• 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.
LondonJohn said:
:

(And JayUtah's point still stands, obviously: Turner played a (partially unwitting) role in the demise of the Lusitania, because he enabled the Germans to predict where he was likely to be and when (the Germans also knew the times of the favourable tides of course). He placed his ship in danger as a result, just as the captains of the Estonia placed their ship in danger by sailing too fast, at around a 30-degree inclination to an oncoming high swell.)
Click to expand...

The point of the original post that led to the digression in the first place was that a ship can be delayed due to reasons beyond the control of the captain.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
He may still have encountered the U-boat though. If he had arrived off the tide there would have been delay anyway due to the tide, which was the point of the original post.
Click to expand...


Indeed. And in fact, of the two options he picked the "less bad" one by slowing down round the bottom of Ireland, rather than slowing down (or, worse, virtually bringing the ship to a halt) in the Irish Sea in the vicinity of the Mersey Bar. The latter location was prime hunting territory for German submarines, since every ship entering or leaving Liverpool had to pass through that relatively small body of water, and the submarines had easy escape routes North or South.

Once Turner got to Ireland when he did, he was forced to choose the lesser of two evils. But IMO he should never have put himself in that position in the first place (see my previous post).
 
Captain_Swoop said:
The point of the original post that led to the digression in the first place was that a ship can be delayed due to reasons beyond the control of the captain.
Click to expand...


Well more accurately, the ship can be delayed for reasons out of control of the captain, but the captain is motivated to attempt to fight those factors in an attempt to stick to the schedule.
 
zooterkin said:
I don’t think I’ve ever in my life claimed to be ‘woke’. Could you quote what you’re basing this allegation on, please?
Click to expand...

The word 'woke' has appeared twice in this thread.

Vixen's post, and your reply to it (three times if you count your quoting of Vixen's post, four if you count this post, and five if you count my quoting you).

Vixen is making unevidenced claims again.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
Regardless of Monty Python, how can someone of 160cm be an expert on anything?
Click to expand...


IKB ;)


Yes, I know you were being facetious

There's a wonderful animated short on the life of Isambard Kingdom Brunel, of which this is just an excerpt https://youtu.be/Vy4nhVslcq0
If you're an engineer or just have one in your life it's well worth your time if you can find the entire video. I couldn't find it in a brief search.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
There was no communications blackout.

You don't know that the bridge wasn't informed.

There is plenty of blame to spread around those that contributed to the sinking. Forging in to a gale at excessive speed, failing to properly investigate strange sounds and water ingress and even sailing a ship known to have problems with the visor leaking are the contributions made by the captain.

What happened to him? He went down with his ship and drowned.
Click to expand...

We know Sillaste, Treu and Kadak did not inform the bridge of being 'in water up to our knees' in the Engine Control Room, because nowhere is it mentioned in the JAIC Report, which refers to their witness statements.

As you know, the JAIC assiduously avoids mention of any water ingress anywhere else in the vessel.
 
JayUtah said:
But you admit you are unable to product the contract in question. How can you be sure what the provisions were?
Click to expand...

As you are well aware, Capt. Andresson's employment contract would not be in the public domain. However, please see here:

The pressure on the masters of ESTONIA from the Board members of Estline AB is confirmed by the statement of Captain Per Ringhagen - Enclosure 5.3.111 - who has stated that during board meetings of Estline AB it had been repeatedly stressed that ESTONIA had to maintain her arrival at Stockholm by all means and that this had been made quite clear to the masters, who sometimes attended the board meetings. This is said to be written in the protocols of these board meetings which must be still available. The apparent fact that the masters of ESTONIA did their utmost to maintain the schedule was obviously not unknown to the crew as it is demonstrated by the questioning of motorman Ziljajev, who testified in this connection as follows:

Q: Was it a must or was it a requirement from the management that ESTONIA or any other vessel may not miss her schedule, i.e. be delayed?
A: With ESTONIA we were always on time. The master had a time schedule received from the owners and we were always on time. The masters always followed the schedule received from the company. According to contract he had to follow this schedule.
Q: You have now told us about the obligations of the master to follow the schedule. There are rumours that masters who are unable to keep the schedule will be sacked.
A: Yes, that is principally so. This is the requirement of the company that the master has to maintain the schedule. Some of the passengers have to reach other connections and if they miss them, because the vessel is delayed, the company has to pay compensation.
Q: Which company has worked out the schedule?
A: Estline AB. But I don't blame Estline for anything. Each company has its own schedule, where it is described up to the minute. If a company buys a ship, then it is not completely known how the vessel reacts during operation, how much power is needed, among other things, during a storm.
Click to expand...
EFD


And in fact, an examination of Estonia arrival times at Stockholm uphold that it was always on time.
 
Vixen said:
We know Sillaste, Treu and Kadak did not inform the bridge of being 'in water up to our knees' in the Engine Control Room, because nowhere is it mentioned in the JAIC Report, which refers to their witness statements.

As you know, the JAIC assiduously avoids mention of any water ingress anywhere else in the vessel.
Click to expand...

It took me seconds to find (among others):

"The list to starboard increased and water had started to enter the accommodation decks."

"... reported to the officer on watch over his portable radio that people were screaming in panic, saying that "deck 1 is under water". "
 
GlennB said:
It took me seconds to find (among others):

"The list to starboard increased and water had started to enter the accommodation decks."

"... reported to the officer on watch over his portable radio that people were screaming in panic, saying that "deck 1 is under water". "
Click to expand...

Erm, as the cause of the accident. It is OK to mention water ingress as long as 'water on the car deck' is ingress number one.


The fact Sillaste was up to his knees in water on Deck 0 in the ECR should have been a red flag at least.

JAIC had to admit that water on the car deck would not have been enough to capsize the ship.
 
Vixen said:
If a seaman had been in the grip of a sea serpent during the course of the accident, or witnessed same biting off the bow visor, should this not at least be mentioned by any investigation report? 'The seaman had a psychotic episode'.
Click to expand...
The point that just whooshed overhead is that neither the serpent nor water ingress other than through the bow ramp has any evidence of its happening. That is a sound reason to "avoid" reporting it.
 
Vixen said:
You deigned to tick me off (hypocritically it now transpires) for using the term, 'Big Heap'.
Click to expand...

As Vixen seemingly refuses to provide a citation, I have dug up what this was about:

Zooterkin said:
Vixen said:
Between 0100 and 0154 Big Heap Problem.
Click to expand...

You can't even get your mildly racist terms correct.
Click to expand...

(from November last year)

That is some impressive grudge-holding. I still don't see Zooterkin claiming to be woke, though.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
We know Sillaste, Treu and Kadak did not inform the bridge of being 'in water up to our knees' in the Engine Control Room, because nowhere is it mentioned in the JAIC Report, which refers to their witness statements.

As you know, the JAIC assiduously avoids mention of any water ingress anywhere else in the vessel.
Click to expand...

We don't know what communication took place internally. I would think that by the time the water was up to their knees in the engine room the ship was well on the way to sinking and the bridge was well aware of the situation.
There is only evidence for water ingress through the bow opening then after the ship listed to starboard directly through the upper deck openings.
Why would they mention things not in evidence?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom