• 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.
autumn1971 said:
One can conclude from the above argument that whoever posted it has never seen water or been near it. Nor has the poster ever seen anything floating in water.

I am amazed that the Atacama Desert has such a good internet connection
Click to expand...

It seems that the Atacama desert gets a fairly regular heavy fog from the nearby ocean, but we don't know at what angle the fog rolls in. Turtles are not involved, however.
 
Vixen said:
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...

What gibberish. How does one measure an angle relative to a single point?
 
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?
Click to expand...
Because that's the standard that's used. The angle of list is how much the ship is listing from it's desirable configuration, i.e. upright in the water (ceteris parabis).

A 90 degree angle of list means that the ship has listed so far that it's now on its side in the water.

This is what list angles mean and what everyone else has been using those angles to mean.

You apparently are blissfully unaware that this is what list angles mean and are confused as to why they mean that.

I would have thought that a scientist could understand this. I've picked up enough from reading about listing and capsizing from casually reading this thread to understand what's obviously what those angles of mean. And I'm no scientist, unlike you.
 
Last edited:
Here are images of ships Clinometers.
First one is a WW2 US Navy model and the second a modern digital one.

Notice how they are marked.

LoIod27m.jpg


0W8umDqm.jpg
 
Last edited:
JesseCuster said:
Because that's the standard that's used. The angle of list is how much the ship is listing from it's desirable configuration, i.e. upright in the water (ceteris parabis).

A 90 degree angle of list means that the ship has listed so far that it's now on its side in the water.

This is what list angles mean and what everyone else has been using those angles to mean.

You apparently are blissfully unaware that this is what list angles mean and are confused as to why they mean that.

I would have thought that a scientist could understand this. I've picked up enough from reading about listing and capsizing from casually reading this thread to understand what's obviously what those angles of mean. And I'm no scientist, unlike you.
Click to expand...


It should be obvious to anyone that zero list is when the ship is the right way up, and the amount of list is the amount it has rotated from that position, unless they don’t know what “list” means.
 
Vixen said:
https://www.icc-cpi.int/resource-library/documents/rs-eng.pdf

Article 7
Crimes against humanity
(i) Enforced disappearance of persons


See also: United Nations Human Rights 1992

Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance

Adopted by General Assembly resolution 47/133 of 18 December 1992
Click to expand...


I don’t see anything in either of those that supports your claim that Sweden was disappearing people, but then neither of them appears to be the “Treaty 1988 (Criminal Law)” you cited. Do you have a citation for that one?
 
JesseCuster said:
Because that's the standard that's used. The angle of list is how much the ship is listing from it's desirable configuration, i.e. upright in the water (ceteris parabis).

A 90 degree angle of list means that the ship has listed so far that it's now on its side in the water.

This is what list angles mean and what everyone else has been using those angles to mean.

You apparently are blissfully unaware that this is what list angles mean and are confused as to why they mean that.

I would have thought that a scientist could understand this. I've picked up enough from reading about listing and capsizing from casually reading this thread to understand what's obviously what those angles of mean. And I'm no scientist, unlike you.
Click to expand...

Let's revisit what Mr. Justice Sheen recommends in his The Herald of Free Enterprise investigation findings regarding car ro-ro stability regulations, quoting Naval Architect and Marine Engineer Robert Taggart:

This point was underlined by Mr. Taggart in his evidence about attempts to obtain agreement on Regulation 8 of the 1974 Amendments to SOLAS Convention. Questioned regarding the residual range of stability and the contrast between the maximum heel figure of 7° proposed by the United Kingdom 53 and others as against the 20° proposed by the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R., Mr. Taggart said that to achieve the latter angle would be extremely difficult.

"I would think to achieve 20° in most vessels there are so many problems in passenger vessels with accesses within the ship to below decks that effectively your curve is terminated because of progressive flooding problems well before 20°of heel. That is not 20° angle of heel from upright; that is 20° from the equilibrium position . . . So that you are talking about possibly 27° or more. You would require to keep all your openings safe so that no progressive flooding could occur within 27° say It would be a major problem . . . It is most important in these things not to impose criteria which are impossible to achieve."​
Click to expand...

Mr Justice Sheen recommends the following set of alternatives re Regulation 8.6.2:

Alternative 1: Maximum GZ of at least 0.05m in association with residual range of 7°
.

Alternative 2: Maximum GZ of at least 0.03m in association with residual range of 5°
Click to expand...


In other words the heel is calculated from the angle of equilibrium which is where centre of gravity and buoyancy meet and as depicted by the metacentric height, GZ being the righting force in distance of the heel, not from "upright in the water".
 
Last edited:
Mojo said:
I don’t see anything in either of those that supports your claim that Sweden was disappearing people, but then neither of them appears to be the “Treaty 1988 (Criminal Law)” you cited. Do you have a citation for that one?
Click to expand...

Do read Articles 58 through to 67.

Do also look up the Magna Carta re habeas corpus.
 
Vixen said:
Let's revisit what Mr. Justice Sheen recommends in his The Herald of Free Enterprise investigation findings regarding car ro-ro stability regulations, quoting Naval Architect and Marine Engineer Robert Taggart:
Click to expand...
Instead of doing that, why not trying answering some questions about your very bizarre posts about list angles and circles and the other stuff no-one can make head nor tail of.

Vixe said:
A boat is only a half circle in shape, thus if port is at 45° and starboard at 135°, it is indeed standing perpendicular to the deck and now parallel with the water's surface when turned 90°
Click to expand...
Seriously, what does "if port is at 45° and starboard at 135°" mean? Port and starboard are 45 degrees and 135 degrees to what?

What does it mean for one side of a ship to be "45 degrees" and the other side of the ship to be "135 degrees"? It's incoherent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom