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

[Vixen]

Vixen, I long to know why you think Svensson could not have used the winch on Y 74 after he was picked up by Y 74.

It's bound to be hilarious so don't keep us in suspense (pun noted).

Please do if you would be very kind, if you wouldn't mind, read the JAIC report

Y 64 began to rescue three people, one in a raft, one lying in the water tied to the raft and one lifeless entangled in the raft's sea anchor. The helicopter winched down its rescue man to the person in the water. Although the winch wire failed, the rescue man managed to raise him. The next to be lifted up was the man in the raft. He was not wearing a lifejacket. He fell into the water just before gaining the helicopter. The rescue man jumped after him and succeeded in grasping him. The winch now failed totally and another helicopter, Y 74, was called upon to rescue them. However, before Y 74 arrived, the person died.

Y 64 brought the survivor to Utö. The medical personnel on board were left to assist the Finnish nursing staff. As requested by the staff, Y 64 transported 20 survivors from Utö to Turku University Central Hospital. After this Y 64 got permission from the OSC to return to Berga to repair the broken winch, and landed there at 1530 hrs.

7.5.5

 

[Andy_Ross]

Y

Svensson was the winch rescue man for Helicopter Y64, a Boeing Kawasaki - which is always ready for immediate standby as per regulations (circa 15 minutes).
.

No, that is wrong. There were no helicopters on 15 minute standby. The standby time for the SAR helicopters was for one and two hour standby.

Y 64 was an Anti Submarine Helicopter of the Navy It was part of 1st Helicopter Squadron.
It was not a SAR helicopter and was not on any kind of standby.

Three helicopters in Finland and four in Sweden were on stand-by. These were the first to be summoned.
They were on one hour and two hour standby, not 15 minutes.
Both in Finland and in Sweden the crews of the helicopters were on stand-by at their homes. The requirement in Sweden is that the helicopter has to take off within the stipulated readiness period. The requirement in Finland is that the crew is obliged to arrive at the base within the readiness period.

The first helicopter on scene was stand-by helicopter OH-HVG on one hour standby, taking off at 0230 hrs from Turku and arriving at the scene of the accident at 0305 hrs

Second on scene was The Swedish stand-by helicopter Q 97, on one hour standbye, which took off from Visby at 0250 hrs, arriving at the scene of the accident at 0350 hrs

Third on scene was The Swedish stand-by helicopter Y 65 on two hour standbye, which took off from Berga at 0320 hrs. arriving at the scene of the accident at 0400 hrs.

Fourth on scene was Swedish standby helicopter Q 99.
This was on one hour standby at Ronneby. It was already on another rescue mission just south of Öland, where it rescued two survivors from a fishing vessel. This mission finished at 0238 hrs. Ordered immediately to proceed to the scene of the accident, Q 99 landed at 0325 hrs at Visby for refuelling and maintenance of equipment and took off from Visby at 0355 hrs, reaching the scene of the accident at 0440 hrs.

 

[Vixen]

She does think Svensson was a helicopter, doesn’t she?

The JAIC identified the helicopters by label, not by name of crew.

Do, please, very kindly, keep up, if you wouldn't mind. Thanks very much for your kind consideration.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Please do if you would be very kind, if you wouldn't mind, read the JAIC report

7.5.5

Yes, there was one survivor aboard Y 64. After the winch failed and the rescue man was in the sea it could do no more so left for repairs.

 

[Vixen]

Well, they are all brave men but you don't get a medal for being brave and doing your job. You get a medal for going above and beyond the normal expectation.



That is a lie.

Being in another helicopter whilst injured is not the same as being part of that helicopter's rescue team.


But you knew that.

 

[JayUtah]

Do, please, very kindly, keep up, if you wouldn't mind. Thanks very much for your kind consideration.

Says the person who can never seem to remember what I've said about Hoffmeister, or anything else.

 

[Vixen]

Have you read the report and what it said about the helicopter rescues?

Did you understand it?

(I don't mean did you agree with it, I just mean did you comprehend the meaning of the text.)

Yes and I recognise ******** when I see it.

 

[Vixen]

Then how do you explain that the JAIC says this:



And how do you explain that the TT announcement from ten years later states that Svensson retrieved eight people, seven of whom survived?



Yes I have, and just did so again above.

No, I didn't. Take that back.

As I said, the TT article appears to be referring to the eight Svensson did rescue but much earlier and citing Aftonbladet than the timeline the JAIC gives.

 

[Vixen]

Plus several others via Y 74 after he got picked up by that helicopter.

So the JAIC obfuscates.

 

[Vixen]

How do you know? The Aftonblad article does not mention that only seven of the eight survived (at least, none of the bits you got from Bjorkman do). So how did TT know that?



That's because there was no such flight outside of your imagination. Even the Aftonblad article you fetishize so much only mentions one flight, not two. the only discrepancy is the time that one flight left. The Aftonblad article got it wrong. A completely unsurprising occurrence, for a tabloid rushing to get a hot story to print about a chaotic and rapidly-evolving event.

You haven't explained how the Aftonblad reporter knew about this alleged first secret flight, or why he failed to mention it if it wasn't secret yet at the time.

As you might have gathered there was a huge press presence around the rescue centres and it was almost certainly Kenneth Svensson himself who described the rescue of the eight. Who else would have known about it?

This was 1994 when newspapers had print runs. A rescue at 0600 - 0700 would not have been in the same day papers as the early morning ones. 28.9.1994.

 

[Vixen]

Yes it does. It explains that he did it by operating from two different helicopters.

Rubbish. Those six are credited to Y74, Olli Moberg.

 

[Vixen]

No, that is wrong. There were no helicopters on 15 minute standby. The standby time for the SAR helicopters was for one and two hour standby.

Y 64 was an Anti Submarine Helicopter of the Navy It was part of 1st Helicopter Squadron.
It was not a SAR helicopter and was not on any kind of standby.

Three helicopters in Finland and four in Sweden were on stand-by. These were the first to be summoned.
They were on one hour and two hour standby, not 15 minutes.
Both in Finland and in Sweden the crews of the helicopters were on stand-by at their homes. The requirement in Sweden is that the helicopter has to take off within the stipulated readiness period. The requirement in Finland is that the crew is obliged to arrive at the base within the readiness period.

The first helicopter on scene was stand-by helicopter OH-HVG on one hour standby, taking off at 0230 hrs from Turku and arriving at the scene of the accident at 0305 hrs

Second on scene was The Swedish stand-by helicopter Q 97, on one hour standbye, which took off from Visby at 0250 hrs, arriving at the scene of the accident at 0350 hrs

Third on scene was The Swedish stand-by helicopter Y 65 on two hour standbye, which took off from Berga at 0320 hrs. arriving at the scene of the accident at 0400 hrs.

Fourth on scene was Swedish standby helicopter Q 99.
This was on one hour standby at Ronneby. It was already on another rescue mission just south of Öland, where it rescued two survivors from a fishing vessel. This mission finished at 0238 hrs. Ordered immediately to proceed to the scene of the accident, Q 99 landed at 0325 hrs at Visby for refuelling and maintenance of equipment and took off from Visby at 0355 hrs, reaching the scene of the accident at 0440 hrs.

It used to be an hour but from Sweden it was defo 15 minutes. Berga is a huge naval base, not just a Coast Guard.

 

[Vixen]

Says the person who can never seem to remember what I've said about Hoffmeister, or anything else.

You said you were his equivalent and that you thought his methods were primitive but passable. Instead of praising his acuity in trying to replicate the JAIC's FEM calculations you knocked him for not testing the widgets for explosives as if that was his aim or scope.

 

[JayUtah]

You said you were his equivalent and that you thought his methods were primitive but passable. Instead of praising his acuity in trying to replicate the JAIC's FEM calculations you knocked him for not testing the widgets for explosives as if that was his aim or scope.

No.

That is not at all what I said. I said absolutely none of that. By all means keep proving my point. You pay little if any attention to what people around you actually say. But you're always ready with a comically inaccurate straw man version of their statements.

Who are you trying to convince here, Vixen? Us, or yourself?

 

[Reformed Offlian]

As I said, the TT article appears to be referring to the eight Svensson did rescue but much earlier and citing Aftonbladet than the timeline the JAIC gives.

It doesn't cite the Aftlonblad article. And the Aftonblad articles you quoted never mention that any of the eight human beings Svensson retrieved died; they say (incorrectly) that Y 64 brought eight people and one dead body to Huddinge *after* they cut Svensson loose -something even you don't agree with. The only place TT could have gotten that specific number (eight, one of whom died) was the JAIC report.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Please do if you would be very kind, if you wouldn't mind, read the JAIC report

7.5.5

So you read it, but you did not understand.

Y64 winched one survivor up before its winch failed. This left its rescue man in the sea where he was recovered by Y74. Y64 flew its one rescued survivor back.

I am utterly unsurpried, by the way, that this does not in any way address my question of why you think Svensson could not use Y74's winch when he was on Y74.

 

[LondonJohn]

The JAIC identified the helicopters by label, not by name of crew.

Do, please, very kindly, keep up, if you wouldn't mind. Thanks very much for your kind consideration.

Pitiful.

You have no idea what you're talking about. And then your post tries to obfuscate by adopting a condescending tone.

We know exactly what we're talking about on this issue. It's been abundantly clear for a long time now that a) you manifestly do not, and (worse) b) you apparently refuse to be corrected or enlightened in any way whatsoever.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The JAIC identified the helicopters by label, not by name of crew.

Do, please, very kindly, keep up, if you wouldn't mind. Thanks very much for your kind consideration.

The passive aggressive sarcasm make the fact that it's only you who's confused doubly hilarious.

 

[Mojo]

The JAIC identified the helicopters by label, not by name of crew.

Indeed. And you have repeatedly been referring to Svensson by label, not name, and treated him as synonymous with Y64.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Being in another helicopter whilst injured is not the same as being part of that helicopter's rescue team.


But you knew that.

Being in another helicopter when they have an injured crewman who does exactly the same job as you is an opportunity for you to step in and keep them operational.

But that's too confusing for you.