• 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:
I got back to the response times for the helicopters.

https://sok.riksarkivet.se/bildvisning/ES002173_00001#?c=&m=&s=&cv=&xywh=-2020,-33,6570,3508
This document is the report from the Airforce and Marine aviation on their part of the rescue. In there the on-call times are mentioned, as has been share several times in this thread. (1-2 hours, with some not being on call at all).

The interesting part is on the bottom on the 8th page, continuing on the 9th.



My translation:

2.3 Experiences

Response times during non-service hours should be adjusted so that rescue missions can take place as quickly as possible. When it comes to rescue missions during the time of year when the external conditions are most unfavorable for those in need at sea (autumn, winter and spring) and the time for survival is short, preparedness should be higher.

2.4 Suggestion

Preparedness during non-service hours must be organized so that emergency crews are stationed at the unit. This could mean that the helicopter can be in the air within 15-45 minutes after an alarm.

Yet another case were we can see that lessons learned from M/S Estonia have contributed to the improved rescue capabilities that we see today.

That document confirms that during 1994, helicopters were on a 1-2 hour standby, and contradicts Vixens claim of 15 minutes.
Click to expand...

Yup.

This table from the report lists all the alert times, readiness times, who alerted them and how they were alerted.

https://onse.fi/estonia/kuvat/suuren/kuva7_7s.gif
 
Captain_Swoop said:
there are so many unsupported claims it is hard to keep up.
Click to expand...
I think the detail of that particular unsupported claim is that men in US Marine uniforms escorted two trucks to the ferry. Not that the men boarded.

If you get the description of the claim wrong in any detail it can simply be denied the claim was ever made, despite its being obvious which claim you meant.
 
Axxman300 said:
If I'm the captain of that sub, I'd sink it too.

My point is that instead of making your point from a British point of view, say the silence surrounding the Dieppe raid, Operation Tiger, or if you wanted to stretch it - Coventry, the fact is you went with the Nazi perspective.

This is where your lack of historical facts merges with your lack of all things nautical.

Pro-Tip: Never take the Nazi's side on anything.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the sinking of the Battleship Barham was kept secret for many months.
 
Vixen said:
Er, MRCC Stockholm and MRCC Turku. You can look them up in recorded police statements and the official distress transcript as it happened live.
Click to expand...

No, you are making the claim, you should show us, we shouldn't have to look it up for you.
 
Reformed Offlian said:
Her quotes have ellipses in exactly the same places they appear in Bjorkman's material. Vixen has not evinced any knowledge of Aftonbladet's coverage outside of those extracts (such as whether they issued any corrections/updates on following days).

When I pressed her for links to the original article, she admitted she didn't have it, and only reluctantly provided a link to a page that, in turn, linked back to Bjorkman.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it's obvious she's cribbing from Björkman. It's understandable, but dishonest, that she is reluctant to cite him as the lens through which she is attempting to view the primary sources.
 
Say, Vixen are you going to surprise us all and give Mark the much-requested book reference for the Wilhelm Gustloff's hospital ship status?

Or are you perhaps going to astonish us all by admitting you don't actually have the reference at all and were just bluffing?
 
Vixen said:
It is a fact the Estonian crew were listed as survivors and their names later removed from the list. No explanation given.


The captains of Oceanos and Concordia wasted no time in saving themselves and the lower Estonia orders, Treu, Linde, Kadak and Sillaste were all on the same life raft, suited and booted before Tammes even got his Mayday call through. So erm, the senior crew of the Estonia on the privileged upper deck and lifeboat accessibility quite possibly had the same idea.

In fact, a Man Overboard lifeboat was found floating some miles to the East of Estonia, which had been successfully launched from the ship. It was empty.

It is meet and right to expect to understand what happened to the senior crew.
Click to expand...

A 'man overboard lifeboat' is a small inflatable with an outboard motor.

Why do you think it was launched and didn't just float free as the ship sank?

Why is that boat special compared to the other boats?

Why would you choose to use a small 'man overboard boat' that is just an inflatable with an outboard rather than a proper life raft or life boat?

This is a rescue boat.
https://amimarine.com/product/ocean-safety-solas-450-rescue-rib/
 
Vixen said:
You can search for the discussion we had about the mayday communications and the responses of the various ships in the area and MRCC. It is all there.
Click to expand...

Show us where it matches your specific claim that the Estonia command crew were spirited away in a flight that isn't recorded anywhere.
 
Vixen said:
If a thing is classified, what would you accept as evidence?
Click to expand...

Again the lack of evidence seems to be your evidence.

A claim could be made for anything if the evidence for it is the complete absence of evidence.
 
Vixen said:
Ensign Kenneth Svensson did indeed get the Swedish Defence Forces Medal of Merit, Gold with Sword, did he not?

Or is that a 'conspiracy theory' that he got a medal but nobody else did in that category, not even silver or bronze.

Is it a fact?

A simple yes or no will suffice.
Click to expand...

Yes he did get a medal.

Why don't you just answer the question?

Why were the rest of the crew not given medals to keep them quiet qabout their secret mission?
 
Vixen said:
They had video cameras in their helmets.
Click to expand...

Who did?

What evidence do you have for these cameras in helmets?

Did they all have them or just some of them?

ETA. I misunderstood your post.

You mean the divers had cameras on their helmets?

OK, so how would that help? Do you think the crew on the support ship would know what the missing men looked like? You have seen the quality of the pictures the divers were getting.
 
Last edited:
JayUtah said:
How would you propose to distinguish between an event that never happened and one whose evidence is alleged to be classified? In the total absence of evidence, is it more parsimonious to conclude that some particular, proposed event never occurred? Or that some particular event occurred and has been classified? Can someone who desires to believe that a certain particular thing happened simply assert its historicity and then claim that all evidence of it is classified? Cannot one simply conjure into existence any desired event under that pretext?
Click to expand...


Well, I don't know how you go about this sort of thing yourself, but....

....I've based (and justified) my entire claim about a fleet of extra-terrestrial spaceships landing in 2007 in a field just outside Watford, England....

...upon the fact (the fact, mind you) that the British Government would clearly have immediately declared the incident highly classified as a State secret. So when the sheeple - the sort who watch Strictly Come Dancing and Homes under the Hammer - ask me for evidence, I give them the rational and obvious answer: if I did have evidence, that would have meant that the incident had remained unclassified. Which in turn would mean that it hadn't actually happened, otherwise it would have been classified. So, naturally, the very fact that I don't have evidence to support my claim is - in and of itself - evidence that the incident happened!

I'm frankly astonished that a small cadre of nutters still won't accept my concise, logical explanation at face value.
 
Vixen said:
They had video cameras in their helmets.
Click to expand...


It's not just a teeeeeeny bit possible, then, that the authorities had:

1) A manifest of all the officers and crew who were aboard the Estonia that night; and

2) A reliable list (after around Day 2) of all the survivors.

And that they looked to see which officers (and crew) were on the survivors' list, then subtracted those from the manifest.....

.....leaving them with the names and ranks of every officer and crewmember who, by then, would be confirmed dead?



Maybe? Just maybe? Rather than your fantasy of divers going round IDing the bodies of crew?
 
Jack by the hedge said:
I've read the radio transcript where MRCC Turku underestimates how long it'll take the first Swedish helicopter to arrive (which was not Y64, of course) but you claimed the mystery flights were logged by MRCC Stockholm and MRCC Turku. If you have that log documented kindly present it. If you don't then why are you claiming it?
Click to expand...


I think it's very obvious by this point that many (most, even) of Vixen's claims regarding reliable evidence to support her...uhm....conjectures.... are either hugely oversold or total fabrications.

I mean, she could easily prove me wrong in this, of course.......
 
Vixen said:
You keep lying that my well-sourced and referenced citations are my imaginative fantasies. Your saying it doesn't make it so.
Click to expand...


****laughing dog emoji****

Prove us wrong, then. Show us the original citations, with precise references so that people can check them out for themselves.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Yes he did get a medal.

Why don't you just answer the question?

Why were the rest of the crew not given medals to keep them quiet qabout their secret mission?
Click to expand...

Vixen answered your question in the post you quoted. They only had a first place gold medal, no silver or bronze for the runners up. Poorly prepared for the intensity of the competition, it seems.
 
Reformed Offlian said:
Her quotes have ellipses in exactly the same places they appear in Bjorkman's material. Vixen has not evinced any knowledge of Aftonbladet's coverage outside of those extracts (such as whether they issued any corrections/updates on following days).

When I pressed her for links to the original article, she admitted she didn't have it, and only reluctantly provided a link to a page that, in turn, linked back to Bjorkman.
Click to expand...


Good work. I do quite very much indeed enjoy it when material that is fraudulent or misrepresented gets caught in this sort of manner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom