• 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:
But we have seen the lab reports, they do not say it was explosive damage.

Can we see these reports?
Where did you get them?

Can you scan them and put them up somewhere or make a PDF email them to us?
Click to expand...

Too many pages to scan, plus a lot of tables, which my camera might not recognise as text.


Basically to do with levels of hardening, twinning and the presence of perlites, together with levels of sulphurs.
 
Axxman300 said:
The report also points out the Estonia was never designed for open-ocean sailing, and had only sailing into ONE other storm in the time she'd been making those crossings.

My truck is "road-worthy" which means I can drive it anywhere there is asphalt or a graded road bed. However, it's a 2WD/4cylinder, and if I take it into less than optimal conditions like snow I have to put chains on my tires, and drive slow. And if I feel like taking it onto an old logging or mining road, my road-worthy truck will quickly become a paperweight...just like the Estonia is today after sailing in conditions for which she was not designed.
Click to expand...

It is true the vessel was never designed for twelve hours at open sea, plus the leak at the bow visor meant it was constantly travelling with a hundred tonnes of water swishing around. The speed didn't help, although it was fifteen minutes late leaving Tallinn, Naval Officer Seppälä, said that although the Europa had left Helsinki one hour earlier than the Estonia from Tallinn, Estonia was already ahead when they caught it!

I don't think the JAIC ever investigated why it was bombing along at that speed and when it turned westward, was virtually head on with the waves (southwesterlies), plus it went round in a circle, backtracking on itself and ending up eastwards.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Too many pages to scan, plus a lot of tables, which my camera might not recognise as text.


Basically to do with levels of hardening, twinning and the presence of perlites, together with levels of sulphurs.
Click to expand...


What?

Are you saying that you've got a hard copy (only) of these reports? That you haven't accessed the reports online? Really? Honestly?
 
Vixen said:
Too many pages to scan, plus a lot of tables, which my camera might not recognise as text..
Click to expand...

Where did you get a hard copy of the report?

Your camera or software doesn't need to be able to recognize text to photograph it and put it into a PDF.
 
JesseCuster said:
Where did you get a hard copy of the report?

Your camera or software doesn't need to be able to recognize text to photograph it and put it into a PDF.
Click to expand...

True.
But if the camera doesn't recognize the text, you can't do CTRL-F in order to quote mine the report and have to actually, gasp!, read it in it's entirety.
 
Vixen said:
Too many pages to scan, plus a lot of tables, which my camera might not recognise as text.


Basically to do with levels of hardening, twinning and the presence of perlites, together with levels of sulphurs.
Click to expand...

How many pages?

Anybody ever seen a scanner with a page limit? Or a camera that cannot photograph text because it does not recognize it?
 
Last edited:
Again Vixen, just provide the full title(s), author(s) and journal(s) that the lab reports were published in and we can find them ourselves.
 
Vixen said:
...where it is unclear.
Click to expand...

It's certainly not clear in the following that you're stating an opinion rather than a fact:
Vixen said:
It was never the JAIC's job to discover the real cause of the accident. All they were tasked with doing was bringing out a plausible report that upheld the ludicrous 'strong wave caused the bow visor to fall off due to a design fault in the bolts'.

No more, no less.


Sweden even set up a Ministry of Information to browbeat its citizens into accepting the findings.
Click to expand...

How are we supposed to tell the difference if you don't, as you claimed, state 'IMV' when giving an opinion unsupported by facts?
 
Vixen said:
It is true the vessel was never designed for twelve hours at open sea, plus the leak at the bow visor meant it was constantly travelling with a hundred tonnes of water swishing around. The speed didn't help, although it was fifteen minutes late leaving Tallinn, Naval Officer Seppälä, said that although the Europa had left Helsinki one hour earlier than the Estonia from Tallinn, Estonia was already ahead when they caught it!

I don't think the JAIC ever investigated why it was bombing along at that speed and when it turned westward, was virtually head on with the waves (southwesterlies), plus it went round in a circle, backtracking on itself and ending up eastwards.
Click to expand...

It was going at that speed to make up time, they left late and were heading in to a head sea which would further slow them down.

They 'backtracked' because they lost control of the ship when the bow came off and the ship listed to starboard. Even with the engines running at 40 or more degrees of list the rudder would not have a much reduced effect.
Once power was lost the ship would swing broadside on to the waves and drift downwind.
A ship or boat with no forward way will always swing broadside on to waves.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
It was going at that speed to make up time, they left late and were heading in to a head sea which would further slow them down.

They 'backtracked' because they lost control of the ship when the bow came off and the ship listed to starboard. Even with the engines running at 40 or more degrees of list the rudder would not have a much reduced effect.
Once power was lost the ship would swing broadside on to the waves and drift downwind.
A ship or boat with no forward way will always swing broadside on to waves.
Click to expand...

The point being made is that Estonia left fifteen minutes late, yet was ahead of Europa which had left Helsinki one hour earlier.

The Estonia was ahead just towards Turku.

One of the witnesses said he overhead Andresson on the bridge saying they had to hurry as they had an hour to make up. This is puzzling as a fifteen minute delay was hardly the end of the world, albeit it was in Andresson's contract with the shipping line that he had to be on time.
 

Attachments

  • data=Yqt39ThmXMCyLZjsp0EVQeLaFvNY04sh7rohzMdZVT1oTUOG3Ki8wceMUrNfQAVnOJG0K48rZQ39UjKv11NykTzJc8I.jpg
    data=Yqt39ThmXMCyLZjsp0EVQeLaFvNY04sh7rohzMdZVT1oTUOG3Ki8wceMUrNfQAVnOJG0K48rZQ39UjKv11NykTzJc8I.jpg
    16.9 KB · Views: 5
Vixen said:
The point being made is that Estonia left fifteen minutes late, yet was ahead of Europa which had left Helsinki one hour earlier.

The Estonia was ahead just towards Turku.

One of the witnesses said he overhead Andresson on the bridge saying they had to hurry as they had an hour to make up. This is puzzling as a fifteen minute delay was hardly the end of the world, albeit it was in Andresson's contract with the shipping line that he had to be on time.
Click to expand...

They were ahead of the Europa as the latter ship was taking storm precautions.

being late because of a storm would not be held against the captain of the ship. His first responsibility is the safety of his vessel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom