• 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.
Captain_Swoop said:
How do we know he wasn't taken by the CIA on one of those mysterious cargo flights and put in a secret prison somewhere?
Click to expand...

Well that would indicate a conspiracy, you see. And Vixen, with her posts containing nothing but properly linked, referenced and confirmed facts, is pointedly avoiding posting anything that would even hint at a conspiracy.
 
Vixen said:
Why would 0° usefully refer to a mast or funnel that sits perpendicular to the deck and when the ship is at rest on a calm surface?

No, in simple terms, it doesn't mean "capsizing 90° to either port or starboard would then see the mast parallel to the water's surface, while 180° would see the mast pointing straight down, i.e. a precise 'turtling'."

Forget about listing for a moment.

Think of a number between say 10 and 260. Draw a circle. Draw a straight line which passes through the middle. Jot down your number at one end of your straight line. If the number you chose was less than 180, add this to 180 and jot down the total at the other end of your line. If your number was more than 180, subtract it from 360 and jot it down.

Now draw a line that bisects the other line at right angles. This will be 90°
away from the start and end of the other two lines, whatever the figure isyou have.

So, 10°, 20°, 30°, etcetera, will always be 10°, 20°, 30° relative to that point, no matter what configuration you have of your circle, whether it is upside down or back to front.

So, the centre of gravity is not necessarily bang in the physical middle of an object. It lies at the average where all of the points of its average weight lies. So we call this point – where there is perfect balance, the centre of gravity.

So imagine you now have a boat floating in water, which is not flat, but has a rounded hull. Depending on how its cargo is loaded, the centre of gravity is not necessarily in the middle. If it floats, it means there is a centre of buoyancy, also not necessarily at the middle of the boat. (Albeit the crew will aim for trim so that it is.) There is gravity which is perpendicular to the boat (straight downwards, regardless of where it is) and buoyancy which pushes upwards, also perpendicular. The metacentre is the imaginary straight line that passes through the point where the centre of gravity line and the centre of buoyancy line meet and this will vary depending on the angle that the boat is listing in. It is not necessarily upright. As the vessel lists to one side (Z) , say to starboard, say by a movement of one unit downwards, the centre of gravity moves likewise as the weight average is now weighted to its right and the centre of buoyancy moves likewise, thus it carries on floating. This is because the rotational force, the righting arm, exerts a momentum pulling the list back into equilibrium. The more the boat lists, say by two units and then three, this righting force weakens. There comes a point where the boat capsizes owing to the angle of the list, and the side of the ship hitting the surface of the water and concomitant surge of water flooding into it, after which point it flips, Z becomes a rotational force in the opposite direction from the centre of gravity. We have negative stability at the point Z reverses with G. Once toppled over, the boat will continue to interplay gravity versus buoyancy, but this time, whilst upside down. Because there is lesser list whilst upside down, due to the hull shape limitation, one could say a boat is more stable in this position than when it is upright.

So, if we call the centre of gravity in its upright position 0°, the angle of list is relative to this centre of gravity not to an abstract right angle or where the mast stands upright.
Click to expand...

:dl:
 
GlennB said:
They can float, or at least float for a time until they sink. We've all seen the videos and photos. This one is on the brink of going completely beneath the water.
Click to expand...

My google lens identified that vessel as the following the MV Tricolor:


On Dec 14, 2002, in the early morning’s thick fog, on its way from Zeebrugge to Southampton, the MV Tricolor, with a load of almost 3,000 BMWs, Volvos and Saabs, collided with a 1982 Bahamian-flagged container ship named Kariba, about 20 miles north of the French coast in the English Channel. Albeit scathed enormously above the water line, the Kariba could continue on while the MV Tricolor remained wedged on her side in 30 metres (98 ft) of deep waterway.
Click to expand...
Marine Insight

That ship is not floating, old chap, it is sinking. It had an enormous breach in its hull which was letting in water (letting in water).
 
Steve said:
The same way they identified all of the other passengers and crew who did not survive. Lack of a living, breathing body in the subsequent days, weeks, months and years is rather compelling evidence.
Click to expand...

Helicopter Y64? Kenneth Svensson...?

How did they appear on early survivors' lists?
 
Vixen said:
Why would 0° usefully refer...
Click to expand...

That was painful to read. Simply too many misconceptions to call out individually. I mean, you're not even in the same room as a proper understanding of hydrostatic stability. Seriously, stop pretending to be some sort of a scientist. You're not even good at faking it.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
How do we know he wasn't taken by the CIA on one of those mysterious cargo flights and put in a secret prison somewhere?
Click to expand...

That's what happened two to Egyptian suspected terrorists in Sweden in 2002 IIRC. They were 'disappeared'.

The fact there is a Treaty 1988 (Criminal Law) that forbids the disappearance of suspects, must mean that it had been happening.
 
Vixen said:
I can recommend the fiction of Kazuo Ishiguro, especially his first two novels, A Pale View of Hills and An Artist of the Floating World, as he was actually born in Nagasaki. He does deal with the Hiroshima and Nagasaki issues, albeit having moved to England aged five. This is a better place to understand what happened in Japan, than someone bouncing off theories, which may or may not be reasonable.
Click to expand...


Evasion noted. This is completely irrelevant to my point.

Vixen said:
I have no idea what this person's arguments are that are, 'as offensive as denying the Holocaust'.
Click to expand...


Now I wonder whether you are being deliberately obtuse. I quoted from Björkman's own website where he claims the atomic bombings were faked, and that "only [a] few Japanese died." How is denying the deaths of at least 300,000 Japanese not as offensive as denying the Holocaust?

Vixen said:
For the record, I neither agree nor disagree with Björkman's theories as I am not familiar with them.
Click to expand...


So you have no opinion one way or the other about whether nuclear weapons exist, whether space travel is possible, or whether the US government staged the September 11 attacks?
 
Mojo said:
That would explain why Vixen thought Sheen’s finding that the HOFE had turned by more than 90 degrees (although Vixen, of course, quoted that as 90”) supports her claim about “turning turtle”. By Vixen’s reasoning, a 90 degree roll would put the ship completely upside-down.

Sheen went on to say that “there is some reason for thinking that the ship floated more or less on her beam ends”, though. I’m still waiting for Vixen to say what she understands “on her beam ends” to mean.
Click to expand...

Vixen said:
Why would 0° usefully refer to a mast or funnel that sits perpendicular to the deck and when the ship is at rest on a calm surface?

No, in simple terms, it doesn't mean "capsizing 90° to either port or starboard would then see the mast parallel to the water's surface, while 180° would see the mast pointing straight down, i.e. a precise 'turtling'."

Forget about listing for a moment.

Think of a number between say 10 and 260. Draw a circle. Draw a straight line which passes through the middle. Jot down your number at one end of your straight line. If the number you chose was less than 180, add this to 180 and jot down the total at the other end of your line. If your number was more than 180, subtract it from 360 and jot it down.

Now draw a line that bisects the other line at right angles. This will be 90°
away from the start and end of the other two lines, whatever the figure isyou have.

So, 10°, 20°, 30°, etcetera, will always be 10°, 20°, 30° relative to that point, no matter what configuration you have of your circle, whether it is upside down or back to front.

So, the centre of gravity is not necessarily bang in the physical middle of an object. It lies at the average where all of the points of its average weight lies. So we call this point – where there is perfect balance, the centre of gravity.

So imagine you now have a boat floating in water, which is not flat, but has a rounded hull. Depending on how its cargo is loaded, the centre of gravity is not necessarily in the middle. If it floats, it means there is a centre of buoyancy, also not necessarily at the middle of the boat. (Albeit the crew will aim for trim so that it is.) There is gravity which is perpendicular to the boat (straight downwards, regardless of where it is) and buoyancy which pushes upwards, also perpendicular. The metacentre is the imaginary straight line that passes through the point where the centre of gravity line and the centre of buoyancy line meet and this will vary depending on the angle that the boat is listing in. It is not necessarily upright. As the vessel lists to one side (Z) , say to starboard, say by a movement of one unit downwards, the centre of gravity moves likewise as the weight average is now weighted to its right and the centre of buoyancy moves likewise, thus it carries on floating. This is because the rotational force, the righting arm, exerts a momentum pulling the list back into equilibrium. The more the boat lists, say by two units and then three, this righting force weakens. There comes a point where the boat capsizes owing to the angle of the list, and the side of the ship hitting the surface of the water and concomitant surge of water flooding into it, after which point it flips, Z becomes a rotational force in the opposite direction from the centre of gravity. We have negative stability at the point Z reverses with G. Once toppled over, the boat will continue to interplay gravity versus buoyancy, but this time, whilst upside down. Because there is lesser list whilst upside down, due to the hull shape limitation, one could say a boat is more stable in this position than when it is upright.

So, if we call the centre of gravity in its upright position 0°, the angle of list is relative to this centre of gravity not to an abstract right angle or where the mast stands upright.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that 'her beam ends' is where Vixen is getting her physics.
 
Vixen said:
Why would 0° usefully refer to a mast or funnel that sits perpendicular to the deck and when the ship is at rest on a calm surface?

No, in simple terms, it doesn't mean "capsizing 90° to either port or starboard would then see the mast parallel to the water's surface, while 180° would see the mast pointing straight down, i.e. a precise 'turtling'."

Forget about listing for a moment.

Think of a number between say 10 and 260. Draw a circle. Draw a straight line which passes through the middle. Jot down your number at one end of your straight line. If the number you chose was less than 180, add this to 180 and jot down the total at the other end of your line. If your number was more than 180, subtract it from 360 and jot it down.

Now draw a line that bisects the other line at right angles. This will be 90°
away from the start and end of the other two lines, whatever the figure isyou have.

So, 10°, 20°, 30°, etcetera, will always be 10°, 20°, 30° relative to that point, no matter what configuration you have of your circle, whether it is upside down or back to front.

So, the centre of gravity is not necessarily bang in the physical middle of an object. It lies at the average where all of the points of its average weight lies. So we call this point – where there is perfect balance, the centre of gravity.

So imagine you now have a boat floating in water, which is not flat, but has a rounded hull. Depending on how its cargo is loaded, the centre of gravity is not necessarily in the middle. If it floats, it means there is a centre of buoyancy, also not necessarily at the middle of the boat. (Albeit the crew will aim for trim so that it is.) There is gravity which is perpendicular to the boat (straight downwards, regardless of where it is) and buoyancy which pushes upwards, also perpendicular. The metacentre is the imaginary straight line that passes through the point where the centre of gravity line and the centre of buoyancy line meet and this will vary depending on the angle that the boat is listing in. It is not necessarily upright. As the vessel lists to one side (Z) , say to starboard, say by a movement of one unit downwards, the centre of gravity moves likewise as the weight average is now weighted to its right and the centre of buoyancy moves likewise, thus it carries on floating. This is because the rotational force, the righting arm, exerts a momentum pulling the list back into equilibrium. The more the boat lists, say by two units and then three, this righting force weakens. There comes a point where the boat capsizes owing to the angle of the list, and the side of the ship hitting the surface of the water and concomitant surge of water flooding into it, after which point it flips, Z becomes a rotational force in the opposite direction from the centre of gravity. We have negative stability at the point Z reverses with G. Once toppled over, the boat will continue to interplay gravity versus buoyancy, but this time, whilst upside down. Because there is lesser list whilst upside down, due to the hull shape limitation, one could say a boat is more stable in this position than when it is upright.

So, if we call the centre of gravity in its upright position 0°, the angle of list is relative to this centre of gravity not to an abstract right angle or where the mast stands upright.
Click to expand...
And you say you're a scientist? :confused:

That was cringeworthy to read.
 
Last edited:
Vixen, did you take 5 years of physics because you failed it the 1st 4 times? Did you pass the 5 time?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom