• 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 IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here_to_learn said:
This has of course nothing to do with M/S Estonia, but according to current reports in Swedish press, Scot Carrier did not notify JRCC. Instead JRCC was alerted by an emergency transponder from the danish ship, and it was JRCC that contacted Scot Carrier and ordered them to return to the scene.

The AIS track is quite confused, but seem to support that after collision, Scot Carrier turned west again and sped up for a couple of minutes, before turning back.

Regardless, there will be an investigation, and the report is expected in 7-10 months from now.
Click to expand...

It looks to me from the track that they weren't sure what had happened right after the collision it was dark and foggy.
They had just changed course to the west, after the collision they veered south then set back on their original course before turning back.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
I did wonder if that might have been struck by the larger ship's propeller.
Click to expand...

more likely the bow rode over it.

Scot Carrier is in cargo, that's over 4000 tons and the Karin Hoej was just in ballast so running very light.
A ship cargo ship will be more likely to capsize if it's holds are empty. Likewise for staying afloat, an empty ship is a lot more buoyant.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
more likely the bow rode over it.
Click to expand...

Yes, you can see the crease running right across and interestingly it isn't quite straight, suggesting that the smaller ship both turned (as you might expect if it wasn't struck centrally) and rolled as it was pushed and ridden over, so damage on one side of the hull is at a different angle to the other. The gash in the hull seems to be at right angles to that damage, which is why I wondered if that might be a propeller strike, but it may just be a natural line of weakness which opened up.
 
abaddon said:
Yay. Once again the convo gets diverted into an unrelated event. I wonder when people will notice this is an active tactic.
Click to expand...

It is at least peripherally connected, not by being in the Baltic, but by raising Vixen's question of how it can be that all stricken ships don't behave in identical ways.
 
It's another data point against ships sinking quickly if they have a breach in the hull.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
The gash in the hull seems to be at right angles to that damage, which is why I wondered if that might be a propeller strike, but it may just be a natural line of weakness which opened up.
Click to expand...

I would like to see the damage to the other ship before I gave a verdict but I don't think the prop will have done it. More likely the bow.

It doesn't look like the hold was breached, that hole is just in the bottom plates. It only has one hold, if it had flooded then the ship would have gone down as the only other space below deck is the machinery space and a small forepeak.
All the accommodation is in the superstructure, it's just a glorified river barge with an open hold.
Under full load there is very little freeboard.

g06FlrFm.jpg


CdMUUe9m.jpg



ETA looking at a close up of the hole, you can see the keel just inside, the gash is running along the keel, it looks like the plates have torn away.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
I would like to see the damage to the other ship before I gave a verdict but I don't think the prop will have done it. More likely the bow.

It doesn't look like the hold was breached, that hole is just in the bottom plates. It only has one hold, if it had flooded then the ship would have gone down as the only other space below deck is the machinery space and a small forepeak.
All the accommodation is in the superstructure, it's just a glorified river barge with an open hold.
Under full load there is very little freeboard.

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/g06FlrFm.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/CdMUUe9m.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

And a rather average one at that. It's only 55 meters in length.

A normal river barge here in the neighborhood easily clocks in at 80 meters length. And I'm rather far from the sea removed (well. considering the size of this country, that is not really saying much), so they're really river barges.
 
erwinl said:
And a rather average one at that. It's only 55 meters in length.

A normal river barge here in the neighborhood easily clocks in at 80 meters length. And I'm rather far from the sea removed (well. considering the size of this country, that is not really saying much), so they're really river barges.
Click to expand...

It's obviously designed for coastal work as a barge would not have such a large superstructure and coasters that need to go inland tend to have a bridge and masts etc that can be lowered.

like this

dUwiLTIm.jpg
 
Captain_Swoop said:
It's obviously designed for coastal work as a barge would not have such a large superstructure and coasters that need to go inland tend to have a bridge and masts etc that can be lowered.

like this

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/dUwiLTIm.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

True.

The height of the superstructure sets it apart as a ship that is supposed to go to the sea.
My point was that this is a very small sea going vessel. Smaller than the true riverine vessels we have here.

Edit: So it turning turtle after having been rammed by a 'real' ship, should be a surprise to no one.
 
Last edited:
Mojo said:
Are you sure it wasn’t the Russians who capsized it, or was it no true Scotsman?
Click to expand...

Heh. "No true boat floats on its side".

Strangely enough, one of the posters here believes had The Herald of Free Enterprise been out on open sea, it would have sank sideways and landed on its side in exactly the same position on as it did on the sand bank.
 
Vixen said:
Did you know that the laws of physics means that things can be predicted to follow a rule? (cf Archimedes)
Click to expand...

Did you know that Ro-Ro ferries are prone to capsizing when their car decks flood?

Did you know that Estonia's sister ship, Diana II, had her bow locks replaced after they failed in calm seas? Her bow locks were identical to Estonia's.

Did you know you can't have it both ways?

Did you know that you cannot claim something is true until it conflicts with your theory, and then claim it is no longer true?

[Solid source: https://www.marinelink.com/news/estonia-disaster-a-bottomless-source-483896 ]
 
Vixen, are you claiming to know more about the physics of how boats sink than JayUtah and the rest of your interlocutors? Is that why you feel you can condescend to us as if we were children who don't know what we are talking about?

Are you a scientist?
 
Vixen said:
Heh. "No true boat floats on its side".

Strangely enough, one of the posters here believes had The Herald of Free Enterprise been out on open sea, it would have sank sideways and landed on its side in exactly the same position on as it did on the sand bank.
Click to expand...


Link, or it didn’t happen.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Vixen, are you claiming to know more about the physics of how boats sink than JayUtah and the rest of your interlocutors? Is that why you feel you can condescend to us as if we were children who don't know what we are talking about?

Are you a scientist?
Click to expand...

Vixen makes no claims of her own. Vixen posts only properly cited, referenced and verified facts. We know this because Vixen has told us her very own self.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom