• 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 Reopened Part V

Status
Not open for further replies.
Captain_Swoop said:
Ships were on the way to the Estonia within minutes of receiving the mayday.
First Finnish rescue helicopter was alerted by 01.35, it was on 1 hour standby and was in the air within an hour.

First Swedish helicopter was alerted by 02.07, it was on one hour standby and was in the air within an hour.

As Finland was controlling the rescue Sweden could only send helicopters once they were cleared to do so.

I notice you don't criticise the Finnish helicopter response. |Their second helicopter wasn't alerted until 02.18 and wasn't in the air until after 3.
Click to expand...

Er, that's because there was a massive disruption in communications...?

The problem you are claiming never happened...?
 
Captain_Swoop said:
That is in Canada.
Try ordering it in the UK and expect a visit from the police.



The ship was pitching up and down, it was a storm.
Click to expand...

Oh please. The Baltic is a choppy sea. The Atlantic lock was only ever added as an accessory.

If the Atlantic Lock is the root cause of the disaster, such a shame the bolt was thrown back onto the sea bed.
 
Vixen said:
Oh please. The Baltic is a choppy sea. The Atlantic lock was only ever added as an accessory.

If the Atlantic Lock is the root cause of the disaster, such a shame the bolt was thrown back onto the sea bed.
Click to expand...


I’m beginning to feel like a bowl of petunias.
 
Vixen said:
Easily.

AS Bob Dylan so nicely put it, "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows".
Click to expand...

But you do need to understand physics, particularly buoyancy. So you think you are able to accurately determine that Bjorkman's calculations are correct?
 
Jack by the hedge said:
Report section 17.3.2:

The accident took place within the rescue region of MRCC Turku.

The alerting plan in place did include alerting other countries' MRCC but if you look to the extreme lower left of the linked diagram you will see how far down the priority list it was.
https://onse.fi/estonia/kuvat/suuren/kuva17_2s.gif

At 0152 hrs MRCC Stockholm was informed of the accident by MRSC Mariehamn which, in accordance with normal practice, contacted MRCC Stockholm to check whether they knew about the accident. After first calling MRCC Helsinki, at 0157 hrs MRCC Stockholm called MRCC Turku and offered helicopter assistance.

Three Finnish helicopters were on stand-by at various bases. The crews were on one-hour alert, meaning that they should be assembled within that time. Three of the Swedish stand-by helicopters should be ready to depart within one hour, and one should be ready to depart within two hours. All stand-by helicopters fulfilled the requirements. The first helicopters took off earlier than their alert times required.

As the report does not believe this was "all sunshine and buttercups" it then goes on to recommend ways in which helicopter standby times might be reduced.

Which you might know, if only you had read it.
Click to expand...

In other words, ignoring the obvious problem and making out it was to do with procedures, instead. Fact is, MRCC Stockholm had to be informed by a lorry driver who had heard of trouble in the Baltic on the grapevine and had rung up MRCC Stockholm to ask about it. Stockholm then rang Turku. MRCC Turku finally got through to Stockholm at 1:58 and the rescue was activated 0202 from Sweden's end. By then, the Estonia had been sunk for ten to twelve minutes.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
But you do need to understand physics, particularly buoyancy. So you think you are able to accurately determine that Bjorkman's calculations are correct?
Click to expand...

1. Bjorkman is not my go-to.

2. You don't know what level of physics I have.

Just because you are dependent on what you learnt as a kid, it doesn't mean others do not carry on learning throughout life.
 
Vixen said:
... such a shame the bolt was thrown back onto the sea bed.
Click to expand...

It's absolutely hilarious after all the discussion this has had that you are still stubbornly clinging to the wording "thrown back onto the sea bed" to indicate your refusal to accept that the lock bolt was brought to the surface and inspected.
 
Vixen said:
No, you do not get to put the cart before the horse. You cannot claim the capsize happened before the cause of it. Like a footballer rolling around in agony before he was even tackled. If the ingress of 8,000 tonnes of water caused the capsize, it cannot also be the result of the capsize.

Chronology is all. The JAIC on realising that an ingress of water onto the car deck could not cause the vessel to capsize, it had to come up with a ridiculous hypothetical scenario of the thing floating on its side until enough windows and dividers were broken.
Click to expand...

The bow fell off and water flooded the car deck, this caused the ship to list as the hull flooded. Once it listed the windows were then broken by the waves.
If you read the dive logs you will see that the divers found windows broken.

Not that old chestnut of an obviously defective window, which shows that the exception proves the rule. The chance of that happening is so exceptional it has become a viral youtube clip.

Thank you for underlining the truth of the rule.
Click to expand...

But it did happen and it has happened before and since then. This one happened to be on camera.
 
Vixen said:
In other words, ignoring the obvious problem and making out it was to do with procedures, instead. Fact is, MRCC Stockholm had to be informed by a lorry driver who had heard of trouble in the Baltic on the grapevine and had rung up MRCC Stockholm to ask about it. Stockholm then rang Turku. MRCC Turku finally got through to Stockholm at 1:58 and the rescue was activated 0202 from Sweden's end. By then, the Estonia had been sunk for ten to twelve minutes.
Click to expand...

Your version sounds so much more exciting. But who to believe? Are you claiming Stockholm was not alerted by Mariehamn? Based on what?
 
zooterkin said:
You said 'dynamite'. That's not dynamite.

(Not that there's a shred of evidence of an explosion on the Estonia.)
Click to expand...

Also, that is a link to a company in Canada.
Does Vixen think that it could be got mail order in the UK or Sweden?
 
Vixen said:
Er, that's because there was a massive disruption in communications...?

The problem you are claiming never happened...?
Click to expand...

No, there was not 'massive disruption' if that was the case the Finnish helicopter would not have been alerted so quickly and the helicopters from Sweden would not have been requested.
 
Vixen said:
Oh please. The Baltic is a choppy sea. The Atlantic lock was only ever added as an accessory.

If the Atlantic Lock is the root cause of the disaster, such a shame the bolt was thrown back onto the sea bed.
Click to expand...


What does that have to do with the availability of explosives?

Choppy Sea? really?


Again, it was not an 'accessory. Why do you keep saying that?

The bolt was inspected and measured, it had no defects.

From the report

The locking bolt remained attached to the actuating cylinder piston rod, which was bent . The remains of the attachment lugs and the locking bolt were removed from the wreck during the diving operation for close investigation.
It was noted that the weld beads between the lugs and the bolt housing and the support bushing respectively had failed partly in the bead itself and partly in the fusion zones. The steel plate of the lugs had failed in their thinnest sections, generally in a forward-upward direction. The two lugs for the bolt housing were twisted towards the port side.
When the locking bolt was removed from the actuator piston rod, the actuator was in fully extended, i.e. locked, position. The piston rod was bent upwards, away from the forepeak deck. The hydraulic hoses were connected. The bolt was checked for wear and deformation. The bolt was straight. The general diameter of the bolt was about 78 mm. Only a slight variation in diameter was measured at the contact area between the bolt and the visor lug. No other damage to the bolt was noted.
The mating lug in the visor was attached to the structure but was bent about ten degrees to starboard and the adjacent structure was deformed and cracked). The hole in the lug for the locking bolt had an original diameter of 85 mm while after the accident the hole was oval with dimensions at mid-thickness about 83 x 95 mm. The visor lug was removed from the visor after it had been brought ashore.
The recovered parts have been investigated with regard to properties of the material and characteristics of the fracture surfaces and deformations.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Yes, let's give it a neutral sounding euphemism, such as 'Extraordinary Rendition' and quibble about the exact name of the various Acts and Treaty, instead.
Click to expand...

They are not the same thing. Enforced disappearance is a specific thing, defined by a section of a specific statute, all of which Bollyn specifically cites.

Have you found any non-Bollyn-based sources that makes that specific claim, with that specific wording, citing that specific statute? If not, where did you get them?
 
Vixen said:
The Atlantic lock was only ever added as an accessory.
Click to expand...
What's your evidence for that?

Bonus points for actually answering the question and providing actual evidence for the Atlantic lock being added as "an accessory".

Points taken away for a thought experiment involving rubber ducks or pieces of paper or the likes.
 
Vixen said:
1. Bjorkman is not my go-to.

2. You don't know what level of physics I have.

Just because you are dependent on what you learnt as a kid, it doesn't mean others do not carry on learning throughout life.
Click to expand...

You have the level of physics that you think that suspending a piece of paper on wall is an accurate simulation of physics of a ferry's bow visor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom