix ASAP as and when.